Season over

[Marten]

It's very simple, every single solution is unfair to some. There is no fully "fair" solution, but the one that is the fairest overall needs to be chosen and I think the suggested solution is just that, but I appreciate it's subjective and other people will have a different opinion. Like @GordonS said, the solution in England is very unfair on the likes of Jersey Bulls & Vauxhall Motors.

Anyone who claims to have a solution that doesn't disadvantage anyone is fooling themselves.

[buloyal]

6 hours ago, Black Dug said:

So you are disregarding fairness and sport for commerce? Why should sponsors get their money back? Why should fans get season ticket money back? They have had the exposure and the entertainment. Yes, they could argue that they are entitled to a pro-rata refund for the games yet to be played but not for the full season.

It'd be tough on some clubs without a doubt but there are too many variables to ensure integrity when trying to decide results based on an arbitrary system that nobody had agreed to and is shown to have flaws.

No system was agreed to for ending the season early prior to the season starting (understandably, it's unprecedented what is going on), therefore any system employed now and voted on now will not be without bias.

All clubs, sponsors, fans, players will need to take a hit here.

Fairness in sport ?? So Boness gets the same outcome as newtongrange for example ?? Or Liverpool gets what Norwich city get? That’s fairness ?!? 
why wouldn’t they get money back null and void means exactly that null and void, it never happened ! Sponsors give money to get their business in the limelight for all home games, season ticket holders are due money back, fines need to be given back to clubs from leagues, players need to give goal bonuses back or clean sheet bonuses, your opening up a big can of worms and that’s a legal matter certainly more for pro clubs. Prize money ?!? How do you pay clubs ? Sky sports money ?!? Clubs rely on that, can’t be paid tho because who gets the biggest slice ?? 
and all clubs are run as business these days so yes you would! 

Edited April 19, 2020 by buloyal

[sniffer]

Planning elapsed 3 years after it was granted in 2011, which is why they've submitted another application, basically the same as before.

Planning hasn’t lapsed at all, as I said in my previous post planning that was awarded in 2010 can be completed if they want as planning can be completed if started which it had been with the containers.

[sniffer]

Are you sure? Why reapply then?
10 years to build a fence, but priorities lay elsewhere, hence the competitiveness on the park, I'm sure.
Meanwhile everyone else has been investing in facilities and folk think it's fair that new clubs, who dismissed the move and criticised those leaving, should come in at the same level 2 years down the line.

They can take as long as they like to build a fence, it obviously wasn’t important at the time, as for investing in facilities and competitiveness on the park, in the last 10 years thornton have levelled the park basically starting from scratch and if you know anything about Thornton it was a huge task, they’ve built the stand and covering, purchased floodlights.
I’m sure they got to the semi final of the Scottish junior cup, won two leagues, was runner up in the Fife & lothians cup also are reigning holders of the Fife & lothians cup, got promoted and relegated so please don’t tell me that Thornton from a small village have done nothing in 10 years.

[Che Dail]

22 minutes ago, sniffer said:

They can take as long as they like to build a fence, it obviously wasn’t important at the time, as for investing in facilities and competitiveness on the park, in the last 10 years thornton have levelled the park basically starting from scratch and if you know anything about Thornton it was a huge task, they’ve built the stand and covering, purchased floodlights.
I’m sure they got to the semi final of the Scottish junior cup, won two leagues, was runner up in the Fife & lothians cup also are reigning holders of the Fife & lothians cup, got promoted and relegated so please don’t tell me that Thornton from a small village have done nothing in 10 years.

Thornton have done nothing on the fence build in 10 years - true or false?

I can't remember them getting to the semi-final of the Junior cup in the last 10 years either.

And the F&L success, congrats... but all the SL clubs had gone by then. No Linlithgow, Bonnyrigg, Kelty or Bo'ness to beat. 

When did they level the pitch? 

[sniffer]

Thornton have done nothing on the fence build in 10 years - true or false?
I can't remember them getting to the semi-final of the Junior cup in the last 10 years either.
And the F&L success, congrats... but all the SL clubs had gone by then. No Linlithgow, Bonnyrigg, Kelty or Bo'ness to beat. 
When did they level the pitch? 

So basically you know feck all

[Deanburn Dave]

When are they deciding what’s happening with the season?

The deadline for votes is noon on 24 April. My understanding is that if the vote passes then that is that. If it doesn't pass there's a fallback position to discuss matters further at the EGM on the 30th.

[Andy groundhopper]

Let's hope they vote for something positive, get the feeling that leagues and clubs are waiting for guidance from somewhere and someone higher up - before landing themselves in the shite,thus taking the blame ! Seems the biggest argument is because the season didn't end -  no ups or downs, everyone self interested as normal. Making fantasy football iook almost real

[Blowin In the Wind]

Final thoughts on this.  In my opinion The EOS board have three choices (or a variation on one but will be inconsistent.  These are:-

1.  Null and void - in my opinion the worst of all situations.

2. Wait and see when the season could be finished.  Not really practical bearing in mind other leagues around have declared and there are a number of teams waiting to join.

3. PPG - my preferred option provided it is applied consistently across all leagues and conferences at both ends. I agree not wholly fair (my team will be a potential loser in this) but these are exceptional times and no league committee, team or supporters could have foreseen this.  The board could amend this or vary it e.g. 2 up (Conference winners only and 2 down) but if they fail to apply it consistently it will make it even unfairer on those teams that do lose out of the process.

whatever happens I’ll be back next season happy to be a part of the EOS .

[Che Dail]

58 minutes ago, sniffer said:

So basically you know feck all

Happy to keep this going all week:

I know, categorically, that Thornton did not reach the semi-final of the Scottish Junior Cup in the last 10 years, this being 2020.

I know with some confidence that the Planning Permission granted in 2011 has expired.  The works were not formally implemented and therefore it has no legal basis.  The current application has not yet been determined.

Consequently, I know that right now you are in no position to give any assurances to the League and club members that the fence will be erected in time for the start of the season, let alone Friday's meeting.

You, it seems, don't know very much.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Che Dail

[patriot1]

20 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

Happy to keep this going all week:

I know, categorically, that Thornton did not reach the semi-final of the Scottish Junior Cup in the last 10 years, this being 2020.

I know with some confidence that the Planning Permission granted in 2011 has expired.  The works were not formally implemented and therefore it has no legal basis.  The current application has not yet been determined.

Consequently, I know that right now you are in no position to give any assurances to the League and club members that the fence will be erected in time for the start of the season, let alone Friday's meeting.

You, it seems, don't know very much.

The fence doesn't need to be completed for the start of next season. All accepted applicants will have 12 months to meet the EOS criteria for their parks.

[Che Dail]

52 minutes ago, patriot1 said:

The fence doesn't need to be completed for the start of next season. All accepted applicants will have 12 months to meet the EOS criteria for their parks.

I think that's a fair approach - ultimately it's at the discretion of the Board members to offer a pre-defined period of grace to any club failing to meet any of the criteria and 12 months seems reasonable.  

My point about having the ability to give assurances now remains though - the guy is wrong because right now they do not have permission to build the fence. 

Whether it actually affects their league application or not is another matter, and in any case even if it does take another month or two, I would expect their application for planning permission to be approved, in the circumstances.  Hopefully all the applicant clubs will be voted in and accepted - We all want to see the League grow and thrive.

However, I do think that the new clubs should come in at the bottom level and not above or alongside others who have committed to 2 seasons of conferences already - I just don't think it's right and it disadvantages others, particularly neighbouring clubs who are in the same market for players for next season.  

I don't really think existing members should pander to what aspiring new ones believe to be fair or unfair - regardless of any arbitrary opinion on playing quality versus the existing teams in the league, and the fact one club got to a cup semi-final in 2008, which is obviously completely irrelevant.   Stay in the Juniors if it's too much to bear working through the divisions.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Che Dail

[patriot1]

9 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

I think that's a fair approach - ultimately it's at the discretion of the Board members to offer a pre-defined period of grace to any club failing to meet any of the criteria and 12 months seems reasonable.  

My point about having the ability to give assurances now remains though - the guy is wrong because right now they do not have permission to build the fence. 

Whether it actually affects their league application or not is another matter, and in any case even if it does take another month or two, I would expect their application for planning permission to be approved, in the circumstances.  Hopefully all the applicant clubs will be voted in and accepted - We all want to see the League grow and thrive.

However, I do think that the new clubs should come in at the bottom level and not above or alongside others who have committed to 2 seasons of conferences already - I just don't think it's right and it disadvantages others, particularly neighbouring clubs who are in the same market for players for next season.  

I don't really think existing members should pander to what aspiring new ones believe to be fair or unfair - regardless of any arbitrary opinion on playing quality versus the existing teams in the league, and the fact one club got to a cup semi-final in 2008, which is obviously completely irrelevant.   Stay in the Juniors if it's too much to bear working through the divisions.

I think that's a fair point of view but the thing to remember is that it was the clubs who voted for conferences. And that's one of the great things about the EOS, where possible they let the club's decide. It's the same with Thortons application and the fate of the 19-20 season, both going to democratic votes.

[Che Dail]

3 minutes ago, patriot1 said:

I think that's a fair point of view but the thing to remember is that it was the clubs who voted for conferences. And that's one of the great things about the EOS, where possible they let the club's decide. It's the same with Thortons application and the fate of the 19-20 season, both going to democratic votes.

Yes, but that vote was taken 3/4 of the way through the season, when the outcome was determined by a majority of clubs casting a vote based on their current league position. 

I don't think that is fair and balanced. 

Also at that time the Board did not take a position on their preferred option whereas this time clubs are being asked to vote for or against the Board's stated preference - it would be better if they could remain impartial.

And now, the landscape has changed - a lot of clubs are going to be missing out on promotion and there's nothing they can do on the park to remedy it. The only way is to have another look at the structure and at the very least the ones missing out will have gained a promotion, of sorts. 

[sniffer]

Happy to keep this going all week:
I know, categorically, that Thornton did not reach the semi-final of the Scottish Junior Cup in the last 10 years, this being 2020.
I know with some confidence that the Planning Permission granted in 2011 has expired.  The works were not formally implemented and therefore it has no legal basis.  The current application has not yet been determined.
Consequently, I know that right now you are in no position to give any assurances to the League and club members that the fence will be erected in time for the start of the season, let alone Friday's meeting.
You, it seems, don't know very much.

Your correct 2008 for the semi final just slightly over 10 years and I see patriot1 has the correct ruling ALL CLUBS will be given 12 months to build, erect , dig or whatever they have to do to tick all the boxes for the 26 entry points.
The new planning application is in place with fife council with a little adjustment BUT and here’s the BUT, if there seems to be an issue with the new application and we all hope there won’t be then the club will just use the old planning application in 2010 so unless your the the actual planner from the fife council who has changed his mind about using the existing 2010 app that’s still in place, then I think with more confidence than you that a fence will be erected within the 12 month grace period.

[sniffer]

I think that's a fair approach - ultimately it's at the discretion of the Board members to offer a pre-defined period of grace to any club failing to meet any of the criteria and 12 months seems reasonable.  
My point about having the ability to give assurances now remains though - the guy is wrong because right now they do not have permission to build the fence. 
Whether it actually affects their league application or not is another matter, and in any case even if it does take another month or two, I would expect their application for planning permission to be approved, in the circumstances.  Hopefully all the applicant clubs will be voted in and accepted - We all want to see the League grow and thrive.
However, I do think that the new clubs should come in at the bottom level and not above or alongside others who have committed to 2 seasons of conferences already - I just don't think it's right and it disadvantages others, particularly neighbouring clubs who are in the same market for players for next season.  
I don't really think existing members should pander to what aspiring new ones believe to be fair or unfair - regardless of any arbitrary opinion on playing quality versus the existing teams in the league, and the fact one club got to a cup semi-final in 2008, which is obviously completely irrelevant.   Stay in the Juniors if it's too much to bear working through the divisions.

[sniffer]

Case closed see you next season .

[Che Dail]

28 minutes ago, sniffer said:

Your correct 2008 for the semi final just slightly over 10 years and I see patriot1 has the correct ruling ALL CLUBS will be given 12 months to build, erect , dig or whatever they have to do to tick all the boxes for the 26 entry points.
The new planning application is in place with fife council with a little adjustment BUT and here’s the BUT, if there seems to be an issue with the new application and we all hope there won’t be then the club will just use the old planning application in 2010 so unless your the the actual planner from the fife council who has changed his mind about using the existing 2010 app that’s still in place, then I think with more confidence than you that a fence will be erected within the 12 month grace period.

The original consent was with conditions. 

Condition 3 starts with, (in caps) "BEFORE ANY WORKS START ON SITE...." and then a stipulation that certain obligations must be met. 

There is no record on the portal of that condition being purified. 

So dropping a container on the land (additionally, without consent to connect to the drains, hence the request for SUDS)  before meeting the provision in Condition 3  cannot not qualify as 'started work'.

Plus, 'prior to development... you are required to submit written confirmation to Fife Council... the intended date of commencement...' etc. No record of that either.

So the permission has lapsed, which is why they have had to reapply, as per the advice in your screen grab.

There is nothing materially different in the current application so why on earth would they want to reapply if they did not have to?

Think you are either deluded, ignorant or simply being disingenuous. 

Edited April 19, 2020 by Che Dail

[Che Dail]

24 minutes ago, sniffer said:

Your correct 2008 for the semi final just slightly over 10 years and I see patriot1 has the correct ruling ALL CLUBS will be given 12 months to build, erect , dig or whatever they have to do to tick all the boxes for the 26 entry points.
The new planning application is in place with fife council with a little adjustment BUT and here’s the BUT, if there seems to be an issue with the new application and we all hope there won’t be then the club will just use the old planning application in 2010 so unless your the the actual planner from the fife council who has changed his mind about using the existing 2010 app that’s still in place, then I think with more confidence than you that a fence will be erected within the 12 month grace period.

Yes, I know the difference between 10years and 12 years.

And the 12 months period of grace is not a 'ruling', it is an offering, at the discretion of the board, and one you should be grateful for.

Edited April 19, 2020 by Che Dail

[sniffer]

Yes, I know the difference between 10years and 12 years.
And the 12 months period of grace is not a 'ruling', it is an offering, at the discretion of the board, and one you should be grateful for.

I don’t think it’s an offering I would say a decision the board has made and what is anyone to be grateful for ?
Are you looking for clubs to fail so the clubs trying to come into the league doesn’t compete against your club because it definitely sounds like it is.
We will also see what happens with planning.