Black & Red Socks

It’s really just a reaction to your utterly non-sensical questioning, all of which flies in the face of every piece of available evidence - evidence you appear to glory in ignoring. However, go ahead and play the bullied card and dress it up just as you want - people see through it you know and as I’ve already said, it’s just such poor charades that have brought the juniors to such an ignominious end.

“Who knows”? Quite palpably - not you. Posting constant nonsense in the guise of intelligent probing, your grasp of the subject matter is frankly embarrassing. You do yourself or your beloved grade absolutely no favours with such pathetic interventions. The Juniors are down the toilet and attitudes such as yours are precisely why. Dearie me.

This is just a little something more, piled upon a gathering mountain of evidence, to indicate that Mr. Ronney is heading up a campaign to “save the Juniors” and not necessarily a campaign to offer clubs a pathway to what is ultimately right for them. No clarity of just what the WRSJFA proposal actually is and what substance it has, nothing to dispute the mounting evidence – here and elsewhere and backed up by the cold, hard facts based on the rules and regulations of those other football organisations that have to be interacted with to make what he proposes happen – against the likelihood of his proposal ever coming to pass. Nothing. What we do have is a tug at the heartstrings – a plea that all but poses the question “Surely if an unwell man sees the WRSJFA as the solution to the Pyramid conundrum then it must be so? Surely?”. My word, we have now reached a new and desperate low. Mr. Ronney, the LL/EoSFL WoSFL proposition is a deliverable solution that includes all of the benefits that the EoSFL currently offers the myriad of ex-Junior clubs who moved to be under their auspices over the last two seasons. Please make it clear just how you believe the WRSJFA proposition can match such a solution and how it can overcome the innumerable hurdles in its way. Do this and you may just find that you and the WRSJFA can be taken that bit more seriously. Oh yes, and why did it take until the LL/EoSFL made their offer of facilitating a WoSFL before the WRSJFA/you acted? If you had made just such a move last year then it would almost certainly have attracted the support of the EoSFL and the LL as well as the majority on here – insignificant as posters on a P&B thread are in the whole scheme of things.

Further proof that every one of you Junior haters hang on everything that comes from Burnie as being solid gospel truth. This is both pathetic and embarrassing in equal measure. From my perspective and, I imagine, the perspective of most on here and most who have an interest in the future of the non-league Scottish game, no one "hates" the Juniors. No one. What they are coming to "hate" is the abject failure of the Junior games administrators and their utterly appalling attempts to gain traction with such a very similar play to that which failed so miserably last season (read 'done deal') - and to what end? To save a pretty tidy remuneration, and a remuneration for what may we all ask? For having run their grade aground and for steadfastly standing in the way of the lifeboats.

Where are you going with your argument? I think anyone with a semblance of sense would agree that there cannot be two teams with the same name in the same league set up. BUT.....you just can’t argue that one of them is out of the reckoning because they don’t have their own ground when that’s equally as true for the other, regardless of how long the original BU’s have been in existence. The evidence has been posted for you to read and digest, you’re choosing not to and it’s absurd to think that evidence doesn’t counter your original ‘argument’. For the avoidance of doubt, I don’t think the ‘new’ Bo’ness United should be admitted either - but the reasoning will have to be better than them not having their own ground or length of history that the current senior Bo’ness side have.

Interested to know why HibeeJibee removed his response to this last night that started with something along the lines of “This shows that other countries leagues don’t get everything right” clearly implying he felt this was far from the correct thing to do. Does removing it suggest he now knows something to the contrary?

When a game is abandoned then the team that was ahead will, more often than not, be unhappy with the decision while the team who were behind will be more than supportive of it - it’s the very nature of the beast and both positions are entirely understandable. This is why the decision is in the hands of the referee as the only neutral arbiter and he has to think solely of players safety. Almost certainly he won’t have wanted to abandon with a team already in front so must have had real concerns. I think second guessing him on his decision would be unfair. What is very disappointing to read is Sauchie taking the hump and failing to turn up for after match hospitality. That’s really not on and I hope they reflect on those actions and apologise to Blackburn if that was indeed the case.

Teams playing each other four times a season in league competition is, for me, the very definition of dull in a footballing context so I'm in 100% agreement with you on that. However, you do realise that in a 12 team, Tier 1 league - should you continue with it's present construct - teams will play each other four times a season (four times v teams who finish in your half of the league post split and three times v teams who finish in the other half of the league post split)? Four times a season is four times a season whether it is against the whole league or only against half of it so you are arguing, even if only in some small way, for the continuation of a dull product at the very top of the Pyramid. Anyway, as has been rightly said - this is a debate on the future of the Junior game so best it is that which is debated and not the wholesale restructuring of the game at the top of the Pyramid as that is hugely unlikely to happen any time soon and is more likely to remain a simple fantasy for long into the foreseeable future.

Precisely. In the decision making process required of the current EoSFL members there should be no thought at all given to appeasing recalcitrant Junior clubs by offering, for a third season in a row, conference leagues to the potential detriment of current clubs. Particularly if some of those Junior clubs are playing the field by - according to posts on other threads - noting their interest in a possible WoSFL. I can see no compelling reason at all to go with anything other than a Tier 6/7/8 set up from next season onwards, a set up that offers more than just the one promotion spot from a Tier 7 league than would be the case should multiple conferences at Tier 7 be the format again for season 2020/21.

Goodness guys, I instanced Buster Motram for his tennis playing abilities (which, to be fair, weren’t really that bad), not his political leanings. How far off topic are we going to drag this to prove anyone and everyone can do a google search?

Seriously? It’s 0-6, 0-6, 0-5 and love-40 on the SJFA serve (think Buster Motram for those old enough to remember) with Novak Djokovic (the LL/EoSFL) waiting to return. I suspect there’s only one winner.

100% this. The argument elsewhere that there should be no fixed geographical boundary between west and east because not too many teams will choose to take advantage of it really is quite bamboozling when a simple rule as above takes care of any issues and let’s clubs know where they stand. Should it be otherwise and one club takes advantage of being close to only a notional border to move to a region outwith their hitherto natural area then you can be sure that others will look to follow. What’s good for the goose and all that.

Fill yer boots on how you want to manipulate the discussion and misrepresent me, the issue is about sensible application of the rules but you go ahead and believe what you want to believe, it's of no concern to me.

That's because they are entirely different cases when it comes to making an exception to any rule that may apply. It has been simply and best put by Marten. Fauldhouse doesn't straddle a boundary but Luncarty and Harthill do and therefore have the best cases for exceptions should they wish to ask for one. Those close to the line have little case for exceptions - particularly if it's merely to get a jump in Pyramid position.

Exactly this. Fauldhouse have scheduled a meeting and it is for them to plot their way forward. They have had two opportunities to move to the EoSFL and have either decided against doing so or have not really discussed the prospect at all up until now. The potential formation of a WoSFL would appear to have prompted them to either discuss the matter again or to discuss it properly for the first time. The LL/EoSFL statement that "There will of course be issues such as geographical integrity to be considered" seems to make it clear that there will only be one destination on offer should they choose to progress from the Juniors into the Seniors anyway.

I’m still absolutely none the wiser on your direction of travel here, why leave application open to manipulation and the possibility of a geographical crossover when a simple rule prevents any such potential mess?

I really don’t understand the argument you’re putting forward? Just because clubs haven’t taken advantage of picking and choosing previously doesn’t mean they won’t in the future should the opportunity present itself. Why leave it to the whim of what clubs may or may not think, however unlikely the unthinkable might be, when a simple statement saying WRSJFA = WoSFL and ERSJFA = EoSFL takes care of the matter? Why wouldn’t you expect that, no matter how unlikely you believe a club taking advantage of it not being a requirement might be? As I’ve already stated, I rather suspect this will already be in the minds of those who will be tasked with making the WoSFL happen.

I think the point is, if you don’t have a demarcation line between the proposed WoSFL and the EoSFL then what Burnie_man instances could happen with these clubs is, without doubt, a distinct possibility. Surely you do understand that? Further, if clubs believe that they might have a choice to apply to one league over another to get them a Tier or two higher in the Pyramid and there are people out there who think that this isn’t factoring into the thoughts of those clubs then it is they who are the fantasists. WRSJFA clubs to a new WoSFL (should it happen) and ERSJFA south of Tay clubs to the EoSFL, it really is and should be that simple. I’m sure that those involved in setting up the proposed WoSFL will see it pretty much in that way too.

As the bodies who will be overseeing the creation of a WoSFL I would imagine that the LL and the EoSFL will view things in a pretty straight forward manner - quite correctly teams from the WRSJFA will be eligible for the new WoSFL and teams from the ERSJFA that are south of the Tay will be eligible for the EoSFL. Any other approach is similar to the geographical overlap argument that they were strong on and quite rightly prevented the ERSJFA being a competitor league to the EoSFL at Tier 6.

This could very well be the case. However, there are clubs who are in the Premier League who are perhaps safe enough for this season but may not be in future seasons and who, like their SPFL Division Two counterparts when they look at the Lowland and Highland Leagues, want as soft a landing as possible. Accordingly, they will no doubt believe that a First Division with promotion spots of 3 from 16 has more to facilitate that soft landing than conferences with promotion spots of 3 from anything up to 32 or more clubs. At the other end of the scale, there will be teams at the lower end of the current conferences who simply will not see themselves as contenders for promotion to the Premier League any time soon and don't want to be forever floating about near the foot of a conference just so they can continue to be one promotion away from Tier 6 but would, instead, embrace a Tier 8 Second Division that they could actually envision themselves winning. This is the excitement of league football and this is what the creation of a First and Second Division could and should offer.

Nail hit firmly and resoundingly on the head.

I think it's reasonably clear that most who are expressing any sort of opinion or preference on here would like to see it as you state - a Tier 8 being created and new applicants beginning there, a regional split happening at that Tier should enough applicants step forward. The time for planning with an eye to how the Juniors might feel if they were to come across is past. However, it is for the clubs to decide - and I'd be pretty confident they will feel the same way too.

This, potentially, is where it is going for West Lothian clubs, a West Lothian league that might be little better than the Saturday and Sunday amateur leagues surrounding them. Were they all to move en-masse, as rumour seems to suggest all the Fife clubs are about to, then they may be able to recreate something very similar to what they have at present but within a Tier 8/9 West & Fife league in the EoSFL, should the EoSFL go to a Tier 6/7/8 structure, sitting alongside a Tier 8 South & East league? In that way at least progression is open to them rather than being stuck in a never ending cycle of playing the same teams in the same league year on year on year as the rest of Scottish football moves on without them. As you say though, it really is their choice - but they do have some big and important decisions to make and make soon, continuing to stick their heads in the sand just isn't going to do.

Fair comment, but I really can’t see why there shouldn’t be and why it shouldn’t commence next season - it’s the eminently sensible move. Continuing with Conferences into next season only suits those possible Junior sides looking to move and who will most likely have a misplaced sense of entitlement if they do move over. There have been two chances for them to move and to have Conferences accommodate them. Surely there shouldn’t be a third and the structure of the league should now be moulded to what is best for the current teams and not what is most appealing to possible new entrants who have not exactly shown themselves to be enthusiastic previously? Still, it will be up to the EoSFL membership what to do.

Tier Six (16) - Tier Seven (16) - Tier Eight (11 - 16) seems the way to go for me, splitting the Tier Eight league regionally to broaden the Pyramid base as and when numbers allow and playing inter regionally to keep interest and to provide sufficient games.