gaz5

Genuine question, why was Dunipace a surprise result?

The HMRC rate isn't obligatory, it's just the rate you are allowed to pay as a maximum per mile before it becomes taxable. Your company can choose to pay you what they want. But better believe if they choose 60p per mile the revenue will be after you for tax on the extra 15p per mile. [emoji846]

I used to travel to London every 3 weeks for 2 days, meaning a 06:50 flight, 05:30 leaving the house to get me into the office for 09:00 or thereabouts. Got 13p mileage to the airport and back and nothing for the extra hours. I think it's pretty standard practice (not saying it's right).

They are an employee, so their time starts on arrival at their first designated place of work for that day. If you ask them to arrive at your park to get on a bus, you pay from the time you ask them to arrive. If you ask them to arrive at an away ground direct, but not go anywhere else first, you pay from arrival time at the away ground. It may well sound like shite, but that was the HMRC advice for the last two budgets I've looked after in the LL and now EoS. [emoji6] I can only take the tax man's word on it.

Players can only sign a non contract professional if their previous contract was professional. You can't go from amateur direct to non contract. Anyone signing a professional contract must be paid minimum wage, there is a section on the form which the club must fill out that specifically has a tick box saying they will pay minimum wage. Ams and non contract NC players are entitled to 45p per mile (maximum) in expenses, no wage or bonuses. Minimum wage isn't £75 a week. There are ranges based on age from ~£28 up to around ~£58 depending on age. Unless clubs decide to take a bus to all away games in which case you need to factor in a little more for those weeks (travel time to training and home games isn't wages and only away travel time counted if travelling by bus, not if employee going direct by car for which you can choose to pay expenses up to 45p per mile if you wish, but but required). Dont have a skin in this at all, just passing on some info about some of the questions asked re registrations/ minimum wage.

Has been brilliant with our 20's and as part of the senior club management team with us the last 18 months. Great appointment for Kilsyth. All the best Gaz. [emoji106]

Jesus Christ. [emoji85] Declined to make one specific (and ludicrous) change to the playoff rules that would have caused carnage that the SFA themselves clearly knew was batshit crazy, while offering another change to the same rules that would have seen any junior team who wanted to be involved in a far more sensible and pragmatic way right now. Junior entry was facilitated, the SJFA just didn't like the way it was facilitated and refused to split the East from the West when it offered a solution for their members (despite proving it could be done within their "all in mandate" when they dropped the North like a hot tattie). Happy to help. Again. Don't let the actual events get in the way of your "facts" though, do continue. You really are flogging a dead, decaying, buried, resurrected like sevco horse at this point.

You know I am. Just like you know the Senior league's aren't (and never have been) holding up the West Juniors clubs coming into the pyramid. But carry on, I'm sure you have a point.....

You do know that it isn't?

[emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787]

Literally no one is using any of that as an argument. You're either deliberately not paying attention or are incapable of seeing beyond the argument you've backed yourself into. 1. The SJFA weren't ever coming in as an intact organisation, they themselves were more than happy to drop the North, who unless I'm mistaken, are part of the SJFA. They set the precedent that we didn't have to consider the SJFA as an all or nothing block. 2. The SJFA were not happy to do the same with the East, to uncouple then from the West, to allow the West to join and the East clubs to make up their own minds, when presented with that option. 3. If the Junior clubs join as a block there's no need for the SJFA inside the Pyramid. Everyone here is arguing that the juniors (SJFA) should be allowed to exist outside of it for any junior clubs who don't want to join. We are all, quite literally, proposing the exact opposite from SJFA disband. You've backed yourself into a preposterous position that has been dismantled on multiple occasions by people who were actually involved in the discussions but for some reason can't accept that the EoS did not in any way block junior access for this season, they did, in fact, more than the SJFA to get them on board. [emoji85]

As has been pointed out many, many, many times, no it isn't factual. The EoS were asked for their view on one solution, a bad one, they proposed another solution, a pragmatic one, which would have seen the WRSJFA in this season, right now, as ayt speak. The SJFA "blocked" that happening by insisting no West without East and not taking that proposal to the clubs. You can peddle this EoS "blocked" the juniors shite as many times as you want, but "100% factual" it most certainly is not.

You seem to be lost in one event in the series, without offering any cognisance of what preceded or proceeded it. Saying no to a terrible proposal that happened to include the juniors while offering a second, more workable solution that included the juniors != "Blocking the juniors". Run of events: 1. Unworkable plan presented by the SJFA 2. SJFA members vote to accept it "all in" 3. North dropped from "all in" by the SJFA, reason speculated as being lack of interest 4. Plan presented to PWG 5. Lots of back and forth in PWG, seemingly ltd of misunderstanding and certainly lots of misinformation around done deals etc 6. Eventually the proposal is called to a vote by members of EoS and LL 7. Priposal declared unworkable by 100% of EoS and LL clubs, not on the basis that it contained the juniors, but that it unnecessarily had two geographic league's in the same region, one containing clubs who could never be promoted, as had been speculated for over a year 8. Counter proposal put forward by the EoS that included the juniors. West structure intact at Tier 6, East clubs joining the EoS at Tier 7 (Conferences), Tayside clubs in a Tayside league. The West were invited to join for this season, delaying the East and Tayside for a year for further discussion if required 9. SJFA do not take that proposal to their membership 10. Impasse reached, meaning the SFA declares no Juniors for this season Now, you are of course free to interpret that as "The EoS and LL blocked the juniors", but clearly you would be wrong, as has been pointed out several times. They said no to the first (terrible) proposal, a position which was consistently held throughout, which happened to include the juniors. They then put put forward a pragmatic, workable alternative, which also included the juniors, which would have seen the juniors in the Pyramid right now. Is your argument that proposing a workable solution in place of an unworkable one, that would have seen all West and East Junior teams in the pyramid right now, was actually them actively blocking junior entry? If so, you can understand the ridicule that position is being treated with by some, surely.

To put a bit more context around the issue, at the EoS meeting RP's opening gambit to the room included the statement "your objection to the Juniors joining the pyramid". He and IM seemed to be under the impression that the EoS and LL were "blocking" access for "the juniors". He was of course quickly set straight, that it was nothing to do with the juniors, that the West were welcome as a unit and the East junior clubs welcome to join the EoS as the pre-existing feeder, in the same way any amateur teams could and the and that 26 already had. Now, where they got the opinion that the objections to a poorly thought out proposal were centred purely around stopping the juniors coming into the pyramid is anyone's guess (yes, that is sarcasm), particularly with more than half of the room former Juniors who had made the switch through the already available league. My view is that it became clear to them only during that discussion that they had been sold a pig in a poke with regards the problem. The issue is not, and never had been about "the juniors". It has always been about an overlapping geographical league in the East, containing non LL region clubs, regardless of whether that is the ERSJFA or the LEAFA. I can't speak for what happened at PWG meetings, but as far as the EoS are concerned the feedback from the league and association has been consistent dating back to a question asked at our very first meeting in early 2018, prior to the junior plan being issued. The position has always been that there is already a feeder league in the East. Misunderstanding/misrepresentation of the agreement reached in the PWG, in terms of probability, is far more likely for me than the EoS telling the PWG one thing and their members another for over a year. They simply aren't an organisation who operate that way.

I tend to agree, making clear that licence awards only happen once a year gives clarity to the process that doesn't exist at the moment. As we saw last year with moving meetings (for good reason) the dubiety in the "when" of the process led to lots of frustration and lots of questions. We know the AGM will happen every year in May or June, so making it a standing item on the Agenda clarifies the timings for everyone. It should also help the licencing guys, given they are the front line and have to field the timescale question I would expect from every applicant. So I think long term this is a sensible move, if unfortunately a little detrimental to ourselves as we are caught up as an applicant during the process change. My concern with it, which Burnie alluded to as well, is that criteria has tended to change in December, as we saw last year. That doesn't give any applicant, or for that matter the licence guys, much time to react to any changes. This was a huge issue last year. I think Burnie's suggestion is the most pragmatic one, that any changes to the criteria should also be approved at the AGM, so that no one applying for the current year has their application impacted by changing criteria/short turnaround time (they would still have to meet the criteria before next audit, but as members having been compliant initially). Anyone applying post February licence board meeting would know that they won't be awarded till the following June and have criteria updates coming in May/June to manage, with plenty of time to work with licencing to get the job done. Hopefully, that is the next step. Still leaves the Lowland League needing to look at their playoff rules, given they reflect the previous licence process where awards could happen in March and April. Overall, other than the overlapping dates for criteria change, which is potentially messy but which could easily be resolved by confirming those are also agreed at the AGM, the confirmation of an annual award date feels like a positive move that clarifies the timescales for everyone, so fair play. Shame it impacts our application, but greater good and all that.

More changes to the club licencing process announced today. The SFA board will, with immediate effect, only award licences once per year at their annual meeting in May or June. Any applicant clubs must conform to criteria and be accepted by the licencing board at their February meeting, to be eligible to be awarded in May/June. So, unless in mistaken: Any currently unlicensed EoS premier League club (like Bo'ness) will be ineligible for promotion to the LL this year unless the LL waive their 31/03 deadline again or change their playoff rules permanently to note the new date as end June. Also means that anyone in the process, like we have been since February 2019, who currently meet all the criteria have to wait with some trepidation for the licence update in December, despite meeting all current criteria. If anything else is added you (and everyone else) have 4-7 weeks to get it done, get re-audited and through the licencing board or you have to wait another 18 months to have your licence awarded, having to go through the same period of uncertainty with everyone else the following year. I won't give my opinion, just presenting the information to keep people updated.

It's always fun to watch these games, when Rangers fans have built themselves up to think they are world beaters, to have it confirmed that, yep, they are still shite.

The utter state of your posts today. [emoji1787]

There's already a league for Fife teams to go to within the pyramid and Tayside clubs with the exception of 2 are in the Highland catchment, not the Lowland, so can't play in the Lowland league (or Lowland League playoff) anyway. All these off the wall suggestions aimed at enabling a small number of clubs in the East to circumvent the established route to the pyramid in that region are a waste of everyone's time. Any South of the Tay teams who met the criteria and want to join the Pyramid, join the EoS league. Any who don't, stay in the juniors or the amateurs. Clubs need to make their own choice.

[emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787][emoji1787] Just wow.

Correction: As it stands, no club North of the Tay can play in the EoS league at Tier 6 or below. Promotion to LL isn't an issue, cos they can't play in the structure below it either.

So, just to be clear, the "compromise" put forward wasn't that IM could propose "2 additional clubs" to take part in the LL playoff. The "compromise" the LL and EoS were presented was that they (willingly) update their playoff rules to defer ALL decisions on who could take part in the LL playoff to IM. They were asked to give up the EoS and SoS guaranteed places and put it in the hands of the SFA CE in the hope that he would still choose them every year, with no legal/rules based guarantee he would. IM would have been able to choose any clubs he wanted, from anywhere, to take part in the playoff. He could have chosen, for example, to allow 4 teams from the West to compete and none from the East or South, had the suggestion (which seemed to just come out of RP's head at the time) not been rightly laughed out the room. Anyone who seriously thinks that "let's scrap the playoff rules and let one guy pick whatever teams he fancies at the end of each season" is a solution at all, never mind a better solution than the West coming in now and the East deferring a year, is a crackpot. As if Scottish football wasn't seen as tinpot enough around the world. [emoji85]

Dunipace 1-3 Kelty Decent game between 2 decent sides spoiled by a woeful match official. From making Kelty take a bye kick again because the ball wasn't out of the box to sending off the Dunipace keeper at 1-0 in the second half for picking the ball up INSIDE his box. From 40 yards away wrongly deciding it was outside the box then compounding that first error by sending the keeper off for denying the Pace defender who was closest to him and the ball a goalscoring opportunity [emoji85]. Proper mind blowing stuff. [emoji1787][emoji1787]

Which is exactly why the answer is to stop talking about "the juniors" and set up a WoS league at Tier 6. Invite applications from interested clubs and see where it goes. If there are a host of Junior teams who don't want to move over, West or East, so be it they can stay in the SJFA in their region. Any who do want to move (as well as any other non junior team in the region) can apply to join the WoS or the EoS and on we move forward. The problem we need to solve here, from a pyramid perspective, is a missing West feeder league, not the West juniors being external to the Pyramid. We need to stop framing the debate as if not having the juniors in the pyramid is the problem. Yes the West juniors have all the best non league teams in the West, so the ideal would be that they play in the pyramid feeder, like all the best non league teams (South of the Tay) in the East do now. Yes the easiest way to do that is bring the whole WRSJFA intact. But we've had a year of the SJFA doing everything they can to stop that happening, so time for another approach. Put it into the hands of the clubs. Start a WoS league and let those who want to move over do so. Any who don't, fair enough, they can apply at a later date should they choose to.

It really is. All the teams in the South plus Scone and Tayport move to the EoS, leaving all the teams in the North in the Tayside league feeding the Highland League (based on current demarcation line). Took me ages to come up with a way to resolve your completely insurmountable issue there. [emoji39][emoji1787][emoji1787] In all seriousness, I reckon a fair few of those clubs don't care for the Pyramid anyway, so in my proposed way forward in the past above those who want to go, go, those who don't get the choice to stay Junior outside of the Pyramid. Create the league's and let clubs make up their own minds.