Jump to content

Premier Relegation spots


Recommended Posts

i have no idea whats going on and i really dont give a fk , 

How anyone can honestly expect us , players,to go back is not only a farce but a total narrow minded approach by what appears to be few idiots on their own agenda

So what if its another season as was , we have and are STILL on lock fffking down its a pandemic , get a life you bunch of tossers 

as already advised the only reason ll and hl went PPG was to get their teams in the playoffs , no one argues with that it made sense as it was the same 2 teams as last season

 

This has nothing to do with the EOS  is that clear enough

lets just move on to next season as what was agreed and planned for and have a premier of 16 , or 18 

4 conferences if thats what required , and look forward the next season 

 

really dont need this stress of thinking we will be forced to go back early to keep some idiots sitting at home happy 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Scrappydoo said:

i have no idea whats going on and i really dont give a fk , 

How anyone can honestly expect us , players,to go back is not only a farce but a total narrow minded approach by what appears to be few idiots on their own agenda

So what if its another season as was , we have and are STILL on lock fffking down its a pandemic , get a life you bunch of tossers 

as already advised the only reason ll and hl went PPG was to get their teams in the playoffs , no one argues with that it made sense as it was the same 2 teams as last season

 

This has nothing to do with the EOS  is that clear enough

lets just move on to next season as what was agreed and planned for and have a premier of 16 , or 18 

4 conferences if thats what required , and look forward the next season 

 

really dont need this stress of thinking we will be forced to go back early to keep some idiots sitting at home happy 

 

 

 

Whoever you are and whoever you play for - well said sir. Couldn’t agree more. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, TheGeneral10 said:

I don’t think whatever they are proposing is the issue. The fact that it’s only certain clubs that have been approached to back their attempt to force an EGM is the issue - certainly from where I am standing anyway. It amounts to collusion and I’m not sure they will be welcomed with open arms by a large proportion of clubs next season - whatever the next few days hold. 

What would Dundonald actually gain from this if theyve went sneakily behind other clubs backs?

It's no as if they're going up or getting relegated through ppg ?

Certainly not clever on their part and by looks of things could potentially cause a bit animosity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit of over reaction here.  All we have asked is for the management committee to consider finishing the league season on a ppg basis in the same way as the lowland and highland league have.  To allow the establishment of a tiered league structure at tier 6 and 7

This is only if we can’t get to 50% of games played this season.  
 

It’s a mere suggestion to reconsider as the lowland league have done the stated position at the start of the season.  
 

A tiered structure of 16 teams in each league at tier 6 and 7 and a more structured pyramid being the aim and preference of a number of clubs.

You can’t please everyone but if we don’t look at it as individual clubs surely all should agree it’s a better structure.

At the end of the day the management committee will decide and we will go with the decision.

 

Edited by bluebell1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, bluebell1 said:

A bit of over reaction here.  All we have asked is for the management committee to consider finishing the league season on a ppg basis in the same way as the lowland and highland league have.  To allow the establishment of a tiered league structure at tier 6 and 7

This is only if we can’t get to 50% of games played this season.  
 

It’s a mere suggestion to reconsider as the lowland league have done the stated position at the start of the season.  
 

A tiered structure of 16 teams in each league at tier 6 and 7 and a more structured pyramid being the aim and preference of a number of clubs.

You can’t please everyone but if we don’t look at it as individual clubs surely all should agree it’s a better structure.

At the end of the day the management committee will decide and we will go with the decision.

 

Absolute bulls?!t. 

if you wanted the management committee to consider a proposal then you would inform EVERY club of your intentions and go through the appropriate channels. The below paragraph from the email sent hangs your club and the sneaky so and so who sent it. 

“I need to get the below into the EOSL in next couple of days, however I need as many clubs as possible to back the proposal.  If we get 10 then we could if required call an EGM to allow all clubs to vote on it.  So if there any other clubs who you think would back our proposal please share below with them and give me there email address so I can copy them into submission.”. 

The only damage done here is to your club and probably the 4 or 5 other clubs you actually name further down in the body of the text. I wonder if they know your club has named them?

You say you will go with the management committee decision, but this decision was made in the summer when the clubs all voted - so why not go with what’s already been decided. I’d suggest your club has shown your true colours and is not to be trusted. Its all a bit shameful really. 
As the above players said - nail on the head tbh - nobody is considering them and the stress caused to jobs and family by forcing them to go back. 

Edited by TheGeneral10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think the proposal has any malicious intent and holds with good rationale. Given the potential influx of new teams, there is a challenge to overcome.  Play to 50% would be the least worst option. If that’s not possible ppg is a better alternative than null and void. Harsh on some yes, however it happened last year (good enough for spl) and both Kelty and Brora were rewarded as a consequence of ppg, why wouldn’t the remainder of the leagues be afforded the same courtesy? As a minimum the top ppg teams should be given the rewards that come with being declared champions after the precedent was set in lowland-they have a play off which is the reward of winning the lowland, the EOSFL reward for being champion is promotion. This still leaves a question on how to structure with the new teams coming in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, bluebell1 said:

A bit of over reaction here.  All we have asked is for the management committee to consider finishing the league season on a ppg basis in the same way as the lowland and highland league have.  To allow the establishment of a tiered league structure at tier 6 and 7

This is only if we can’t get to 50% of games played this season.  
 

It’s a mere suggestion to reconsider as the lowland league have done the stated position at the start of the season.  
 

A tiered structure of 16 teams in each league at tier 6 and 7 and a more structured pyramid being the aim and preference of a number of clubs.

You can’t please everyone but if we don’t look at it as individual clubs surely all should agree it’s a better structure.

At the end of the day the management committee will decide and we will go with the decision.

 

Think you’ve chosen a very narrow path to go down. The broad front of the EoS already have the earlier and applicable agreement in place. 
For some reason and without taking cognisance of the players, officials, helpers and volunteers together with the wider health and safety issues on all those peoples family - you have proposed a selfish agenda. 
No doubt at this moment some other clubs may now be realising what they’ve actually supported, and are trying to extract themselves from being associated to it. 
The Dons of Anarchy ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

I don’t think the proposal has any malicious intent and holds with good rationale. Given the potential influx of new teams, there is a challenge to overcome.  Play to 50% would be the least worst option. If that’s not possible ppg is a better alternative than null and void. Harsh on some yes, however it happened last year (good enough for spl) and both Kelty and Brora were rewarded as a consequence of ppg, why wouldn’t the remainder of the leagues be afforded the same courtesy? As a minimum the top ppg teams should be given the rewards that come with being declared champions after the precedent was set in lowland-they have a play off which is the reward of winning the lowland, the EOSFL reward for being champion is promotion. This still leaves a question on how to structure with the new teams coming in. 

I will go back to my previous point here - if not malicious and/ or underhand then why only send the email to certain clubs and at the same time ask if these clubs know of others who would support the proposal?
Whatever way you look at it, the content of the email is undeniable - it’s underhand and disrespectful to every club not included in the ‘send list’ and even more disrespectful to the EoS Board and their position.  Suggesting they can force an EGM 🤷🏼‍♂️. If that’s not underhand then I don’t know what is tbh. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Malty Guy said:

Think you’ve chosen a very narrow path to go down. The broad front of the EoS already have the earlier and applicable agreement in place. 
For some reason and without taking cognisance of the players, officials, helpers and volunteers together with the wider health and safety issues on all those peoples family - you have proposed a selfish agenda. 
No doubt at this moment some other clubs may now be realising what they’ve actually supported, and are trying to extract themselves from being associated to it. 
The Dons of Anarchy ???

🎯

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, TheGeneral10 said:

I will go back to my previous point here - if not malicious and/ or underhand then why only send the email to certain clubs and at the same time ask if these clubs know of others who would support the proposal?
Whatever way you look at it, the content of the email is undeniable - it’s underhand and disrespectful to every club not included in the ‘send list’ and even more disrespectful to the EoS Board and their position.  Suggesting they can force an EGM 🤷🏼‍♂️. If that’s not underhand then I don’t know what is tbh. 

What would be the potential implications for Dunbar if it was agreed? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Crow said:

What would be the potential implications for Dunbar if it was agreed? 

They would go down, although there is a separate argument about the double Tranent game (raised earlier in this topic) which if they lose the forced rescheduled fixture from April then I believe Crossgates would go down on PPG. That’s how close it all is. 

Nevertheless, my issue is with how Dundonald have gone about this, not what they have proposed. If you can honestly tell me that what’s been done is in the sprit of the game and basic sporting integrity then I’d be pleased to hear your argument on that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, TheGeneral10 said:

I will go back to my previous point here - if not malicious and/ or underhand then why only send the email to certain clubs and at the same time ask if these clubs know of others who would support the proposal?
Whatever way you look at it, the content of the email is undeniable - it’s underhand and disrespectful to every club not included in the ‘send list’ and even more disrespectful to the EoS Board and their position.  Suggesting they can force an EGM 🤷🏼‍♂️. If that’s not underhand then I don’t know what is tbh. 

It’s not unusual for clubs to create proposals and ask whether clubs support it before proposing to league committees  at any level. The club proposing it don’t gain from it other than it solves a structural problem. 
 

Those in relegation positions through ppg will clearly oppose it, but those who either live with the conferences or lose the good work at the top end of the table lose out from null and void, no approach suits all. 
 

The outcome for your team is understandably why you are passionate about the subject but making it personal about the proposer whose club isn’t really gaining advantage is not fair. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture, a highland league team has won the title having played 3 games - to say that is nothing to do with the east is not correct - it results in them getting a shot at promotion, the lowland and east leagues filter up to the same pyramid. I do think relegating is very harsh,  interested to see what league structures and numbers stands as the alternative options. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That’s remarkably accurate to the details of the underhand email and attachment from Mr General Manager, Dundonald FC - only sent to certain EoS clubs of course. Affiliated perhaps?
Like I’ve said above - sporting integrity and principles seems to have gone out the window. It’s all so distasteful and disrespectful to fellow member clubs and hard working volunteers, never mind players and coaches. Every club is meant to be professional and part of a pyramid structure that represents Scottish Football to work together to the betterment of all - yet the behaviour and self serving tactics of certain clubs resemble nothing more than a pub league setup. Time for the EoSFA board to stand up and be counted and take control of a situation that seems to be spiralling out of control at a rapid rate of knots!!
Pub league set up
Ran by those who should be confined running a pub league .
Laughable for so called 'pyramid'
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

It’s not unusual for clubs to create proposals and ask whether clubs support it before proposing to league committees  at any level. The club proposing it don’t gain from it other than it solves a structural problem. 
 

Those in relegation positions through ppg will clearly oppose it, but those who either live with the conferences or lose the good work at the top end of the table lose out from null and void, no approach suits all. 
 

The outcome for your team is understandably why you are passionate about the subject but making it personal about the proposer whose club isn’t really gaining advantage is not fair. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture, a highland league team has won the title having played 3 games - to say that is nothing to do with the east is not correct - it results in them getting a shot at promotion, the lowland and east leagues filter up to the same pyramid. I do think relegating is very harsh,  interested to see what league structures and numbers stands as the alternative options. 

Your point is fair and well put. However I still can’t agree as the proposing club should contact all other member clubs to inform them of their proposal. That’s the bit that I take issue with (and the statement about forcing an EGM if necessary tbh).

I spent some time unofficially supporting the committee a few years ago and know the work that goes in to every club just to keep the doors open and the light on. Won’t be any different at Dundonald - so why not just be up front and contact all clubs? At least you can then hold your head up. It’s left a bitter taste. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Crow said:

What would be the potential implications for Dunbar if it was agreed? 

But it already has been agreed: if the season can't get to 50% of fixtures it is null and void.  And that's that - There should be no further discussion or entertaining any proposed changes at this late stage.  

Almost half the clubs did not believe the season should have started in the first place, and that viewpoint has now been vindicated. 

It must simply start afresh on exactly the same basis as this season, but with an extra conference. 

No promotion, no relegation and no penalties for any of the reluctant participants.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

But it already has been agreed: if the season can't get to 50% of fixtures it is null and void.  And that's that - There should be no further discussion or entertaining any proposed changes at this late stage.  

Almost half the clubs did not believe the season should have started in the first place, and that viewpoint has now been vindicated. 

It must simply start afresh on exactly the same basis as this season, but with an extra conference. 

No promotion, no relegation and no penalties for any of the reluctant participants.

Well said sir! A bit of procrastination is going with some Clubs who really should know better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Che Dail said:

But it already has been agreed: if the season can't get to 50% of fixtures it is null and void.  And that's that - There should be no further discussion or entertaining any proposed changes at this late stage.  

Almost half the clubs did not believe the season should have started in the first place, and that viewpoint has now been vindicated. 

It must simply start afresh on exactly the same basis as this season, but with an extra conference. 

No promotion, no relegation and no penalties for any of the reluctant participants.

100% last season was unique. There was no heads up a pandemic was gonna hit. Season was curtailed in APRIL near the end of season some teams had played nearly 20 games. No one could complain about teams who went up.

 

This season we all knew where we stood starting. 50% or N&V. To potentially promote a team who has played 7 and relegate 4 (of those 2 teams have played 10) isn't right. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

It’s not unusual for clubs to create proposals and ask whether clubs support it before proposing to league committees  at any level. The club proposing it don’t gain from it other than it solves a structural problem. 

Those in relegation positions through ppg will clearly oppose it, but those who either live with the conferences or lose the good work at the top end of the table lose out from null and void, no approach suits all. 
 

The outcome for your team is understandably why you are passionate about the subject but making it personal about the proposer whose club isn’t really gaining advantage is not fair. Take a step back and look at the bigger picture, a highland league team has won the title having played 3 games - to say that is nothing to do with the east is not correct - it results in them getting a shot at promotion, the lowland and east leagues filter up to the same pyramid. I do think relegating is very harsh,  interested to see what league structures and numbers stands as the alternative options. 

Let's take a look at that.   Both the LL and HL would have went down the road of declaring null and void, the LL had the same plans in place as the EoS.

Their hand was forced by the SFA to declare on PPG if they wanted to enter a club in the SPFL play-off, that is the only reason they did not N&V, so the comparison is false as the EoS are under no such pressure.

So then we have a back door proposal which not only relegates and promotes clubs who haven't even reached 50% of games played - Luncarty promoted after only 7 league games & Leith after 9, Jeanfield Champions after 9 - we have clubs who just fall above and below the qualifying line when it comes to forming the new First Division, some "condemned" to tier 8 on goal difference. Then there is the Dunbar/Tranent/Crossgates situation which is far from clear with Dunbar having played Tranent twice.  These clubs are unable to react to the situation on the pitch.

I understand that clubs may not be happy with potentially 13-14 new clubs coming into the structure alongside them next season.  I think the EoS should follow what the WoS are likely to do and restrict those new clubs ability to get promotion to the Premier and place them all in a Second Division Conference with only First Division spots available to them for season 2022-23. That then allows existing Conference clubs the same shot at Premier promotion as they had this season.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, TheGeneral10 said:

Your point is fair and well put. However I still can’t agree as the proposing club should contact all other member clubs to inform them of their proposal. That’s the bit that I take issue with (and the statement about forcing an EGM if necessary tbh).

I spent some time unofficially supporting the committee a few years ago and know the work that goes in to every club just to keep the doors open and the light on. Won’t be any different at Dundonald - so why not just be up front and contact all clubs? At least you can then hold your head up. It’s left a bitter taste. 

I stand by the attempt the clubs involved have made to look at a solution, especially given it doesn’t seem to be self serving.
 

I can see your point however and Perhaps a mail round all clubs could have avoided the view of underhand approach. I get your frustration on that. 
 

As I said, me personally, have no desire to enforce relegation, but I do believe the decision in lowland/highland means the minimum outcome has to be all tiers receive that reward (integrity of pyramid). 

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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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