Jump to content

Club Licencing


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, patriot1 said:

Our lights haven't been used in at twenty years. 

To take our money and then change the criteria is a joke. Is anyone aware of an SFA board meeting being held since our EGM and if not who made this decision?

It's sAme for us Wasnth sure if the lights can be salvaged

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

There is an appeals process heard by an independent panel I believe, whether they will deem it applicable in this scenario who knows.

I can see why derogation would be refused IF there is no plan in place to have lights by the next audit (although I still don't agree under the circumstances), but Bonnyrigg's (and I think Dundonald) will have them in place by the start of next season.  It's just not right.

Can't see any planning permission for Dundonald's lights? Bonnyrigg are still waiting on their decision almost a month after the (extended) deadline, they might want to give the council a boot up the arse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not really taken a great time to read criteria as my team Craigroyston simply dont have the money to upgrade never mind throw it away on an application that SFA would know straight away as being pointless as they seem to have done with some clubs. Obviously need money to pay off McLeish.

Congratulations to those clubs who have been successful and commiserations to those who were not.

Does another fee to have to be paid if those clubs reapply

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I assume they'll be removing the licences of Whitehill, Civil Service, VoL, Coldstream, Burntisland, Wigtown and Golspie then?  Can't have one rule for historic members and another for new applicants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Gimme said:

Bonnyrigg actually have the lights, I understand that irrespective of how much the fundraisers bring in they were to be installed over the closed season.

Still at least it keeps our neighbours with no lights safe for at least the next 12 months.

Absolute shocker from the SFA.  Bonnyrigg should be promotedIf not all teams in the LL without floodlights should have their licences revoked.

on a separate point I don’t think it will save WW they will lose out on re-election to Lithgae 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolute shocker from the SFA.  Bonnyrigg should be promotedIf not all teams in the LL without floodlights should have their licences revoked.
on a separate point I don’t think it will save WW they will lose out on re-election to Lithgae 
Whitehill won't be relegated without a licenced EoS champion so they are safe. If Cove beat Berwick then the LL is back to 16 teams and there's no vacancy for Linlithgow to sneak in via the back door.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, stanley said:

I assume they'll be removing the licences of Whitehill, Civil Service, VoL, Coldstream, Burntisland, Wigtown and Golspie then?  Can't have one rule for historic members and another for new applicants.

Oh yes they can. It's SFA the clubs are dealing with  who clearly make rules up as they go along

Edited by snowball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeanfield have our audit on Friday but with today's announcement it looks like a waste of time.

We have the lights on one side and have permission from council to use lights from a local unused ball park.

Looking back at emails we actually had a visit from SFA on the day the criteria was changed.

It was the lad from SFA who pointed it out when we met him recently.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Cumbo said:

Jeanfield have our audit on Friday but with today's announcement it looks like a waste of time.

We have the lights on one side and have permission from council to use lights from a local unused ball park.

Looking back at emails we actually had a visit from SFA on the day the criteria was changed.

It was the lad from SFA who pointed it out when we met him recently.

What date did the criteria change? Well after all the clubs joined the eos I’m fairly sure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, snowball said:

Oh yes they can. It's SFA the clubs are dealing with

Yes, I will be shocked if they actually remove licences from any clubs but surely the applicants can challenge this on the basis that other clubs have a licence but no floodlights.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, stanley said:

Yes, I will be shocked if they actually remove licences from any clubs but surely the applicants can challenge this on the basis that other clubs have a licence but no floodlights.

Probably cost them even more money if they can challenge or appeal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What date did the criteria change? Well after all the clubs joined the eos I’m fairly sure?
The manual for 2019 was sent to applicant clubs on December 11.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Golum said:

i cannot see them at this stage kicking WW ,VALE and Strollers out ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Not just now because they were audited in Oct/Dec 2018 so it'll be later this year when the licensing committee audits their non-compliant facilities - but what happens then is surely up to the SFA board?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cumbo said:
9 minutes ago, BS7 said:
What date did the criteria change? Well after all the clubs joined the eos I’m fairly sure?

The manual for 2019 was sent to applicant clubs on December 11.

Cheers - so the timeline for the embargo and the new criteria is pretty damning in favour of the rejected clubs. 

There’s an argument that the sfa didn’t really want the juniors but had to be seen to be promoting the pyramid. I think that this shabby episode would seem to confirm it.

sporting integrity beyond purchase mr Petrie? My arse!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cheers - so the timeline for the embargo and the new criteria is pretty damning in favour of the rejected clubs. 
There’s an argument that the sfa didn’t really want the juniors but had to be seen to be promoting the pyramid. I think that this shabby episode would seem to confirm it.
sporting integrity beyond purchase mr Petrie? My arse!
They only opened the application process in November again I am sure after suspending it in the summer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

St Andrews had their audit on 14th December,so 3 days after manual was sent out. How can they possibly think we could get lights in by then. This is a complete joke and I think the papers will be getting a few calls

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...