Future progression and development of the WOSFL

[Pyramidic]

This thread is evolving into covering a number of important issues relating to how the WOSFL may progress and develop. These include:

1. The structure of the WOSFL Pyramid and place within the National Pyramid.

2. The number (and type) of clubs that should be accommodated in the WOSFL.

3. Ground criteria that should be adopted for clubs in the WOSFL (with variations at different tiers).

4. Linkage between WOSFL and Amateur Leagues.

5. Meeting the challenges of social media.

6. Respecting diversity and inclusion in terms of race, age, gender, language, beliefs, sexual orientation and style of communication.

7. Helping facilitate the progression of clubs in the West of Scotland in terms of advice and support.

8. Discussing and communicating any other issue which is relevant to the development of the WOSFL.

 

We have plenty of time at present to reflect how the WOSFL should progress and develop over the next few years. 

There appear to be a number of options:

Option A: The WRJFA model
Mirror the WRJFA league structure and cater for 64-72 clubs in a linear “tower” pyramid with 16-18 clubs in each of the 4 divisions. Seek to ensure that the existing membership is not diluted by the inclusion of numerous youth and amateur set-ups.

Option B: The “Open House” model
Cater for all the clubs that may wish to join the WOSFL without defining a broad administrative area. Acceptance of new clubs - Junior, Youth, Amateur and Colts - subject to voting of the existing members.

Option C : The Regional Pyramid model
Define the fixed administrative area for the WOSFL. Deliver a regionalised structure below the first two tiers. This may entail working with the SOSFL to achieve a regional pyramid across the West of Scotland with the SOSFL feeding into the WOSFL at the appropriate level.

Option D : The “Slow Evolution” model
Not to interfere but to allow the Pyramid to slowly evolve and change over time in accordance with current needs and requirements. This follows the broad strategy of evolution not revolution. WOSFL is structured in accordance with the number of clubs in membership at any given time.

Any views on which is the best approach (or hybrid) for the WOSFL to adopt?

Edited March 13, 2021 by Pyramidic

[Stag Nation]

Option A is a closed shop, which is what (nearly) everyone criticises the SPFL for.

B, C and D don't seem to be mutually excusive. I'd suggest the league should be open to all applicants who can meet the entry requirements. Any regionalisation should be subject to what the members want, not arbitrarily imposed at Tier 7, 8 or whatever.

[parkcircus]

The league will always be open to clubs that fit a criteria. Which in the future might be less the further down the tiers you go. Ie tier 10 shouldn’t have the same criteria as tier 6.

I imagine over the next 2/3 years the league will be very fluid as it’s not just the old league with a new name and the team same happy to try things out.

There’s lots of plans for the future but they need to go in sequence and sorting this season is the priority for now.

One thing we are keeping an eye on is the amount of Amateur teams looking to join, at some point a discussion will have to happen to make sure cannibalisation of other leagues/associations isn’t happening and what’s best for the sport, but that’ll take a different path to what’s gone before, and it’ll be awhile away.

[whitburn exile]

Needs to be full pyramid with option to move up and down. If a club at the bottom doesn’t meet the criteria or decline to move up then that should be fine as well. What there also should be is what happens in the west is same opportunities in the south, east and north/highlands

[Bestsinceslicebread]

2 hours ago, Pyramidic said:

We have plenty of time at present to reflect how the WOSFL should progress and develop over the next few years. 

There appear to be a number of options:

Option A: The WRJFA model
Mirror the WRJFA league structure and cater for 64-72 clubs in a linear “tower” pyramid with 16-18 clubs in each of the 4 divisions. Seek to ensure that the existing membership is not diluted by the inclusion of numerous youth and amateur set-ups.

Option B: The “Open House” model
Cater for all the clubs that may wish to join the WOSFL without defining a broad administrative area. Acceptance of new clubs - Junior, Youth, Amateur and Colts - subject to voting of the existing members.

Option C : The Regional Pyramid model
Define the fixed administrative area for the WOSFL. Deliver a regionalised structure below the first two tiers. This may entail working with the SOSFL to achieve a regional pyramid across the West of Scotland with the SOSFL feeding into the WOSFL at the appropriate level.

Option D : The “Slow Evolution” model
Not to interfere but to allow the Pyramid to slowly evolve and change over time in accordance with current needs and requirements. This follows the broad strategy of evolution not revolution. WOSFL is structured in accordance with the number of clubs in membership at any given time.

Any views on which is the best approach (or hybrid) for the WOSFL to adopt?

Think D is best although I will say that any team, youth, junior, amateurs etc... should never be neglected or not allowed to progress if said teams all comply with the current WOSFL league criteria at the time of applying.   Think the pyramid is here to say so and I'm sure for a long, long time to come so sure it will evolve over time

[Ginaro]

1 hour ago, parkcircus said:

The league will always be open to clubs that fit a criteria. Which in the future might be less the further down the tiers you go. Ie tier 10 shouldn’t have the same criteria as tier 6.

One thing we are keeping an eye on is the amount of Amateur teams looking to join, at some point a discussion will have to happen to make sure cannibalisation of other leagues/associations isn’t happening and what’s best for the sport, but that’ll take a different path to what’s gone before, and it’ll be awhile away.

The amateur connection will be an important one for both east and west in the years to come. In the east it seems a bit easier with the Fife, Lothians, and Borders AFAs (plus Stirling) ready to bolt on below the EOS. 

Whereas in the west, aside from Ayrshire you have four amateur leagues covering the Glasgow area (Scottish, Central, Caledonian, Greater Glasgow) which needs sorting out first. Rationalising those down to one or two stronger feeder leagues to the WOS and having more depth would be sensible. 

[Black Pennel]

Hmm...Erm,...early days, lads...we're only thinking about Jack's Park at the moment...good playing surface, very tiring on the old limbs,...fucking miles fae dressing rooms. Cannot possibly meet criteria unless rules are relaxed from WRJFA version. Perhaps Colin can confirm ? If rules are going to be relaxed then I fear for the likes of Saltcoats Victoria & Ardeer Thistle if other clubs (good amateur clubs) can just get the council to give them a park at a better standard to allow them to progress instead.

Dunno what to think about this one really...Can Sean give more detail ?

Is it their intention to abstract support from Victoria ?

[Bestsinceslicebread]

The  criteria all sounds fine except the walk to the dressing rooms. I believe I read somewhere the rules that govern the LL down to the WOSFL, SOSFL and EOSFL state that the dressing rooms must be close to the park, not sure the exact distance, if someone could confirm ?

[Stag Nation]

32 minutes ago, Bestsinceslicebread said:

The  criteria all sounds fine except the walk to the dressing rooms. I believe I read somewhere the rules that govern the LL down to the WOSFL, SOSFL and EOSFL state that the dressing rooms must be close to the park, not sure the exact distance, if someone could confirm ?

WoSFL say they must be "immediately adjacent to the pitch".

https://wosfl.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/WOSFL_-Entry-Criteria-2020.pdf

[Pyramidic]

4 hours ago, Stag Nation said:

WoSFL say they must be "immediately adjacent to the pitch".

https://wosfl.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/WOSFL_-Entry-Criteria-2020.pdf

But there appears to be plenty of room for flexibility and common sense in rule 26:

“The Office Bearers/Board may, entirely at their discretion, offer any applicant a pre-defined period of grace to meet any of the above criteria should they so decide.”
 

With reference to rule 13 they appear to be the criteria set down by the EOSFL and we know the flexibility that the EOSFL showed in allowing Inverkeithing Hillfield Swifts  to join their league some three years ago.

[Pyramidic]

Further confirmation that the WOSFL is a very progressive set-up willing to embrace change.

Edited March 8, 2021 by Pyramidic

[glensmad]

22 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

Without wishing to pee on anyone's bonfire, if they are so inclusive why do they have to post about it? Just include the member into the committee without the fanfare. Doubtful anyone would have batted an eyelid.

It's International Women's Day, we are supporting it and promoting the women working within our league.

[jimbaxters]

1 hour ago, glensmad said:

It's International Women's Day, we are supporting it and promoting the women working within our league.

That's fair enough pal. I stand corrected 

ETA- deleted

Edited March 8, 2021 by jimbaxters

[Sean Kenney]

Hmm...Erm,...early days, lads...we're only thinking about Jack's Park at the moment...good playing surface, very tiring on the old limbs,...fucking miles fae dressing rooms. Cannot possibly meet criteria unless rules are relaxed from WRJFA version. Perhaps Colin can confirm ? If rules are going to be relaxed then I fear for the likes of Saltcoats Victoria & Ardeer Thistle if other clubs (good amateur clubs) can just get the council to give them a park at a better standard to allow them to progress instead.
Dunno what to think about this one really...Can Sean give more detail ?
Is it their intention to abstract support from Victoria ?

Hi mate, just going to try and answer some of the questions raised.

The current changing rooms as you say are in the school but we’ve been working since December to have changing rooms and public toilets adjacent to the pitch. This would probably have been done by now in normal times but unfortunately like so much else in the world Covid has held things up a bit. We are still confident we will have these in place for the start of pre season.
Even if there was potential flexibility with the rule on this one it’s not ideal for us and our opponents to have to go back to the school at half time so we’re working hard to make sure this isn’t the case.

Obviously I’m not 100 percent on the clubs mentioned situations with their grounds but I think our arrangement will be a similar one to theirs. Apologies if I’m wrong here but both those grounds are owned by the council and they are on long term lease arrangements, we’ll be similar.

Just the final one about the support. This will be our 25th season as a club. We have a group of faithful supporters who follow us home and away already. We won’t be looking to steal any supporters from any other clubs. Again, I’m not sure about other local teams supports but we don’t want to be stealing or harming anything to do with the other clubs. We have very good relationships with all the local teams and a massive amount of respect for them all.

All the points raised above are legitimate and fair questions, I hope I have answered them as well as possible.


Cheers,

Sean

[Black Pennel]

Thanks Sean, think it'll come down to decision on distance from pitch to changing rooms & toilets, then.

Best of luck with your plans.

[Ginaro]

On 08/03/2021 at 15:28, glensmad said:

It's International Women's Day, we are supporting it and promoting the women working within our league.

From IWD to this in four days. Maybe get a Twitter admin who knows when and what (not) to tweet. 

Edited March 12, 2021 by Ginaro

[FairWeatherFan]

2 hours ago, Ginaro said:

From IWD to this in four days. Maybe get a Twitter admin who knows when and what (not) to tweet. 

While deleting those tweets, this has been their follow up.

[Ray Patterson]

18 hours ago, Ginaro said:

From IWD to this in four days. Maybe get a Twitter admin who knows when and what (not) to tweet. 

Honestly, how fucking thick do you have to be to think that that suggestion was serious? Honestly, what the actual f**k was their Twitter admin thinking.

[LongTimeLurker]

The EoS twitter guy was not too far behind a few days ago tweeting out misleading information about the league having a fixed boundary at the Tay Bridge midpoint line of latitude that he later had to retract. 

[craigkillie]

Yes, those are the same thing.