The Season

[jimbaxters]

2 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said:

Change it to what exactly? Since all that does is open up another can of worms with a myriad of opinions.

A decision should have been made to have no relegation or relegate and have promotion. It really is that simple.

Edited May 16, 2022 by jimbaxters

[glensmad]

A decision should have been made to have no relegation or relegate and have promotion. It really is that simple.

As we've said though, that decision was made by the Lowland League board who were running the WoSFL at the time, in consultation with and with the agreement of the Scottish FA. The league format was then set in stone and approved by the Scottish FA Board in June 2020. After that it couldn't be changed. The Interim Management Group weren't formed till after that, in preparation for the handover to the WoSFL Management Committee which didn't happen until 1st March 2021. We inherited this situation and had no option other than to play it out.

[jimbaxters]

19 minutes ago, glensmad said:

28 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

A decision should have been made to have no relegation or relegate and have promotion. It really is that simple.

As we've said though, that decision was made by the Lowland League board who were running the WoSFL at the time, in consultation with and with the agreement of the Scottish FA. The league format was then set in stone and approved by the Scottish FA Board in June 2020. After that it couldn't be changed. The Interim Management Group weren't formed till after that, in preparation for the handover to the WoSFL Management Committee which didn't happen until 1st March 2021. We inherited this situation and had no option other than to play it out.

Look, if it was something you all felt strongly about, given that you were then the custodians and representatives of the clubs then it would have been at the top of the agenda to try and negotiate on. You all just went with it which was not in the best interests of the WoSFL.

[glensmad]

Look, if it was something you all felt strongly about, given that you were then the custodians and representatives of the clubs then it would have been at the top of the agenda to try and negotiate on. You all just went with it which was not in the best interests of the WoSFL.

Jim, I respect your opinion on many topics on here. Although I don't always agree with you, I like the way you post in a respectful manner and are generally open minded.

Please trust me when I tell you that the current WoSFL Management Committee were powerless to change the set-up agreed by the Lowland League with the Scottish FA. We took over after all of these agreements were cast in stone, and only shortly before the end of the Covid-abandoned first season. Promises had then been made to all clubs that the status quo would be rolled over to the 2021-22 season. We had to honour that.

[FairWeatherFan]

32 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

A decision should have been made to have no relegation or relegate and have promotion. It really is that simple.

The same old can of worms. Can't really call something simple when you offer two choices. It's easy not to have an opinion beyond that since it wouldn't make a difference to your club.

23 minutes ago, glensmad said:

32 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

A decision should have been made to have no relegation or relegate and have promotion. It really is that simple.

As we've said though, that decision was made by the Lowland League board who were running the WoSFL at the time, in consultation with and with the agreement of the Scottish FA. The league format was then set in stone and approved by the Scottish FA Board in June 2020. After that it couldn't be changed. The Interim Management Group weren't formed till after that, in preparation for the handover to the WoSFL Management Committee which didn't happen until 1st March 2021. We inherited this situation and had no option other than to play it out.

Since the season started under COVID concerns, presumably there would have been nothing to stop the 2 ten team Conferences idea that became the plan for 2020-21.

Overall I think this has been overblown a little bit.

[jimbaxters]

1 hour ago, glensmad said:

Jim, I respect your opinion on many topics on here. Although I don't always agree with you, I like the way you post in a respectful manner and are generally open minded.

Please trust me when I tell you that the current WoSFL Management Committee were powerless to change the set-up agreed by the Lowland League with the Scottish FA. We took over after all of these agreements were cast in stone, and only shortly before the end of the Covid-abandoned first season. Promises had then been made to all clubs that the status quo would be rolled over to the 2021-22 season. We had to honour that.

Cheers for the opening line and the sentiment is mutual.

It's all moot anyway as it's over and done with. Just feel that it was a situation that not only could but definitely should have been avoided for the benefit of everyone involved. Hopefully, it will never happen again.

[jimbaxters]

1 hour ago, FairWeatherFan said:

The same old can of worms. Can't really call something simple when you offer two choices. It's easy not to have an opinion beyond that since it wouldn't make a difference to your club.

 

It made a difference to every club in the Prem, none more so than the Talbot.

[Arthurlie1981]

14 hours ago, jimbaxters said:

It made a difference to every club in the Prem, none more so than the Talbot.

Talbot could have resigned their SJFA membership and been involved in less games, or chosen to play some of their under 20's in cup games to manage the workload of their first choice players but they chose this way and I don't think you can blame the league for that when your team (if they were that concerned about it) could have made different choices themselves. 

[jimbaxters]

5 minutes ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

Talbot could have resigned their SJFA membership and been involved in less games, or chosen to play some of their under 20's in cup games to manage the workload of their first choice players but they chose this way and I don't think you can blame the league for that when your team (if they were that concerned about it) could have made different choices themselves. 

Yes you're correct. However, for any part-time club a 38 game league season is unacceptable.

[Arthurlie1981]

6 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

Yes you're correct. However, for any part-time club a 38 game league season is unacceptable.

I agree it is a bit much, but for one season I can understand it and don't see what the alternatives were. I am pretty sure I would agree with you if my club had been in that position especially towards the end of the season I would feel differently.

I think it all relates back to when the first discussions happened and it didn't look like clubs were coming on mass. It was hard for the LL to gage the best way of doing it when initial indications were that around 20 (someone can correct me if I am wrong) clubs were at the meeting in East Kilbride. 

They had to do it in a way that was fair to all clubs including those in the conferences.

Edited May 17, 2022 by Arthurlie1981

[jimbaxters]

Just now, Arthurlie1981 said:

I agree it is a bit much, but for one season I can understand it and don't see what the alternatives were. I am pretty sure I would agree with you if my club had been in that position especially towards the end of the season I would feel differently.

I think it all relates back to when the first discussions happened and it didn't look like clubs were coming on mass. It was hard for the LL to gage the best way of doing it when initial indications were that around 20 (someone can correct me if I am wrong) clubs were at the meeting in East Kilbride. 

There was no way to do it imo that was fair to all clubs including those in the conferences. 

There was a way to do it. A difficult decision should have been made. Either have promotion/relegation based on PPG or keep the status quo. No one had the balls to do either so the 20 team league was born. 

@FairWeatherFan will come back about opinions but that's what a committee put themselves forward for, making the difficult decisions as representatives. If they had done so then a maximum of three clubs would have felt aggrieved. Instead another 17 had to put up with it.

[glensmad]

Jim,

Once again, there was no committee in place when that decision was made. It was the Lowland League board who were running the WoSFL. They negotiated the set-up with the Scottish FA, and when agreement was reached it was set in stone, otherwise the Scottish FA would not have sanctioned the very creation of the WoSFL in the first place.

You really need to trust me on this.

[wow-wee]

7 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

There was a way to do it. A difficult decision should have been made. Either have promotion/relegation based on PPG or keep the status quo. No one had the balls to do either so the 20 team league was born. 

@FairWeatherFan will come back about opinions but that's what a committee put themselves forward for, making the difficult decisions as representatives. If they had done so then a maximum of three clubs would have felt aggrieved. Instead another 17 had to put up with it.

Jim your going over old ground here it's been argued to bits with all different opinions why we had to run with 20 team league I've got my opinion but you wouldn't like it because it mentions your team . Go back over all the old threads and you might be able to work out who's to blame .Ps you will get it on the junior forum there's a clue!

[Arthurlie1981]

7 minutes ago, jimbaxters said:

There was a way to do it. A difficult decision should have been made. Either have promotion/relegation based on PPG or keep the status quo. No one had the balls to do either so the 20 team league was born. 

@FairWeatherFan will come back about opinions but that's what a committee put themselves forward for, making the difficult decisions as representatives. If they had done so then a maximum of three clubs would have felt aggrieved. Instead another 17 had to put up with it.

Firstly I will say that I felt it should have been all in conferences for the first season to sort out who went to what league but it is my understanding that the SFA and or LL overruled this.

Secondly I have no reason not to believe the WOSFL board on this as we all knew prior to their appointments what the set up was going to be and I am know that there were people back then (including yourself against it) but I don't see another way of doing it that was fair on all parties. 

[jimbaxters]

24 minutes ago, glensmad said:

Jim,

Once again, there was no committee in place when that decision was made. It was the Lowland League board who were running the WoSFL. They negotiated the set-up with the Scottish FA, and when agreement was reached it was set in stone, otherwise the Scottish FA would not have sanctioned the very creation of the WoSFL in the first place.

You really need to trust me on this.

I do trust you on it. In the last post there is no blame being apportioned but simply the notion that a decision should have been taken by whoever was in charge of it.

21 minutes ago, wow-wee said:

Jim your going over old ground here it's been argued to bits with all different opinions why we had to run with 20 team league I've got my opinion but you wouldn't like it because it mentions your team . Go back over all the old threads and you might be able to work out who's to blame .Ps you will get it on the junior forum there's a clue!

Know what you're referring to and I agree.

20 minutes ago, Arthurlie1981 said:

Firstly I will say that I felt it should have been all in conferences for the first season to sort out who went to what league but it is my understanding that the SFA and or LL overruled this.

Secondly I have no reason not to believe the WOSFL board on this as we all knew prior to their appointments what the set up was going to be and I am know that there were people back then (including yourself against it) but I don't see another way of doing it that was fair on all parties. 

Last time on this because it's boring everyone now. The only clubs who could possibly have found a 20 team league acceptable were those who were involved in either a PPG promotion or relegation spot. Someone (anyone who was in charge) should have decided either way. 

Over & out!

[wow-wee]

No person thought a 20 team league was acceptable but you are on here with lots of different theories the someone did ?