Club Licencing

[craigkillie]

I agree. I think it's a bit shit that the goalposts have been shifted slightly, but I'm not sure it makes much material difference to the clubs. I wonder if the SFA might move to a slightly different licensing/membership system where the different tiers of membership are based on the level of the pyramid. Means the entry criteria for each tier can be varied by the SFA rather than the sort of weird hybrid that exists now.

[Dev]

11 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Isn't it in the regulations that the SFA can adjust the requirements and add new conditions as they see fit?

As long as Scottish cup entry and ability to be promoted isn't affected this associate membership thing is no big deal. Better that than ever harsher licensing requirements to pull up the drawbridge.

Yes but rules and regulations are part of a contract and contracts have to be "reasonable". 

[Dev]

11 hours ago, craigkillie said:

I agree. I think it's a bit shit that the goalposts have been shifted slightly, but I'm not sure it makes much material difference to the clubs. I wonder if the SFA might move to a slightly different licensing/membership system where the different tiers of membership are based on the level of the pyramid. Means the entry criteria for each tier can be varied by the SFA rather than the sort of weird hybrid that exists now.

When other small footballing nations make alterations to their Pyramids they set up consultations processes with all clubs so that they can take into account the opinions/guidance received. In Scotland this has been a complete shambles.

[craigkillie]

The SFA have the pyramid working group, but it has reached a bit of a stalemate and it's not clear whether it's fit for purpose any more. If something like that happens they have to eventually reach the point where they take action themselves.

[Jambo'ness]

9 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

The SFA have the pyramid working group, but it has reached a bit of a stalemate and it's not clear whether it's fit for purpose any more. If something like that happens they have to eventually reach the point where they take action themselves.

The SFA could not give a toss.  One of their pals, TJ, will be getting them to delay things as much as possible for his benefit, not the games'.  They are like the 'three monkeys' of sense, see no sense, hear no sense and definitely speak no sense.

[Hossy87]

Club licensing feedback was sent out last week - clubs given until this week to send in Derogation applications for any issues.  

I suspect a review of the BR floodlights and reassessment this week is the correct decision to make.  

SFA AGM is the 12th June.  Would hope that this issue is raised to avoid thks happening in future. 

Best thing is to agree the yearly review cycle and give clubs the full term to comply to any new changes.  

[Burnie_man]

13 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Isn't it in the regulations that the SFA can adjust the requirements and add new conditions as they see fit?

As long as Scottish cup entry and ability to be promoted isn't affected this associate membership thing is no big deal. Better that than ever harsher licensing requirements to pull up the drawbridge.

They can adjust requirements, but they can't ignore legalities given they have taken a payment upon application.

As for it being "no big deal", I'm sure you can join the dots and see where this is leading.   They have introduced this motion with absolutely no explanation of why they are doing it, or consulations with members. It's come directly from the SFA board.  Hopefully it fails.

[parsforlife]

. It's come directly from the SFA board.  Hopefully it fails.

I’m very hopeful it will, and I think there’s a good chance it will. All clubs outside tier 5 will vote against and LL clubs are very likely to be sympathetic so very good chance of a clean sweep from then, HL clubs will maybe have 3-4 vote for the proposal but I’d expect the majority to see it as wrong. Similar story for league 1. Lower end League 2 might vote for it if they fear things like automatic relegation might get votes through if spfl loses influence.

Above that I’m not sure how much this will be on clubs rader, at championship the decisions clubs are over prize distribution, challenge cup entry and possibly expanding to 12 teams ok these are spfl issues but if clubs are discussing all that on top of their normal pre-season preparations then SFA proposals are unlikely to be discussed in full.

Premiership clubs it’s double sided, in theory they have the most to lose as they take the most prize money etc
However this makes up a far lower proportion of their income.


I don’t think the spfl clubs will be happy with remaining 1 club 1 vote if much more clubs gain membership however I think for the majority they will be happy with less dramatic change than basically silencing tier 6 clubs.

Thresholds for certain criteria similar to spfl voting structure would be a far wiser route to pursue.

[Burnie_man]

 

I’m very hopeful it will, and I think there’s a good chance it will. All clubs outside tier 5 will vote against and LL clubs are very likely to be sympathetic so very good chance of a clean sweep from then, HL clubs will maybe have 3-4 vote for the proposal but I’d expect the majority to see it as wrong. Similar story for league 1. Lower end League 2 might vote for it if they fear things like automatic relegation might get votes through if spfl loses influence.

 

Above that I’m not sure how much this will be on clubs rader, at championship the decisions clubs are over prize distribution, challenge cup entry and possibly expanding to 12 teams ok these are spfl issues but if clubs are discussing all that on top of their normal pre-season preparations then SFA proposals are unlikely to be discussed in full.

 

Premiership clubs it’s double sided, in theory they have the most to lose as they take the most prize money etc

However this makes up a far lower proportion of their income.

 

 

I don’t think the spfl clubs will be happy with remaining 1 club 1 vote if much more clubs gain membership however I think for the majority they will be happy with less dramatic change than basically silencing tier 6 clubs.

 

Thresholds for certain criteria similar to spfl voting structure would be a far wiser route to pursue.

The SPFL is having an increasing influence on the SFA and they won't happy with 1 member 1 vote with the prospect of increasing numbers of non league clubs becoming licenced, hence the attempt to downgrade new members to effectively second class citizens with no voice unless they reach tier 5.

 

It also limits full membership to a set level and hands control back to the SPFL ie 42 SPFL clubs versus 32 HL/LL clubs.

 

Neil Doncaster is having more and more influence on our game, and that's not a good thing.

 

[parsforlife]

The SPFL is having an increasing influence on the SFA and they won't happy with 1 member 1 vote with the prospect of increasing numbers of non league clubs becoming licenced, hence the attempt to downgrade new members to effectively second class citizens with no voice unless they reach tier 5. 
It also limits full membership to a set level and hands control back to the SPFL ie 42 SPFL clubs versus 32 HL/LL clubs.
 
Neil Doncaster is having more and more influence on our game, and that's not a good thing.
 

Agree with pretty much all that.

Especially on Doncaster, he’s a bad influence and the more he’s allowed involved the worse things get.

Given spfl opposition 1 member 1 vote isn’t sustainable long term, hence why I’d push for a tiered voting structure. We need to allow clubs outside the top 5 tiers to have a voice even if that voice isn’t as loud as the spfl clubs. To completely silence clubs is wrong, we need everyone involved.

[Cowden Cowboy]

Agree with pretty much all that.

Especially on Doncaster, he’s a bad influence and the more he’s allowed involved the worse things get.

Given spfl opposition 1 member 1 vote isn’t sustainable long term, hence why I’d push for a tiered voting structure. We need to allow clubs outside the top 5 tiers to have a voice even if that voice isn’t as loud as the spfl clubs. To completely silence clubs is wrong, we need everyone involved.

It isn't 42 v 32 necessarily as this also ensures the 32 have a continuing voice that is not greatly diluted

[FairWeatherFan]

2 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

It isn't 42 v 32 necessarily as this also ensures the 32 have a continuing voice that is not greatly diluted

It is greatly diluted 42-33-20. The SPFL also has continued talks of various league formats that would increase its membership and has even discussed placing a league at Tier 5.

[parsforlife]

It isn't 42 v 32 necessarily as this also ensures the 32 have a continuing voice that is not greatly diluted

 

No it isn’t always going to divide directly on spfl vs non-spfl(technaility here, isn’t is 42 vs 33 , 17 HL teams teams?) however that doesn’t excuse trying to silence those outside the tier 5.

 

Let’s make no mistake hear, whilst a vote could go through without majority spfl support they know they can close ranks and stop anything major. The spfl fear the day they will can be outvoted even with all their sides voting in sync. I don’t think clubs worry so much that non-league sides can influence a vote the spfl clubs are in dispute over.

 

 

[parsforlife]

Can anyone give a brief summary on SFA votes in the last few years? Most things seem to happen at board level and the directors seem usually to put on the board virtually unchallenged.

[LongTimeLurker]

They lost the attempt to end junior superleaue and cup winners  entry into the Scottish Cup.

[Burnie_man]

Agree with pretty much all that.

Especially on Doncaster, he’s a bad influence and the more he’s allowed involved the worse things get.

Given spfl opposition 1 member 1 vote isn’t sustainable long term, hence why I’d push for a tiered voting structure. We need to allow clubs outside the top 5 tiers to have a voice even if that voice isn’t as loud as the spfl clubs. To completely silence clubs is wrong, we need everyone involved.

Yip, spot on. Margininalising clubs completely isn't the right thing to do, it's not exactly inclusive behaviour from the national association.

[GNU_Linux]

They lost the attempt to end junior superleaue and cup winners  entry into the Scottish Cup.

Which year was this?

[LongTimeLurker]

I forget exactly but probably two or three years ago. 

[Cowden Cowboy]

There was no serious attempt made re this - there were various suggestions from some senior clubs (not particularly SPFL) that if juniors weren't joining the pyramid they should not continue to enjoy benefits of playing in the senior cup albeit SJC winners could be given a place in line with Amateur Cup winners

[FairWeatherFan]

Fair to assume Dundonald will be getting reassessed this week along with Bonnyrigg?