theboke

1) Indictment. During deliberation, the jury may change the charge(s) against the accused in order to reflect the evidence that they can corroborate. For example, a charge of assault that refers to the complainant being punched and repeatedly kicked can be reduced to the accused only punching the complainant - if there's no corroboration for the kick or for more than a single punch. 2) Special defence. A document that the jury must consider during deliberation if they are minded to find the accused guilty of the charge; this is a further test/hurdlevthat asks the jury if the accused had a 'reasonable belief' that their actions were justifiable. 3) Corroboration. The jury need only try to corroborate those key elements of the complainant's testimony that have given rise to the charge(s). The accused's testimony, if given, is just another piece of evidence and does not need to be corroborated, as the accused is innocent until proven otherwise; where the 'may be taken down in evidence and used against you' line given out by the police becomes relevant is where the accused's statement may inadvertently corroborate the complainant's evidence against them. 4) Distress evidence. Independent witness testimony that describes the immediate change in the complainant's mood or behaviour after a serious crime, which shows that something traumatic has occurred to them; it is for the jury to decide if this change in behaviour or mood is at least in part attributable to the events alleged to have taken place. 5) Corroboration beyond a reasonable doubt. Blackstone's Ratio, said to be a foundation of liberal society, equates convicting 1 innocent person to allowing 10 guilty people to walk free. A ratio of 10:1, so 10/11, or about 91% certainty is required by the jury in order to say that a crime is proven beyond a reasonable doubt. And 'not guilty' would be chosen by juries with at most 50% certainty that an accused did, on the balance of probabilities, commit the crime. So leaving juries whi had a 51-90% certainty that the accused did commit the alleged crime (but without enough proof) the 'not proven' verdict. However, the best qualitative definition of a 'reasonable doubt' that I found is the one that they use in the Canadian justice system, which is: 'a reservation that is logically derived from the evidence or lack of evidence.' How about you??

^ This is a bit trite now and, as others have pointed out, somewhat irrelevant due to the issue being more about where the players are travelling from...but just to complete the series... Brechin would travel 3, 528 miles (LL, 17 teams) if they were in the Lowland League next season (assuming no colts, and no Kelty = 16 opponents, playing each once). So not much difference for Brechin in terms of travel, whether playing nationally in League Two or in either of the Lowland or Highland regions. Perhaps the Midlands League linkup hasn't been announced yet due to its correlation with where Brechin will find themselves.

I was curious as to how much further Brechin would have to travel next season if they are relegated to the Highland League, compared to what we know so far about next season if Brechin were to remain in League 2 (i.e. - with Forfar replacing Queen's Park). I found that a Brechin team bus, going town to town, would travel approximately: 3,184 miles (HL, minus Brora) 3, 522 miles (HL, including Brora) 3, 632 miles (League 2) So Brechin would likely be travelling fewer miles in the HL next season than they would in L2.

Maybe they could keep some element of its Juniors roots by having its first round as being pre-season/summer local group sections. Allow them to play local summer football including evenings midweek, not much travel, the chance of local sponsorship. Maybe invite SPFL clubs to put in a second-string team to participate but not qualify for knockout stages. A couple could qualify from each local group for the national knockout stages. It wouldn't be done by council area, but if it was then 2 teams x 32 areas in an open draw for the national stages. Final to be the big day at Hampden.

Makes me wish the EoSFL didn't vote to Null and Void. If they'd gone PPG, same as the LL, think to be consistent the LL would have had to accommodate some promotion from below. Since the East did n&v, suppose they'll have to not organise in the basis of PPG, since 2020-21 effectively did not happen. Which probably means re-running the 16 + 15 Conferences, with the newbies in their own division of 11 below. So for 2022-23 maybe the top 7 of each 2021-22 Conference, plus a couple down from the Premier, could form the First Division of 16. The next 6 from each conference could automatically go into the Second Division. The remaining 5 from the conferences could then play off against the best 3 from the newbies' division, to see which 2 teams would qualify to make up the rest of the Second Division of 14 teams. The 6 play off losers could join the remaining 8 newbies in the Third Division of 14 teams for 2022-23. Something like that.

https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/19278734.best-west-rossvale-boss-david-gormley-aiming-high-ahead-next-season/

Thank goodness!

If they're also looking to reduce the top EoSFL division from 18 teams in 2021-22 down to 16 teams for 2022-23, then possibly go with a structure of: 2021-22 Premier (18) First (10) Conferences (16 + 16) - where the First Division is composed of the top 5 of each 2020-21 conference, decided by points-per-game; - the 11 new clubs are either drawn into the remaining 2020-21 conferences, to make the numbers up to 16 in each (from the 10 + 11 remaining conference teams), or the whole lot (21 existing, plus 11 new) are just drawn into two new conferences of 16, for season 2021-22. With the aim then being to produce a structure for season 20222-23 of: Premier (16) First (16) Second (14) Third (14) To reach that, the 2021-22 Premier Division could relegate 3 automatically, with 1 automatically promoted from the First Division. Giving a Premier of 16 for 2022-23. And the best 2 from each 2021-22 Conference could be automatically promoted. Giving a First Division of 16 for 2022-23. The next best 7 of each 2021-22 Conference would then come together form the Second Division of 14 teams for 2022-23. And the remaining 7 of each 2022-22 Conference would then form the Third Division of 14 teams for 2022-23. (In the 2021-22 season, they could also add play offs between: 15th in the Premier and 2nd, 3rd, 4th in the First; and the bottom 2 of the First Division and teams 3-5 of each of the Conferences. Due to knock-on effects of the various pyramid play offs, at this level there would always need to be the proviso that promotion/relegation play off places could be converted to automatic places, and vice versa.)

I would use PPG from 2020-21 to put the top 6 from each of last season's conferences into a tier 7 First Division, which would allow the remaining 19 plus 11 newbies to be drawn into two parallel conferences of 15 at tier 8 for 2021-22. That would be fair in: - rewarding some for their performances on the pitch; - preventing the newbies skipping ahead; - not discouraging the newbies by placing them alone in a bottom tier; - freshening up the conferences for the rest. Basically the 11 new clubs would effectively be pushing the 12 best-performing conference teams upwards into their own division. And a 12-team First Division would leave spaces to be filled if expanding to 16 teams for season 2022-23, so there would plenty for teams in the two conferences to aim at (I would, if possible, have 2 automatic promotion places from each conference, with the bottom 2 of the First in an 8 team play off with 3-5 of each conference to ensure the right teams go into the right divisions). Then the EoSFL can stop gobbling up clubs and focus instead on tying in with county/district amateur feeder leagues (where clubs qualify for the EoSFL by team performance, not just by application).

No new clubs this season. (Unless I misread EoSFL twitter account, in which case I apologise.)

And Cowdenbeath sharing (subordinate to) the stock cars. Ex-manager Jimmy Nic said it was the first football job he had where he needed a crash helmet and had to be out of the car park by 5pm or he'd be rammed. Yuk yuk yuk

I would like to see governments legislate against the taking of political opinion polls. My reason is that people are more likely to feel that their vote matters in situations when the outcome of an election is genuinely unknown, and so more of the electorate will turn out to vote when there are no polls telling them what is likely to happen. That seems to be a more democratic situation than the status quo.

Easier to reach the play offs, yeah, but ultimately they'll still have to beat whatever comes out of the LL if they are to make it back. Not likely that they will do that, for a very long time. Maybe why Ken is trying everything right now to prevent it coming to that. Where else to discuss a moot point than on a forum.

Since Brora can't send some of their first team regulars on foreign holidays this time around, I'm going to say Brora to win the play offs. Redemption. Brora 3 - 1 Kelty Kelty 1 - 1 Brora Brora 2 - 1 Brechin Brechin 1 - 2 Brora

Brechin to lose the play off final but survive via the Ken's magic powers*. (*League restructuring.)

Seems like the Championship side going into the play off final will have the advantage over the Premiership side. A much shorter season and an extra day of rest for the Championship team.

Slightly alarmed that Kelty are heading to Brora on the 4th for a 7pm ko, yet Brora are preparing for a 7.45pm ko. Sort it oot!

I can see the appeal to clubs of a revenue-neutral move of 2-8 places up the SPFL / away from the non-league. Yet I think that what the supporters and players relish is the opportunity to face new opponents more often. So maybe promoting 6-8 clubs into an SPFL with divisions of 12 or 14 would be the first step to giving the SPFL the airing that it needs, then moving to 3 divisions of 16-18 a few years thereafter.

I think it's a tightsrope, trying to find something to please everyone. Better to make a change here that some want and others don't mind about, then a laterr change there that others want and some don't mind about. An 8/4 split in the Premiership with 40/36 games would likely have been tried already if the clubs thought it viable. It would give the teams in 7th and 8th at 33 games something more to play for, though, rather than prematurely cutting them off from a run at Europe when they're already safe from relegation in the usual Premiership scenario. It would be good if they could just relax a little bit and relegate two automatically in a 12-18-18 set up. Make things open and straightforward. Play offs from 2nd-5th in the lower levels. Same thing in the Lowland and Highland. Allow teams freedom of movement, spreading the money more widely and giving supporters so many new fixtures to be excited about.

I also calculated the mileages for all present League One and Two clubs to compare their travel distances in the current structure, with splitting those same teams into West and East conferences, or organising them into a national league of 18 (excluding the biggest clubs, Partick and Falkirk). The results are near the bottom of page 63 of the League Reconstruction thread in the Fans' Views forum. See below - https://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php?/topic/227671-league-reconstruction-lets-hear-your-view/page/63/#comments

I was assuming clubs at that level own their team buses...

I calculate the town-to-town travel for Fraserburgh in the current Highland League, with 16 away return trips, to be: 2418 miles. If they had been promoted to replace Brechin in League Two for this season, and the season had run normally, I calculate Fraserburgh's travel, with 18 return away trips, to be: 6560 miles. Multiply through by £1.25 per litre for diesel and by 4.546 litres per gallon to give £5.68 per gallon. If the team bus does 5-10 miles per gallon, then divide the total milages by 5 for a maximum travel cost or by 10 for a minimum travel cost. On that basis, I have Fraserburgh's basic travel costs rising from £1375-£2750 for a season in the Highland League, to £3726-£7452 for a season in the current League Two. So, if Finlay Noble's right and his club can maintain their present budget whilst avoiding relegation from League Two, he's going to be pocketing ten of thousands in SPFL prize money! For comparison, Peterhead's mileages are approximately: 3796 (if SPFL Conference East) 4844 (current League One) 5564 (if 18-teamNationalLeague)

It's about his 50th troll ID. Ballermk was one of his previous ones, as was Traffordab and a whole host of others. Something wrong with him. Avatart.

I recall, when the SPFL was formed, shaking my head at the branding (badge/logo, division names) being so similar to the English version at that time. Like we thought we could trick overseas countries into buying up our product by being so similar superficially to England. As if they wouldn't notice the difference in quality... Well, that part may have worked actually. But, yeah, that wouldn't necessarily be a good reason to stick with multiple wee versions of the English divisions, including the national conference at tier 5. Given how East Stirlingshire and Berwick have yet to make much impression on the Lowland League, I can see why the SPFL2 clubs are reticent about opening up to further relegation to tier 5. I don't know if a well supported but poor quality LL would appeal most to them, in terms of keeping their finances in good nick and making re-promotion to tier 4 more likely; whereas what we seem to have is the opposite of that: a poorly supported LL with a coterie of good quality teams on the pitch. Which doesn't give SPFL2 clubs much incentive either on the pitch or off it to look at opening up to tier 5.