Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Stego Mac

Conference Call

Recommended Posts

From a neutral point of view, it is always going to be interesting to see how the Conferences are made up, and I have no idea how the discussions have been on these. So for a bit of fun, I decided to come up with my own version. I split each of the teams into a pool of 4 based on league positions last year with the exception of Johnstone Burgh and Newmains who moved up a pot based on their points per games. The 4 new clubs were also put in the same pot. Each of the pots would then in turn be drawn into each of the conferences in turn. Below I have listed ‘my’ pots followed by the initial draw I made for a bit of fun. I don’t think I could have hand picked some of the derbies better myself without the random generator though.

 

WOS League ‘pots’

 

Pot 1

Kilwinning Rangers

Pollok

Auchinleck Talbot

Irvine Meadow

 

Pot 2

Clydebank

Glenafton Athletic

Beith

Kilbirnie

 

Pot 3

Cumnock

Rossvale

Largs Thistle

Hurlford

 

Pot 4

Troon

Benburb

Rutherglen Glencairn

Kirkintilloch Rob Roy

 

Pot 5

Darvel

Cumbernauld

Blantyre

Renfrew

 

Pot 6

Shotts

Arthurlie

Neilston

Whitletts

 

Pot 7

Kilsyth Rangers

Dalry Thistle

Gartcairn

Petershill

 

Pot 8

St Rochs

Cambuslang

Craigmark

Irvine Victoria

 

Pot 9

Ardrossan

Lanark

Shettleston

Port Glasgow

 

Pot 10

Lesmahagow

Greenock

Carluke

Glasgow Perthshire

 

Pot 11

Larkhall Thistle

Bellshill Athletic

Girvan

Maryhill

 

Pot 12

Kello Rovers

Wishaw

East Kilbride Thistle

Royal Albert

 

Pot 13

Vale of Leven

Yoker Athletic

Muirkirk

Johnstone Burgh

 

Pot 14

Maybole

Ashfield

Thorniewood United

Forth Wanderers

 

Pot 15

Annbank

Vale of Clyde

St Anthony’s

Newmains United

 

Pot 16

Saltcoats Victoria

Lugar Boswell Thistle

Ardeer Thistle

 

Pot 17

Bonnyton Thistle

Drumchapel United

Glasgow University

St Cadocs

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My own draw for fun:


WOS Leagues 2020/21

Conference A

Benburb
Bonnyton Thistle
Cambuslang Rangers
Darvel
Girvan
Greenock
Kello Rovers
Kilbirnie
Kilsyth
Hurlford
Muirkirk
Pollok
Port Glasgow
Thorniewood
Vale of Clyde
Whitletts

Conference B

Ardeer Thistle
Ashfield
Beith
Cumbernauld
Dalry Thistle
East Kilbride Thistle
Glasgow Perthshire
Glasgow University
Irvine Meadow
Irvine Victoria
Largs Thistle
Larkhall Thistle
Rutherglen Glencairn
Shettleston
Shotts
St Anthony’s
Vale of Leven

Conference C

Arthurlie
Auchinleck Talbot
Bellshill
Blantyre Victoria
Carluke
Craigmark
Cumnock
Forth Wanderers
Gartcairn
Glenafton
Johnston Burgh
Kirkintilloch Rob Roy
Lanark
Newmains
Saltcoats
St Cadocs
Wishaw

Conference D

Annbank
Ardrossan
Clydebank
Drumchapel United
Kilwinning Rangers
Lesmahagow
Lugar Boswell
Maryhill
Maybole
Neilston
Petershill
Renfrew
Rossvale
Royal Albert
St Rochs
Troon
Yoker

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’ve thought about something similar but instead of splitting teams from the same area up, loosely keeping teams from the same area playing each other in the first season of conferences...

So you would have teams seeded based on current standings in the WJ league, with the new teams added on, and try to keep the conference’s as close as possible geographically at first

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would this years junior standings be relevant when taking into account the conferences for the WOS? With the organisations being two separate entities and the addition of the 4 new teams, again coming from separate organisations, would it not be prevalent to have all teams on a level playing field and basically draw the conferences out of hat so to speak? Would this not make it fair and would not differentiate the likes of Auchinleck and Kilwinning to Saltcoats and Drumpchapel for instance who really all should be on a level playing field. Well at least at the beginning and formation of the league you would think!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The clubs will all get the opportunity to give their opinions this week on how the conferences should be worked out via video calls on Tuesday and Wednesday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, spud4 said:

Would this years junior standings be relevant when taking into account the conferences for the WOS? With the organisations being two separate entities and the addition of the 4 new teams, again coming from separate organisations, would it not be prevalent to have all teams on a level playing field and basically draw the conferences out of hat so to speak? Would this not make it fair and would not differentiate the likes of Auchinleck and Kilwinning to Saltcoats and Drumpchapel for instance who really all should be on a level playing field. Well at least at the beginning and formation of the league you would think!

Possibly not, I’m just going on how it was done in the east, although they didn’t regionalise the conferences. The situation this season is completely different so I can see why it may not be the best way, but also a random draw could end up with ALL the best teams in one conference. Therefore putting better teams a division or 2 lower than not so good teams for season 2.

The only other way is to split the season in 2 to allow teams who got an unfairly difficult conference in the first place, to find their true level for the first full season of divisions...

It will be an interesting discussion but with the LL’s track record of allowing teams to have their say, I’m sure they will come to an agreement that (almost) everyone is happy about

Edited by Spyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Possibly not, I’m just going on how it was done in the east, although they didn’t regionalise the conferences. The situation this season is completely different so I can see why it may not be the best way, but also a random draw could end up with ALL the best teams in one conference. Therefore putting better teams a division or 2 lower than not so good teams for season 2.
The only other way is to split the season in 2 to allow teams who got an unfairly difficult conference in the first place, to find their true level for the first full season of divisions...
It will be an interesting discussion but with the LL’s track record of allowing teams to have their say, I’m sure they will come to an agreement that (almost) everyone is happy about


My next question was going to ask how they did it in the east? I’m not even sure it’s really the same scenario as the easy though as everyone has moved across here. Again I don’t know, personally if regionalising it would ultimately be a fair way either. Think the idea of sort of “free for all” draw makes it more appealing to everyone and not just the elite teams. If you have a hard conference then ultimately that could provide the best football next year and the most entertaining conference. It will give everyone a fair chance of qualifying for the WOS league. Think over the next season or 2 most teams will find their level but this way allows, so called smaller teams a one year free hit next season and a big chance to jump a few leagues in one season, especially if they are in a so called easier conference. Will be interesting to see where it goes for sure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, spud4 said:

My next question was going to ask how they did it in the east? I’m not even sure it’s really the same scenario as the easy though as everyone has moved across here. Again I don’t know, personally if regionalising it would ultimately be a fair way either. Think the idea of sort of “free for all” draw makes it more appealing to everyone and not just the elite teams. If you have a hard conference then ultimately that could provide the best football next year and the most entertaining conference. It will give everyone a fair chance of qualifying for the WOS league. Think over the next season or 2 most teams will find their level but this way allows, so called smaller teams a one year free hit next season and a big chance to jump a few leagues in one season, especially if they are in a so called easier conference. Will be interesting to see where it goes for sure.

They seeding things based on the previous season's ranking. League order was LL-EoS-Super-Premier-South-Central 2nd-Am/Youth. Luckily there was only one amateur/youth club in Inverkeithing. They could end up doing something similar in the WoSFL. That's probably the idea they're working to right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You need to work backwards from the end goal. Which presumably is a 16-team Premiership etc. So you need to find the 16 best clubs in the WOSFL*, but you can't just take the old Premiership as it's a fresh start with new teams, and those in the Championship didn't get their promotion.

To do that, you need a number of conferences each of which are roughly equal strength. That way everyone has roughly the same chance of trying to get towards the top. At the end of the season the top teams get assigned to the WOS Premiership.

Drawing teams out of a hat or doing it by regions will not achieve equal conferences.

IMO the only real choices the clubs have are: number of games to be played in the season (which might influence the number of conferences), whether to use PPG, whether to use sequential or snake splitting, and where to put Bonnyton (top or bottom) in the list.

* actually might only be 15, depends on whether Dalbeattie or Gretna want to go into the SOS or WOS.

Edited by Ginaro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, spud4 said:

 


My next question was going to ask how they did it in the east? I’m not even sure it’s really the same scenario as the easy though as everyone has moved across here. Again I don’t know, personally if regionalising it would ultimately be a fair way either. Think the idea of sort of “free for all” draw makes it more appealing to everyone and not just the elite teams. If you have a hard conference then ultimately that could provide the best football next year and the most entertaining conference. It will give everyone a fair chance of qualifying for the WOS league. Think over the next season or 2 most teams will find their level but this way allows, so called smaller teams a one year free hit next season and a big chance to jump a few leagues in one season, especially if they are in a so called easier conference. Will be interesting to see where it goes for sure.

 

The other difference in the east is that they only had to sort out 39 clubs, not 67.
I personally am not a fan of regionalising the conferences but I figured that considering the circumstances of clubs not playing for so long and the amount of teams, it might be more appetising for the first (or even the first HALF) of the season to allow clubs to catch up with finances and old friends again.

My other concern is 67 is a horrible number to try and split fairly, even with a higher in maths! Although sadly, the chances of ALL 67 making it to whenever the season starts again could be quite slim. I’m not banking on even seeing a 2020-21 season tbh 😪

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The other difference in the east is that they only had to sort out 39 clubs, not 67.
I personally am not a fan of regionalising the conferences but I figured that considering the circumstances of clubs not playing for so long and the amount of teams, it might be more appetising for the first (or even the first HALF) of the season to allow clubs to catch up with finances and old friends again.
My other concern is 67 is a horrible number to try and split fairly, even with a higher in maths! Although sadly, the chances of ALL 67 making it to whenever the season starts again could be quite slim. I’m not banking on even seeing a 2020-21 season tbh


I think the last sentence is the one we should be worrying about more than the conferences itself sadly. It could very well be the case. The regionalising scenario for financial reasons is a very good point and understandable but the argument could be a Lanarkshire club could be better off financially with a visit from Auchinleck than it would from Rutherglen for example. All hypothetical I know and there probably isn’t a correct answer. I’m sure clubs will be heard and their opinions considered.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is how it was split in the east....

And this is how the conferences looked. Thanks again to FWF for breaking it down so neatly

99C6A5E9-9B0D-409F-B61E-EC59B98201AD.png.20f135c81f82c0ba8bde020ae1ea64bd.png

Edited by Spyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, spud4 said:

 


I think the last sentence is the one we should be worrying about more than the conferences itself sadly. It could very well be the case. The regionalising scenario for financial reasons is a very good point and understandable but the argument could be a Lanarkshire club could be better off financially with a visit from Auchinleck than it would from Rutherglen for example. All hypothetical I know and there probably isn’t a correct answer. I’m sure clubs will be heard and their opinions considered.

 

Yeah sorry to bring the mood down but we can bang our heads working out every different possibility under the sun. But until we know when football will start again and how many teams we will actually have, it’s all a waste of time trying to dream up who will be playing who

Edited by Spyro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Bonnyton would be in a higher pot on account of already being a tier 6 club

The numbers of the pots aren't really relevant - there's a series of (ordered) Junior pots and then another non-Junior pot. That's exactly how the EoS did it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting thread. I would prefer to see a list 1 to 67 that provides our seeding numbers. Should the Championship  winners be seeded above those teams that finished in the Premiership relegation positions? Etc.

The seeding list is the starting point and then we can debate from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about something that gives balanced conferences, but also tends to give more local fixtures. Important when teams are hard up after the enforced break.

Divide into groups of 4, same idea as the EoS did with groups of 3. The EoS put the 1sts in group together, then the 2nds etc,. Instead take the most northerly out of each group of 4. And call that Conference N. Then the most southerly, Conference S. Most easterly becomes Conference E and the remainder Conference W.

It won't be perfect geographically, but could give the best of both worlds?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, colourofthegrass said:

How about something that gives balanced conferences, but also tends to give more local fixtures. Important when teams are hard up after the enforced break.

Divide into groups of 4, same idea as the EoS did with groups of 3. The EoS put the 1sts in group together, then the 2nds etc,. Instead take the most northerly out of each group of 4. And call that Conference N. Then the most southerly, Conference S. Most easterly becomes Conference E and the remainder Conference W.

It won't be perfect geographically, but could give the best of both worlds?

 

Tbf all of those clubs were playing in a West-wide league with the exception of Glasgow Uni and St Cadocs - and they knew what they're signing up to. There's no need to sub-regionalise, especially since the largest travelling distance is going to be about 1hr 25m (Kilsyth to Girvan). 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that when Conferences are drawn, there should aforethought perhaps be three/four different ones made!

A 4-way split, a 5-way split, a 6-way split and even an 8-way split ~ and chosen accordingly for the available length of season.

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...