Jump to content


Gold Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Burnieman

  1. It's just a rumour but it would make sense from a local game perspective. They should never have moved IMO, although if they do move back they haven't lost anything much as they wouldn't have been in the promotion hunt in X this season anyway.
  2. Hearing that Harthill Royal could be returning to their roots.
  3. What incentives are there? finish in the top 2 of an 11 team league to guarantee promotion, maybe even third, then next season finish in the top two or three of a 8/9/10 team league. You call the level above as "full of mince", how did Edinburgh College get on this season? Pretty disrespectful. I personally think this could have been handled a bit better to ensure the Third Division had adequate numbers, I would have relegated the bottom team in both Conferences (I understand why they didn't want to relegate clubs - nominally - two tiers, but if you're bottom you should suffer the consequences) but it's not as if it's new news and there has been plenty of "incentives" this season for the teams in X with potentially more than a quarter of the Conference being promoted.
  4. I'm not sure that really helps their issue as if it's the cage, that's not EoS compliant either unless significant work is being done to it.
  5. Not sure anyone cares that you don't like what the EoS clubs agreed to a year ago. It won't change, deal with it. Tell us about the WoS.
  6. Not heard anything in that regard. I did hear Leith Athletic and Rosyth were among a number of current members who were warned their ground arrangements/facilities weren't suitable a year or so ago after a review. Obviously Leith's will be resolved when they move back to Meadowbank but Rosyth are in a difficult position as it doesn't look like they're getting a new ground anytime soon and their cage probably doesn't meet EoS requirements. Whether Edinburgh South were allowed to groundshare for 3 years to allow them to sort a suitable home ground I don't know.
  7. Also Hawick Royal Albert United to drop United and revert to traditional name.
  8. Not a new club, but I believe Ormiston are returning to being known as Ormiston Primrose next season.
  9. The point being of course that your club can ask the league directly for clarification given you said they didn't know when you asked them.
  10. Probably! Although the table on the website has a line after 1st place.
  11. If Tranent lose and only 1 club goes up from X as a result, then the Second runs with 18, and we have 16-16-18-10. Who knows though. I thought I had a grasp of it, clearly not.
  12. I'm not sure it's clear either way. The colouring suggests to me that 7th is in the mix for the First, either both or one via a better record. 8th looks to me like it's Second regardless. My thinking is why would the EoS want the First to increase to 18 clubs when in reality, there's no need? Ultimately you want a set-up which is consistently 16 clubs throughout with a standard 3 up/down, and I thought that was the aim with 16-16-18 next season with then a process to reduce the Second to 16 the following season and bump up the Third to a better number and hopefully see a gradual increase towards 16 itself. Trying to reduce the First and Second to 16 from 18 is a little more difficult and may take more than a season, and an 8 club Third is a bit ridiculous frankly. Will the First have 4 down next season if it goes to 18, which results in the Second relegating....a lot!?
  13. I think its 5 down from Premier, 2nd to 6th (10) plus best 7th (1) which gives us 16 in the event of Tranent not going up. I know the notes refers to 8th place, I think that could be a typo as it doesn't correlate with the graphic. Either the notes wrong or the graphic is wrong. 16-16-18 and then however many left in the Third has always been the intended structure for 22-23 as far as I'm aware. 18 in the First and a very small Third makes no sense and I've never heard anyone discuss the possibility of an 18 team First. Maybe the league need to absolutely clarify this ASAP.
  14. If someone wants to dig out the graphic/flow chart, it shows the First Division is 16 clubs next season and Second at 18, that hasn't changed as far as I'm aware (feel free to correct me if it has). Therefore, in the scenario of a net gain of VoL from the LL (ie Tranent don't go up), then 5 are relegated from the Premier, meaning only 11 places available in the First Division, ie 2nd-6th plus best 7th placed. That then means all remaining clubs go to the Second Division (17) meaning only the winners of Conference X are promoted to the Second. So the structure would be 16-16-18-10. I'd then expect the Second to see 4 down next season to bring it in line at 16 and increase size of the Third.
  15. Maybe you should ask your club rather than having a dig at the league.
  16. Done very well, but I think having a League One standard striker may have been the difference between staying up and struggling.
  17. Superb achievement to stay up this season, particularly the run-in with wins at Penicuik, Broxburn and Linlithgow. Hopefully can build on this. Some way for Mark Campbell to head into retirement after 27 years as player and manager. Cheers gaffer.
  18. What does it take for these people to understand this is just the beginning of the Pyramid, and it's not just about next season. Come back in 10 years time and pass judgement on it, not after a handful of Covid disrupted seasons. The EoS Premier faced relegating 4-6 clubs this season, it'll probably be 5, that's a hefty number out of 18 clubs but everyone understood it was a one-off, had to be done, and are getting on with it. We also finally kiss goodbye to Conferences. The way the LL is being run isn't going to last forever either. It's shite what they're doing just now, but in 10 years time the league will be unrecognisable to what it is now, hopefully without any B teams to be seen.
  19. Great to hear, pass on our best wishes from everyone at Blackburn United.
  20. I know this has been talked to death on here, but the long term solution is surely to have a combined top division with the NRJFA. The 6 places below Banks O'Dee are all Aberdeen sides plus Montrose Roselea and that balance probably wont change very much. The top 6 or 7 from each would be pretty competitive and perhaps avoid triple digit for/against columns. The only other solution is split the league in two with very small divisions, not exactly ideal.
  21. They do identify referees they want to "fast track" and probably get it wrong at times hence some looking pretty young and out of their depth. There was a young lad earlier this season who done one of our U20's on the Friday night, he was OK but pretty raw. He then told us he was doing a top of the table clash in one of the Conferences the next day without assistants. No idea how he got on, but dropping referees into that environment can make or break them, no young ref should be allocated a senior game without assistants IMO. I saw that article, he doesn't know the rules clearly but from experience, that dugout likes a moan but so does every clubs, inc mine. I think one thing clubs can try and do themselves is cut down on indiscipline from their coaching staff.
  22. I remember the days when referees actually had a personality, players could talk to them. Now most of them appear to be robots churned out by the SFA, and many appear out of their depth. Some of them talk to players like dirt. That said, some of the stuff dugouts (and fans) shout at officials is completely out of order, particularly when they don't have the support of linesmen. It's a difficult job. Both sides need to change.
  23. We welcome any supporters, over enthusiastic or not, we can't be picky I still need to find out who the MMA Master is though, could come in handy
  • Create New...