Jump to content

Premier Relegation spots


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Malty Guy said:

I’m still waiting on your definition. Smoke and mirrors,,,, I’ve around too long to be distracted by that technique.

Please define a season,,,, simples 

Are you seriously looking for the definition of a football season? 
I thought you were being rhetorical.

We all know we’d love the season to be defined by all clubs completing their allocated fixtures, with winners and losers borne out of their efforts in all fixtures.

But right now football is different, hopefully not for much longer.

If Hearts, Patrick etc can be relegated on a PPG basis and LL and HL can use this system 2 years in a row to declare winners then I have no doubt that the EOSFL can use the same principles to define this as a “season” and relegate the current poorest performing teams in each of their leagues and promote the current best performing teams. 

Edited by themillerman1979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But let’s not suggest anyone is being forced to do anything unreasonable in the sense they’d have to play 2 or 3 games per week for 4 weeks. 


But it IS entirely unreasonable to ask players to commit to that schedule just because of its similarity to schedules they may have endured previously in a pre-pandemic world.

There are life experiences and necessities that have been missed for many months and that will take precedence over play-play-play (as you seem to suggest that training can simply be shelved, itself an entirely unrealistic proposition) as demanded by your route map to end the season. In previous seasons where demanding schedules were the norm near the end of the campaign these demands weren’t placed in a climate where a form of house arrest had proceeded them so it was indeed then something that had to be factored into life as a football player or committee member.

Simply to imply that if a return to football after lockdown impinges on your family life and prevents what to some is their desired ‘finish’ to a season then the solution is for individuals to choose not to return is also unreasonable. This indiscriminate course will impact the potential strength of teams on their enforced return and thus potentially impact performances and therefore results meaning the season is again adversely affected. It also has the potential to put additional stresses and strains on those behind the scenes - where many committees are short handed during the best of times - should some committee volunteers not return due to an entirely understandable desire, nay need, to put a return to normal family life first.

For me, it is entirely unrealistic, and therefore unreasonable, to shoehorn games in to reach a 50% watermark to avoid a null and void decision already agreed upon twice.
Link to comment
Share on other sites



My opinion is my one and isn’t representative of an official club position, it’s ok to give one here isn’t it? 
 
My position remains, I would like a return and 50% played. I’m sorry if that differs to yours. I support a pyramid and not benefits handed to selected teams, like those getting play off opportunities and those avoiding looming relegation, more than once [emoji6]
I’ve  nothing against your club, great set up, but I think the outcome you prefer suits your agenda, maybe the outcome I support suits mine, but I believe in dialogue to find a better answer than null and void [emoji6]


If having an agenda is pointing out that contingencies were put in place at the start if the season by the board to deal with this situation - as agreed by all clubs - then I guess I do have one.

You have just registered to push your own agenda but a little coy about what clubs agenda you want to push. Hey ho.

If the season can be sensibly played out to a conclusion then we'll do that, but it needs the 17th May date brought forward and that isn't happening.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sidney Lumet said:

 


But it is entirely unreasonable to ask players to commit to that schedule just because of its similarity to schedules they may have endured previously in a pre-pandemic world.

There are life experiences and necessities that have been missed for many months and that will take precedence over play-play-play (as you seem to suggest that training can simply be shelved, itself an entirely unrealistic proposition) as demanded by your route map to end the season. In previous seasons where demanding schedules were the norm near the end of the campaign these demands weren’t placed in a climate where a form of house arrest had proceeded them so it was indeed then something that had to be factored into life as a football player or committee member.

Simply to imply that if a return to normal life after lockdown impinges on what to some is their desired finish to a football season then the solution is for individuals to choose not to return impacts the potential strength of teams on their enforced return and thus potentially impacting performances and therefore results meaning the season is again adversely impacted.

For me, it is entirely unrealistic and therefore unreasonable to shoehorn games in to reach a 50% watermark to avoid a null and void decision already agreed upon.

 

I take on board your points, but tend to disagree. Over a length of time I’d actually agree.

but we’re talking about the worst affected teams needing to play a maximum of 8 games.

That’s  4 weeks of 2 games per week.

I do agree with you however that if some players decide against playing it does disadvantage teams. So that point is entirely valid and would suggest that clubs are canvassed along with their playing staff to discuss this.

I suppose the difficulty again is trying to get honest answers as opposed to clubs looking at self preservation.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, bluebell1 said:

It is very clear who wrote the email you refer to as said before if all clubs want to see it contact me and I will happily discuss or copy them in.  I am the general manager of the bluebell.  
 

I assume you have an identity also ?

If you wrote that email my friend and your conscience is clear, then your moral compass compared to my own are not even in the same vicinity, and all I will say is I’m glad I’m me. 
Like you say what will be will be. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:


 

 


If having an agenda is pointing out that contingencies were put in place at the start if the season by the board to deal with this situation - as agreed by all clubs - then I guess I do have one.

You have just registered to push your own agenda but a little coy about what clubs agenda you want to push. Hey ho.

If the season can be sensibly played out to a conclusion then we'll do that, but it needs the 17th May date brought forward and that isn't happening.

 

I’ve been consistent in my opinions. Equally consistent is the run of 11 defeats in 12 your team suffered, you want a 3rd crack at survival while punishing the teams at the top end?? 
Why should you benefit again but the top end don’t? 

Here’s another option resume the new season where we left off? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’ve been consistent in my opinions. Equally consistent is the run of 11 defeats in 12 your team suffered, you want a 3rd crack at survival while punishing the teams at the top end?? 
Why should you benefit again but the top end don’t? 
Here’s another option resume the new season where we left off? 
Ah here we go, mask slipping. None of this is any clubs doing, we're all victims of the pandemic and we all go along with the guidance and recommendations of the EoS board and the SFA. We all had a say when these proposals were tabled. Not a single club objected to these contingencies. None.

To have a pop at clubs in these circumstances behind an anonymous ID is pretty pathetic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

I’ve been consistent in my opinions. Equally consistent is the run of 11 defeats in 12 your team suffered, you want a 3rd crack at survival while punishing the teams at the top end?? 
Why should you benefit again but the top end don’t? 

Here’s another option resume the new season where we left off? 

Not a bad suggestion to restart where we left off.

Only question mark will be what to do with new entrants which could be overcome.

Doesn't adversely punish anyone and gives the players who are concerned about having to play too much plenty free time as one game a week should suffice for the whole season.

Poor performing teams don’t get a full reprieve but do get an opportunity to play their way safe, and better performing teams are left with their advantage intact.

 

Edited by themillerman1979
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, never been to scotland said:

There are no easy answers. I'd run with a 20 team EOS Prem with a split after 19 games. 3 conferences below that. Then move to 16 16 and regional tiers the following season.

Not a bad shout either. 
The Null and Void option was made without the knowledge of any other available options. 
If this debate has served to do anything it’s show that there are other viable alternatives out there and there is an appetite from most to see the pyramid find it’s true form and move the conferences into tiers.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Burnieman said:

Ah here we go, mask slipping. None of this is any clubs doing, we're all victims of the pandemic and we all go along with the guidance and recommendations of the EoS board and the SFA. We all had a say when these proposals were tabled. Not a single club objected to these contingencies. None.

To have a pop at clubs in these circumstances behind an anonymous ID is pretty pathetic.

I’m not getting personal with you, so can you try to do the same.  Whether ‘my mask is slipping’, and your agenda  certainly is, the dundonald proposal looks pretty neutral to me and worthy of consideration without a witch hunt. There should be parity across tiers in approach as a minimum. Personally I’d be open to alternatives also but null and void is the worst outcome for everyone who made sacrifices (and did a hell of a job I might add) to get where we are, In my opinion.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So many points of view ,,,,no clear path, and anarchy to boot.

One possible scenario due to the fact this campaign and the previous one have ended short could possibly be the amalgamation of all points gained from August 2019 until the current period.

Not a perfect solution and the weighting wouldn’t be correct - but it would take a mean average over the two aborted seasons. Maybe there’s worth in it, maybe there’s not.

But as there was no relegation last year could it be ruled out as an option?

My viewpoint is still maintained that Null & Void is the true legal position that has to be adhered to.

 

Edited by Malty Guy
?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, TheGeneral10 said:

If you wrote that email my friend and your conscience is clear, then your moral compass compared to my own are not even in the same vicinity, and all I will say is I’m glad I’m me. 
Like you say what will be will be. 

Pathetic, you my friend are a man/woman of straw.  Throwing accusations and comments around hiding behind a username kinda makes you insignificant in my world 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Malty Guy said:

So many points of view ,,,,no clear path, and anarchy to boot.

One possible scenario due to the fact this campaign and the previous one have ended short could possibly be the amalgamation of all points gained from August 2019 until the current period.

Not a perfect solution and the weighting wouldn’t be correct - but it would take a mean average over the two aborted seasons. Maybe there’s worth in it, maybe there’s not.

But as there was no relegation last year could it be ruled out as an option?

My viewpoint is still maintained that Null & Void is the true legal position that has to be adhered to.

 

Malty, something we agree on! Another potential option for concluding a season tabled.

Please don’t let me down and tell me that you’ve investigated this and it preserves your team! (That is meant jokingly and rhetorical).

And whilst null and void was the plan, not sure we can call it a legal position unless you’re Ann Budge in disguise??

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Malty Guy said:

So many points of view ,,,,no clear path, and anarchy to boot.

One possible scenario due to the fact this campaign and the previous one have ended short could possibly be the amalgamation of all points gained from August 2019 until the current period.

Not a perfect solution and the weighting wouldn’t be correct - but it would take a mean average over the two aborted seasons. Maybe there’s worth in it, maybe there’s not.

But as there was no relegation last year could it be ruled out as an option.

My viewpoint is still maintained that Null & Void is the true legal position that has to be adhered to.

 

I have to agree that legally the null and void agreed to by all clubs before the league re-started should be upheld. People cannot simply change their minds because suddenly things are not so rosy or looking really good for their club. What was the point in having all clubs agree at the meeting. Oh yes, I agree unless the result of null and void is detrimental to my club then I will change my mind. Come on folks, seriously. As I said before, NO debate required as it has been decided already.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not getting personal with you, so can you try to do the same.  Whether ‘my mask is slipping’, and your agenda  certainly is, the dundonald proposal looks pretty neutral to me and worthy of consideration without a witch hunt. There should be parity across tiers in approach as a minimum. Personally I’d be open to alternatives also but null and void is the worst outcome for everyone who made sacrifices (and did a hell of a job I might add) to get where we are, In my opinion.  
You're going a strange way about not getting personal, maybe stop having a pop at clubs behind a cloak of anonymity then. To repeat, no club in the EoS are at fault for being in this position, but all clubs knew what the contingency was, which was set last year and reiterated only a few weeks ago with no objections.

Let's go with those contingencies set by the board. Many clubs have played less than 10 games, some only 7 or 8. Null and voiding is hardly a devastating move.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Allan C said:

I have to agree that legally the null and void agreed to by all clubs before the league re-started should be upheld. People cannot simply change their minds because suddenly things are not so rosy or looking really good for their club. What was the point in having all clubs agree at the meeting. Oh yes, I agree unless the result of null and void is detrimental to my club then I will change my mind. Come on folks, seriously. As I said before, NO debate required as it has been decided already.

Agreed,,,,, totally reasonable to expect members to stick with what they signed up to.

All the ‘ifs’ ‘buts’ ‘maybes’ smokescreen words are exactly that : smoke & mirrors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Allan C said:

I have to agree that legally the null and void agreed to by all clubs before the league re-started should be upheld. People cannot simply change their minds because suddenly things are not so rosy or looking really good for their club. What was the point in having all clubs agree at the meeting. Oh yes, I agree unless the result of null and void is detrimental to my club then I will change my mind. Come on folks, seriously. As I said before, NO debate required as it has been decided already.

It’s a strong point. Decisions are made and I agree only exceptional circumstances should merit changing them.

Whether these circumstances are exceptional is what the discussion will centre around at the EOSFL.

What is different from these circumstances and those experienced in the Lowland / Highland however?

They are voting to change rules and keep the pyramid moving. The argument could be that they’ve not completed a season so how can they be promoted and Brechin (example purposes) be relegated if they win a playoff?

the HL and LL committee have reviewed the options and decided that a mistake was made in saying they’d null and void if 50% of games weren’t completed. Exceptional circumstances which could be to the detriment of Vale of Leithen and circumstances which mirror the situations Jeanfield, Luncarty and Leith are currently in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

You're going a strange way about not getting personal, maybe stop having a pop at clubs behind a cloak of anonymity then. To repeat, no club in the EoS are at fault for being in this position, but all clubs know what the contingency was, which was set last year and reiterated only a few weeks ago with no objections.

Let's go with those contingencies set by the board. Many clubs have played less than 10 games, some only 7 or 8. Null and voiding is hardly a devastating move.

I’ll agree to disagree. Good luck to your club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Allan C said:

I have to agree that legally the null and void agreed to by all clubs before the league re-started should be upheld. People cannot simply change their minds because suddenly things are not so rosy or looking really good for their club. What was the point in having all clubs agree at the meeting. Oh yes, I agree unless the result of null and void is detrimental to my club then I will change my mind. Come on folks, seriously. As I said before, NO debate required as it has been decided already.

I agree Allan, this is very straight forward if less than half games are played it’s a null and void.  A vote has already been taken and clubs are trying to recast the die to suit their own agendas. 

 

Link to comment
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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...