stanley
-
Posts
878 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by stanley
-
-
Is the problem that the clubs joined knowing they had to meet a set of conditions relating to their ground and then the WoS league dropped those conditions/didn't follow through with them? I was under the impression that, originally, the fourth division was set up separately and was more of a trial for the new clubs and that seems to have been forgotten about and now they are simply members like all the clubs above them.
1 -
Off topic but any ideas if there will be another vote on opening up relegation from the Lowland League any time soon? Just as important as the B teams and another previously messed up vote.
1 -
Don't worry, it's just for one year.
15 -
Personally, I would support a system where the highest placed licensed team takes the promotion/playoff spot but only if they achieve a certain position e.g. top 3. This would keep things competitive but not hold back licensed teams. England used to a similar thing at level 9 of the pyramid (possibly top 5 was needed but can't remember for sure).
Over time, the west will catch up with the east.
2 -
4 minutes ago, Autistisches Nilpferd said:
Thank you. No one looking like coming in then?
I have no idea but there haven't been many clubs joining in the past few years (other than the juniors moving across) so I'd be surprised if there are many applications.
0 -
49 minutes ago, Autistisches Nilpferd said:
Looking on the EOS website. Says three come down but only two go up? Is someone new coming in next year? Not going to 11 teams surely?
Goes from 17 teams in the second and 10 in the third this season to 16 teams in the second and 11 in the third next season. Was supposed to be 16-12 next season but Syngenta folded meaning only three teams get relegated rather than four. Only two go up because they're reducing the second dvision to 16 teams like the divisions above.
Other factors based on promotions/relegations in the leagues above:
1) If the EoSFL gains a club on net from the Lowland League, the 14th placed club in the second division will also be relegated
2) If the EoSFL loses a club on net to the Lowland League, the 3rd placed club in the third division will also be promoted
0 -
Just when this absolute nonsense of clubs splitting/renaming looks it can't get any worse, we have a second Caledonian Thistle in the pyramid. I swear some of these decisions must be made as a joke.
1 -
1 hour ago, Crazy Feet said:
How bad is the standard of this league when a decent (and no more) amateur team come up and win the league comfortably?
But they are competing against other teams who are not established as senior teams (other than Threave) so one of them has to win it...
What it probably shows more strongly is just how weak the South of Scotland League is that Threave are struggling for third. They'll probably make it but only just.
1 -
32 minutes ago, Benidorm said:
I felt last year we probably had another 4/5 years left of the Colt shite until the trickle effect of all the LL no hopers being relegated for real teams is fully complete, and unfortunately I stand by that.
As we all know its nothing to do with player development, if a kid is slumming it week in and out in the LL with the B jobbers then they are almost certainly never becoming regulars within the first teams at Celtic and Rangers (Hearts are just useful idiots). Its always about it being a placeholder for fucking off to some other league.
You could see the likes of East Stirlingshire and Cowdenbeath relegated before some of the no hopers. Just hoping that they eventually decide to increase the number of relegation spots or could it take a decade to level out.
0 -
1 hour ago, FairWeatherFan said:
Edinburgh News has the indicative vote on B teams next season as 7 yes, 6 no, 3 abstaining.
Do they need a majority of the clubs to vote yes i.e. 9+ or is it just a majority of those who actually vote rather than abstain?
0 -
25 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:
My own thoughts on this are, f**k the old firm?
Just to be clear, I am 100% against B teams. I was just making the point that clearly all that matters here is the Old Firm so any sensible proposals are likely to be rejected by those running our game.
1 -
24 minutes ago, Marten said:
Plus if you replace the OF B-teams with say Linlithgow Rose & Auchinleck Talbot, I can bet attendances would go up instead of down as both are well-supported clubs.
Yes, but please explain how that benefits Rangers and Celtic?
6 -
If what they are interested in is bigger attendances then why not open up relegation and get some of the bigger non-league clubs into the league...
5 -
1 hour ago, razamanaz said:
Why isn't the obvious plan of having a reserve league the B teams can go into never suggested? Or is it just the OF keeping teams in the leagues to when they join the super European league - will we ever know he truth?
This is certainly all done just to please the Old Firm and their desire to have B teams in the league. It's irrelevant to them if Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen etc. have teams in the league but helps keep up the pretence that it is about what's good for the future of Scottish football. As with every other decision in Scottish football, all that matters is what the Old Firm want.
4 -
17 minutes ago, sfha said:
Agreed. Did they lose the bag?
They didn't even shuffle the names...just picked it in the order they were in.
0 -
What a bizarre way to do a draw.
0 -
1 hour ago, Ginaro said:
The Scottish AFL lost 8 clubs for this season plus two more since it started, now down to 14 from 54 in 2014-15 as the smallest west central belt amateur league, so it would be shutting down pretty soon anyway without the "merger"...
Yes, it certainly would but they've agreed a merger and no point in calling it that if they keep the Central Scottish name. Otherwise, it should have just been the league closing down and the 14 clubs applying elsewhere.
0 -
22 minutes ago, Ginaro said:
Other leagues have a nice geographical name (apart from Caledonian) but instead of keeping the perfectly acceptable and descriptive "Central Scottish" they go for a shit name like "Premier Amateur"...
Difficult to keep the Central Scottish name. If they did that, it wouldn't really appear to be a merger at all but just the Scottish AFL shutting down.
0 -
If only the SFA would look at other priorities like opening up relegation from tier 4 and 5 and looking out for the interests of the hundreds of senior clubs rather than the biggest two.
3 -
8 minutes ago, Burnieman said:
I've now seen the document (it bangs on a lot about B teams being great and wonderful in Croatia), There is no mention in the documentation regarding funding/prizemoney.
3. a new ten-team Conference League to sit between League 2 and the Lowland / Highland Leagues, to include a number of B teams, Lowland League clubs and Highland League clubs. This option would not allow for B teams to be promoted out of the new league (but would allow for promotion and relegation of non-B teams in the usual way).
3. Conference League
Strengths
If established as a separate company, like the Scottish Women’s Premier League, it would not need the high
level of voting support that the other two models require
As a separate company, the new league would be able
to exploit commercial rights for the benefit of its member clubs
Weaknesses
Does not allow for promotion or relegation of B teams,
who would be stuck at this tier unless and until SPFL
clubs could be persuaded in substantial numbers to vote to admit B teams into the four divisions of the SPFL
I honestly don't get it. If B teams can't get promoted or relegated out of the league and are playing in tier 5 against teams below the top four divisions then how is it any different from them playing in the Lowland or Highland League? What is the benefit of it?
1 -
46 minutes ago, Burnieman said:
Didn't the centre half Neilson step up? and the boy Smith who is now out of loan somewhere.
Neilson was signed from Dundee United last summer and only made a couple of appearances in the B team before playing in the first team. Connor Smith is already 21 and had played in the first team before the B team was even created. Neither are examples of players who established themselves in the B team then made the step up to the first team as a result.
0 -
2 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said:
You make the point that Naismith made in the Evening News regarding the lack of boys making it into the first team. I suppose he is saying what they did in recent years wasn't working hence the LL thing, will it be any better time will tell.
Personally i'm not keen on them being in the league.
Yes, I totally get the comparison to Naismith's point. I suppose I just think the cause of the problems of youngsters not making it won't be solved by Lowland League football but the reality remains to be seen. For one thing, we are barely giving any youngsters a chance and haven't for a while. No matter how many times they play in the Lowland League, without actually playing any of them in the first team, they'll certainly never make it.
0 -
I think it would probably make more sense to have a clear boundary with Perthshire teams being in the Midlands League. I think that's what would have happened had it not been for the influx of juniors to the EoS before the Midlands League was formed. Jeanfield, Kinnoul and Luncarty played in the old Tayside region pre-2002 alongside the current Midlands League clubs. I really don't see them moving the boundary further south when there's already such a massive imbalance in numbers between the Highland-area leagues and the Lowland-area ones.
0 -
56 minutes ago, cowdenbeath said:
Isn't that meant to be the point getting players coming through to their first team.
I'm not saying there's no benefit to the youngsters by playing in the B team. The article seems to suggest that the B team being in the Lowland League will make some sort of impact on how many break through to our first team. I honestly can't see that happening. I could be wrong but I don't think us having a B team in the Lowland League for years will suddenly see a few of the youngsters becoming regulars in the first team at Hearts and making it with us. We basically don't really have any first team regulars who came through the youth ranks at us currently (there's been the odd fringe player like Smith) and I don't think a couple of seasons playing against non-league teams will change that.
Regardless of the above, I still strongly object to their being B teams in the Lowland League . I think there's more benefit of sending the players out on loan to play alongside older players than there is of having a large group playing together in the Lowland League. We'll certainly have to improve over the years to compete once you get Pollok, Auchinleck, Linlithgow etc. replacing the likes of Edinburgh Uni and Dalbeattie.
0
National Conference League
in Lowland League
Posted
I've listened to the start of the Conference part of the interview above and it certainly doesn't fill me with confidence about the future of Scottish football.
Is the idea that the B teams can't be promoted/relegated so stay forever in the Conference? Apologies if this has been covered somewhere already. If that's the case then it would be an even crazier set up than the current Lowland League one with only 10 teams in the league.