New clubs in the East of Scotland

[Ginaro]

44 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

I do believe he had no idea about the 31st March deadline either.

^^^ brown envelopes from Linlithgow IMO.

With floodlights, the timing could have been better but the LL really should have lights at all grounds. They didn't seem to be in a hurry to add that rule, so the SFA have done it for them - no problem with that so long as they SFA are consistent and apply the same derogation standards to CSS, VOL as Bonnyrigg.

As for grounds, all clubs in the Premier Division next season seem to have a fully-compliant ground so that could be a requirement for promotion whilst relaxing the rules further down the pyramid to encourage more clubs to join.

[GordonS]

2 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

In the HFL, Harmsworth Park in Wick is a public park - outwith match days, you can just wander in. Even on match days, you can drive in and park on the bank.

I entered by that gate a few weeks ago and they were charging people in cars coming in. Is the charge voluntary? I'd be surprised if folk were allowed to just drive in and watch Scottish Cup games at a licensed ground for free. 

[Ginaro]

28 minutes ago, gogsy said:

There was a link provided to this by hibbeejibbee September 2017

https://www.peeblesshirenews.com/news/15522440.Peebles_Rovers_net___10k_for_revamp/

Picture from the ex-manager back in April:

 

[Robert James]

2 hours ago, bluebell1 said:

A hope your right in terms of the clubs getting licensed time will tell a suppose but the complete lack of communication from SFA at the moment for me means there’s things happening we aren’t privy to.   

I know senior league  clubs don’t want clubs getting a licence for fear of us reducing there income and also the potential voting rights effect.  I am aware this has been taken up with Mr Maxwell also. 

The floodlight fiasco was a deliberate attempt to stop clubs getting licensed as we all know.  Unfortunately they haven’t counted on some clubs rising to that challenge and getting them in place pretty quickly.  I wonder what next they will ask for. A may be cynical but history doesn’t show a fully transparent sfa.

It is also my belief that no derogation will be given for lights but again hopefully I am wrong.

However in the blue sky world of the pyramid as seen by some am happy to be proved wrong and for all the clubs to have there licence before the end of the month.

Here’s hoping

Regarding floodlights, it is my view, that a derogation will be granted for :

(1) existing SFA Member clubs who do not have floodlights (eg CS Strollers, VoL, Whitehill,  Wigtown , Golspie, etc), although the derogation will be time limited (period unknown).

(2) new clubs (without floodlights) who applied for a Licence BEFORE 1st January 2019, providing they were compliant (as audited) with all the other pre-2019 entry requirements. These clubs made a legitimate application (and paid the £2k) fee, in accordance with the rules applicable/published at that time. The SFA can't backdate a change in the rules, however much they may want to (although I can't think of a good reason why they would wish to do so) .

In my opinion, no floodlight derogation will be given to :

(3) any new clubs who submitted an application on or after 1st January 2019

(4) existing SFA member clubs, who do not apply for a lighting derogation, when their Licence is next due for renewal. 

And on a separate point, I agree with Burnie_man  that a minimum number of seats  (25/50 ?) will be the next  Licensing requirement,  for clubs at Tiers 5 & 6 , but not for clubs below these levels, providing they meet the minimum requirement for covered standing instead.

I hope I am right (?) 

 

[parsforlife]

Regarding floodlights, it is my view, that a derogation will be granted for :
(1) existing SFA Member clubs who do not have floodlights (eg CS Strollers, VoL, Whitehill,  Wigtown , Golspie, etc), although the derogation will be time limited (period unknown).
(2) new clubs (without floodlights) who applied for a Licence BEFORE 1st January 2019, providing they were compliant (as audited) with all the other pre-2019 entry requirements. These clubs made a legitimate application (and paid the £2k) fee, in accordance with the rules applicable/published at that time. The SFA can't backdate a change in the rules, however much they may want to (although I can't think of a good reason why they would wish to do so) .
In my opinion, no floodlight derogation will be given to :
(3) any new clubs who submitted an application on or after 1st January 2019
(4) existing SFA member clubs, who do not apply for a lighting derogation, when their Licence is next due for renewal. 
And on a separate point, I agree with Burnie_man  that a minimum number of seats  (25/50 ?) will be the next  Licensing requirement,  for clubs at Tiers 5 & 6 , but not for clubs below these levels, providing they meet the minimum requirement for covered standing instead.
I hope I am right (?) 
 

I'd agree with most of that.

Couple of points. No licensed club without lights is going to fail to ask for derogation but your right in saying any who don't are going to probably lose their licence.

The other thing is that licensing isn't tier specific, so if seats become a entry level requirement then if will apply to all.

Having only 4/5 levels(did platinum ever become a thing?) is far too restrictive for our licensing structure, I found the English equivalent at some point and it had a lot more levels, covering at most 2/3 levels at every stage of the pyramid. Tho it did have some interesting requirements that would fail clubs up here playing at a far higher level than their equivalents, despite the overall off-field standard being better( for example IIRC 4 sided grounds were needed for a level where triple figure crowds were the norm)

[honestman54]

3 hours ago, Auld Heid said:

That's too simplistic - if you don't set standards then your open to standards dropping.

It's not just entry to Scottish but the ability to be promoted.

Rules should be there to be followed.

I didnt think that they would be promoted if they werent licensed so those who have the ambition have the ability to move up through the LL, others will not be promoted.  Not sure what your issue is.

[Burnie_man]

55 minutes ago, Ginaro said:

Picture from the ex-manager back in April:

 

That's not a fence......

[Cyclizine]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

I entered by that gate a few weeks ago and they were charging people in cars coming in. Is the charge voluntary? I'd be surprised if folk were allowed to just drive in and watch Scottish Cup games at a licensed ground for free. 

Not through the gate on South Rd (open in the bottom of the photo), but there's nothing stopping you from the other side as it's a wide driveway and there's more parking space. They do go up and get admission usually and most people pay. You can theoretically gate it off on that side as well during a match.

[parsforlife]

Not through the gate on South Rd (open in the bottom of the photo), but there's nothing stopping you from the other side as it's a wide driveway and there's more parking space. They do go up and get admission usually and most people pay. You can theoretically gate it off on that side as well during a match.

The north side looks quite far from the pitch, with little to no elevation I'd certainly rather pay than watch from that distance from a car, tho given the number of cars it looks like a number of people disagree.

[Auld Heid]

I didnt think that they would be promoted if they werent licensed so those who have the ambition have the ability to move up through the LL, others will not be promoted.  Not sure what your issue is.

Simple - it's consistency of approach.

Teams are joining a senior league, not juniors or amateurs.

So they should be complying to rules that enable them to fulfil their commitment to that tier if they win the league.

[TheLad]

https://www.eosfl.com/downloads/eosfl/EoSFL-Entry-Criteria-2018.docx
The first point is one which might get them... " Enclosed self-contained ground such that admission can be controlled and charged for. The ‘football ground’ must give an overall appearance and impression of being a football ground. It is a matter for the Office Bearers/Board to determine whether a ground meets this requirement"
Failing that, point seven: " Separate dedicated changing facilities for two teams with seating and clothes hanging facilities for up to twenty two within the ground enclosure and immediately adjacent to the pitch"

Immediately adjacent to the pitch.
How is this defined?
Where do Heriot Watt get changed?

[TheLad]

Peebles maybe the best comparison. Been there twice this season.

Couple of minutes walk from the changing rooms in the sports centre to the park for players and officials, park is an open park with no controlled access.

There's no difference at all between Little Kerse and Peebles, other than the 4G versus grass.

TBH, I don't see any issues with Syngenta at Little Kerse (or Peebles) until they start moving through the levels. Certainly not suitable for a license and thus Teir 5, and potentially in the long term Teir 6 may become a licensed league as well, but for next season in the EoS at Teir 7 - I think they will be fine.

If they are just chucking together a team then I don't think pestering tier 5 is an immediate concern.
I really hope there is no hitches with this application. Syngenta is a well run club with real ambition.

[parsforlife]

Simple - it's consistency of approach.

 

Teams are joining a senior league, not juniors or amateurs.

 

So they should be complying to rules that enable them to fulfil their commitment to that tier if they win the league.

 

 

 

This has been explained time and time again. such an approach means every single club in the pyramid need to meet spfl premiership requirements, IT  IS UNWORKABLE.

 

we need an approach that has stepped progression so that top end clubs of whatever tier can progress and achieve the higher standards of the tier above,  We will occasionally see clubs have a one-off season from a normal lowly position that suddenly have the season of there lives and are unable to take promotion, but at least 9/10 the progressive step should be achievable  for most.

 

[GordonS]

Not through the gate on South Rd (open in the bottom of the photo), but there's nothing stopping you from the other side as it's a wide driveway and there's more parking space. They do go up and get admission usually and most people pay. You can theoretically gate it off on that side as well during a match.

Yeah, I came in that top gate and saw people in cars getting asked for money and paying. I presumed it was required.

The north side looks quite far from the pitch, with little to no elevation I'd certainly rather pay than watch from that distance from a car, tho given the number of cars it looks like a number of people disagree.

It's actually got decent elevation, comparable with the premium seats behind the goals at Parkhead. I don't think my picture quite does it justice, the cars are parked a little higher and just to the left of where I took it.

[Cyclizine]

44 minutes ago, GordonS said:

Yeah, I came in that top gate and saw people in cars getting asked for money and paying. I presumed it was required.It's actually got decent elevation, comparable with the premium seats behind the goals at Parkhead. I don't think my picture quite does it justice, the cars are parked a little higher and just to the left of where I took it.

Aye, Harmsworth has a cracking slope, almost on a par with Bonnyrigg Rose!

[Robert James]

6 hours ago, parsforlife said:

I'd agree with most of that.

Couple of points. No licensed club without lights is going to fail to ask for derogation but your right in saying any who don't are going to probably lose their licence.

The other thing is that licensing isn't tier specific, so if seats become a entry level requirement then if will apply to all.

Having only 4/5 levels(did platinum ever become a thing?) is far too restrictive for our licensing structure, I found the English equivalent at some point and it had a lot more levels, covering at most 2/3 levels at every stage of the pyramid. Tho it did have some interesting requirements that would fail clubs up here playing at a far higher level than their equivalents, despite the overall off-field standard being better( for example IIRC 4 sided grounds were needed for a level where triple figure crowds were the norm)
 

Some good points : thanks

[GordonS]

Aye, Harmsworth has a cracking slope, almost on a par with Bonnyrigg Rose!

Ah, found another pic I'd taken.

[cmontheloknow]

9 hours ago, TheLad said:

Immediately adjacent to the pitch.
How is this defined?
Where do Heriot Watt get changed?

Criteria is for new members, I'd have thought.

[Hillonearth]

9 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

Aye, Harmsworth has a cracking slope, almost on a par with Bonnyrigg Rose!

It's almost like one of those M.C Escher drawings - it seems to slope in about four different directions at once...

[Robert James]

20 hours ago, GordonS said:

Yeah, I came in that top gate and saw people in cars getting asked for money and paying. I presumed it was required.It's actually got decent elevation, comparable with the premium seats behind the goals at Parkhead. I don't think my picture quite does it justice, the cars are parked a little higher and just to the left of where I took it.

Its one of my favourite HFL grounds. It has lots of character. Decent attendances too.