Summer football?

[DOA]

loads of neutrals at that play off game.

aboot 400 lol

Were you there counting who was supporting who?

[DOA]

Fair enough to say don't pay players, but we all know that it only takes one club out of 160 odd to pay their players and the pressure is on all the others. Players talk, committees talk and there is always a Mr Big (some with money, many with empty pockets) lurking in the shadows. Whether we like it or not football is driven by personal greed at both the admin and playing side. You only have to look at FIFA to see the extreme end. And the same happens at national FA level as well as at senior clubs in Scotland, including many of the lesser ones. To ignore that or change it is laudable but not realistic.

Many will say junior clubs are different as they are run on a 'not for profit' basis.

Intrigued the argument on change of season/summer football has moved from the attitude we couldn't possibly do it, to preselecting what the change of season would be. By defining this new season as a split season people can then pick out the bits that would make it more difficult. Hence getting to the 'could you be ars*d' scenario.

It might be useful to question why look at any change. What are we trying to achieve? Better playing surfaces? Less last minute postponements? Bigger crowds with less competition with the senior games and TV coverage (have you ever gone to a junior game when good Champions League games are on TV), and the benefit of a better climate for spectators? More and cheaper options for training? I am just making these up as I go along.

But what benefits do we really want to achieve? What gets in the way of success?

So if we started with what we want the junior game to look like we might have a better chance of deciding how to achieve it. I can prattle on with MY personal views on how it should be but we need a clarity and common purpose across the majority of clubs to make any headway.

And of course one option is no change at all! With many clubs not playing players, clubs dropping out of competition mid season, an aging and dying off supporters base, every committee struggling to get more help, and times when even the Junior Cup didn't have a sponsor, all this might indicate some change is needed. But some might say it is better to keep things as they are.

So an open discussion rather than arguments would be good. Based on making the junior game better than it is. And of course each of us can define our own version of better.

I think that junior football is grinding slowly to extinction no matter what happens.Came to the conclusion a few years ago that the powers that be had accepted that to be the case with regard to crowds falling.Having said that it would more pleasant to watch its remaining years in more pleasant weather.

[Vollyman]

Your biggest crowd was a second leg play off tie which was finely balanced and was the only game on in Scotland. Time of year the game was played had almost zero to do with the 600. Put yourselves up against umpteen other fixtures for a run of the mill game week after week in midweek and see how many turn out

The time of year had a lot to do with it if the game was played in November there would be less of a crowd our Midweek crowds in May and June have always been larger than games played played on cold November and December days

[Man on a bike]

I’m realistic enough to know it will probably never happen, that doesn’t mean it’s not the right things to do. As for paying "entertainers", for goodness sake, these guys are playing for enjoyment, it's not their job.

The highest level of Junior football in Scotland is still 5 or 6 levels below the top level, should we be paying substantial sums of money to players who more often than not play in front of crowds of not more than 200? There are players at my clubs level (level 8?) who are paying decent – silly - money. At the same time we can’t even provide the basics of football such as floodlights, basic toilets for male and females, terracing that’s not a safety hazard, roofs over it that don’t leak or are falling down (or no roof at all) and very few grounds even provide seated areas for fans.

I’ll use Irvine Meadow as an example as I was there recently (it’s not a dig at them, just using them as evidence of my point). One of the biggest clubs at this level, players paid significant sums (and allegedly large sums not so long ago), yet they cannot play games in the dark evenings as there are no floodlights, and there is one “toilet” for fans which is a couple of brick walls and no roof, females have to go into the social club if they need to use the facilities.

I go to games all over Europe and occasionally at a pretty low level, and on the whole the facilities make Junior football look like something out of the dark ages. You don’t even need to go far, go to English non league, and go down to the equivalent of Junior level and grounds are way better than what we suffer, and players are not paid huge sums, some even pay to play. Every single ground has floodlights as a basic requirement, and toilets, and many have stands.

So back to my original point, when clubs bleat about installing floodlights or upgrading their ground to meet modern basic requirements (like the basic entry level SFA licence) ask them how much they pay players.

True that grounds in other countries have better facilities and more up to date than at junior grounds. Mainly due to money they get from the state or local (council) government. The funding available in the UK or Scotland in particular is on a different basis.

In Scotland there is no conflict between clubs spending money to pay players against money to develop the grounds and facilities. Spartans is held up to be an example of what can be done. They have had in excess of £7 million invested in their setup. Mainly capital investment to create pitches, club house, floodlights etc. But also funding to run various projects around sport, better health and social outcomes. They pay their Lowland League players, which will be pennies compared with the grant funding they receive. The project funding generates regular income to pay for staff and use of facilities.

Any junior club could do the same. The SFA will say the only way to get funding is through them, with things like Cashback for Communities. Absolute and total nonsense.

We can complain about what we don't have and how hellish everything is. Or we can step up to make the changes we need, and grab the opportunities that exist.

[Vollyman]

loads of neutrals at that play off game

aboot 400 lol

[HTG]

Yet you are quite happy with some teams having to play maybe as many as 3 games a week at the end of the season and the season not ending until June?

Not particularly but the number of teams who actually have to do that across the entire structure is tiny. The vast majority complete their season easily enough. Now, if you'd like to explain how many midweek games we'd need to schedule to guarantee an end of November finish ...

I'm not arsed to get into this - there must be a dozen threads with the same arguments.

I do agree with your follow up post - junior football is dying. Like the rest of football, the gap between top and bottom is now a chasm. Part of the problem here is too many clubs have shite drainage. But they haven't got a button in the plate to do anything about it. Drainage is a bigger concern than dealing with frost. And drainage is an issue all year round. I don't think anyone could guarantee finishing a season in November in current circumstances unless all the games from about September onwards were less important, run of the mill fixtures.

The definition of junior against that of amateur has become blurred to the point of non existent for a large number of clubs. At the other end of the scale, you have about 15 - 20 teams at the top who would be better served in more professionally run set up. And you'll have some just below that level with an aspiration to get there. The whole non league structure needs fixed and clubs playing at a more realistic but interchangeable level. If the whole game goes across to the summer then the senior leagues will cope easily - much more so than this grade would.

[Vollyman]

loads of neutrals at that play off game.

aboot 400 lol

Neutrals,home supporters and away supporters combined an attendance of 600 because it was a good summers night maybe that's why neutrals attended. This was only a play off game, how many Scottish Cup Ties attract over 600 on a winter's day

[Burnie_man]

True that grounds in other countries have better facilities and more up to date than at junior grounds. Mainly due to money they get from the state or local (council) government. The funding available in the UK or Scotland in particular is on a different basis.

In Scotland there is no conflict between clubs spending money to pay players against money to develop the grounds and facilities. Spartans is held up to be an example of what can be done. They have had in excess of £7 million invested in their setup. Mainly capital investment to create pitches, club house, floodlights etc. But also funding to run various projects around sport, better health and social outcomes. They pay their Lowland League players, which will be pennies compared with the grant funding they receive. The project funding generates regular income to pay for staff and use of facilities.

Any junior club could do the same. The SFA will say the only way to get funding is through them, with things like Cashback for Communities. Absolute and total nonsense.

We can complain about what we don't have and how hellish everything is. Or we can step up to make the changes we need, and grab the opportunities that exist.

Many of these funding streams require input from the clubs themselves (no real difference from down south) of between 40-60%, it also requires community engagement in many cases (ie community club set-up) otherwise your application doesn't even get looked at. Nobody gets handed money these days, not even Spartans.

So let's say a stand alone Junior club needs to spend 15/20k on building new toilets for spectators, or £60/70k on floodlights, they maybe get half of that through grant funding (a big maybe), and they stump up the rest but only they don't, as they'd rather the money goes towards the playing budget.

This is why many grounds are falling into a state of disrepair whilst players get £50 a week.

[Burnie_man]

Neutrals,home supporters and away supporters combined an attendance of 600 because it was a good summers night maybe that's why neutrals attended. This was only a play off game, how many Scottish Cup Ties attract over 600 on a winter's day

It was a nice night, pleasant to watch a game of football in and as a result an excellent crowd. This is why we need to play more football in the summer months and less in winter.

However, if we went to a full summer season ie March-November, this game would have been played in November, on a Saturday (no floodlights) and it would have been a wee bit colder and probably a much smaller crowd.

I can't see a full summer season working in Junior football unless all clubs install floodlights to allow for midweek games outwith the April-August period.

[Vollyman]

It was a nice night, pleasant to watch a game of football in and as a result an excellent crowd. This is why we need to play more football in the summer months and less in winter.

However, if we went to a full summer season ie March-November, this game would have been played in November, on a Saturday (no floodlights) and it would have been a wee bit colder and probably a much smaller crowd.

I can't see a full summer season working in Junior football unless all clubs install floodlights to allow for midweek games outwith the April-August period.

The point I am making is that clubs would get better crowds in summer and I agree this particular game would have a smaller crowd if played in November there has got to be change from the present farce or junior football will die

[HTG]

All the evidence I've seen is that a midweek summer crowd comes nowhere near a winter Saturday crowd. There isn't much of that evidence around though - happy to concede that. Most clubs don't count their gate. Jamie has definite evidence for Pollok who are one of the better supported clubs though and it's not good reading for midweek. And to be clear, a summer season would need a lot of midweek fixtures. Far more than we use at the moment. The impact on playing squads would be significant I suspect and would require clubs to push towards using the full 25 available.

[cmontheloknow]

The point I am making is that clubs would get better crowds in summer and I agree this particular game would have a smaller crowd if played in November there has got to be change from the present farce or junior football will die

Would the better crowds be there for run of the mill league games? i.e. Armadale vs West Calder - would that have a better turnout at 6.45pm on a Wednesday in May rather than 2.30pm in November?

[cmontheloknow]

All the evidence I've seen is that a midweek summer crowd comes nowhere near a winter Saturday crowd. There isn't much of that evidence around though - happy to concede that. Most clubs don't count their gate. Jamie has definite evidence for Pollok who are one of the better supported clubs though and it's not good reading for midweek. And to be clear, a summer season would need a lot of midweek fixtures. Far more than we use at the moment. The impact on playing squads would be significant I suspect and would require clubs to push towards using the full 25 available.

It will depend on the competition and time of year I suppose but for a Sectional game in the group or an unimportant league game in April/May you'd expect to lose up to 40% of the equivalent saturday crowd.

Only the sectional to go on this year though but here are the numbers chronologically:

Wed

313 (SLC G)

247 (SLC G)

433 (SLC QF)

Sat

904 (SLC G) (v Arthurlie, no way this would be as high midweek)

568 (L)

606 (L)

617 (L)

625 (SJC)

521 (L)

450 (SJC)

410 (L)

515 (L)

I was at the Shettleston game (410). This was the day when every other game was off. I guess a lot of people just gave football a miss that day, Lok fans included!

[blue manalishi]

It will depend on the competition and time of year I suppose but for a Sectional game in the group or an unimportant league game in April/May you'd expect to lose up to 40% of the equivalent saturday crowd.

Only the sectional to go on this year though but here are the numbers chronologically:

Wed

313 (SLC G)

247 (SLC G)

433 (SLC QF)

Sat

904 (SLC G) (v Arthurlie, no way this would be as high midweek)

568 (L)

606 (L)

617 (L)

625 (SJC)

521 (L)

450 (SJC)

410 (L)

515 (L)

I was at the Shettleston game (410). This was the day when every other game was off. I guess a lot of people just gave football a miss that day, Lok fans included!

Perhaps the main reason only 410 punters turned up for Pollok v Shettleston when every other game was postponed was the horrible weather.

[lang]

But still more than the nice summer nights

[HTG]

It will depend on the competition and time of year I suppose but for a Sectional game in the group or an unimportant league game in April/May you'd expect to lose up to 40% of the equivalent saturday crowd.

Only the sectional to go on this year though but here are the numbers chronologically:

Wed

313 (SLC G)

247 (SLC G)

433 (SLC QF)

Sat

904 (SLC G) (v Arthurlie, no way this would be as high midweek)

568 (L)

606 (L)

617 (L)

625 (SJC)

521 (L)

450 (SJC)

410 (L)

515 (L)

I was at the Shettleston game (410). This was the day when every other game was off. I guess a lot of people just gave football a miss that day, Lok fans included!

Saturday consistently beats Wednesday then with very occasional exceptions which can usually be explained.

[peasy23]

Saturday consistently beats Wednesday then with very occasional exceptions which can usually be explained.

Certainly has been our experience. We had over 900 at the playoff second leg against Glenafton 5 years ago on a Wednesday night. That was easily explained by the fact it was the second leg with the first having ended 0-0, it was well into June with no other games on, and there was also no Euros or WC games on TV to compete with. More than half the crowd were neutrals imo.

[Burnie_man]

The point I am making is that clubs would get better crowds in summer and I agree this particular game would have a smaller crowd if played in November there has got to be change from the present farce or junior football will die

I don't disagree, but I don't think a full summer season can work as it stands.

What can work is that we have a winter break and we start the season earlier and end it later so we play more football in the summer months. This would also help towards the holy grail of a fixture list.

If fans knew months in advance that they would be playing a few league games midweek, they could make plans to attend the game. Tell them 7 days in advance and that's where you have problems, and that's where we are just now.

[cmontheloknow]

Certainly has been our experience. We had over 900 at the playoff second leg against Glenafton 5 years ago on a Wednesday night. That was easily explained by the fact it was the second leg with the first having ended 0-0, it was well into June with no other games on, and there was also no Euros or WC games on TV to compete with. More than half the crowd were neutrals imo.

On that, I remember Pollok played SBA at Newlandsfield in the Central League Cup semi final. It was a Wednesday night, 16th May 2001. Crowd was 287. What else was on? UEFA Cup Final, Liverpool vs. Alaves.

On the previous saturday we had 861 in for Arthurlie. The average attendance that year ended up beng just over 500 in all competitions. We played a good number of home midweek games that season because of fixture congestion at the end... 309 v Maryhill, 372 v Renfrew, 252 v Petershill. We had two saturday games below the season average but 6 midweeks (also 2 sectionals).

[blue manalishi]

But still more than the nice summer nights

Pollok v Shettleston was a Saturday.