Pyramid 2019/2020

[Marten]

2 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

While I agree with your sentiment, licensing is being used as a barrier to progression based on footballing merit.  Licensing and footballing ability have to work hand in hand, but the application of the rules need to be sufficiently flexible to enable clubs who have committed to the licensing process to progress on footballing merit, whether or not they meet all the criteria on any given day.  

Agreed, in principle, I think football ability shouldn't apply. There could be a bit of flexibility though for clubs that would miss promotion if they don't get a license. If there is a decent, and realistic, plan to comply with all conditions within say one season (like Bonnyrigg now), conditional licenses should be possible. But imo that should only be for clubs that would otherwise be up for promotion.

[Cameron Wilson]

1 hour ago, Khufu2 said:

At the rate of one a season maximum (none if the SFA can find a way of blocking promotions) it will be a gey long time before all the  cream rises to the top.

I  agree. As things stand it's going to take too long, that's even before considering the west juniors possibly coming in, or the disgraceful treatment of Bonnyrigg.

And  now with six new clubs licenced in the EoS and a fair few more to come, plus the fact that everyone knows there's a good number of EoS clubs stronger than many of those in the league above them, it's time for the Lowland League to open up more promotion spots ASAP. Three would be my preference, especially as its now confirmed there's three going down in next year's EoS Premier.

You could even argue there should be promotion places than may normally be the case to cope with the influx of strong clubs into the pyramid and to speed things along so everyone can find their level more quickly. It's in everyone's interest to be playing at a level they can be competitive at. 

[FairWeatherFan]

1 hour ago, GordonS said:

Agreed that it's only those who were in with a shot of winning the Junior Cup who miss it. It is a big loss to us though. The three wins I've seen are my favourite club football memories and far exceed winning the league, beating Forfar or giving Ross County a scare. The downside of the Junior Cup was the stupid scheduling, but that can be fixed.

The FA Vase is over 40 years old and the FA Trophy is 50 this year. Heritage and name recognition count for a lot. No point throwing away something people already love. I'm sure we all want an all-in non-league knockout competition, might as well work with what we have.

I'm not confident that will happen. Who really wants it? In theory they said they wanted to join the pyramid, but when it came to it none of the big west clubs did anything to make it happen.

I'm also not making presumptions about relegation from the LL. When is their AGM? If they don't increase it to 2 places from next season, given how strong the EoS Premier is and how many licensed clubs it now has, I'll be pretty sceptical.

They can't change it next season as it means changing the LL playoff rules. Which is the whole mess we've just gone through the last 12 months.

[honestman54]

A

1 hour ago, Burnie_man said:

There will come a point, towards the end of next season, where the WRJFA will enter for 2020-21 without the other two regions following (it could/should have happened for next season), or moves will have started to form a WoSFL.

Once that happens, I can see the LL opening up to two relegation spots which effectively hands promotion to both EoS and WRJFA/WoS Champions - if Licenced of course......

and the SOS at Tier7?

[Footballfirst]

7 minutes ago, Marten said:

I agree with you on that one. I greatly support more relegation spots, which will probably majorly change the LL within a few years. I see no reason just merge leagues at this point just to rapidly get a new 16 team LL. The only other option would be to move tier 5 to a 3 region structure, with Tayside being in the east. That will obviously create new spaces in tier 5 to be filled by current EOS, ERJFA (north of Tay), WRJFA and SOS clubs.

I would go further and limit the SPFL to two national leagues, predominantly full time and with sufficient funding to operate that way. Start regionalisation at tier 3, with mostly part time clubs taken from the current Leagues 1 & 2 split North/East and South/West.  Tier 4 would be further regionalised with comprising at least the Highland League and a Lowland League East & West. Below that you'd be looking at the EOSFL, WOSFL, SOSFL and perhaps a Midlands League.

I'm also a believer in making big steps when implementing change, then tweak it based on experience, rather than the trickle feed change that we are seeing at the top and bottom of the current tier 5 LL. 

[Guest]

What everyone must appreciate is that for teams steeped in winning history then the expectation would be to maintain that level. For other clubs having a youth set up, involving the local community and making steady progression on and off the park is the aim.... In order to get success.... Over a period of time. 

To suggest that any top level junior team would easily dispose of LL teams and that the LL teams should now 'move aside' because the juniors is on board makes me chuckle a little..... I've said it before and say it again, most clubs would get a shock when playing in the LL over a league season when weighted against a league season in the respective junior leagues, the standard is better. The teams are more consistent and LL teams naturally have access to better players leaving league 2 clubs, which is why the standard is higher. Automatic promotion and more places is a given though. 

Licensing is a tick box, that's its base function. It is present to ensure clubs don't just bash right through the levels by putting all their money in the playing side and have appropriate facilities that meet not only expected standards, but comply with certain legislation. I think it's a good thing for everyone to ensure that only clubs who are as successful off the park as they are on it make our top leagues. It ensures that clubs don't just succeed based on what happens on a Saturday. The next step for me, thinking ahead for the sfa, if they wish to raise standards further, will undoubtedly be seated cover instead of stand g cover for 100. Albeit this years decision (bonnyrigg and others) with regards floodlights wasn't right. 

 

[FairWeatherFan]

2 hours ago, Khufu2 said:

Unless the SFA changes its rules again in the middle of the assessment period because they don't want too many new members  threatening the old guard.

In that case the apposite facilities still won't be apposite enough.

It was in the middle of some clubs being assessed, not the middle of the assessment period.

Licensing rules run by the calendar year. EoS knew by at least mid October floodlights were coming & hoped clubs would be treated under the rules at which they applied under.

[Auld Heid]

2 hours ago, Marten said:

I agree that the licensing situation has been handled badly, especially with regards to moving the goalposts during the process and not giving applicants derogation. However, I think football ability should not be a part of the licensing process. If a club matches all licensing requirements they should be given a license when they apply for it, regardless of how good or bad they are on the pitch. Once everything is sorted off the pitch and a license has been granted, it's likely to help clubs improve on the pitch as well.

A good example is Coupar Angus. They are by far the poorest team I've watched in any senior or junior game all season, and I've been to the likes of Inverkeithing and Fort William as well. They got trounced 0-14 when I went there. However, they have floodlights and decent facilities. If the Tayside juniors end up in the pyramid somehow, they should get a license if they do match all the requirements and apply for one. If many smaller junior sides get licensed on the longer term, maybe there should be a change in the Scottish Cup structure to prevent too many mismatches like Coupar Angus v Auchinleck Talbot, but there is no reason why they should be snubbed just for being poor on the pitch.

There has to be a better balance.   The Bonnyrigg situation following on from LTHV has meant the EoS have not always been able to reward the best footballing team (not their fault).   Until the relegation of Berwick - promotion to the LL could have been  base upon non-footballing standards.  

Yet teams above the EoS in the LL are not being penalised for not keeping their licence up to present requirements.  As soon as lights were added to the process that should apply to all clubs equally. 

1 hour ago, G4Mac said:

What everyone must appreciate is that for teams steeped in winning history then the expectation would be to maintain that level. For other clubs having a youth set up, involving the local community and making steady progression on and off the park is the aim.... In order to get success.... Over a period of time. 

To suggest that any top level junior team would easily dispose of LL teams and that the LL teams should now 'move aside' because the juniors is on board makes me chuckle a little..... I've said it before and say it again, most clubs would get a shock when playing in the LL over a league season when weighted against a league season in the respective junior leagues, the standard is better. The teams are more consistent and LL teams naturally have access to better players leaving league 2 clubs, which is why the standard is higher. Automatic promotion and more places is a given though. 

Licensing is a tick box, that's its base function. It is present to ensure clubs don't just bash right through the levels by putting all their money in the playing side and have appropriate facilities that meet not only expected standards, but comply with certain legislation. I think it's a good thing for everyone to ensure that only clubs who are as successful off the park as they are on it make our top leagues. It ensures that clubs don't just succeed based on what happens on a Saturday. The next step for me, thinking ahead for the sfa, if they wish to raise standards further, will undoubtedly be seated cover instead of stand g cover for 100. Albeit this years decision (bonnyrigg and others) with regards floodlights wasn't right. 

 

I agree with the last paragraph - there still needs to be a balance which recognises the footballing standards. 

[newcastle broon]

43 minutes ago, Auld Heid said:

There has to be a better balance.   The Bonnyrigg situation following on from LTHV has meant the EoS have not always been able to reward the best footballing team (not their fault).   Until the relegation of Berwick - promotion to the LL could have been  base upon non-footballing standards.  

Yet teams above the EoS in the LL are not being penalised for not keeping their licence up to present requirements.  As soon as lights were added to the process that should apply to all clubs equally. 

I agree with the last paragraph - there still needs to be a balance which recognises the footballing standards. 

^^^^^^^^

Gutted didn't get fast tracked to LL.

Fairly certain those THREE clubs yer referring to in the LL will have been given ultimatums. So in time you will get yer wish and they'll be penalised unless they get them pesky floodlights which until very recently yer own team never used and  weren't anything to do with license requirements. It's been talked aboot countless times now regarding where they stand regarding licenses.  

Edit its shit what's happened to Bonnyrigg and very fortunate if ww are given a reprieve by the way. 

Edited May 21, 2019 by newcastle broon

[Sparticus]

I think we need a proper conference league directly below the fourth tier.

How its made up is another matter? I'd say it should have 18 or 20 clubs but the top six or so from the highland and lowland should be in.

Reckon the fourth tier needs expanded a bit also with a direct relegation and  one playoff place.

Loads of ambitious clubs here screaming for a helping hand and it wouldnt be difficult to do.

Time for the SFA to play fair.Football has changed hugely at the junction of league/non league.

People might say there's too many clubs but thats rubbish.Thats how it is and it'll never change.

 

 

[Ray Patterson]

24 minutes ago, Sparticus said:

I think we need a proper conference league directly below the fourth tier.

How its made up is another matter? I'd say it should have 18 or 20 clubs but the top six or so from the highland and lowland should be in.

Reckon the fourth tier needs expanded a bit also with a direct relegation and  one playoff place.

Loads of ambitious clubs here screaming for a helping hand and it wouldnt be difficult to do.

Time for the SFA to play fair.Football has changed hugely at the junction of league/non league.

People might say there's too many clubs but thats rubbish.Thats how it is and it'll never change.

 

 

I don't think there's any real appetite for that at the moment, could be something that's possible 5-10 years down the line.

[Cyclizine]

1 minute ago, ArabAuslander said:

I don't think there's any real appetite for that at the moment, could be something that's possible 5-10 years down the line.

It was what the SFL clubs wanted previously. The two region Highland/Lowland was a compromise from all sides. At some point you've got to regionalise, I honestly don't know where the optimum level, split of regions or number of clubs is in Scotland; there's so many different arguments from all over. What I do know is that current SPFL clubs will not countenance being split off into regional divisions, even if the notional pyramid "level" doesn't change for them.

[firewarden]

I agree with you on that one. I greatly support more relegation spots, which will probably majorly change the LL within a few years. I see no reason just merge leagues at this point just to rapidly get a new 16 team LL. The only other option would be to move tier 5 to a 3 region structure, with Tayside being in the east. That will obviously create new spaces in tier 5 to be filled by current EOS, ERJFA (north of Tay), WRJFA and SOS clubs.

Bored

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

Could add Arthurlie as well as iirc they enquired about the LL during it's formation. Kilwinning are another who've stated pyramid ambitions too I'm sure.

The way forward for the west imo is to restart the pwg next season then if no progress is made re:west by say January or Febuary then it may be best to look at a WOSL. If it drags on too long again it'll be groundhog day all over again.

Heard Kilwinning were asked about a breakaway wosl and weren’t for it. But in fairness to them they have a lot of change this coming season.

[rockson]

On 20/05/2019 at 00:29, San Starko Rover said:

 

ICT and Livingston weren’t even around 25 years ago but look what they’ve achieved.

They were around - ICT as Inverness Thistle and Inverness Caledonian, Livi as Meadowbank (and before that Ferranti) Thistle.

[Robert James]

9 hours ago, GordonS said:

Agreed that it's only those who were in with a shot of winning the Junior Cup who miss it. It is a big loss to us though. The three wins I've seen are my favourite club football memories and far exceed winning the league, beating Forfar or giving Ross County a scare. The downside of the Junior Cup was the stupid scheduling, but that can be fixed.

The FA Vase is over 40 years old and the FA Trophy is 50 this year. Heritage and name recognition count for a lot. No point throwing away something people already love. I'm sure we all want an all-in non-league knockout competition, might as well work with what we have.

I'm not confident that will happen. Who really wants it? In theory they said they wanted to join the pyramid, but when it came to it none of the big west clubs did anything to make it happen.

I'm also not making presumptions about relegation from the LL. When is their AGM? If they don't increase it to 2 places from next season, given how strong the EoS Premier is and how many licensed clubs it now has, I'll be pretty sceptical.

The Lowland League should be increased to 18 clubs (as in the HFL), and provide for a minimum of 2 relegation and 2 promotion places each year. It should also relegate a third 3 club, if another Berwick/Cove situation arises. It would speed up pyramid movement, thereby enabling ambitious East and West clubs to advance each season.  It would also mean that 15 existing Lowland League clubs, still  retain their Tier 5 status  each season. Thirty Four league matches per season, is very manageable, especially as the spread of floodlights  is increasing.  

[PRICEY]

I'm surprised Pricey hasn't been on today asking if the league set up for next season has been finalised yet.

So this is your league set up from now on?.

[Guest]

44 minutes ago, PRICEY said:

 

So this is your league set up from now on?.

 

Any future league organisation (expected to be premier, championship and first division the season after next) will be voted on by member clubs at an AGM prior to the season staring, this is so every club knows what they are aiming for next year. 

[AlanCamelonfan]

9 hours ago, PRICEY said:

 

So this is your league set up from now on?.

 

Better than shite regional leagues for a top division 

[FairWeatherFan]

8 hours ago, G4Mac said:

Any future league organisation (expected to be premier, championship and first division the season after next) will be voted on by member clubs at an AGM prior to the season staring, this is so every club knows what they are aiming for next year. 

Just don't call it the championship