New clubs in the East of Scotland

[Spyro]

3 minutes ago, Pyramidic said:

rather than try to join the emerging Midland League.

I really don’t know why this keeps being brought up. They are BELOW the line, they are in Perth, they are in the EoS catchment... I don’t understand how this idea even came about!

[LongTimeLurker]

10 minutes ago, Spyro said:

I really don’t know why this keeps being brought up. They are BELOW the line, they are in Perth, they are in the EoS catchment... I don’t understand how this idea even came about!

The line has only ever been for the relegation of Club 42 and isn't some rigidly carved in stone edict for the rest of the pyramid. Luncarty are north, while Scone Thistle and Tayport are south and nobody is losing any sleep over them being in the EoS and Midland Leagues, respectively. Letham being in the Midland League might muddy the waters a step too far but if all the relevant parties were comfortable with it then it could theoretically happen.

Edited May 25, 2021 by LongTimeLurker

[Spyro]

2 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Luncarty are north, while Scone Thistle and Tayport are south and nobody is losing any sleep over them being in the EoS and Midland Leagues, respectively.

These are common sense though and are only outside by a few meters, same with Harthill.

Letham have 2 (or 3) other clubs from their own city playing in a Lowland League feeder and are quite clearly in that catchment. If they then go and play in the Highland League feeder league then you would be as well allowing the Dundee teams into the EoS and the West Lothian teams into the WoS... which they were told wasn’t going to happen.

[Specky]

It's a pretty contrived story... Club B move from juniors into senior pyramid. Club A from another - rival - town nearby move from amateurs to juniors, relocate to this town, groundsharing this facility (which is owned by a community trust not Club B), and agree to rename themself under Club B's umbrella. Club B get promoted higher up the senior pyramid. Juniors league collapses. Club A move into senior pyramid and rename themself once again. End result is 2 clubs from this town, using this ground, both in the senior pyramid, albeit significantly far apart (you're talking probably 3-4 tiers).

There are other town groundshares (QotS + Heston, Falkirk + 'Shire, Clyde + Cumbernauld, Stirling Albion + Stirling Uni) but backstory in Bo'ness must be unique.

What seems to have been conveniently forgotten through all this is that when boness athletic were amateur (as Linlithgow thistle) many of their players were from boness. When the committee changed they obviously wanted to take it to back to boness as they had no tie in nor connection with Linlithgow or the rose.

They linked up with boness Utd to create a pathway but were then left with no league or association to play in as the juniors collapsed.

Now this is where the story splits depending on your convenient narrative: athletic would either have had to go back amateur - having invested a lot of time and effort to get where they were - just because Utd didn't want them to impact on their only fund raising stream

Or

They continue to try to progress and change their identity to avoid any confusion.

There has been no backhanded shenanigans in it, unless it fits your story and theory. You play the cards you're dealt.

Talk was made about the Friday evening games against Linlithgow last season out and I can understand why they did this, having attended to watch my son with LRCFC. Why wouldn't you try to increase any potential revenue? It's not rocket science....

As an outsider I really don't see that they are trying to steal boness identity or support but are seeking to be as good as they can and progress as far as they can rather than be held to some glass ceiling because some in Utd feel threatened.

As has been said, there are several tiers between them so what's the big deal? Unless Utd slide dramatically and athletic progress rapidly then they are unlikely to ever impact on each other.

The ground they both use is a community facility as far as I know so neither has ownership rights to it and the Trust can and should use it to the best effect. It would be extremely churlish to prevent athletic using it just because Utd don't like it especially when it was they who put the hospitality facility in which both teams seem to use??....

Now, queue the usual suspects who will respond to belittle or abuse post and poster as it goes against their narrative....

[latapythelegend]

39 minutes ago, Specky said:

What seems to have been conveniently forgotten through all this is that when boness athletic were amateur (as Linlithgow thistle) many of their players were from boness. When the committee changed they obviously wanted to take it to back to boness as they had no tie in nor connection with Linlithgow or the rose.

They linked up with boness Utd to create a pathway but were then left with no league or association to play in as the juniors collapsed.

Now this is where the story splits depending on your convenient narrative: athletic would either have had to go back amateur - having invested a lot of time and effort to get where they were - just because Utd didn't want them to impact on their only fund raising stream

Or

They continue to try to progress and change their identity to avoid any confusion.

There has been no backhanded shenanigans in it, unless it fits your story and theory. You play the cards you're dealt.

Talk was made about the Friday evening games against Linlithgow last season out and I can understand why they did this, having attended to watch my son with LRCFC. Why wouldn't you try to increase any potential revenue? It's not rocket science....

As an outsider I really don't see that they are trying to steal boness identity or support but are seeking to be as good as they can and progress as far as they can rather than be held to some glass ceiling because some in Utd feel threatened.

As has been said, there are several tiers between them so what's the big deal? Unless Utd slide dramatically and athletic progress rapidly then they are unlikely to ever impact on each other.

The ground they both use is a community facility as far as I know so neither has ownership rights to it and the Trust can and should use it to the best effect. It would be extremely churlish to prevent athletic using it just because Utd don't like it especially when it was they who put the hospitality facility in which both teams seem to use??....

Now, queue the usual suspects who will respond to belittle or abuse post and poster as it goes against their narrative....

Are they just planning to rely on friends and family of players for crowds? The town has pretty must exhausted any local support since United have been around for generations. 

They clung on the United's coat tails. I'd possibly have a bit more sympathy if they dis-associated themselves from United thanking them for their initial support becoming a junior club then totally reformed with new colours, name etc but they haven't quite done that.  They are trying to replicate the same image United have.  

I'm not a United fan, I just have an interest in local football but from what I see the whole thing stinks a bit. It will end in the same way Falkirk Juniors did.

Edited May 25, 2021 by latapythelegend

[Specky]

Are they just planning to rely on friends and family of players for crowds? The town has pretty must exhausted any local support since United have been around for generations. 
They clung on the United's coat tails. I'd possibly have a bit more sympathy if they dis-associated themselves from United thanking them for their initial support becoming a junior club then totally reformed with new colours, name etc but they haven't quite done that.  They are trying to replicate the same image United have.  
I'm not a United fan, I just have an interest in local football but from what I see the whole thing stinks a bit. It will end in the same way Falkirk Juniors did.

Their colours have always been blue and white as far back as I remember (even when playing in Linlithgow) so they haven't really stolen that identity.

As for support, it will be what it will be. I'd be astonished if they were expecting to get hundreds each week, but everyone has the right to choose. If another team started in Linlithgow then I'd want them to do well, without worrying that I or others may end up supporting them - that's just a bit daft and childish.

These guys seem to be able to attract sponsors etc which haven't impacted on Utd and he anything may even bring more interest to them being in a higher level? But depends on your ambition and foresight, but I would say that with the amount of criticism and resentment that they are receiving on here, athletic would be well within their rights to do their own thing and generate as much funding as they can.

Anyway, that's my opinion so I'm off for another hiatus til any real football starts again

[Auld Heid]

Think if club A applied, saying they were sharing at club B, there are no arguments (usually) Plenty of groundshares work very well, are there many instances of the Bo'ness situation happening before ? and how did they end up ? Honesty would be the policy, get more respect that way.

Groundshare is becoming a cheap option, abused by to many.

Some teams are using their hard earned on ground improvements. Whilst others upkeep costs are minimal in comparison.

Add the postcode lottery, where councils are supportive, in comparison to councils who are anything but helpful to the majority of clubs, in favour of the few.

[Cyclizine]

1 hour ago, Auld Heid said:

Groundshare is becoming a cheap option, abused by to many.

Some teams are using their hard earned on ground improvements. Whilst others upkeep costs are minimal in comparison.

Add the postcode lottery, where councils are supportive, in comparison to councils who are anything but helpful to the majority of clubs, in favour of the few.
 

It's unrealistic to expect every club to own their own ground, particularly when it'll stand idle every other Saturday. Yes, it costs money to develop grounds, but this is an investment. Clubs that rent a ground aren't able to invest in future facilities, do you think the clubs they share with let them play for free? They'll be paying a decent whack.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

6 hours ago, Auld Heid said:

Groundshare is becoming a cheap option, abused by to many.

Some teams are using their hard earned on ground improvements. Whilst others upkeep costs are minimal in comparison.

If a club use their hard earned on ground improvements they're entitled to get some more hard earned by renting it out to other clubs in a ground share as well. Goes both ways

[Auld Heid]

If a club use their hard earned on ground improvements they're entitled to get some more hard earned by renting it out to other clubs in a ground share as well. Goes both ways

Hardly realistic if you play on grass rather than plastic.

My point remains, as condition of entry teams should have a ground on which they have first and only call upon.

Instead we have teams who are like nomads and no tie to the local community.

Then you have the Bo'ness situation who gave up their park.

Now they are complaining about another team hiring the same park and joining the EoS - which is like giving up the wean for adoption and still wanting the family allowance.

Then you have the postcode lottery, where local authorities are supporting only some clubs and not all.

The EoS approach is more about quantity over quality and admitting teams who probably don't fully meet all ground criteria.

[AlanCamelonfan]

13 minutes ago, Auld Heid said:

Hardly realistic if you play on grass rather than plastic.

My point remains, as condition of entry teams should have a ground on which they have first and only call upon.

Instead we have teams who are like nomads and no tie to the local community.

Then you have the Bo'ness situation who gave up their park.

Now they are complaining about another team hiring the same park and joining the EoS - which is like giving up the wean for adoption and still wanting the family allowance.

Then you have the postcode lottery, where local authorities are supporting only some clubs and not all.

The EoS approach is more about quantity over quality and admitting teams who probably don't fully meet all ground criteria.

What a load of nonsense. Who has no tie to their local community? The only team is BSC?. Not sure who doesn't meet ground criteria in EOSFL. WOSFL have their development division which is allowing that. They have more groundshares than we do in the East.

You honestly need to move on. You are stuck in a romantic past aye teams had their own grounds but you pissed against a wall for gods sake. No where to wash hands and crumbling terracing.

Bo'ness didn't give up their park. The park always belonged to the people of Bo'ness its just that other than them no-one wanted to use it or were of the same mentality as you stuck in a time warp well they've always played their its their ground.

Maybe you should campaign for a return of the grade

[Auld Heid]

What a load of nonsense. Who has no tie to their local community? The only team is BSC?. Not sure who doesn't meet ground criteria in EOSFL. WOSFL have their development division which is allowing that. They have more groundshares than we do in the East.
You honestly need to move on. You are stuck in a romantic past aye teams had their own grounds but you pissed against a wall for gods sake. No where to wash hands and crumbling terracing.
Bo'ness didn't give up their park. The park always belonged to the people of Bo'ness its just that other than them no-one wanted to use it or were of the same mentality as you stuck in a time warp well they've always played their its their ground.
Maybe you should campaign for a return of the grade

Edu Sports have moved around to suit.

BSC from Glasgow to Alloa

Inverkeithing playing in a park surrounded by rope - people casually stepped over. Changing facilities away from park. Now looking at Dalgety Bay as an option. (That may finally give them proper roots).

Newtown Park may have been Gifted. But it was their base for years. In passing it over to NPA they chose to give up the right. Now complaining about another club wanting to use the same facilities and stepping on their toes.

Who pays for Camelon's upgrades. Or do they just appear magically?

[GNU_Linux]

Nice to see Auld Heid still giving it the BUT AYE WE OWN WUR GROUND big licks.

[GordonS]

1 hour ago, Auld Heid said:

Edu Sports have moved around to suit.
 

They now have a solid base and have built a stand.

Quote

Inverkeithing playing in a park surrounded by rope - people casually stepped over. Changing facilities away from park.

That's not true, they put up a four-foot orange plastic web perimeter round the outside of the running track. Yes, you can watch the game over it but big deal. Their changing facilities are no further from the park than Edinburgh Rugby's will be in their new stadium, or those at Heriot Watt.

Pic from NLS.

[AlanCamelonfan]

2 hours ago, Auld Heid said:

Edu Sports have moved around to suit.

BSC from Glasgow to Alloa

Inverkeithing playing in a park surrounded by rope - people casually stepped over. Changing facilities away from park. Now looking at Dalgety Bay as an option. (That may finally give them proper roots).

Newtown Park may have been Gifted. But it was their base for years. In passing it over to NPA they chose to give up the right. Now complaining about another club wanting to use the same facilities and stepping on their toes.

Who pays for Camelon's upgrades. Or do they just appear magically?



 

2 of which nothing to do with eosfl.

So we are at inverkeithing isnthe reason the eosfl is shite.

If ur renting a park ull be paying a packet just to play there

[Dev]

2 hours ago, GordonS said:

They now have a solid base and have built a stand.

That's not true, they put up a four-foot orange plastic web perimeter round the outside of the running track. Yes, you can watch the game over it but big deal. Their changing facilities are no further from the park than Edinburgh Rugby's will be in their new stadium, or those at Heriot Watt.

Pic from NLS.

Inverkeithing Hillside Sports

Well said.

The current ground gave this established youth football club the chance to move up into Senior football and they took it. Reaching the Premier Division.

Now they seem to be looking at taking over a Council facility at Dalgety Bay with excellent facilities including an astro-turf cage and two grass pitches. They'll presumably need to up-grade some aspects of it to achieve Licence standard but, all in all, they're a fine example of a progressive club.

 

[Andy groundhopper]

Think there's a difference between say a youth club entering senior football, and trying to make improvements along the way, OR a club who has no interest in getting a ground of their own, happily plodding along groundsharing here there and everywhere. If clubs are lucky enough to have council pitches/3g on their doorstep, then go and make use of them, but please try to improve.

[HibeeJibee]

Dalgety Bay and Inverkeithing near enough meet, and Hillfield is actually a part of Dalgety Bay.

I think AuldHeid needs to draw a distinction between clubs careening around the countryside trying to find a new home every few years... a criticism that can be levelled at BSCG (Ashfield > Maryhill > Alloa?), Edusport (Hamilton Palace > Annan > Bothwellhaugh?), or even Syngenta (Grangemouth > Dunipace > Little Kerse > Stenhousemuir?)... and thinking there needs to be 2 different licensed grounds in towns like Stirling or Bo'ness, or a dozen in Edinburgh.

It's perfectly sensible for the likes of Edinburgh City + Leith, Boroughmuir + Tynecastle, Falkirk + East Stirlingshire, Heriot-Watt Uni + Edinburgh College, and so on to share facilities.

Only oddity among those admitted to EOSL has really been Edinburgh South who've chosen to share out at Dalkeith. However they plan to develop somewhere like Fernieside (IIRC).

[Spyro]

10 minutes ago, HibeeJibee said:

Dalgety Bay and Inverkeithing near enough meet, and Hillfield is actually a part of Dalgety Bay.

I think AuldHeid needs to draw a distinction between clubs careening around the countryside trying to find a new home every few years... a criticism that can be levelled at BSCG (Ashfield > Maryhill > Alloa?), Edusport (Hamilton Palace > Annan > Bothwellhaugh?), or even Syngenta (Grangemouth > Dunipace > Little Kerse > Stenhousemuir?)... and thinking there needs to be 2 different licensed grounds in towns like Stirling or Bo'ness, or a dozen in Edinburgh.

It's perfectly sensible for the likes of Edinburgh City + Leith, Boroughmuir + Tynecastle, Falkirk + East Stirlingshire, Heriot-Watt Uni + Edinburgh College, and so on to share facilities.

Only oddity among those admitted to EOSL has really been Edinburgh South who've chosen to share out at Dalkeith. However they plan to develop somewhere like Fernieside (IIRC).

This is the sensible approach. I was surprised to read that the WoS will point-blank refuse entry to any clubs wanting to ground share though. I can’t see the logic in this. As long as clubs aren’t taking the piss, then I really don’t see the problem... maybe Letham should’ve joined up with one of the other Perth teams until they got their place sorted if they were serious about joining. My personal suspicion is that they probably didn’t fancy being stuck in a league full of West Lothian teams for 2-3 seasons though

[HibeeJibee]

Incidentally - by my reckoning these are the groundshares in senior and what remains of junior football next season. I may have missed some in this new West division.

Far from unique to EOS.


SPFL (1)
? + Queen's Park

Lowland (6)
Alloa + BSCG
Clyde + Cumbernauld
Falkirk + East Stirlingshire
Stirling Albion + Stirling Uni
? + Celtic B
? + Rangers B

East of Scotland (7)
Bo'ness Utd + Bo'ness Athletic
Boroughmuir + Tynecastle
Dalkeith + Edinburgh South
Edinburgh City + Leith
Heriot-Watt Uni + Edinburgh College
Spartans + LTHV
Stenhousemuir + Sygnenta

South of Scotland (3)
Caledonian Braves + Edusport Academy
Queen of the South + Heston
Stranraer + Stranraer SOS

West of Scotland (7)
Airdrie + Glasgow Uni
Broomhill + Finnart
Clydebank + Yoker
Cumbernauld Utd + Kirkintilloch
Petershill + Rossvale
Renfrews + St Peters
St Anthonys + St Cadocs

North Juniors (1)
Montrose + Montrose Roselea