Jump to content

Pyramid 2019/2020


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, gogsy said:

:lol::lol: I know its not really relevant to this thread but would you be able to guess at the attendance?

Probably about 150 I reckon. Why you ask ?

If Larry does pop in he counts the money so he will certainly know the answer :P

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gogsy said:

Easy answer, was wondering what like Lochee United's attendances were this season.

To be honest no senior games in Dundee, top of the league, Junior cup 1/4s.  

No idea what they have to do to get better support.

Their social side is excellent.

Hardly anyone below 50 years old in the ground must be where the problem lies

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, GNU_Linux said:

@superbigalis there anything in the documents you have regarding the situation up north or clarification of the HL/LL demarcation line?

What is strikingly apparent about the documents is they appear to be a "sub group" of the PWG.

As there is never a mention of anything from the North and no person from the North represented, I conclude this is in effect a "Lowland" Pyramid sub group.

The only mention of the North is in the Maxwell email where it is noted the  North Juniors and the Highland League will have their own discussions.

I surmise from this that the Tayside juniors as part of the East Juniors were always apparently part of this "Lowland" Sub Pyramid group.

Again no mention of the HL/LL dividing line.

The only geography mentioned is the EOS objection to overlap.

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, superbigal said:

What is strikingly apparent about the documents is they appear to be a "sub group" of the PWG.

As there is never a mention of anything from the North and no person from the North represented, I conclude this is in effect a Lowland League Pyramid sub group.

The only mention of the North is in the Maxwell email where it is noted the  North Juniors and the Highland League will have their own discussions.

I surmise from this that the Tayside juniors as part of the East Juniors were always apparently part of the Lowland Sub Pyramid group.

Again no mention of the HL/LL dividing line.

The only geography mentioned is the EOS objection to overlap.

It got mentioned in the January 9th minutes that Burnie_Man posted up with John Greenhorn asking why a Highland League rep wasn't present.

On 15/02/2019 at 10:13, Burnie_man said:

JG mentioned that the SHFL were not represented at the working group. This was followed by a general discussion regarding the demarcation line and the geographical issues regarding that and how some teams would potentially have to travel large distances.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:


You must have missed the hundreds of posts on the holm park renovations and the long term plans for licensing.

I know the plans which are great, should provide the club a good base to work from.... In no way was I attempting to be derisory towards Clydebank..... However I was trying to say that certain people... Not you of course..... Are using the crowd size or history of a club or shelter size to downplay other clubs achievements.... Like bsc and Cumbernauld colts..... Which tend to show their complete lack of understand dung of what these clubs have gone through to get where they are..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, superbigal said:

What is strikingly apparent about the documents is they appear to be a "sub group" of the PWG.

As there is never a mention of anything from the North and no person from the North represented, I conclude this is in effect a Lowland League Pyramid sub group.

The only mention of the North is in the Maxwell email where it is noted the  North Juniors and the Highland League will have their own discussions.

I surmise from this that the Tayside juniors as part of the East Juniors were always apparently part of the Lowland Sub Pyramid group.

Again no mention of the HL/LL dividing line.

The only geography mentioned is the EOS objection to overlap.

The no mention of the dividing line is interesting as the LL advertisement from yesterday uses the current mid-point of the Tay Bridge dividing line which is a tad confusing in light of the PWG seemingly being a subgroup focused on the South. Unless as you speculated in an earlier post somehow the dividing line will be applied differently to different clubs i.e. Brechin Vics would be Lowland but Brechin City Highland.

If the line is adjusted to further north the question remains where does the line get drawn now (I don't know geography to well in that part of the country). I'd assume whatever the cutoff is between Angus & Aberdeenshire geographically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

It got mentioned in the January 9th minutes that Burnie_Man posted up with John Greenhorn asking why a Highland League rep wasn't present.

 

I get that but there was no HL rep at any meeting.  

Also no mention of apologies etc.

Also in the November minutes so far unseen.

Ian Maxwell confirmed East, South and Lowland Leagues have fairly similar discipline procedures etc. Junior football is different.

This is a fairly lengthy document that repeatedly refers to Lower.

 

So absolutely no mention of Highland League in a single "Sub-Group" of the Pyramid Working Group meeting.

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At all times in the minutes of November they refer to "Lower Pyramid" rules,  "LowerPyramid" play off rules etc.

Remember at this meeting no objections are noted to the Maxwell position.

George Fraser of the Lowland League repeatedly indicates he will "tweak" or "create" whatever is needed.

Like I previously said, either the EOS reps were A: Asleep or B: had no objections C: Were ignored and not minuted.

As these minutes were not produced until after the January meeting no one had a chance to leak them or pass comment on them.

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, superbigal said:

I get that but there was no HL rep at any meeting.  

Also no mention of apologies etc.

Also in the November minutes so far unseen.

Ian Maxwell confirmed East, South and Lowland Leagues have fairly similar discipline procedures etc. Junior football is different.

 

So absolutely no mention of Highland League.

When January 9th was mentioned as a PWG meeting previously I remember it being referenced as a subset of the PWG, so I'm not surprised there was no Highland League rep there.

I am agreeing with your EoS going over old ground during January 9th by referencing why there wasn't a Highland League representative. Something appears to have been decided previously. Which is why it gets hand waved in the minutes as

Quote

This was followed by a general discussion regarding the demarcation line and the geographical issues regarding that and how some teams would potentially have to travel large distances.

 

Quote

TJ said that the matter had already been agreed by the Scottish FA Board and that AR and JG were going over old ground. The decision has been made at Scottish FA Board level and it has to be agreed how it will work. It cannot be changed or challenged at this stage.

So it isn't clear going by the January minutes what has been decided. Especially in light of the Lowland League only advertising for applications South of the Tay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is an interesting comment made by unknown.

This is in relation to the Juniors joining.

"There was a suggestion of a trial year but it was felt it was only delaying the change"  Ian Maxwell suggested "It was a trial year anyway, as unlikely any club would be in a position to go up, due to not having a club license"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, superbigal said:

Well I now have access to the following documents. I believe 2 of them have been "published" on here already.

Email 25th October from Ian Maxwell 16.18 gmt

Board Meeting Notes EOSFL 25th October 19.00 to 21.30 gmt

Minutes Sub Group Pyramid Working Group 14th November

Minutes Sub Group Pyramid Working Group 9th January.

Will chew over them before passing comment or copying in full.

What I immediately find most interesting is that the complaints on the January minutes that the November minutes had not been circulated.

Particularly because the EOS were apparently not agreeing with the directive in the October email from Ian Maxwell

This is  slightly odd, in light of the opening paragraph in the November minutes, which I will print immediately. It certainly does not show any Eos objection at that time. Forgive me for bolding a few words.

Ian Maxwell welcoming everyone to the first sub-group meeting of the Pyramid Working Group. He confirmed that the Pyramid Working Group had previously discussed the structure and agreed the implementation of the proposed changes for season 2019/20

The other immediate standout, is the apparent what I would call fundamental understanding foul up or difference of opinion by the EOS representatives in the January minutes, where the objections do officially appear for the 1st time. To me this smacks of some old clueless duffer. Of course I could be completely wrong and apologies if said gentleman is not an old fogy.

Andrew Renwick (Vice President EOS) mentioned that the contentious matter was Tayside. That would be where the EOS would object. 

John Greenhorn (Secretary EOS) clarified that rather than Tayside, another East League would be the issue.

 

This is where Tom Johnston does come steaming in telling them that they are "going over old ground"

The  Eos then declare they will have objections.

Laura Dougan then tells everone in effect to pull their finger out with any "concerns" so as to not delay the process.

Tom Johnston then apparently tells Ian Maxwell to get the SFA board to issue the statement that he  believes should have been published shortly after October.

This apparently is due to the issues now being raised by the EOS which could in effect cause an issue with the PWG complying with the SFA board directive.

 

I do not want to cherry pick what I print but I do have to say the EOS input is not particularly consistent, and they appear to be asleep on the job in November.

The EOS minutes in October suggested they would be indeed pushing their own arguments at the November PWG meeting. The reality is there are no objections certainly in print.

Those EOS minutes in October do also back up the old duffer theory because they do state that the PWG had agreed to the formation of 2 additional Tier 6 leagues. One of which being a Tayside league.  I really cannot see anywhere where they came up with this. And for Andrew Renwick to still have this in his head 3 months later in January and be corrected by his own secretary is plain odd.

 

Before anyone has a pop at me I am not in either camp.  I just want the best for Scottish Non League. Just does not look particularly good on paper for certain representatives.

 

I also did hear today that the SFA statement is actually at long last imminent.

Should be interesting.

 

 

 

If that was the case why did the hey make the announcement in November if eos said nothing. Smacks of they thought they could railroad people into it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, superbigal said:

There is an interesting comment made by unknown.

This is in relation to the Juniors joining.

"There was a suggestion of a trial year but it was felt it was only delaying the change"  Ian Maxwell suggested "It was a trial year anyway, as unlikely any club would be in a position to go up, due to not having a club license"

Out of curiosity, for the November 14th meeting is TJ the only SJFA representative?

In the January 9th minutes it was mentioned that the West Region & East Region don't need to be represented as TJ is there for both of them. Yet the way the Highland/North Region dicussions have been referenced makes it sound like it has been delegated to the North Region.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Ian McQueen (Assistant Secretary/treasurer, Scottish Junior FA) was also present.

He apparently was the only person not present in January.  I assume he does not represent a SJFA league.

It was Andrew Renwick that  asked why the SJFA leagues were not represented at January meeting.

Not sure why and perhaps his understanding of the junior structure and hierarchy is really poor. That is backed up by his Tayside comment later on that is amended by John Greenhorn

 

Edited by superbigal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, superbigal said:

No Ian McQueen (Assistant Secretary/treasurer, Scottish Junior FA) was also present.

He apparently was the only person not present in January.  I assume he does not represent a SJFA league.

It was Andrew Renwick that apparently asked why the SJFA leagues were not represented at January meeting.

Not sure why and perhaps his understanding of the junior structure and hierarchy is really poor. That is backed up b his Tayside comment later on.

 

He's assistant secretary/treasurer, cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Out of curiosity, for the November 14th meeting is TJ the only SJFA representative?
In the January 9th minutes it was mentioned that the West Region & East Region don't need to be represented as TJ is there for both of them. Yet the way the Highland/North Region dicussions have been referenced makes it sound like it has been delegated to the North Region.
Theres also the question of the NCL as well. Im sure I read they did internal polling regarding the pyramid or something to that effect.

I dont frequent or post on fitbanorth but have these NRJFA/HL meetings ever been mentioned at all there?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting Al and thanks for sharing.

 

Minutes obviously aren't transcripts of everything that was discussed, hence why you have passages of "there followed a discussion on....."

 

It's also amateur in the extreme that minutes of the Nov meeting had not been released before the Jan meeting, quite astonishing.

 

The bottom line is that the last meeting is the only one that really matters and the Lowland League Chairman confirmed that changes to play-offs required agreement, but that until he had a proposal to work with he couldn't seek that agreement. The SFA cant force change or ignore the rules.

 

The EoS reps could have been much clearer on the objections, it all appeared a bit hamfisted, however those objections are now known (and have been aired at previous meetings).

 

So IMO nothing really changes and TJ is now worried, hence wanting the board to intervene, but I cant see how the board can do anything apart from advise the PWG to seek a solution in the east that is agreeable to everyone.

 

Also, the unanswered question, all in or nobody in, the SJFA can't alter that approach without an egm or agm. TJ has always underlined the fact that the SJFA can only move into the Pyramid in its entirety. So how can he claim a deal is done if the NRJFA arent interested?

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, GNU_Linux said:

Theres also the question of the NCL as well. Im sure I read they did internal polling regarding the pyramid or something to that effect.

I dont frequent or post on fitbanorth but have these NRJFA/HL meetings ever been mentioned at all there?

Not that I have seen. Only references I have seen to their happening it on here.

As for the NCL, they are meant to have voted for the pyramid at their AGM back in June.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Burnie I believe it is because this is a new "sub group" and not the historical "pwg"

That explains why the North Juniors are never mentioned.

It is feasible that a "North Sub Group" is in existence but maybe never met ?

Remember who said the North Juniors were not interested ?

No paper evidence to support that.

Edited by superbigal
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...