New clubs in the West of Scotland

[Ped]

I never stated blantyre sa wanted to go senior or have any knowledge on it all I know is theres been talk between council about taking control of the jock Stein 

[gaswork]

To look at clubs collecting wee toys and easter eggs for kids in some of the poorest parts of the country and sneer at it is the hallmark of a complete roaster. Clubs are at the heart of their communities, sometimes they are forgotten by the community when buses flood out to the bigot brothers etc but the clubs always step up and do their bit. Its right that the wosl shows just how important these teams are, they’re the identity and lifeblood of these places. 

Get off your high horse ffs .

Nobody is denying them the right to exist and contribute to local community but don't come near the semi professional game.

Where have the standards gone.

Down the drain by looks of it.

[Stag Nation]

2 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

I have no strong opinion on that beyond there being a need for a club to be more than one person's ego trip like Caledonian Braves and for there to be a reasonable expectation that it will still be around in another 20 years because it caters to an identifiable community. Overall I think some people on here are getting a bit too carried away with pyramid mania to the extent that they seem to view the entry of absolutely any new team as a positive.

Who can predict what will happen in 20 years?

In the early 70s I used to go to watch friends who played in the EOS for Spartans and Edinburgh Uni. Sometimes I was the only spectator there, apart from relatives, so no "identifiable community".  Meanwhile, Rangers were getting crowds of 30,000+

Half a century later, Spartans and Uni are still going strong. Whatever happened to Rangers?

[Big Dougie]

6 hours ago, jimbaxters said:

He has a point though. It might just be the speculative nature of this thread and/or the posters who contribute but reading about teams who are thinking of applying but then have to look for a ground which fits requirements is concerning. All for ambition but it all seems a bit nebulous. There are plenty of clubs who are established and who would benefit from gaining ambitious people and their ideas rather than a new or very young club starting afresh.

What sort of incentive is there for new or newish clubs starting afresh if they are just dismissed out of hand.

[LongTimeLurker]

2 hours ago, parsforlife said:

I haven’t seen any clubs that seem to be one man ego trips.   

I literally provided an example from the immediate Hamilton area in the shape of Caledonian Braves. Other prime examples over the years would be Bon Accord and Wilson's XI in the north region.

The north region in general would be the poster child for how not to run the semi-professional level in a way that's different enough from amateur level to actually be taken seriously in spectator terms.

Inverness City would be an example of a club that was allowed in despite having no viable plan on where they were going to be 20 years down the road with predictable results a few years later. Time will tell where BSC Glasgow are concerned on that.

Edited April 6, 2021 by LongTimeLurker

[jimbaxters]

2 hours ago, Big Dougie said:

What sort of incentive is there for new or newish clubs starting afresh if they are just dismissed out of hand.

It's not dismissing them. The rumours peddled by the time-rich posters on this thread in particular, suggest that there are clubs playing out of facilities which are not fit for purpose. This may be a lot of mince, mind you. The point is there are plenty of established clubs already in the league who have the facilities but lack the playing talent, committee, fresh ideas or ambition. Surely it would be better to bolster those clubs than try to establish ones.

 

ETA- the second wee emoji guy appeared by mistake but won't erase, damn him!

Edited April 6, 2021 by jimbaxters

[GordonS]

4 hours ago, Hillonearth said:

No idea what prompted that - just had a look at the offending Twitter and the only recent thing I can see that isn't directly related to football is one tweet highlighting the work clubs are doing for foodbank collections and after school homework clubs which isn't exactly screaming libtard behaviour to me.

YMMV though...I'm sure there are some out there who think back with a degree of nostalgia to when the venerable Scotty R ended a meeting by dropping an N-bomb. What's the world coming to/canny say anything these days/PC gone mad etc. etc.

I'm willing to bet it means the tweets they did on international women's day. Because God forbid anyone tries to encourage half the population to get involved in the game, eh.

[Marten]

The great thing of a pyramid is that all clubs can eventually find their natural level. Some new clubs might shine and quickly rise through the ranks. Others might end up at the bottom of the pyramid, drop down to the amateurs or even go out of business entirely. In the pyramid there can be natural selection. All this stuff about "diluting the semi-pro game" is just rubbish. Fair enough if new clubs try, some will succeed and some will undoubtedly fail. That's football.

[AsimButtHitsASix]

If a youth team, let's say from Strathaven but it could be anywhere, has an U-18s team, an U-16s team, maybe three or four teams as you go down the age groups and wee mini 7-a-side leagues for young kids as well all under the name of "Strathaven Santos" then there at least 100 kids involved in that set up. Plus at least that number of parents/guardians/uncles/cousins/grannies who are helping out or even just showing up for encouragement. That's 200 folk involved with a club that is giving something back to its local community. 

Why is that any more or less a part of a community than a junior club with 30 folk turning up every fortnight to watch 22 players, none of whom come from the town the club represents?

Some clubs rely on the income from their clubhouse or other non-football related income. Why is that any different to basing their survival and income on grants or subsidies from parents?

Maybe Bonnyton or St Cadocs will never make three figures of home fans for their regular matches but, even if they don't, they're serving their communities and offering a chance for young players to progress to the professional game. Why would anyone want to knock it? Boomer pish

[FairWeatherFan]

9 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

If a youth team, let's say from Strathaven but it could be anywhere, has an U-18s team, an U-16s team, maybe three or four teams as you go down the age groups and wee mini 7-a-side leagues for young kids as well all under the name of "Strathaven Santos" then there at least 100 kids involved in that set up. Plus at least that number of parents/guardians/uncles/cousins/grannies who are helping out or even just showing up for encouragement. That's 200 folk involved with a club that is giving something back to its local community.

If this youth also had an amateur team is it still just a youth team?

[jimbaxters]

38 minutes ago, Marten said:

The great thing of a pyramid is that all clubs can eventually find their natural level. Some new clubs might shine and quickly rise through the ranks. Others might end up at the bottom of the pyramid, drop down to the amateurs or even go out of business entirely. In the pyramid there can be natural selection. All this stuff about "diluting the semi-pro game" is just rubbish. Fair enough if new clubs try, some will succeed and some will undoubtedly fail. That's football.

Fair enough that there should be an opportunity to try but it's not a good look for a league administration for clubs to fail and go out of business. 

Therefore, there has to be an infrastructure in place before an application is accepted.

[Marten]

Just now, jimbaxters said:

Fair enough that there should be an opportunity to try but it's not a good look for a league administration for clubs to fail and go out of business. 

Therefore, there has to be an infrastructure in place before an application is accepted.

There are membership criteria and they are fair enough imo. I do support having at least some minimal criteria like there are now. There will still be clubs that fail, that's football as well but when clubs fit the criteria it's fair enough they get a chance.

[LongTimeLurker]

You can quickly identify the posters that can only handle a binary argument in a thread like this. There is a third more nuanced position on this that new clubs are good in theory and should definitely be encouraged to emerge but the bar should be set in a way that requires them to have their own ground with a long term secure lease and a large volunteer base that doesn't leave them dependent on one or very few individuals. That means for example that Cupar Hearts joining the EoS (yes I know but couldn't come up with a WoS scenario as good as this one) would probably be viewed as a positive development, but AM Soccer would be something to be a lot more wary about.

[Hillonearth]

26 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

You can quickly identify the posters that can only handle a binary argument in a thread like this. There is a third more nuanced position on this that new clubs are good in theory and should definitely be encouraged to emerge but the bar should be set in a way that requires them to have their own ground with a long term secure lease and a large volunteer base that doesn't leave them dependent on one or very few individuals. That means for example that Cupar Hearts joining the EoS (yes I know but couldn't come up with a WoS scenario as good as this one) would probably be viewed as a positive development, but AM Soccer would be something to be a lot more wary about.

Agreed up to a point, but requiring clubs to present a 20 year plan is maybe a bit extreme...I know it's unlikely ever going to happen, but a new club could conceivably be playing in Europe within 20 years!

There should however be safeguards in place to filter out speculative and/or frivolous applications...that being said there almost certainly are, as the one wing-and-a-prayer applicant so far was politely shown the door last year. In terms of new applicants, they should be able to supply evidence of longer-term sustainability - Big Davie's Mates United have no future once Big Davie loses interest or stops playing for instance and would be better suited to the amateur game where there's a lot of that thing goes on, and likewise a team whose sole plan is securing a block let on a school 3G which they've got zero chance of being able to develop into an actual football ground probably aren't what should be joining.

It's worth noting though that the criteria you mention above for consideration would probably rule out a decent proportion of pre-existing WOS clubs...we all know clubs who survive thanks to the efforts of a handful of volunteers and whose grounds are owned by local councils and are subject to their whims...I'm not sure that grandfather rights should mean that the bar should be set significantly higher for brand new clubs than it is for ones that are already involved.

[Dev]

It will be interesting to see how the "different criteria for different Tiers" in the WoS will work out. Presumably current clubs will be given time to adjust whilst new clubs to the league will be required to meet the new minimum criteria or have a plan showing that will be reached by a dead-line.

It will also be interesting to see what the new varying criteria will be at each Tier.

Then there's the idea from the WoS of direct links to some of the Amateur Leagues with direct promotion (subject to meeting minimum criteria) and relegation. This will, presumably lead to a maximum number of clubs allowed into the league.

[Pyramidic]

1 hour ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

If a youth team, let's say from Strathaven but it could be anywhere, has an U-18s team, an U-16s team, maybe three or four teams as you go down the age groups and wee mini 7-a-side leagues for young kids as well all under the name of "Strathaven Santos" then there at least 100 kids involved in that set up. Plus at least that number of parents/guardians/uncles/cousins/grannies who are helping out or even just showing up for encouragement. That's 200 folk involved with a club that is giving something back to its local community. 

Why is that any more or less a part of a community than a junior club with 30 folk turning up every fortnight to watch 22 players, none of whom come from the town the club represents?

Some clubs rely on the income from their clubhouse or other non-football related income. Why is that any different to basing their survival and income on grants or subsidies from parents?

Maybe Bonnyton or St Cadocs will never make three figures of home fans for their regular matches but, even if they don't, they're serving their communities and offering a chance for young players to progress to the professional game. Why would anyone want to knock it? Boomer pish

I wrote the following statement on another thread almost a month ago. I think it is relevant to the current debate.

“It does make a lot of sense incorporating the name of the town or settlement in the club title.

I think that we will see more Youth set-ups applying to the EOSFL and WOSFL. They are very different from the general football model. Most will trace their origins to a few dads that wanted to establish a Youth side for their sons. One team subsequently grew into two teams and the club then begins to mushroom and we have say 20 or 30 teams or perhaps more.

Money can be raised with enthusiastic mothers an fathers. Sponsors arrive from all sorts of directions. Grants are available from local councils and other funding bodies.

The club becomes recognised as a community service. The downside arrives when players are 16 or 18 and the more talented ones migrate to Junior/Senior clubs. A few may remain with the club and progress into Men’s amateur football.

It is natural for those administering the club to consider at some stage creating a pathway to Senior football. This can be achieved with a partnership with a Senior club or by taking the difficult route of applying to the EOSFL or WOSFL and upgrading facilities as appropriate.

In most cases the level of support for a newly created Senior side is likely to be very poor at the outset. Interested family members and a few youngsters who play for youth sides is probably the most that can be expected to attend games.

However, providing that players are not paid it does not really matter. It may be possible to bring in older more experienced amateur players to swell the ranks but there is always the possibility of a clash of cultures.

A Youth club following the Senior route can over time have built up a lot of assets from grants and membership/monthly fees (say 700 players paying say £25 annual membership and £20 monthly training/match fees). Some money may be left over for important development projects! Then add the fund raising and sponsorship elements. Whilst some youth set-ups will struggle others will not.

The point I am making is that the funding model (assuming it works successfully) is very different for a Youth club that moves to Senior football. It will not work if the club is simply going to rely on its local support base in terms of matchday attendances.

A successful Youth club who establishes a Senior side in my view represents a positive element for the future of the EOSFL and WOSFL . However, it does need to be carefully assessed by the respective league officials to make sure that league criteria can be properly met and the applicants proposals are truly sustainable.”

[FairWeatherFan]

5 minutes ago, Hillonearth said:

There should however be safeguards in place to filter out speculative and/or frivolous applications...that being said there almost certainly are, as the one wing-and-a-prayer applicant so far was politely shown the door last year.

A lot of this kicked off because of the mention of two Paisley based clubs being assessed, with one not meeting the criteria. As mentioned Scoutable United were turned down last year as well.

So clubs aren't getting the red carpet treatment as someone suggested.

One of the reasons why they haven't declared a number of applicants publicly after the deadline, is probably because now what's there on paper is being assessed in reality. With a few failing to meet the requirements.

[Pyramidic]

2 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

A lot of this kicked off because of the mention of two Paisley based clubs being assessed, with one not meeting the criteria. As mentioned Scoutable United were turned down last year as well.

So clubs aren't getting the red carpet treatment as someone suggested.

One of the reasons why they haven't declared a number of applicants publicly after the deadline, is probably because now what's there on paper is being assessed in reality. With a few failing to meet the requirements.

I think the other issue will be that a significant number of applicants will not meet the current league entry criteria. The question may then arise to the degree that the entry requirements can be relaxed to create a viable Development Division. These will be difficult issues for league management to address and I can understand why public “leaks” have been curtailed for the time being until the matter has been resolved.

[Marshmallo]

Tears at Inter and AC Milan being rejected for "not having their own ground".

[Hillonearth]

39 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

A lot of this kicked off because of the mention of two Paisley based clubs being assessed, with one not meeting the criteria. As mentioned Scoutable United were turned down last year as well.

So clubs aren't getting the red carpet treatment as someone suggested.

One of the reasons why they haven't declared a number of applicants publicly after the deadline, is probably because now what's there on paper is being assessed in reality. With a few failing to meet the requirements.

Yeah, this thread has gone a bit silly season with speculation being reported as fact a couple of pages later - we've already had half of Argyllshire joining up based on somebody saying they fancied a day trip to Oban, and now we've got folk getting annoyed at applications chances are haven't even been made.

I suppose it's symptomatic of so little going on at the moment that these things grow arms and legs...I'd be content to let the league do their job and weed out the chancers.