TheGeneral10
-
Posts
67 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by TheGeneral10
-
-
26 minutes ago, bluebell1 said:
Absolute shambles, it wasn’t an egm or an sgm or an agm but only certain clubs were allowed to vote. A 34 or 36 game season for the premier next season. Who knows ? Aw the best with that getting completed.
You got ur vote so it was democratic. Your club is no worse off and no better off, as is every club. Stop moaning FFS. At least we all know what’s happening now.
2 -
1 hour ago, Bigbro19 said:
Whilst I expect Nicola will remain cautious and stick to the 17th there’s been a lot of speculation due to reaching the tipping point (herd immunity) this could even be brought forward a week. Announcement expected on Tuesday.
At her last briefing she said there would not be any further announcements on the roadmap out of lockdown until the 20th April when she would confirm if the lifting of restrictions planned for the 26th April would go ahead.
I do believe that you are a bit of a rascal and what you don’t know, you just make up.
1 -
1 hour ago, Bigbro19 said:
No need for testing from the 17th May, so that ones blown out the window . Next.
Can you please direct me to a government/ SFA statement that confirms this ‘fact’?
0 -
1 hour ago, LongTimeLurker said:
Once adult contact sports are allowed again from May 17th forward there is no need for testing.
Can you show me where that is stated please?
0 -
2 hours ago, bluebell1 said:
Why is the “management” committee not make a decision. Why is the vote to null and void or play only. Why is declaring on ppg not a voting option.
An absolute shambles for me, gotta play now give a club the chance of promotion and get the leagues sorted for a 16 team premier league august start.I’m inclined to agree on the committee shirking their responsibility and hiding from making a decision - but we don’t know the facts and I’m sure there will be a reason, perhaps being pedants and following rules to the letter. Who knows. PPG is an option though so unsure on your point there. All as agreed at the seasons outset. You have a vote same as everyone else so you can cast it accordingly.
0 -
14 minutes ago, Big Dougie said:
No change in dates from First Minister today.
Not even a commitment to 26th lifting either of travel between local authority regions so zero knowledge on non contact training g for clubs that have loads travelling from other areas. The update is there is no update.
Time for the EoS to take the plunge one way or another. We can’t wait another 3 weeks. Surely!!!
3 -
17 hours ago, bluebell1 said:
Pathetic, you my friend are a man/woman of straw. Throwing accusations and comments around hiding behind a username kinda makes you insignificant in my world
We are on the same page then, so we are both happy.
I’m not hiding behind anything though. I’m merely a supporter and personally find your actions underhand and disingenuous. I’d feel the same if the club I watch/ support were benefiting - that’s the truth as it is who I am. There are no accusations, only opinions and all based on my own standards and belief that all member clubs are essentially in the same boat, facing the same challenges and as such there is a respectful way of behaving that should be inclusive. Next time you visit the club, if I’m there I will most certainly introduce myself and perhaps even buy you that free pint you mentioned previously.
I guess all I hoped for was a little bit of contrition from you in the cold light of day after some time to reflect. Sadly not.0 -
54 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:
The call it early decision was based on uncertainty, stability is more prevalent than it was at that point (thus with vaccines, LL decision taken) and the timescales can work if we want them to.
hypothetical option;
- 8th April - communicate that the league will play out to 50%
5 weeks to get match readyish to May 17 (every club in same position)- if required further 1 or two weeks contact training/friendly matches, takes us to 31st May
- 3/4 weeks to get to 50% threshold, 26 June.
Depending on how many weeks break teams feel appropriate at end of season, push start date into august (why the rush to start in July, allows time for more clarity on pandemic progress before new season starts). Personally I don’t think a big break is required after the 13 months of large breaks/stop start (unless of course some are desperate to spend their week queueing at the click and collect garden centres) but take a vote on what is appropriate.
If there’s a debate about congested fixtures, happens every year, if there’s a debate about spending anti lockdown time in football, June is still part of the football calendar every year, it’s a small extension. Fairness and transparency, winners win and losers lose.
Clubs may have agreed to contingency, not an imposed date on that contingency when a workable solution exists.
Currently there are a number of teams able to non contact train with most if not all players in attendance due to geographical location. Others are unable to train as the playing squad made up from players coming from a number of different local authority regions. This restriction not due to open up until 26th April, leaving some teams 4 if not 6 weeks ahead in terms of fitness. How do you factor this into fairness and equality of preparation?
2 -
10 minutes ago, bluebell1 said:
It is very clear who wrote the email you refer to as said before if all clubs want to see it contact me and I will happily discuss or copy them in. I am the general manager of the bluebell.
I assume you have an identity also ?
If you wrote that email my friend and your conscience is clear, then your moral compass compared to my own are not even in the same vicinity, and all I will say is I’m glad I’m me.
Like you say what will be will be.0 -
2 minutes ago, bluebell1 said:
Please be assured my conscience is also clear, we will agree to disagree on the way forward.
I assume you never wrote the email from your club?
0 -
10 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:
I'd give my right arm to be able to play football competitively again. Suspect there will be a range of opinions amongst players on that and many would love to be able to get out there playing ASAP.
And there will be many more with the same view - but there will be equally as many who agree with the previous player.
My take would be: Young lads will more happy to play and older players with families and higher pressure jobs will be less happy to play.
But after 5+ months in lockdown, players at this level who don’t get paid material amounts of money should not be forced to play. Football league structures at the minute is really not that important and football must be used for nothing other than ensuring mental and physical health. Let’s get the players back after the 17th and let them enjoy just training with teammates again without the pressure and stress of 3 games a week when not fit and ready. Surely that’s the sensible approach?1 -
6 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:
What happens if the LL decide to relegate Vale of Leithen and Edinburgh Uni to get back to 16? Honestly think that if you can play through to June 30th like the North Caley league are doing, getting things 50% completed to achieve 16-16-conferences as the format for next season would be the sensible outcome.
Did you read the post by a current EoS Player? That’s not going to the feelings of a lone person.
End of debate.-2 -
2 minutes ago, Scrappydoo said:
I really cant believe the niave petty mind set of some of the posters on here , but i thought it was just me being paranoid,
so to clarify , yes im a player , do i want to play play football , yes 100%
Have i had my jag, no , has my young family No , has my team mates No so will i be forced into playing ? then i have to explain to my family that some greedy gits have decided ive to play 3 games a week to keep the numbers happy for PPG ,REALYY ?
NO EFFING WAY just to keep some back room , ass wipes happy about PPG , whom ever thinks going back early is a 100% AN idiot
players are human beings not numbers, we arent getting paid ,cant travel together , cant shower,we have families ,commitments,jobs and responsibilities
i asked my team mates the younger ones dont care the older ones were all a NO Way
it may be ok to say , oh 50% can be done , its not impossible , lets just play ,,,,you are not the ones playing you immature ,selfish cretins
therefore if we are forced back what stance will the league team when clubs cant field teams ? will i get banned ? will the club ?
please stop all this Crap
FOOTBALL IS DONE FINISHED , THIS SEASON ,
lets look forward to next season and some normality
3 minutes ago, Scrappydoo said:I really cant believe the niave petty mind set of some of the posters on here , but i thought it was just me being paranoid,
so to clarify , yes im a player , do i want to play play football , yes 100%
Have i had my jag, no , has my young family No , has my team mates No so will i be forced into playing ? then i have to explain to my family that some greedy gits have decided ive to play 3 games a week to keep the numbers happy for PPG ,REALYY ?
NO EFFING WAY just to keep some back room , ass wipes happy about PPG , whom ever thinks going back early is a 100% AN idiot
players are human beings not numbers, we arent getting paid ,cant travel together , cant shower,we have families ,commitments,jobs and responsibilities
i asked my team mates the younger ones dont care the older ones were all a NO Way
it may be ok to say , oh 50% can be done , its not impossible , lets just play ,,,,you are not the ones playing you immature ,selfish cretins
therefore if we are forced back what stance will the league team when clubs cant field teams ? will i get banned ? will the club ?
please stop all this Crap
FOOTBALL IS DONE FINISHED , THIS SEASON ,
lets look forward to next season and some normality
Well said. Everything else being debated is insignificant to the points raised here.
0 -
20 minutes ago, bluebell1 said:
After a request by the management board for points to raise at next board meeting.
Our proposal for consideration was circulated to some clubs not all as a way to gauge other clubs thoughts on implementing a tiered league structure by declaring the season on ppg. I am happy to forward to all clubs if that is so desired.
The feedback was mostly positive with other points raised and some negative feedback also.
As suggested here nothing is underhand, I was advised that if we wanted to call an egm to discuss we need 10 clubs to second our proposal. We have achieved this although after further discussion our thought process is we are happy to go with the decision of the management committee after Thursdays meeting.
Would I have made this proposal is Dundonald would have been relegated as a result possibly not. If proposal came in was accepted and we were duly relegated a would get on with it as firmly believe a league structure is required ASAP.
I don’t hide behind user names and happy to discuss with anybody any issues or concerns they have. I am easily contactable.
Self preservation is understandable but surely we need to be bigger than that and look at the end goal on pyramid structure not what’s in front of our nose. Look at the bigger picture.
As for not being made welcome at certain clubs if the proposal is implemented as suggested by a poster on here. I am big enough and ugly enough not to let that bother me to be honest. I might get a free pint from others.
Change effects everyone sometimes positively and other times negatively. We still need to embrace it if it’s for the greater good.
Fair enough. What’s done is done.
The wording of the email was very poor, and a huge mistake not forwarding to every club. But move on and see what comes from the meeting this week.
0 -
8 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:
In general and including this season, the Scottish Cup final doesn't mark the final game in the senior calendar. There's a number of games that get played beyond it. The original fixture lists for 2020-21 had games going into June.
Check the press release from the SFA dated 3rd March - that says different
0 -
3 minutes ago, Casey Jones said:
Yip. Contact training only. The guy who said earlier that matches then start on 22 May was having a laugh.
You’ve misinterpreted me there. The date of 22nd May is the Scottish Cup Final at Hampden, and as per the SFA statement, will bring the curtain down on the 2020/ 2021 season. I don’t mean Tier 6 could go back playing - I meant that we could not play beyond that date. Apologies for confusion on that.
1 -
17 minutes ago, Malty Guy said:
Yes I’m more than supportive of your comments above.
you’re bang-on with the TJFC/Crossgates/Dunbar situation. That data has to extrapolated from the table. It should also apply to any others teams in similar circumstances
If the rearranged fixture v Tranent is extrapolated out then Dunbar have a current PPG of 0.916 and Crossgates have 0.909. Do I want that to happen - absolutely not as no way Crossgates should be penalised by a margin of 0.007 no more than Dunbar should by keeping the Tranent game in.
Crossgates would also rightly point to playing 1 less game, and neither club has played each other yet.
1 -
14 minutes ago, Truthteller said:
50% can be achievable IMO given that the season officially ends on 30th June, however some teams may not even wish this to reach 50%, look at the league table.
Some may argue that they need a 3 week break between the season end and the season starting, if so start the season slightly later and then catch up, especially with all these new floodlit facilities springing up.
If we are indeed part of the Pyramid - and the most used statement for the past few months has been ‘to protect the integrity of the pyramid’ - then as per the SFA’s press release earlier this year when league 1 and 2 were allowed to return - the curtain comes down on the professional Scottish Football Season with the glamour occasion of the Scottish Cup Final’ (22nd May 2021).
I honestly don’t think you can reasonably ask players, coaches and club volunteers to prioritise football over family, work, holidays and general physical and mental well-being after what would be 5 months of lockdown for a crazy 6 week period. Personal opinion but I do not think that is a realistic option.
1 -
7 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:
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).
We will just agree to disagree on that one. There are processes in place and Dundonald have not followed due process. Each club can make their own judgment and act accordingly. I would not be surprised if the EoS Board have received/ will receive numerous letters from member clubs raising concerns. Just my opinion. It’s done now though - nobody has a DeLorean - move on to more important issues. Over to the Board to deal with Dundonald (or not) as they see fit.
0 -
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.
1 -
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.
1 -
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 ???
0 -
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.
3 -
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.0
EoS Structure for 2021/22
in East of Scotland Football League
Posted · Edited by TheGeneral10
As a club official you are making a rip roaring t£&t of yourself now tbh. Of course it was democratic and to state otherwise shows ignorance and stupidity of the highest order. Never got your way. Dummy spat. Toys out the pram.