Premiership relegation

[Beenzon-Toste]

I've heard it's to be either 7 or 5 relegations after first season. Clubs to vote on it.

What's the feelings on this?

Has there been anything from the Wosfl about pros and cons?

[jimbaxters]

It would be interesting to find out if there has ever been a league where 7 have been relegated. Maybe as part of reconstruction but this isn't the case here.

Whether it's 5 or 7 it was completely avoidable if those in charge of the situation had had a bit of backbone.

[glensmad]

It is to be discussed at the Zoom conference calls with all of the member clubs next week, and the clubs will be asked to vote by email at some point after that.

 

You are correct, the two options are 7 down next summer or 5 down for the next two summers.

 

For me it's a no-brainer. 5 down not only means that two teams stay in tier 6 that would otherwise be relegated, but it also means that two more teams from the conferences will make it into the tier 7 league for season 2021-22, i.e. the two 5th placed teams with the best record.

 

The only down side to 5 down is that, at the end of season 2021-22, five teams would also need to be relegated from tier 7 to balance out the leagues again.

 

In a 7-down scenario, the two best-record 5th placed Conferences teams (who would go into tier 7 in a 5-down scenario) would now drop to tier 8, as well as two more teams from tier 6 dropping to tier 7.

 

With season 2020-21 likely to be shortened and potentially imbalanced, I think it's harsh to be relegating 7 teams in those circumstances. Also bear in mind that, if a team is relegated from the Lowland League to the WoSFL and nobody is promoted in the other direction, then it would need to be 8 down from tier 6. That would be 40% of the league.

 

It only takes a team to have a dodgy start to the season and they may not recover in time, and you might see some big team names involved in that. They'd be crazy to vote to potentially put themselves in that danger, in my opinion.

 

That's only my thoughts, though. Others will possibly see it differently.

 

 

 

 

[FairWeatherFan]

1 hour ago, jimbaxters said:

It would be interesting to find out if there has ever been a league where 7 have been relegated. Maybe as part of reconstruction but this isn't the case here.

Whether it's 5 or 7 it was completely avoidable if those in charge of the situation had had a bit of backbone.

The creation of the Scottish Premier Division for 1975-76 saw 8 out of the 18 teams relegated from the top tier.

On a similar note the Welsh Premier League went from 18 to 12 teams in 2009-10. 6 Clubs ended up being relegated and some other clubs avoided relegation due to clubs in promotion spots in the second tier didn't meeting licencing standards. Otherwise 8 clubs would have been relegated if things had gone to plan.

 

Edited June 10, 2020 by FairWeatherFan

[Bestsinceslicebread]

1 hour ago, glensmad said:

It is to be discussed at the Zoom conference calls with all of the member clubs next week, and the clubs will be asked to vote by email at some point after that.

 

You are correct, the two options are 7 down next summer or 5 down for the next two summers.

 

For me it's a no-brainer. 5 down not only means that two teams stay in tier 6 that would otherwise be relegated, but it also means that two more teams from the conferences will make it into the tier 7 league for season 2021-22, i.e. the two 5th placed teams with the best record.

 

The only down side to 5 down is that, at the end of season 2021-22, five teams would also need to be relegated from tier 7 to balance out the leagues again.

 

In a 7-down scenario, the two best-record 5th placed Conferences teams (who would go into tier 7 in a 5-down scenario) would now drop to tier 8, as well as two more teams from tier 6 dropping to tier 7.

 

With season 2020-21 likely to be shortened and potentially imbalanced, I think it's harsh to be relegating 7 teams in those circumstances. Also bear in mind that, if a team is relegated from the Lowland League to the WoSFL and nobody is promoted in the other direction, then it would need to be 8 down from tier 6. That would be 40% of the league.

 

It only takes a team to have a dodgy start to the season and they may not recover in time, and you might see some big team names involved in that. They'd be crazy to vote to potentially put themselves in that danger, in my opinion.

 

That's only my thoughts, though. Others will possibly see it differently.

 

 

 

 

This information about either 5 or 7 to be relegated has been well known for a while now
Yeah Glens I agree with what you stated above.

The SFA told  the Lowland League there could be only one division in tier 6, even though the Lowland league originally thought they would be allowed to have four conferences at tier 6.
The lowland league wanted every team, equal of standing  from the 20/21 conference season to then have tier 6 at 16 clubs in the following season 21/22.
As SFA told Lowland there would be no conferences in tier 6 so the Lowland league had no choice but to make a 20 'tier 6' league, with the 16 from junior footballs top ex West juniorleague and the 3 promotional teams from the ex West region championship league and Bonnyton Thistle from tier 6 of the South of Scotland League.
In order to get back to a 16 team league, George Fraser stated that they hope to get back to this within a couple of years if not before.

This means, quite simply,
20/21 season  the 3 conference winners are promoted and either 5 are relegated or 7.
if 5 relegated it means in season 21/22 there will be an 18 team league which again will have 5 relegated and 3 promoted to it and then its 16 team league.
The senior clubs will get to vote on it either 7 relegated to get a 16 team league in the following season or 5 relegated for the two season to get to a 16 team league in two years.

IS there any way to motion during the senior meeting of the clubs and the league, so that its 4 teams relegated each year until they work it out to become 16, might take an extra year and everyone will feel a bit relaxed about it, obviously the teams who will be relegated

Edited June 10, 2020 by Bestsinceslicebread

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, jimbaxters said:

It would be interesting to find out if there has ever been a league where 7 have been relegated. Maybe as part of reconstruction but this isn't the case here.

Whether it's 5 or 7 it was completely avoidable if those in charge of the situation had had a bit of backbone.

Going from 20 to 18 or 16 teams is reconstruction - that's literally the meaning of the phrase.

[Juniorfootball123]

Either way I have a feeling the bottom of the table is going to be more interesting viewing than the top this season!! 

[Beenzon-Toste]

Surely if it's to be 5 down that's a bit unfair on the conference teams.
In season two it will need to be 5 relegations in each of the top 3 leagues to keep them inline.
To me that would look like favouring the Premiership teams again. Why?
They pushed for 20 this season so they should have thought about the consequences of getting back to 16.

[glensmad]

Surely if it's to be 5 down that's a bit unfair on the conference teams.
In season two it will need to be 5 relegations in each of the top 3 leagues to keep them inline.
To me that would look like favouring the Premiership teams again. Why?
They pushed for 20 this season so they should have thought about the consequences of getting back to 16.

No, it would actually only be 5 down from tier 6 and 7 at the end of season 2 if you look at the document sent out last week by the WoSFL. Tier 8 and 9 would not be affected.

Plus 5 down next summer would mean two extra places in tier 7 for Conference teams for 2021-22.

[beith19]

I believe it is getting reduced to 16 teams whether in one season or two, and promotion from conferences isn't impacted as still only the conference winners going up so hardly unfair on conference teams?

Albeit harsh you have to win it to be  promoted. Maybe going to 4 relegated when it is a top 16 and then a play off between the 3 second placed teams?

[jimbaxters]

48 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Going from 20 to 18 or 16 teams is reconstruction - that's literally the meaning of the phrase.

Yes but you take my point. It didn't have to be a 20 team league in the first place so your reconstruction map did not need to be considered.

[jimbaxters]

18 minutes ago, Beenzon-Toste said:

Surely if it's to be 5 down that's a bit unfair on the conference teams.
In season two it will need to be 5 relegations in each of the top 3 leagues to keep them inline.
To me that would look like favouring the Premiership teams again. Why?
They pushed for 20 this season so they should have thought about the consequences of getting back to 16.

I'm sure they didn't. Just those with their bumholes twitching at the prospect of relegation and the three top Championship teams wanted it. 

Don't know this as fact but surely only those who have a direct self interest would ever have asked for that mess. And it looks to me like the same thing is happening again with the push for 5 relegated next year.

[FairWeatherFan]

15 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

I'm sure they didn't. Just those with their bumholes twitching at the prospect of relegation and the three top Championship teams wanted it. 

Don't know this as fact but surely only those who have a direct self interest would ever have asked for that mess. And it looks to me like the same thing is happening again with the push for 5 relegated next year.

It was going to be a 17 team league. Most would probably rather avoid the odd number teams, at which point you had the shared title for the WRSJFA Championship. You couldn't just pick one to make it up to 18. That's how you end up with the 20.

[glensmad]

I believe it is getting reduced to 16 teams whether in one season or two, and promotion from conferences isn't impacted as still only the conference winners going up so hardly unfair on conference teams?
Albeit harsh you have to win it to be  promoted. Maybe going to 4 relegated when it is a top 16 and then a play off between the 3 second placed teams?

5 down actually benefits the Conference teams as two extra would be in tier 7 for 2021-22. It doesn't affect them negatively at all.

[classof2010]

I'm sure they didn't. Just those with their bumholes twitching at the prospect of relegation and the three top Championship teams wanted it. 
Don't know this as fact but surely only those who have a direct self interest would ever have asked for that mess. And it looks to me like the same thing is happening again with the push for 5 relegated next year.

If average points were used to find a league winner then the same system should of relegated 3, you can’t just announce winners it’s either no winners n no relegation or winners and 3 relegated, to have a winner but no relegation but 3 promoted is wrong.
Promotion but no relegation has caused this but again it wouldn’t of mattered if we had been going into 4 conferences, but that was changed to 3 after everyone had voted for 4, so again who was behind all the changes.

[Beenzon-Toste]

No, it would actually only be 5 down from tier 6 and 7 at the end of season 2 if you look at the document sent out last week by the WoSFL. Tier 8 and 9 would not be affected.

Plus 5 down next summer would mean two extra places in tier 7 for Conference teams for 2021-22.

Haven't seen the document, but assuming the leagues formed out of the conferences would be 16, 16 & 17 if 5 relegated from Premiership. That would mean in the following season, if another 5 are relegated from the Premiership that it would be 5 relegated from tier 7 and 5 relegated from tier 8 to keep it at those numbers.

But even if you're correct, it's a bit unfair for the teams that put in a lot of hard work in the conferences to get to tier 7 only to be faced with 5 relegation spots in season 2. Just to favour the Premiership teams.

[Bestsinceslicebread]

3 minutes ago, classof2010 said:

If average points were used to find a league winner then the same system should of relegated 3, you can’t just announce winners it’s either no winners n no relegation or winners and 3 relegated, to have a winner but no relegation but 3 promoted is wrong.
Promotion but no relegation has caused this but again it wouldn’t of mattered if we had been going into 4 conferences, but that was changed to 3 after everyone had voted for 4, so again who was behind all the changes.

The SFA were behind the changes as they stipulated that there can only be one division at tier 6, so the Lowland League had to adjust the WOS

It doesn't matter what the standings are of the ex junior west region, every team, bar Bonnyton were joining a new Association and league so the association don't need to take into account the standings of the ex west region leagues.  You join a new association you fall into their rules.
The lowland league wanted it to be 4 conferences with everyone on an equal standing but the SFA would have none of it.
So the Lowland league tried their best to make the WOS structured under the constrains given from the SFA.

[classof2010]

The SFA were behind the changes as they stipulated that there can only be one division at tier 6, so the Lowland League had to adjust the WOS

It doesn't matter what the standings are of the ex junior west region, every team, bar Bonnyton were joining a new Association and league so the association don't need to take into account the standings of the ex west region leagues.  You join a new association you fall into their rules.
The lowland league wanted it to be 4 conferences with everyone on an equal standing but the SFA would have none of it.
So the Lowland league tried their best to make the WOS structured under the constrains given from the SFA.

Yeah that might be true but surely the relegation and promotion was decided by WOSJ

[Bestsinceslicebread]

Just now, classof2010 said:

Yeah that might be true but surely the relegation and promotion was decided by WOSJ

but that has absolute nothing to do with the Lowland league. To all 63 clubs the WOS is a new league under the Lowland Association.
Any team at any level that joins a new association fall under their rules.
The one good thing is that the clubs will be able to run the league themselves.
The only difference they cant change, as far as I'm aware is that the League match's and South Challenge cup match's must take precedence over all others, bar the Scottish Senior cup 

[glensmad]

Correct. The SFA basically told the LL-WoSFL to take the current West Region Premiership to form their tier 6 league. The LL-WoSFL had no choice, but managed to successfully negotiate with the SFA for three added teams who would have been promoted to the Premiership if it had still been the West Region juniors. The rest of the teams were at tier 7, which is the level they would have been at or higher had they still been in the juniors.

Now it's a matter of how we get the structure back to the originally planned format after the originally planned tier 6 conferences which the SFA wouldn't allow.

To be fair, I can now see the merits in both plans.