Junior football, what is the future?

[Ginaro]

21 minutes ago, Auld Heid said:

Our biggest hurdle is many of our members believe the Pyramid involves playing Elgin away on a Tuesday evening.   Not sure without an EGM that our AGM alone would be enough to change such views.

As someone who is totally against the Pyramid - it has taken a lot of discussion for me to admit that it's also our only viable option going forwards.  Hence my concerns in my opening sentences.

If you look at the League 2 results you'll see that there was only two midweek matches before the round of fixtures Tuesday 2nd January (doesn't really count as it was a holiday and it was "local" matches): https://spfl.co.uk/league-two/results/ Since then there's only been 17 midweek matches, plus one scheduled.

[Ross.]

2 hours ago, Auld Heid said:

How it benefits the wider community - is difficult to see when its a private club (restrictive) and given they play 40 miles away for home games.  I appreciate they aren't setting out to harm or upset anyone.  It just seems an odd way to go about things and more business orientated than football.

One team out of how many associated with BSC play 40 miles away? The fact the Senior Football Club is one of the more visible and high profile faces of BSC is perhaps a bit unfair on BSC themselves. I think some people need to remember that and develop an ability to separate the aims and actions of BSC as a community sports organisation to that of BSC the football club. Just because one small part doesn't fit a specific criteria others are placing on it doesn't mean the rest of the organisation is the same.

I've said it before and will say it again, a lot of the negativity directed to BSC and to Edusport seems founded in arrogance. Every team had to start somewhere and every team had no history at one point.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Ross.

[Jason King]

20 minutes ago, Ginaro said:

If you look at the League 2 results you'll see that there was only two midweek matches before the round of fixtures Tuesday 2nd January (doesn't really count as it was a holiday and it was "local" matches): https://spfl.co.uk/league-two/results/ Since then there's only been 17 midweek matches, plus one scheduled.

For the last few years the SPFL have set league matches as Saturdays throughout the season, with the odd exception around Christmas and New Year, so the only time you would be going to Elgin on a Tuesday would be in a Cup match or when the original game has been postponed. And if you are going for a cup match you'll be getting a payment even if you get cuffed and also a % of the gate money.

It certainly does appear that clubs are telling people of what they think does happen rather than the actual facts.

[lithgierose]

8 minutes ago, Jason King said:

For the last few years the SPFL have set league matches as Saturdays throughout the season, with the odd exception around Christmas and New Year, so the only time you would be going to Elgin on a Tuesday would be in a Cup match or when the original game has been postponed. And if you are going for a cup match you'll be getting a payment even if you get cuffed and also a % of the gate money.

It certainly does appear that clubs are telling people of what they think does happen rather than the actual facts.

Last paragraph sums it up.

[Burnie_man]

One team out of how many associated with BSC play 40 miles away? The fact the Senior Football Club is one of the more visible and high profile faces of BSC is perhaps a bit unfair on BSC themselves. I think some people need to remember that and develop an ability to separate the aims and actions of BSC as a community sports organisation to that of BSC the football club. Just because one small part doesn't fit a specific criteria others are placing on it doesn't mean the rest of the organisation is the same.

I've said it before and will say it again, a lot of the negativity directed to BSC and to Edusport seems founded in arrogance. Every team had to start somewhere and every team had no history at one point.

 

That's all well and good, but to licence a club which has no home ground of its own and never did (BSC) or has no idea where its home is let alone a ground (Edusport) exposes the flaw in Licencing. It doesn't matter how many other teams they have, its the adult operation that needs the licence.

 

Everyone has to start somewhere but you should at least know where you come from and enter a league with your own ground in or near that base. If you dont then sort it first before even considering entering, and licencing should address that in some shape or form.

 

 

 

 

[Ross.]

Just now, Burnie_man said:

 

That's all well and good, but to licence a club which has no home ground of its own and never did (BSC) or has no idea where its home is let alone a ground (Edusport) exposes the flaw in Licencing. It doesn't matter how many other teams they have, its the adult operation that needs the licence.

Everyone has to start somewhere but you should at least know where you come from and enter a league with your own ground in or near that base. If you dont then sort it first before even considering it, and licencing should address that in some shape or form.

From a licensing POV I agree that clubs probably should have a permanent base sorted as part of the criteria, however, the rules are what they are and both BSC and Edusport comply with the rules, so you can't really have a go at them when the fault lies elsewhere.

[Burnie_man]

From a licensing POV I agree that clubs probably should have a permanent base sorted as part of the criteria, however, the rules are what they are and both BSC and Edusport comply with the rules, so you can't really have a go at them when the fault lies elsewhere.

They took advantage of the loophole in the rules, fair enough, doesnt mean to say they aren't open to criticism regarding how they operate. Edusport in particular are a sham, at least BSC are a football club, not an educational course.

[Ross.]

2 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

They took advantage of the loophole in the rules, fair enough, doesnt mean to say they aren't open to criticism regarding how they operate. Edusport in particular are a sham, at least BSC are a football club, not an educational course.

A sham how? They bring overseas students to Scotland on the basis of mixing sport with education. People seem willing to pay for the privilege. It's not everyone's cup of tea but is it any different to Celtic/Rangers/Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen bringing in foreign football players on the basis that they will punt them to England at the earlier opportunity of a decent profit? The players get something they want and Edusport put out a team. Unconventional in approach but one that seems to work for them.

[superbigal]

All those college teams in the US that get major tv coverage on mainline sports channels are absolute shambles (NOT)

[Jason King]

3 minutes ago, superbigal said:

All those college teams in the US that get major tv coverage on mainline sports channels are absolute shambles (NOT)

There are High School teams in the US that would put most of the SPFL to shame in terms of facilities and support.

[Burnie_man]

A sham how? They bring overseas students to Scotland on the basis of mixing sport with education. People seem willing to pay for the privilege. It's not everyone's cup of tea but is it any different to Celtic/Rangers/Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen bringing in foreign football players on the basis that they will punt them to England at the earlier opportunity of a decent profit? The players get something they want and Edusport put out a team. Unconventional in approach but one that seems to work for them.

Of course its completely different!

Its a farce that they are where they are, no base, no ground, no fans and now punting memberships at £25 a pop to have your say in running the team and take them to the Premiership in a cringy publicity stunt, copying a proven failed model.

Maybe the fees arent going far enough to cover costs.

At least with significant change beginning to happen at tier 6, this outfit shouldnt last too much longer at tier 5 or 6.

[Ross.]

1 minute ago, Burnie_man said:

Of course its completely different!

Its a farce that they are where they are, no base, no ground, no fans and now punting memberships at £25 a pop to have your say in running the team and take them to the Premiership in a cringy publicity stunt, copying a proven failed model.

Maybe the fees arent going far enough to cover costs.

At least with significant change beginning to happen at tier 6, this outfit shouldnt last too much longer at tier 5 or 6.

Different how? Their business model combines sport and education. I'm not a fan of the cringeworthy, headline grabbing membership pish they are going with but in terms of the "Get an education while getting a game of football" thing I see absolutely nothing wrong.

If and when others come aboard, Edusport will end up at whatever level they should be at. As should be the case. That is irrelevant to many of the criticisms they have aimed at them.

[HTG]

2 hours ago, Robert James said:

I hope the Committee's decision is ratified by the membership. Your club would be an excellent addition to the pyramid. Good luck.

We've already covered this. Nobody is going to lose a licence when they've (a) voted in favour of joining the pyramid and (b) are following the path identified by their governing body in consultation with the SFA. 

However much people want the applications into the pyramid to be the standard by which clubs are judged, it isn't so.  There is absolutely no risk to Linlithgow in licence terms. Their risks are around the SJFA securing the access they outlined in their February paper, the subsequent response in March and again at the East Region meeting in April. If the SJFA can't or don't deliver on their assurance, there's a whole different conversation to be had between those members who have opted to follow their pleas to keep the game together as a body at food level and those representing the SJFA and SFA.

[Burnie_man]

Different how? Their business model combines sport and education. I'm not a fan of the cringeworthy, headline grabbing membership pish they are going with but in terms of the "Get an education while getting a game of football" thing I see absolutely nothing wrong.
If and when others come aboard, Edusport will end up at whatever level they should be at. As should be the case. That is irrelevant to many of the criticisms they have aimed at them.

If you need me to explain why Edusport are different from SPFL clubs then I despair!

[Ross.]

6 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

If you need me to explain why Edusport are different from SPFL clubs then I despair!

If your answer includes any of the terms "History", "Tradition" or "Support" then large parts of your criticism will be completely irrelevant and not worth paying attention to.

They are unconventional but as long as they put out a team that shouldn't particularly matter.

[Burnie_man]

9 minutes ago, Ross. said:

If your answer includes any of the terms "History", "Tradition" or "Support" then large parts of your criticism will be completely irrelevant and not worth paying attention to.

They are unconventional but as long as they put out a team that shouldn't particularly matter.

You don't get to choose the rules.  Home ground, representing a community and yes, support play a major role in making a football club, none of that exists at Edusport nor is it likely to.  They are used as stick to beat the pyramid with by many, you just need to look on here.  It would be an easier sell if they weren't around and I can't help think that they are an accident nobody wanted.

However they are already there, they are only one "club" and hopefully they'll be gone soon.  I also hope it makes the SFA a little more wary.

Edited April 18, 2018 by Burnie_man

[bendan]

10 minutes ago, Ross. said:

 

They are unconventional but as long as they put out a team that shouldn't particularly matter.

I agree. As you say, they'll find their level, which won't be particularly high without any support. I don't think it's for the SFA to insist that a team must be associated with a particular location in order to get a licence, as long as they have a ground to play at and meet other criteria. We should be open to all kinds of models as long as basic criteria are fulfilled.

[Stag Nation]

1 hour ago, Ross. said:

I've said it before and will say it again, a lot of the negativity directed to BSC and to Edusport seems founded in arrogance. Every team had to start somewhere and every team had no history at one point.

Quite so. There's a team who started from nowhere with no history a mere six years ago, yet go tot this year's Scottish Cup semi.

[Ross.]

46 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

You don't get to choose the rules.  Home ground, representing a community and yes, support play a major role in making a football club, none of that exists at Edusport nor is it likely to.  They are used as stick to beat the pyramid with by many, you just need to look on here.  It would be an easier sell if they weren't around and I can't help think that they are an accident nobody wanted.

However they are already there, they are only one "club" and hopefully they'll be gone soon.  I also hope it makes the SFA a little more wary.

Edusport do represent a community. There is a group of French students who have moved to Scotland to study and play football. Ok, it’s a small community, but a community all the same.

I don’t think they particularly add much to our game, but they exist and as long as they do they are entitled to exist at as high a level as they can manage.

The incorporation of more teams into the senior pyramid should mean that they end up existing at a lower level. Providing of course that teams with history, tradition, grounds and support can run themselves well enough to overtake them.

[Burnie_man]

Edusport do represent a community. There is a group of French students who have moved to Scotland to study and play football. Ok, it’s a small community, but a community all the same.

Erm, the "community" is the team!

I don’t think they particularly add much to our game, but they exist and as long as they do they are entitled to exist at as high a level as they can manage.
The incorporation of more teams into the senior pyramid should mean that they end up existing at a lower level. Providing of course that teams with history, tradition, grounds and support can run themselves well enough to overtake them.

Here's hoping.