EOS so far

[Jambo'ness]

1 minute ago, Burnie_man said:

As I say, I'm not fussed and I've not encountered anyone who is, and yes it's swings and roundabouts.

If your club feel strongly about it they know what to do.

Like you, I give my own opinion, not necessarily that of the club.  I think we'll have to agree to differ on this.

[FairWeatherFan]

I'd have thought split gate after expenses just made sense on cup games. Especially as these cup competitions aren't likely to attract much in the way of prize money to compensate away teams costs.

[LongTimeLurker]

17 minutes ago, Jambo'ness said:

No, my issue is with clubs keeping cup gate money.  I merely illustrated how many recent cup ties we have had that have, effectively, cost us money...

Easy enough to put in a resolution for the AGM once full voting rights are obtained by the new clubs. Prior to this season away supports for cup games were probably usually only in double figures, so this probably wasn't much of an issue.

[AlanCamelonfan]

16 minutes ago, Jambo'ness said:

Like you, I give my own opinion, not necessarily that of the club.  I think we'll have to agree to differ on this.

It would cost you more going to Tayside every othere week in the juniors than it does to have so many away draws in the cups

[Auld Heid]

No, my issue is with clubs keeping cup gate money.  I merely illustrated how many recent cup ties we have had that have, effectively, cost us money. 
As for swings and roundabouts, really?   Even you don't really believe that.  As for being the first to complain, does it mean I'm wrong?

Agree - gates should be split.

Cups are luck of the draw unlike a balanced league programme.

By splitting cup gates you give all clubs a more balanced income as not looking at the luck of the draw to boost coffers.

[HibeeJibee]

It's not a clear-cut issue... Clubs with big supports in away ties may feel aggrieved at not getting a share of the gate, that's undeniable. However the same clubs in home ties may feel aggrieved at having to share it. Where there isn't a big support the home club, having accrued most of the expense in staging the tie, may feel very aggrieved at having to give-up half. Probably the view at any given moment varies from "happy" to "not bothered" to "annoyed" in line with a particular club having 'made', 'broke even' or 'lost' money versus the alternative.

Sometimes other factors also get rolled-in... e.g. governing body taking a cut; single uniform admission price being insisted on tournament-wide; STs being invalid... which become added complications. Guarantees have an even more chequered history, sometimes losing home teams money.


With regard to Bo'ness specifically: the attendances at their 4 home cup-ties have been given as 1,164 and their 6 away cup-ties as 1,433. So broadly speaking... there would no doubt have been variations in admission prices etc... sharing those gates would have seen them 134 admissions better off. Total perhaps £500-600?

However in upcoming cup-ties they've 2 home and 1 away.

(I appreciate on another thread a Bo'ness fan argued League Cup ties should be different and not shared. However so far their 2 home ties have drawn 680; their 1 away tie drew only 150...).


Presumably there are models less stark than either extreme, tbh. Linesman fee is odd. However also worth recalling in South Challenge Cup away travel is subsidised out of a central fund. Incidentally it's not correct that cups "anywhere else" have their gates shared. It doesn't currently happen in the Lowland or South competitions either, nor at least some in the Highland (IIRC).

[Ginaro]

On 24/11/2018 at 12:04, Burnie_man said:

The other good thing is our home KO times remain the same throughout winter due to the devils lanterns. No problem using them in the EoS.

My local rugby club plays at 3pm throughout the year due to having floodlights (good for pre-match lunches and consistency) - I was a surprised when I saw the west region post that all kick-offs until February would be at 1.45pm.  Don't see what's wrong with letting the four West Premiership clubs keep their normal kick-off time.

As for cup gates - how did it work in the East Juniors? 

[AlanCamelonfan]

1 hour ago, Ginaro said:

My local rugby club plays at 3pm throughout the year due to having floodlights (good for pre-match lunches and consistency) - I was a surprised when I saw the west region post that all kick-offs until February would be at 1.45pm.  Don't see what's wrong with letting the four West Premiership clubs keep their normal kick-off time.

As for cup gates - how did it work in the East Juniors? 

Ersjfa I'm sure allowed linlithgow to kick off at 230pm last season did they not 

[boheesian]

5 hours ago, HibeeJibee said:

It's not a clear-cut issue... Clubs with big supports in away ties may feel aggrieved at not getting a share of the gate, that's undeniable. However the same clubs in home ties may feel aggrieved at having to share it. Where there isn't a big support the home club, having accrued most of the expense in staging the tie, may feel very aggrieved at having to give-up half. Probably the view at any given moment varies from "happy" to "not bothered" to "annoyed" in line with a particular club having 'made', 'broke even' or 'lost' money versus the alternative.

Sometimes other factors also get rolled-in... e.g. governing body taking a cut; single uniform admission price being insisted on tournament-wide; STs being invalid... which become added complications. Guarantees have an even more chequered history, sometimes losing home teams money.


With regard to Bo'ness specifically: the attendances at their 4 home cup-ties have been given as 1,164 and their 6 away cup-ties as 1,433. So broadly speaking... there would no doubt have been variations in admission prices etc... sharing those gates would have seen them 134 admissions better off. Total perhaps £500-600?

However in upcoming cup-ties they've 2 home and 1 away.

(I appreciate on another thread a Bo'ness fan argued League Cup ties should be different and not shared. However so far their 2 home ties have drawn 680; their 1 away tie drew only 150...).


Presumably there are models less stark than either extreme, tbh. Linesman fee is odd. However also worth recalling in South Challenge Cup away travel is subsidised out of a central fund. Incidentally it's not correct that cups "anywhere else" have their gates shared. It doesn't currently happen in the Lowland or South competitions either, nor at least some in the Highland (IIRC).

My comments regarding clubs keeping their home gates applied whe the East Juniors League Cup fixtures were based on Home and Away fixtures. Very simple.

 

[Specky]

Ersjfa I'm sure allowed linlithgow to kick off at 230pm last season did they not 

Yes you're right I believe as we had permission to use our new SFA compliant floodlights.

[GordonS]

9 hours ago, Burnie_man said:

As I say, I'm not fussed and I've not encountered anyone who is, and yes it's swings and roundabouts.

If your club feel strongly about it they know what to do.

Maybe others haven't mentioned it because they didn't know - I just presumed cup gates were split, as I'm sure most others would too. There's too much random variation in cup draws, I definitely think it would be fairer to split the gates. I also think that it's a wee bit of healthy redistribution, in that a smaller club getting a big away draw might make decent income from it.

There's more of a case for not splitting gates when travel costs are subsidised- I see above that this happens in the South Challenge, does it happen in any other cups? It seems pretty obviously harsh if a club can be regularly drawn away from home, has to pay their travel and doesn't share the gate. Over the course of a few years a club could be well out of pocket on cup ties while others are well up, all on the luck of the draw.

[Casey Jones]

7 hours ago, GordonS said:

Maybe others haven't mentioned it because they didn't know - I just presumed cup gates were split, as I'm sure most others would too. There's too much random variation in cup draws, I definitely think it would be fairer to split the gates. I also think that it's a wee bit of healthy redistribution, in that a smaller club getting a big away draw might make decent income from it.

There's more of a case for not splitting gates when travel costs are subsidised- I see above that this happens in the South Challenge, does it happen in any other cups? It seems pretty obviously harsh if a club can be regularly drawn away from home, has to pay their travel and doesn't share the gate. Over the course of a few years a club could be well out of pocket on cup ties while others are well up, all on the luck of the draw.

Junior teams knew before they moved to the EoS league that home teams kept all receipts from cup ties.

However, this has been a bummer for Musselburgh. If we lose to LTHV in our next tie, 9 out of 10 cup matches will have been away ties. Only receipts would be for the home match against Dunipace.

[GordonS]

57 minutes ago, Casey Jones said:

Junior teams knew before they moved to the EoS league that home teams kept all receipts from cup ties.

However, this has been a bummer for Musselburgh. If we lose to LTHV in our next tie, 9 out of 10 cup matches will have been away ties. Only receipts would be for the home match against Dunipace.

The committees may have known, but as a mere punter I wasn't aware. No reason why I would, of course.

Your Musselburgh example shows why it's a bit rotten. I'm sure it averages out in the long run, but the long run is a really long time!

[AsimButtHitsASix]

On ‎23‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 22:06, RobM said:

Only thing I'd like to add is a Scotland wide cup tournament, miss the Scottish.

Is there any chat between Lowland/Highland/East/South... even North Caledonian league to make a big "all in" cup? Is Highland League being 18 teams seen as a stumbling block for fitting the fixtures in?

 

[FairWeatherFan]

1 hour ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Is there any chat between Lowland/Highland/East/South... even North Caledonian league to make a big "all in" cup? Is Highland League being 18 teams seen as a stumbling block for fitting the fixtures in?

 

Not that I know of and fan reaction can be mixed on the idea. For many the Scottish Cup fulfils the nationwide competition interest well enough.

When the hope was the juniors would be involved with the pyramid around the formation of the Lowland League, one of the notes was to carry on/merge the Junior Cup and South Challenge Cup into a single competition.

So it's not a topic that's off the table. 

[AsimButtHitsASix]

Not keen on parroting England in our own set up generally but the clubs down here have the FA Cup, FA Trophy and FA Vase that caters for all the clubs national needs. FA Cup they all (at a certain level anyway) get a chance to participate and, hopefully, a day out at a big team, FA Trophy gives the better non-league sides something they can win and, again, decent away days and chances for the lower end of non-league (unlikely to make the FA Cup 1st round) to have a day out a bigger side and the FA Vase for all the diddies to enjoy.

I guess a Scottish equivalent would be Scottish Cup: all licensed clubs. "Junior" Cup: all non-league and FA Vase either all unlicensed or all below tier six?

[Marten]

12 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Not keen on parroting England in our own set up generally but the clubs down here have the FA Cup, FA Trophy and FA Vase that caters for all the clubs national needs. FA Cup they all (at a certain level anyway) get a chance to participate and, hopefully, a day out at a big team, FA Trophy gives the better non-league sides something they can win and, again, decent away days and chances for the lower end of non-league (unlikely to make the FA Cup 1st round) to have a day out a bigger side and the FA Vase for all the diddies to enjoy.

I guess a Scottish equivalent would be Scottish Cup: all licensed clubs. "Junior" Cup: all non-league and FA Vase either all unlicensed or all below tier six?

It's worth noting that English non-league clubs all play in either the FA Trophy (tiers 5-8) or FA Vase (tiers 9 and lower), never both. If that's copied for Scotland it will basically be the "Trophy" for teams that are now in the SJFA, LL, HL, SOS, EOS & NCL. The Scottish "FA Vase" is effectively the Scottish Amateur Cup (although they are not in the pyramid obviously).

[AsimButtHitsASix]

I suppose a lot of the smaller, regional cups, like Alex Jack, etc do what the Vase/Trophy does in England to a degree as well.

[FairWeatherFan]

It's probably going to take a bit more depth to the pyramid for it to become an attraction to the likes of the Highland clubs.

You've already got 90+ clubs so that's the potential of 7 rounds of its an all in competition. And a lot of those clubs will be facing off in the early rounds of the Scottish Cup. So you don't have the excuse of novelty of new opposition.

In fact it could mean the scraping of a more regional cup you'd have a chance of winning, for a national cup that could be a drain on finances and less chance of winning.

It's something that'd have to be backed by the SFA to be worthwhile.

[Casey Jones]

8 hours ago, GordonS said:

The committees may have known, but as a mere punter I wasn't aware. No reason why I would, of course.

Your Musselburgh example shows why it's a bit rotten. I'm sure it averages out in the long run, but the long run is a really long time!

Sorry Gordon. I did not mean that you would know, just the officials of each club. I and a number of our supporters knew as there were a number of meetings held by our club, prior to start of season and the info was passed on. Perhaps next season we may be more fortunate. Even in competitions where we won the initial tie or group, the next draws also gave us away ties!