Jump to content

Junior football, what is the future?


Burnie_man

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, AlanCamelonfan said:

The EOSFL are happy as long as they apply the same rules as everyone else. where you may be mistaken as to who might not like it might be the West Lowland league teams who if they were to be relegated fall into the myre of being controlled by SJFA

EK unlikely to,BSC not even in the West. So it “might” affect one team !

Whenever I mention Bonnyton being made to play in the West Juniors I get told it’s just 1 team.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, craigkillie said:

Do you have any evidence to show that they aren't? Everything I've seen has suggested that they'd very happy to have the West Region on board in whatever form.

The nit picking over discipline suggests it.

The SFA have met with the Juniors and agreed that it’s all sorted,the SoSL are happy with it.

Guess who brings it up at every opportunity? Take a wild guess?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

The nit picking over discipline suggests it.

The SFA have met with the Juniors and agreed that it’s all sorted,the SoSL are happy with it.

Guess who brings it up at every opportunity? Take a wild guess?

Right so going into playoff game. Junior player two yellows doesnt get banned and can play in the game. EOSFL played 2 yellows gets banned. Straight forward enough for you? Why should they pay fines to stop them getting a ban to line TJs pockets

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, AlanCamelonfan said:

Right so going into playoff game. Junior player two yellows doesnt get banned and can play in the game. EOSFL played 2 yellows gets banned. Straight forward enough for you? Why should they pay fines to stop them getting a ban to line TJs pockets

I knew you’d never understand.

 Suspensions are aligned under the agreement with the SFA.

Straight forward enough for you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

The nit picking over discipline suggests it.

The SFA have met with the Juniors and agreed that it’s all sorted,the SoSL are happy with it.

Guess who brings it up at every opportunity? Take a wild guess?

My feeling is that the issue of discipline is minor, and that if that was the only issue then the EoS would get on with it, even if they disagreed with the implementation. It is fairly clear to everyone that the main sticking point for them is the involvement of the East Juniors as a separate league at the same level in the same area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

I knew you’d never understand.

 Suspensions are aligned under the agreement with the SFA.

Straight forward enough for you?

So whya re they still issueing fines then? As longs they are completley in line with ours then theirs no problem and is not a show stopper. SO f**k up about it. Just stop the nonsense with the East and everything will be fine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

EK unlikely to,BSC not even in the West. So it “might” affect one team !

Whenever I mention Bonnyton being made to play in the West Juniors I get told it’s just 1 team.

 

Cumbernauld and Edusport as well.

33 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

The nit picking over discipline suggests it.

The SFA have met with the Juniors and agreed that it’s all sorted,the SoSL are happy with it.

Guess who brings it up at every opportunity? Take a wild guess?

I don't have the minutes to hand but the way I tend to remember it the EoS usually as clarifying questions on certain issues and get the response from either one of SFA or SJFA reps as to why things are the way things are. 

I don't recall the EoS declaring any of the answers unacceptable to the point of preventing access.

When it comes to the recent unanimous votes the EoS & LL I haven't seen anyone declare exactly what was being voted on. The news of the votes came on the heels of the SFA finally proposing a lower pyramid playoff format.

For all I know the unanimous vote was against the format and the discipline discrepancies were a minor factor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

This is obviously wrong. There is no "pyramid feeder league" to be recognised in the first place. If a licensed club North of Tay applied to the HFL, they would be accepted based on the current rules.

Wow, I would love to see that theory tested by (say) an Angus club making an application to join the HFL !  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, AlanCamelonfan said:

So whya re they still issueing fines then? As longs they are completley in line with ours then theirs no problem and is not a show stopper. SO f**k up about it. Just stop the nonsense with the East and everything will be fine

The fines are nothing to do with the EoSL.

If Junior clubs want to stop paying them then they can have them scrapped at their AGMs.

Is there something in the water through in Camelon today? A leak from Grangemouth perhaps? :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Cumbernauld and Edusport as well.

I don't have the minutes to hand but the way I tend to remember it the EoS usually as clarifying questions on certain issues and get the response from either one of SFA or SJFA reps as to why things are the way things are. 

I don't recall the EoS declaring any of the answers unacceptable to the point of preventing access.

When it comes to the recent unanimous votes the EoS & LL I haven't seen anyone declare exactly what was being voted on. The news of the votes came on the heels of the SFA finally proposing a lower pyramid playoff format.

For all I know the unanimous vote was against the format and the discipline discrepancies were a minor factor.

Don’t get me started on Edusport.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

My feeling is that the issue of discipline is minor, and that if that was the only issue then the EoS would get on with it, even if they disagreed with the implementation. It is fairly clear to everyone that the main sticking point for them is the involvement of the East Juniors as a separate league at the same level in the same area.

Your feeling isn’t borne out by the actions of the EoSL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have the minutes to hand but the way I tend to remember it the EoS usually as clarifying questions on certain issues and get the response from either one of SFA or SJFA reps as to why things are the way things are. 
I don't recall the EoS declaring any of the answers unacceptable to the point of preventing access.
When it comes to the recent unanimous votes the EoS & LL I haven't seen anyone declare exactly what was being voted on. The news of the votes came on the heels of the SFA finally proposing a lower pyramid playoff format.
For all I know the unanimous vote was against the format and the discipline discrepancies were a minor factor.
The vote was to either accept or reject the SFA's proposal, the basics of which were Juniors in west and east at tier 6 alongside EoS and SoS, with rules only fully aligning at play-off stage. The document from the SFA was pretty light on detail.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

Compromises could be along the lines of that we have a 5 year trial. The winner of the East Juniors plays the winners of the West Juniors with the winner facing winner of play off between EOS/SOS in a one of final and make it a big marketable occasion.

Let's keep a sense of proportion: it would not be "a big marketable occasion". It would be a play-off for entry to a league whose average attendance is barely into treble figure. The prize for the winner of that league, in turn, is the opportunity to try for entry to a league which is only marginally more attractive.

Apple, Coca Cola and Nike will not be queueing up to sponsor it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


I disagree with KB and im not sure his views on the EOSL clubs and the way they are expressed is reflective of the views of our support as a whole.
I feel sorry if he is involved at your club in an official capacity. He does the club absolutely no favours.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kilbowie Benches said:

They keep harping on about it! 

That is not the same as it being a deal breaker for them. It is clear to everyone (except you apparently), that the deal breaker is the East overlap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, craigkillie said:

That is not the same as it being a deal breaker for them. It is clear to everyone (except you apparently), that the deal breaker is the East overlap.

I’ve already said I get they don’t like the overlap ffs

I don’t get why they can’t bring themselves to come out and say that they agree to the West coming in which so far they haven’t.

Maybe Burnieman can get John Gree oops!  his source to make a statement  confirming that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:
2 hours ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

I disagree with KB and im not sure his views on the EOSL clubs and the way they are expressed is reflective of the views of our support as a whole.

I feel sorry if he is involved at your club in an official capacity. He does the club absolutely no favours.

Pompous ^^^

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...