tinto Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 Regarding Hartley Wintney FC. I have always thought of them as a club which plays in an English country garden. They are small and in the summer they usually display hanging baskets around the clubhouse. The record crowd was 2,000 set some years ago against the reformed Wimbledon (Hartley won 2-0). Last season they drew Hereford in the FA Vase and the match was all ticket of 1,300 (700 to the Bulls and 600 to Hartley) . Hereford won 4-1. When they played in the league below their average crowd was 40-50 range. This season it has risen to over 100 and continues to rise. If the players get paid it is not a lot. Most are self employed guys and they all get on well together. The club won the league by a mile last season but could not go up because the ground requires work to be carried out on it. They are well on their way to achieving the required money and works for the improvements for this season. I understand that a combination of sources provide the funds. I believe one is the Football Foundation which pays for half the improvements if the club can raise the other half. Hartley like many similar clubs in the league put emphasis on the match day experience, Hartley have an excellent clubhouse; floodlights, top notch website and a second to none programme. The Chairman greets everyone who comes and makes . folk feel welcome. Junior fitba was great in its day but it is now mickey mouse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 On 29/01/2017 at 16:25, Burnie_man said: Looks like the West want to replicate what's going on in the East http://www.largsandmillportnews.com/sport/15053888.Major_shake_up_for_juniors_leagues_/ To me that has always seemed the sensible compromise in the West Juniors rather than repeated struggles between the status quo and 4 region-wide divisions, or the 'Superduperleague'. Only thought is that currently the Superleague clubs play 22 league games + 4/5 sectional league cup games, and they plan to replace that with 30 league games + knockout league cups of 5 rounds? Unless something is giving that's a big increase to fit in when they don't start until into August, take holiday weeks in September, don't play over Christmas, don't play under floodlights, etc. etc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 5 hours ago, tinto said: I think this is a very good post and sums up my view entirely. For many years I got involved with my favourite Junior team from afar. Seeing the way 'Junior Fitba' operated around 15 years ago surprised me and I made countless suggestions to the various forums. I tried going to the clubs agm and giving them all the help that could possibly be given to them. In the end I gave up; I tried my best but there we are. The club people involved are good but collectively as an association there is no vision and no drive to improve. I live in England and as far as I can see Junior Football has not progressed one little bit. I got involved with a Step 6 Non League village side called Hartley Wintney http://www.hartleyfc.com/index.php I started watching them in 2004 and the progress they have made is everything that I dreamed my favourite Junior club would have made. They are a superb set up and I enjoy watching them. They are the highest goal scorers in the Pyramid from the Premiership down 9 levels and have already scored over 100 goals this season and 21 points clear. They have the basics right; despite being a village club and put a big emphasis on giving a good match day experience. Obviously I still have great affection for the team I have supported in Scotland and hope they do well. Scottish Junior Football should be scrapped and merged into the Pyramid. What The Row have achieved is remarkable with only a 5000 catchment area to work from & surrounded by a lot of competition so nearby (Fleet Town - Tier 8, Aldershot Town - Tier 5, Basingstoke - Tier 7). Just goes to show what a bit of effort, patience & determination can deliver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted January 30, 2017 Share Posted January 30, 2017 1 hour ago, Sergeant Wilson said: They also might be more professional commercially, I suppose. There's more money sloshing about Berkshire than Newmains to aim for as well. One's a very large County and the other is a wee toon! but I take your point. That said, big towns like Newbury and Thatcham never really supported their teams in numbers unless it was the latter stages of the Vase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 7 hours ago, Burnie_man said: One's a very large County and the other is a wee toon! but I take your point. That said, big towns like Newbury and Thatcham never really supported their teams in numbers unless it was the latter stages of the Vase. Another part of the problem is "our" habit of trying to equate levels here to England. Trying to predict where SPFL clubs would be if they played down there. We aren't comparing like with like at any level. Some facts remain, facilities could and should be better on a wider scale and the league structure needs changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan of the juniors Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just hope that this carried through as although not perfect it is far better than what we have just now. The 5 month fixture list alone should carry it . Can't see many teams in the bottom echelons of the adl voting for it though as it means no more guaranteed games against Talbot , Glen's & Cumnock every season . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
energyzone Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 Just hope that this carried through as although not perfect it is far better than what we have just now. The 5 month fixture list alone should carry it . Can't see many teams in the bottom echelons of the adl voting for it though as it means no more guaranteed games against Talbot , Glen's & Cumnock every season . Is the vote a simple majority? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 2 hours ago, fan of the juniors said: Just hope that this carried through as although not perfect it is far better than what we have just now. The 5 month fixture list alone should carry it . Can't see many teams in the bottom echelons of the adl voting for it though as it means no more guaranteed games against Talbot , Glen's & Cumnock every season . Having a longer league season, 15 guaranteed home games, and dumping the League Cup sections which appears to be deeply unpopular and nothing more than pre-season friendlies, has to be more attractive to most clubs? In the East, there are some moans and groans mostly from a few Fife clubs and based around travelling, but I haven’t heard anyone moaning about losing the League Cup, or having more guaranteed home league games. It would be a positive move by the West Region to bring in these changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BANKIEBILL Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 it is a simple majority required as I understand it. There are a few options floating around ... I think we need the right one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 10 minutes ago, BANKIEBILL said: it is a simple majority required as I understand it. There are a few options floating around ... I think we need the right one. When the East voted on Re-organisation, the Region themselves proposed a structure, whilst Jeanfield Swifts proposed the one we have now (the one I pulled together and then discussed on here for 12 months to tweek it and make it workable). The Jeanfield proposal won with around 2/3rds of the vote. It "won" largely because the document circulated to clubs was pretty detailed in what it was proposing and answered some of the main concerns, so clubs were well aware what they would be voting on. Plus the discussion on here helped. That is the key, decide exactly the structure clubs would be comfortable with and make sure they have the details well in advance of the AGM, and discuss it on here if needs be. If clubs don't know what they're voting for exactly, status quo normally wins the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 16/16/[16+16] looks like a sensible format and people only need to look east to see how something very similar already operates in practice, which should undermine any scare tactics from those that want to keep the status quo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensmad Posted January 31, 2017 Share Posted January 31, 2017 I think there is an optimistic mood for change amongst many people in the game, however it depends how much influence these people have. The individual clubs all really have to discuss it amongst their own committees and vote on it at their own level first, thus giving their delegates the mandate to vote at the AGM in the way that their committees see fit, and not just by their own personal opinions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marconi Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I notice that on this and other similar threads that glensmad goes on about delegates supporting personal opinions..a delegate is a person DELEGATED by an organisation to ,attend meetings to support the organisation,s opinion. if this is not happenimg delegate should be replaced Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensmad Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 I notice that on this and other similar threads that glensmad goes on about delegates supporting personal opinions..a delegate is a person DELEGATED by an organisation to ,attend meetings to support the organisation,s opinion. if this is not happenimg delegate should be replaced I was only pointing out that this is an important issue that all clubs should discuss internally and decide what their policy is, and not leave it for one person to decide how to vote. I made no suggestion that any delegate votes against the wishes of their club, let's not be putting that suggestion into my mouth please because that's a million miles away from what I actually said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
santheman Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 14 hours ago, marconi said: I notice that on this and other similar threads that glensmad goes on about delegates supporting personal opinions..a delegate is a person DELEGATED by an organisation to ,attend meetings to support the organisation,s opinion. if this is not happenimg delegate should be replaced What Glensmad is alluding to is that in the past, delegates have been put in the position of having to vote on proposals at AGM's that haven't been properly debated by their clubs committee beforehand for whatever reason (lack of detail/time) and therefore are forced to vote according to their own opinions. At least these new proposal will have plenty of time to be debated and a well informed decision made.by each club before it goes to an actual vote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensmad Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 1 hour ago, santheman said: What Glensmad is alluding to is that in the past, delegates have been put in the position of having to vote on proposals at AGM's that haven't been properly debated by their clubs committee beforehand for whatever reason (lack of detail/time) and therefore are forced to vote according to their own opinions. At least these new proposal will have plenty of time to be debated and a well informed decision made.by each club before it goes to an actual vote Spot on, thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 In England, at step 7 i.e. leagues like the Northern League, Combined Counties, etc clubs have to declare their intention to be promoted by a certain point in the season, they then have to finish in a promotion spot in their league. By accepting promotion, they commit to having the required ground standards etc by I think March of the next season.I think there are 20 relegations from the six step 6 leagues and 14 step 7 leagues, so teams are first promoted based on league position and PPG, then relegated teams are reprieved.One of the issues in the English pyramid at regional level is that since few Northern League teams have accepted promotion, the southern boundary of the Northern Premier League have been shifting south, with the resultant travel issues. There's been much talk of a mythical Midland League, and it looks like the FA are about to announce something soon.Another thing about the regional pyramid in England is the way clubs are allocated to leagues. Clubs are promoted and relegated en masse and switched between leagues geographically by a committee, this obviously can lead to some compromises, but I think in general works reasonably well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glensmad Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 Correct, and the winners of last season's Northern League were Shildon AFC, who declined promotion. We were chatting to their officials when they came up to play in the Kilbirnie tournament last July. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornishman Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 31/01/2017 at 06:06, Sergeant Wilson said: Another part of the problem is "our" habit of trying to equate levels here to England. Trying to predict where SPFL clubs would be if they played down there. We aren't comparing like with like at any level. Some facts remain, facilities could and should be better on a wider scale and the league structure needs changed. Groundhoppers have a general 'rule' that they follow in which they can estimate playing strengths of unknown teams; at least throughout Europe; which while not perfect can be surprisingly accurate... They compare average crowds as it's a truism that across the continent, clubs with similar spectator attractiveness tend to operate at similar playing strengths. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cornishman Posted March 16, 2017 Share Posted March 16, 2017 On 16/01/2017 at 13:01, edinabear said: I posted this recently on the LL section of the forum. I realise that many are against any type of proposals to merge with Senior football. If the League Pyramid was set up similarly to the attached would this be more plausible for Juniors to join? There would be at least 2 up and 2 down in each league so it should even out eventually. Would also propose 2 relegation places from League 2. Tin hat firmly on! Pyramid restructure.xlsx 1 This is a fine effort but alongside other commenters, I think that the B-team/Colts inclusion should be canned. A major problem I perceive with the Pyramid idea is that it's all fine and well providing promotion opportunities, but what one is being promoted into must be an attractive proposition in the first place... and personally, I don't think the SPFL structure is all that attractive. Barely more than half of clubs in the SPFL appear capable of sustaining full-time professionalism and it's my contention that maybe the SPFL should 'trim' itself down and concentrate these into two nationwide divisions of say 12 Premier & 18 Division 1 clubs - allowing some space here for the stronger semi-professionals. The remaining dozen clubs would be embraced into the current HL/LL tier of 2x 18 clubs, with ten dropping from this level into the first properly non-league tier which would be formed from the backbone of the present SJFL topmost divisions, topped-up by a few EoSL clubs. In the interests of both league strength parity and footprint hinterland equality, I'd reset the borderline between North Region and the others to the determinant of travel proximity to either Perth/Dundee on one hand and Stirling/Queensferry on the other (which would also apply to the HL/LL tier above). This would add about 15/16 clubs to the North, while the East Region would partially mitigate its loss in numbers from the West Region. The SoSL, North Caledonian League and lower EoSL clubs would be absorbed at appropriate tiers in the remaining SJFL set up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.