The REAL Rookie Cookie Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 6 hours ago, BS7 said: I don’t think clubs were aware in February - were your team Rookie Cookie? Certainly haven’t read anything that suggests any of the 12 clubs knew if and when the licences would be issued. All 12 clubs were due to be part of Licensing Committee report to the scheduled SFA in February which was subsequently cancelled. Every club would have been informed by the Licensing Committee of the content of that report re 'variances' or full compliance and therefore meeting the entry level requirements prior to the SFA board meeting. The expectation of the clubs would have been that the SFA Board meeting in February would have accepted those who met the criteria 100% into membership. The process and timelines were quite clearly laid out and explained during the licensing process and the audit by the licensing officials. If any other club thinks different i would be interested to know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The REAL Rookie Cookie Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 6 hours ago, BS7 said: So clubs who want promotion to tier 5, maybe on gate income of £1000 every other week have to subsidise a £50k capital investment before they can get promotion? thats exactly the kind of thinking that got Scottish football into the mess it’s in. all very well these clubs that have grounds and floodlights bought and paid for by the councils. What about the clubs that are self sufficient????? The old.chestnut again - Midlothian councillors I believe used their former 'community'funds to improve council owned assets at Penicuik, Dalkeith and Easthouses as well as other sports facilities e.g rugby clubs for the long term benefit of the community. These clubs use the facilities under lease or other arrangements with the council and pay for those facilities so the capital cost or otherwise of the lights may well be being recovered long term through those arrangements. Midlothian Council should be applauded for improving local facilities shouldn't they? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The REAL Rookie Cookie Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 5 hours ago, leftbehind said: So technically the Council are helping a club that owns its own ground by re-cycling the surplus light columns and fittings. contrary to previous assertions. good piece of business for the club. The Planning Meeting that would Approve the lights submission was rumoured to be this week you seem to infer this has changed but that could be an oversight by the person in the publicity department. Lets hope so and the work can commence timeously to every ones satisfaction for the next Audit. Not on the public Planning Meeting agenda on MC website. Would be good to see Bonnyrigg Rose confirm where they got the lights from given their previous public criticism of MC on 'we get no help' front. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 (edited) 1 hour ago, The REAL Rookie Cookie said: Not on the public Planning Meeting agenda on MC website. Would be good to see Bonnyrigg Rose confirm where they got the lights from given their previous public criticism of MC on 'we get no help' front. They certainly scored when the open cast was in Rosewell Edited May 14, 2019 by newcastle broon 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted May 14, 2019 Author Share Posted May 14, 2019 So clubs who want promotion to tier 5, maybe on gate income of £1000 every other week have to subsidise a £50k capital investment before they can get promotion? thats exactly the kind of thinking that got Scottish football into the mess it’s in. all very well these clubs that have grounds and floodlights bought and paid for by the councils. What about the clubs that are self sufficient?????What about them? You're making it seem like a bad thing that clubs who lease grounds have benefited from Councils improving their asset. Also, you imply that these clubs aren't self sufficient? There's a lot of sympathy out there for Bonnyrigg's position, don't go ruining it by lashing out at other clubs for no reason. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db11 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 41 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: What about them? You're making it seem like a bad thing that clubs who lease grounds have benefited from Councils improving their asset. Also, you imply that these clubs aren't self sufficient? There's a lot of sympathy out there for Bonnyrigg's position, don't go ruining it by lashing out other clubs for no reason. Point being made is that council spunked huge sums of money on floodlights at these grounds which are for the benefit of the teams involved- not the wider community. Yet midlothian council is looking to shut 3g at poltonhall as it cant afford to replace the surface, Poltonhall is used by community, not like the other grounds mentioned. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 22 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: What about them? You're making it seem like a bad thing that clubs who lease grounds have benefited from Councils improving their asset. Also, you imply that these clubs aren't self sufficient? There's a lot of sympathy out there for Bonnyrigg's position, don't go ruining it by lashing out other clubs for no reason. It may not be a bad thing - but BS7 is correct it can create an in-balance and football doesn't necessarily improve as a result. The real question teams with ready made facilities have to ask - is where would they be without such assistance? Unfortunately there are a lot of teams who wouldn't be where they are today without this level of support. Clubs with their own grounds have spent a pretty penny on improvements towards a licence - improvements which don't necessarily make them stronger on the pitch. (Spend on on capital items is money that can't be spent on the team). Most supporters tend to be solely focused on the pitch. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted May 14, 2019 Author Share Posted May 14, 2019 It may not be a bad thing - but BS7 is correct it can create an in-balance and football doesn't necessarily improve as a result. The real question teams with ready made facilities have to ask - is where would they be without such assistance? Unfortunately there are a lot of teams who wouldn't be where they are today without this level of support. Clubs with their own grounds have spent a pretty penny on improvements towards a licence - improvements which don't necessarily make them stronger on the pitch. (Spend on on capital items is money that can't be spent on the team). Most supporters tend to be solely focused on the pitch. Play another record FFS, you seem to raise this every other day. Have you found that list of grants yet that everyone can apply for by ticking a box, or the clubs that exist on grants?Finishing behind Broxburn really did affect you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db11 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 6 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: Play another record FFS, you seem to raise this every other day. Have you found that list of grants yet that everyone can apply for by ticking a box, or the clubs that exist on grants? Finishing behind Broxburn really did affect you. I can fully appreciate teams like Broxburn getting these facilities which are widely used and available to wider community, but the midlothian teams mentioned are grass pitches, which are infrequently used and not available to be used by public, while now looking to close down a widely used 3g facility. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted May 14, 2019 Author Share Posted May 14, 2019 15 minutes ago, db11 said: Point being made is that council spunked huge sums of money on floodlights at these grounds which are for the benefit of the teams involved- not the wider community. Yet midlothian council is looking to shut 3g at poltonhall as it cant afford to replace the surface, Poltonhall is used by community, not like the other grounds mentioned. Is that the fault of the clubs who lease these facilities? You may have a beef with the local council, but you shouldn't have a beef with the clubs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 3 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: Is that the fault of the clubs who lease these facilities? You may have a beef with the local council, but you shouldn't have a beef with the clubs. To be fair the abundance of youth teams aged from aboot 6 onwards that use the 3g pitches he is on aboot carry the Bonnyrigg Rose name. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
db11 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 8 minutes ago, db11 said: I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. And tae think for aw the success ww had all them years they owned their park yet folk thought/think they were throwing money at players This argument could go on and on though. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipedreamer Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 9 minutes ago, db11 said: I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. As much of an advantage as the 12k plus head start Linlithgow had on East Junior clubs for years due to their license which the rest were unable to get? Linlithgow received grant funding for their disabled viewing area, don’t let the posters fool you like they get no help from anywhere in terms of funding. That’s a brazen lie. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted May 14, 2019 Author Share Posted May 14, 2019 Just now, db11 said: I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. A "whopping advantage", just like Bonnyrigg had a "whopping advantage" after pocketing a 6 figure sum from their cup run whilst a Junior club? or Linlithgow had a "whopping advantage" for years in the Juniors by getting Licenced without having to move to the EoS five years earlier? It's swings and roundabouts, it's fitba, no complaints, and when that "whopping advantage" dissipates (because lights are a one-off investment by the Council) then the likes of Bonnyrigg and Linlithgow will still be ahead of the game because they are big clubs in non-league terms capable of attracting four figures crowds and going to the fourth and fifth rounds of the Scottish occasionally. Mind you, I do believe Dalkeith are having to extend their pavilion along with other work to get Licenced, not sure how much of a whopping advantage having lights will give them. Easthouses play in front of 50 fans, how much of a "whopping advantage" will they have over Bonnyrigg? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BS7 Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 2 hours ago, db11 said: I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. Likewise - the speculate to accumulate requirement has me baffled. I feel the sfa probably don’t understand who funds the teams. i thought I’d said it but I’m delighted with the clubs that have licences - and I think the pyramid is great and all the new clubs bring something to the sfa. Hopefully a template for all clubs in the juniors to look to - but the sfa have made an awful mess of it for reasons that really aren’t clear. I’m sounding like a broken record so I’ll bow out now. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 6 hours ago, db11 said: I dont have beef with the clubs, i am delighted that 3 will be in scottish cup next year, point bs and auldheid are making is it puts these clubs at a whopping advantage. Correct. Self funding requires clubs to ensure capital spend is sustainable, both in the short and long-term. Whilst using a grant over self funding is always preferable - it can also be false econonmy if you can't actually afford the spend in the first place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 If by staying ahead of the game you mean haven't won a league title since 2013 and any cup since 2014 and had to rely on outside funding for their disabled area then fair enough. Linlithgow as a club and their supporters have been in a permanent meltdown since the game mentioned on this link https://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php?/topic/214054-linlithgow-rose-2014-15/&page=68. Blood and snotters and toys out the pram from the wee rose collective. [emoji38] How sad must someone's life be to troll as far back as 2014-15. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonS Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 1 hour ago, Auld Heid said: How sad must someone's life be to troll as far back as 2014-15. Digging out page 68 of a 157 page thread, that's been closed since the summer of 2015. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted May 14, 2019 Share Posted May 14, 2019 Is this the basic state of play? Rejected for not having floodlights: Bonnyrigg Rose (floodlights sourced) Camelon Juniors Dundonald Bluebell Haddington Athletic St Andrews United Tranent Ongoing applications yet to go to the SFA Board: Dalkeith Thistle Edinburgh United Jeanfield Swifts (just had audit, but floodlights sourced waiting to be installed) Musselburgh Athletic Newtongrange Star Waiting for official start of the application process: Dunipace 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.