Pyramid 2019/2020

[FairWeatherFan]

Not entirely sure Bonnyrigg and any others should be basing an appeal or challenge on a derogation on the 2019 criteria. In Bonnyrigg's own statement they say they have a planning application in, but don't yet have permission. So while they can physically and financially install floodlights this close season, Bonnyrigg and the SFA are dependent on a 3rd party granting them permission to do so.

That's something that may never be granted, but in accepting a derogation the SFA have set a precendent that opens them up to future applications that don't meet all the criteria. Think that's why the Gala poster came in to say the SFA take a very black and white decision on these matters.

Any challenge should be on the moratorium set by an interim Chief Exec and the February SFA Board meeting being cancelled delaying proceedings a further 3 months, preventing clubs meeting the criteria in time for the 2019/20 season.

[Gimme]

Not entirely sure Bonnyrigg and any others should be basing an appeal or challenge on a derogation on the 2019 criteria. In Bonnyrigg's own statement they say they have a planning application in, but don't yet have permission. So while they can physically and financially install floodlights this close season, Bonnyrigg and the SFA are dependent on a 3rd party granting them permission to do so.
That's something that may never be granted, but in accepting a derogation the SFA have set a precendent that opens them up to future applications that don't meet all the criteria. Think that's why the Gala poster came in to say the SFA take a very black and white decision on these matters.
Any challenge should be on the moratorium set by an interim Chief Exec and the February SFA Board meeting being cancelled delaying proceedings a further 3 months, preventing clubs meeting the criteria in time for the 2019/20 season.

As I understand it planning permission should be in place next week.

[FairWeatherFan]

24 minutes ago, leftbehind said:

So technically   all going smoothly with the ground works ,power cable installation, connection and final inspection and signing off by power company they will be ready for the Nov/Dec Audit for next seasons re-application.   Bearing in mind they are proposing to have an under 20,s team up and running for next season.  all these games are mid week so things should be fine without having to switch any games within the County.

Is there a particular reason it'd take till Nov/Dec to be re-audited?

[Crossbar]

The SFA doesn't always get what it wants, as has been recently become apparent. Plus the Highland League has refused to reduce to 16 clubs, 5 years on from the 16 club declaration. .
Als,o does it really want a petition in support of Bonnyrigg, potential legal action, questions in parliament, and the SFA 'losing face' ?  Yes the Old Firm dominate the corridors of power, but sometimes  even they don't win (rejection of the Colts). This could become an unpleasant saga, when the above solution is in the best interest of all sides, and would satisfy the parties concerned because :
* a stronger Lowland League, on a permanent basis
* Bonnyrigg win promotion, but only with a derogation of floodlights,with the same rights as Vale of Leithen, Civi Service, Strollers and Whitehill Welfare
* even if Berwick Rangers are relegated, there would still be a minimum of one SLL vacancy, to be filled by an eligible applicant to the Lowland. It would safeguard Dalbeattie, and potentially Whitehill, if they have applied to remain in the SLL, and this situation would not occur again in future
* enable the Lowland League to introduce floodlights as a mandatory requirement for ALL new and existing clubs, from the expiry of the derogation (as above)
* increase the number of promoted teams to the Lowland League from 2 to 3 each season, albeit in an 18 league structure, with clubs 17 & 18 being relegated if the feeder league champions are licensed (important as the number of licensed clubs will increase), and also relegate club 16 (if there is an additional SPFL club being replaced by the Highland League champions, or because an existing club 'does a Selkirk'. With an appropriate adjustment to the badly existing  written SLL clause,  club 15 could never be relegated in any circumstances
* give a greater incentive to the top West Juniors to join the pyramid : ie 2 SLL promotion places ongoing, for licensed champion clubs in the East, West and South (if all 3 champions qualify)
The Lowland League should promote the above change with the SFA, and publicise the OVERALL benefits, to be implemented at the AGM next month. 
SOME SUPPORT FROM P&B POSTERS WOULD BE APPRECIATED PLEASE
 
 

Agreed. Moving to an 18-team LL could be the answer:

Whitehall, Bonnyrigg, Berwick and one applicant (probably Penicuik/Broxburn) would get you to a stronger 18-team league.

That would also mean the three teams who finished 6th in the EoS conference go up to the EoS Premier.

LL teams would have to enter some of the cups (South Challenge/ FNEoSQC) in later rounds to avoid fixtures congestion. But shouldn’t be a problem with that

[Robert James]

2 hours ago, Burnie_man said:

Robert, you need to calm down a little!  people do take notice occasionally of what is posted on here but that diagram is all fantasy nonsense.

We are only at the stage of taking small baby steps towards change (at best), you've seen what the SFA attitude was to all 6 clubs without floodlights, also the attiude of the SJFA.  Change has always been and always will be slow, and we will never end up with a perfect pyramid system I'm afraid.

This thread really was about how the Pyramid will look next season, and we now know - Bonnyrigg scenario apart - what it will look like.  There is a thread somewhere on here dedicated to mad cap pyramid plans.

 

Now "calm down"  burnie_man, it wasn't my post that you are referring to.  It was written by Honestman,  if you bother to check.  My response was clearly against his proposal, on the basis that we can't even sort out the current Pyramid problems, so we have no chance of extending it to Amateur Leagues as well.

What would be useful though would be if you would comment on the post I did write, about the Lowland League, and my suggestion for a "win win" solution, to resolve the current debacle about Bonnyrigg, and the SFA ! 

Any chance of an apology ?

 

[Burnie_man]

Now "calm down"  burnie_man, it wasn't my post that you are referring to.  It was written by Honestman,  if you bother to check.  My response was clearly against his proposal, on the basis that we can't even sort out the current Pyramid problems, so we have no chance of extending it to Amateur Leagues as well.
What would be useful though would be if you would comment on the post I did write, about the Lowland League, and my suggestion for a "win win" solution, to resolve the current debacle about Bonnyrigg, and the SFA ! 
Any chance of an apology ?
 

I was referring to your capital letter rant (which is shouting) asking for support, support for what exactly? What will you do with that support? Take a deep breath.

[Robert James]

13 hours ago, Robert James said:

Turn the present situation from a "lose lose" for Bonnyrigg and for the SFA/Lowland League,  into a "win win" for all concerned.

How ?  Side step the issues, and go for a positive outcome.

The Lowland  is a 16 club league, with only 15 clubs for 2018/19.  As a top tier feeder league to the SPFL, it needs to be increased to an 18 club league  for 2019/20 and beyond.  A league of 16 clubs, is too few for Tier 5, and the number of league games is too low. It is out of step with other relevant  leagues - see comparisons  below. 

The BENEFITS of increasing the Lowland League, are obvious in my view.

* league games are of primary importance in the pyramid, determining the relative strengths of clubs, and giving opportunities for advancement

* two additional clubs in the Lowland League would give additional protection against relegation to Tier 6, and probably increased revenue each season from the  extra league matches

* both champions of the EoSL and the SoSL (if licensed), could be promoted to the Lowland League without requiring playoffs. This could be increased to 3 promotion opportunities to give an automatic promotion spot to the West feeder league, if one is formed. It may also help mitigate against a promotion 'logjam', when the West feeder league is created

* would strengthen the case for automatic promotion for the winner of the Lowland/Highland  champion club, as SPFL Club 42 would be relegated automatically

*  would reduce the impact on the SLL club which defeats Club 42, of having to play 6 additional league matches per season (a sizeable increase)

* and significantly, would resolve the present fiasco concerning Bonnyrigg Rose, who could be awarded a floodlight (exemption) derogation, to enable this club to be be promoted to the SLL for season 2019/20, without adversely impacting upon any other club who are currently seeking to join, or remain in the SLL, Bonnyrigg would be given the same length of time that this "derogation" is to be given to the 3 existing Lowland Clubs without floodlights. It would create a level playing field,  for the 4 clubs concerned, albeit for this season only, as everyone would know the rules for the future ! 

Comparisons......

Scotland

Premier  :  38 league matches.      Championship, League One & League Two   :   36 league matches each

Highland League  :  34 league matches  (which despite SFA pressure, the HFL doesn't wish to change)

Lowland League  :  30 matches (but only 28 matches  this season)

England 

Championship, Division One & Division Two  :  46 matches

National League  Premier :  46 matches.     National Leagues North & South  :  42 matches each

Northern Premier League, Southern League Premier Central & Premier South, Isthmian League  :   42 matches each  

Step 4 Leagues  :  38 matches in each of the seven divisions (soon to be increased to eight divisions)

Step 5 Leagues  :   mostly playing  38 matches, across fourteen divisions (also due to be increased to sixteen divisions) .

********

Yes, and I know that the SFA wants the HFL and the SLL to both have  (only) 16 clubs at this level.   But this would be an ideal time to change.

My post reproduced here, for  burnie_man.

Hardly a "rant" surely ?

 

[Burnie_man]

Looking increasingly like Berwick Rangers will be relegated to LL meaning no vacancy for EoS clubs to apply to.

[FairWeatherFan]

2 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

Looking increasingly like Berwick Rangers will be relegated to LL meaning no vacancy for EoS clubs to apply to.

No vacancy could well split how supportive the LL might be to Bonnyrigg trying to reverse their licencing decision.

By the way after the EoS board meeting the other week has any proposals been sent round to the clubs for changes to be voted on ahead of the AGM? Seeded Conferences at Tier 7, King Cup for Tier 7 and the like?

[Burnie_man]

4-0, it's effectively over for Berwick.

 

Not heard anything.

[Robert James]

34 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

Looking increasingly like Berwick Rangers will be relegated to LL meaning no vacancy for EoS clubs to apply to.

Yes : Berwick lost 0-4 in the  first leg.

Frequently when there is an issue where neither participant is prepared to 'depart from its view  that "they are right", continuing with the argument (eg Brexit, EJFA, etc), rarely results in an acceptable outcome. After years working in industrial/employment relations, you soon learn that things are going nowhere, or both sides end up getting  burnt.

That is why it is often useful for 3rd parties to "look outside the box" for a way ahead.

You have chosen not to respond to my suggestion that increasing the Lowland League to 18 clubs,which IMO is  desirable for the pyramid, now, and as a future structure for the SLL. Just look at the comparisons (of the number of league matches played), in my list of leagues. it is also a solution where no one gets hurt.   On one of the above posts, it is suggested that there may be a split in the EoS about Bonnyrigg's position. Is that a good idea ? No. Hence go for a "win win" solution, which is "outside the box."

In answering your question regarding what I am going to do about it, the answer is "nothing".  However, P&B is not without influence, and it is read by many including Association, League and Club  Officials. Probably by some of the media ? Therefore any positive responses on here may help to provide an agreed way ahead. 

Edited May 11, 2019 by Robert James
typo

[FairWeatherFan]

We'd basically know where everyone was going to be for 2019/20 if it hadn't been for the Lowland League okaying the extension on the licensing situation. Now there's a little bit of doubt which would just mean a straight swap of Bonnyrigg and Whitehill.

[Footballfirst]

I'll repeat something I said some time ago that, from my understanding of the LL rules, there is no mechanism by which Berwick can directly replace Selkirk in the LL, unless the LL Board backtracks on its decision immediately following Selkirk's demise, i.e. that the league would operate with 15 teams for the season, as if Selkirk did not participate. 

Berwick's relegation will require that a LL side is also relegated.  That could be Dalbeattie or Whitehill depending on how the LL/SFA/EoS plays out the Bonnyrigg situation. 

Selkirk's position can only be filled by application. Any side that is relegated from the LL may apply to take up the vacancy along with any other prospective licensed club, from the EoS or elsewhere.

I suspect that it is more likely than not that Whitehill will escape relegation due to Bonnyrigg being unlicenced, but will then be relegated as a result of Berwick dropping into the LL (assuming that they don't apply to some Northumberland league). However, I still think that Whitehill's application to take up the Selkirk vacancy will be accepted, so there will be no change to the final make up of next season's LL, barring Berwick's inclusion.     

I'd hope that all parties have already agreed what will happen following the 2nd leg of the Cove/Berwick playoff and will be in a position to announce what is happening in short order thereafter.   

Edited May 11, 2019 by Footballfirst

[FairWeatherFan]

6 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

I'll repeat something I said some time ago that, from my understanding of the LL rules, there is no mechanism by which Berwick can directly replace Selkirk in the LL, unless the LL Board backtracks on its decision immediately following Selkirk's demise, i.e. that the league would operate with 15 teams for the season, as if Selkirk did not participate. 

Berwick's relegation will require that a LL side is also relegated.  That could be Dalbeattie or Whitehill depending on how the LL/SFA/EoS plays out the Bonnyrigg situation. 

Selkirk's position can only be filled by application. Any side that is relegated from the LL may apply to take up the vacancy along with any other prospective licensed club, from the EoS or elsewhere.

I suspect that it is more likely than not that Whitehill will escape relegation due to Bonnyrigg being unlicenced, but will then be relegated as a result of Berwick dropping into the LL (assuming that they don't apply to some Northumberland league). However, I still think that Whitehill's application to take up the Selkirk vacancy will be accepted, so there will be no change to the final make up of next season's LL, barring Berwick's inclusion.     

I'd hope that all parties have already agreed what will happen following the 2nd leg of the Cove/Berwick playoff and will be in a position to announce what is happening in short order thereafter.   

The bottom club are only relegated if there is a licensed Tier 6 champion = there isn't. So bottom club isn't relegated.

The additional rules for relegation only take place if they end up with a number other than 16 members. With Berwick joining the LL 15 that's exactly 16 members. So B4a and B4b don't apply.

The only hope now is that Bonnyrigg can get licensed and accepted as a licensed Tier 6 champion and Whitehill don't fight relegation.

[Salvo Montalbano]

Not entirely sure Bonnyrigg and any others should be basing an appeal or challenge on a derogation on the 2019 criteria. In Bonnyrigg's own statement they say they have a planning application in, but don't yet have permission. So while they can physically and financially install floodlights this close season, Bonnyrigg and the SFA are dependent on a 3rd party granting them permission to do so.
That's something that may never be granted, but in accepting a derogation the SFA have set a precendent that opens them up to future applications that don't meet all the criteria. Think that's why the Gala poster came in to say the SFA take a very black and white decision on these matters.
Any challenge should be on the moratorium set by an interim Chief Exec and the February SFA Board meeting being cancelled delaying proceedings a further 3 months, preventing clubs meeting the criteria in time for the 2019/20 season.

Why would it set a precedent? No other club is going to apply before having the goalposts shifted after their application was made and their fee was paid? The SFA shouldn't (and surely aren't allowed to) change their rules halfway through a process.

[FairWeatherFan]

Just now, Salvo Montalbano said:

6 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Not entirely sure Bonnyrigg and any others should be basing an appeal or challenge on a derogation on the 2019 criteria. In Bonnyrigg's own statement they say they have a planning application in, but don't yet have permission. So while they can physically and financially install floodlights this close season, Bonnyrigg and the SFA are dependent on a 3rd party granting them permission to do so.
That's something that may never be granted, but in accepting a derogation the SFA have set a precendent that opens them up to future applications that don't meet all the criteria. Think that's why the Gala poster came in to say the SFA take a very black and white decision on these matters.
Any challenge should be on the moratorium set by an interim Chief Exec and the February SFA Board meeting being cancelled delaying proceedings a further 3 months, preventing clubs meeting the criteria in time for the 2019/20 season.

Why would it set a precedent? No other club is going to apply before having the goalposts shifted after their application was made and their fee was paid? The SFA shouldn't (and surely aren't allowed to) change their rules halfway through a process.

Right this very minute there are a bunch of clubs that don't currently have floodlights that were also rejected. Bonnyrigg aren't alone in this.

 

[Duraglit shareholder]

17 hours ago, Robert James said:

Turn the present situation from a "lose lose" for Bonnyrigg and for the SFA/Lowland League,  into a "win win" for all concerned.

How ?  Side step the issues, and go for a positive outcome.

The Lowland  is a 16 club league, with only 15 clubs for 2018/19.  As a top tier feeder league to the SPFL, it needs to be increased to an 18 club league  for 2019/20 and beyond.  A league of 16 clubs, is too few for Tier 5, and the number of league games is too low. It is out of step with other relevant  leagues - see comparisons  below. 

The BENEFITS of increasing the Lowland League, are obvious in my view.

* league games are of primary importance in the pyramid, determining the relative strengths of clubs, and giving opportunities for advancement

* two additional clubs in the Lowland League would give additional protection against relegation to Tier 6, and probably increased revenue each season from the  extra league matches

* both champions of the EoSL and the SoSL (if licensed), could be promoted to the Lowland League without requiring playoffs. This could be increased to 3 promotion opportunities to give an automatic promotion spot to the West feeder league, if one is formed. It may also help mitigate against a promotion 'logjam', when the West feeder league is created

* would strengthen the case for automatic promotion for the winner of the Lowland/Highland  champion club, as SPFL Club 42 would be relegated automatically

*  would reduce the impact on the SLL club which defeats Club 42, of having to play 6 additional league matches per season (a sizeable increase)

* and significantly, would resolve the present fiasco concerning Bonnyrigg Rose, who could be awarded a floodlight (exemption) derogation, to enable this club to be be promoted to the SLL for season 2019/20, without adversely impacting upon any other club who are currently seeking to join, or remain in the SLL, Bonnyrigg would be given the same length of time that this "derogation" is to be given to the 3 existing Lowland Clubs without floodlights. It would create a level playing field,  for the 4 clubs concerned, albeit for this season only, as everyone would know the rules for the future ! 

Comparisons......

Scotland

Premier  :  38 league matches.      Championship, League One & League Two   :   36 league matches each

Highland League  :  34 league matches  (which despite SFA pressure, the HFL doesn't wish to change)

Lowland League  :  30 matches (but only 28 matches  this season)

England 

Championship, Division One & Division Two  :  46 matches

National League  Premier :  46 matches.     National Leagues North & South  :  42 matches each

Northern Premier League, Southern League Premier Central & Premier South, Isthmian League  :   42 matches each  

Step 4 Leagues  :  38 matches in each of the seven divisions (soon to be increased to eight divisions)

Step 5 Leagues  :   mostly playing  38 matches, across fourteen divisions (also due to be increased to sixteen divisions) .

********

Yes, and I know that the SFA wants the HFL and the SLL to both have  (only) 16 clubs at this level.   But this would be an ideal time to change.

Some very sensible suggestions, probably to sensible for some, my fears in the Bonnyrigg situation and todays Cove result are that chairman  and owners of league 2 and 1  clubs may be fearing clubs like Bonnyrigg , Linlithgow Boness, Talbot and Pollock etc  will only take  a short time to navigate their way into league football,and may be pressuring the SFA to put obstacles in the process.Its been a closed shop for so long the owners of league clubs will hold some sway with  the blazers at Hampden.

[Footballfirst]

35 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

The bottom club are only relegated if there is a licensed Tier 6 champion = there isn't. So bottom club isn't relegated. 

The additional rules for relegation only take place if they end up with a number other than 16 members. With Berwick joining the LL 15 that's exactly 16 members. So B4a and B4b don't apply.

The only hope now is that Bonnyrigg can get licensed and accepted as a licensed Tier 6 champion and Whitehill don't fight relegation.

I disagree with the second part of your interpretation of rule B4

The first sentence reads " Admission to Membership of the League will be by (a) written application until the maximum of sixteen (16) clubs is reached or (b) by promotion or relegation." My interpretation is that the LL currently has 15 members, so the 16th place will be taken up by an applicant.

Rule B4 goes on to say "Thereafter, unless a vacancy arises through resignation or expulsion of a Club from the League, admission will only be through relegation from the SPFL as detailed in Pyramid Play-Off Rules in appendix1 or promotion from either the East of Scotland Football League or South of Scotland Football League."  My interpretation of that sentence is that after 16 clubs was reached (a few seasons ago) admission would only be via promotion/relegation, unless there was a resignation or expulsion (Selkirk). My interpretation, as it applies to next season's LL, is that the promotion/relegation criteria are applied in any event, but that an application for membership will also be accepted to make up the 16. That applicant can be a club relegated from the LL.

Edited May 11, 2019 by Footballfirst

[FairWeatherFan]

2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

I disagree with the second part of your interpretation of rule B4

The first sentence reads " Admission to Membership of the League will be by (a) written application until the maximum of sixteen (16) clubs is reached or (b) by promotion or relegation." My interpretation is that the LL currently has 15 members, so the 16th place will be taken up by an applicant.

Rule B4 goes on to say "Thereafter, unless a vacancy arises through resignation or expulsion of a Club from the League, admission will only be through relegation from the SPFL as detailed in Pyramid Play-Off Rules in appendix1 or promotion from either the East of Scotland Football League or South of Scotland Football League."  My interpretation of that sentence is that after 16 clubs was reached (a few seasons ago) admission would only be via promotion/relegation, unless there was a resignation or expulsion (Selkirk). My interpretation, as it applies to next season's LL, is that the promotion/relegation criteria are applied in any event, but that an application for membership will also be accepted to make up the 16. That applicant can be a relegated club.

They've reached 16 with Berwick Rangers (likely) getting relegated and nobody promoted. There is no vacancy.

[Salvo Montalbano]

Right this very minute there are a bunch of clubs that don't currently have floodlights that were also rejected. Bonnyrigg aren't alone in this.
 

Bonnyrigg are the only ones who are waiting on promotion. And the original poster mentioned future applications - this won't be an issue for future applications.