Marten

I'm also active on a Dutch forum, where there is a heated discussion about the pyramid over there. Some people are very conservative and afraid of any change. But there is one who hurls insults at everyone disagreeing with him, keeps going on about it when his posts get deleted, calls clubs that want change traitors to the "grade", keeps repeating his point while ignoring any counter arguments and comes with unacceptable comparisons at times. That feels quite familiar to me by now...

To be honest, I don't think the Dutch situation should be used as an example for the pyramid over here. I'm originally from The Netherlands and I can categorically state that the Dutch "pyramid" structure is a great example of how to NOT set it up in Scotland. Third tier teams that don't want to get promoted (as they are generally from the bible belt & are happy to just stay non-league) basically choke the system and block the route to the professional leagues for ambitious non-league teams. These teams are in terms of support and budget on a par with teams in the top half of the second tier. Them refusing to get promoted and effectively playing a division too low, makes it very difficult for other teams to try and get into the second tier. I'd ideally like to see all juniors in the pyramid, but we need to ensure that teams that don't want to get promoted don't block off the route for everyone else. I also think it's madness to have 2 feeder leagues covering the same geographic area. As opposed to the difference in day they play in Dutch non-league, there is no rational argument why LL feeder leagues in the East of Scotland should be split in 2 separate systems.

The new clubs have been announced by them, can't remember where, but I'm sure someone else can tell. The new structure depends on the outcome of the AGM & possible late applications.

They can just be in the pyramid in the same way as promotion/relegation in England between non-league steps 6 and 7 (tiers 10/11) works. Step 7 is a whole collection of local leagues. Teams can apply for promotion if they want, but they are not forced to get promoted. Teams that applied then replace the bottom 2 in the step 6 leagues. If more teams have applied (& fit the requirements) than there are places available, only a certain number get promoted based on the final league tables. If fewer teams have applied than there are places available, teams that would have been relegated get reprieved. That can easily be done in Scotland. If the SJFA will remain for teams that won't join the pyramid, then the remaining SJFA leagues & SAFA leagues will effectively form the next level in the "pyramid", feeding into the lowest regular pyramid level.

Or Alta v Fram Larvik in the regionalised Norwegian 3rd tier, a 25 hour drive . Clubs in that level are not more professional and better supported than in SPFL 2.

You are forgetting the point that the EOS will split into 2 divisions after a transitional season. Taking into account Dundonald Bluebell coming over in 2019, the EOS Premier could look something like this: Vale of Leithen Hawick Royal Albert Bonnyrigg Rose Athletic Dundonald Bluebell Hale of Beath Hawthorn Camelon Juniors Musselburgh Athletic Haddington Athletic Blackburn United Lothian Thistle Hutchinson Vale Preston Athletic Leith Athletic Peebles Rovers Tynecastle I wouldn't say that's a bad division and not much difference in quality with what remains in EOS. Obviously, promotion/relegation with LL & Clydebank's entrance if there is no WOS being started can change things, but this at least gives a rough picture.

In England there are roughly 110 full-time clubs (92 in the EFL + most of the National League), in Scotland 20. Still a crazy comparison. If you look at the attendances of the SPL other than Rangers/Celtic, you're basically looking at numbers 3-12 in Scotland. Compared to England's population, you'll need to look at numbers 30-120 there, that's from Bristol City until Dartford. If you compare it in that way, Scotland isn't doing bad at all.

As said above, it's madness to compare Scotland to England as they're so much bigger! Here are some more accurate comparisons: The Netherlands, 18,986 average, without Ajax/Feyenoord/PSV/Twente 12,539, 34% drop Belgium, 10,867 average, without Bruge/Gent/Liege/Anderlecht 8,266, 25% drop Portugal, 12,341 average, without Benfica/Sporting/Porto 4,090, 67% drop Greece, 5,116 average, without Olympiacos/PAOK/AEK 1,834, 64% drop Denmark, 5,996 average, without Kopenhagen/Brondby 4,573, 24% drop Serbia, 2,301 average, without Red Star/Partizan 1,468, 36% drop Switzerland, 9,944 average, without Basel/Young Boys 6,939, 30% drop As can be seen, some countries have a larger drop than others, but it's the same in all European leagues outside the top: take away the top and the average attendances drop significantly. Of these countries, only Denmark is roughly the size of Scotland. All others are significantly larger. The attendance in Scotland without Celtic/ Rangers is higher than in all other countries outside the top leagues, with the exception of The Netherlands, a country with a population 3 times the size of Scotland's. Scotland's attendance without Celtic/Rangers is still larger than the average in Greece, Denmark and Serbia, while not being much less than Switzerland and Belgium.

Maybe tier 7 is a better comparison, but there are still massive journeys there for teams with little support. Halesowen Town v Workington is a journey of over 4 hours. Average travel in that division is likely a fair bit more than in SPFL 2.

Plus, if you'd look at the extremes in travelling, then it's possible to get journeys of over 2 hours in the juniors too. Imagine Forfar West End v Dunbar being played on a Monday night...

Celtic and Aberdeen are not in non-league football as far as I know.

In my opinion, it makes sense to change that so clubs can turn down promotion. As long as that's combined with a rule that the best team that want it get a chance of promotion. That would make it easier to form a pyramid without clubs having to worry about not being able to afford promotion or something like that. If the likes of Auchinleck Talbot (for example) want to keep playing at the level where they are, they should be able to, as long as they don't block the route for others imo. Same could go for the north, if the NCL becomes a feeder to the HL, I can imagine some clubs not wanting promotion even if they are licensed. Imagine Orkney being forced to go to the HL and having to travel to Aberdeenshire or even as far as Dundee (if any of the teams there would end up in the HL). They would have a legitimate reason for not wanting to get promoted as the travel costs could be extreme.

Yep, been there.

Hill of Beath Hawthorn v Jeanfield Swifts in the East Superleague yesterday. Enjoyable game, HoB won 3-2, although it should have been much more!

Good luck to Kelty for today. They would be a great addition to the LL.

Did you go to a different game than me last weekend? There is absolutely no way LTHV were the better footballing side on the day.

I'd definitely recommend the app. As someone who is new to Scotland, I use that app to go to various (non-league) grounds.

Had a great day, thanks. Quite impressed by Kelty, very friendly club, all people I spoke to were so nice and passionate about their club. I was in the club house early and just enjoyed soaking up the atmosphere.

Agreed, possession doesn't say much. When in possession, Kelty were far more dangerous and created far more than LHTV. Despite them having the entire second half (until the 3-1 in stoppage time) to equalise, they never looked like they were doing it. I guess as a supporter you were still very nervous, but for me as a neutral I never really had any doubt who would win the game.

I agree with you. Unfortunately, I think there is no way the SPL will become a larger league with teams playing each other twice. They want 2 certain clubs to play each other 4 times a season for commercial/TV interests. However, there is no reason why the 3 divisions below can't become 2 divisions of 16 with clubs playing each other twice. That surely would be better for the attractiveness of those leagues? If the loss of fixtures is a problem to those clubs, there are always ways to compensate that through a cup or something.

How can you be so sure that (some of) the switching clubs didn't try to get any change within the SJFA? Reality is that SJFA is being run by some dinosaurs. Clubs all make decisions for themselves and I can fully understand the reasoning of clubs like Blackburn.

Surely you can't blame the clubs who made the switch? All this talk about sticking together is nice, but in reality, the SJFA were not moving. Only a mass exodus like this will bring change...

LTHV a better footballing side? As I said before, I was there on Saturday as a neutral. Kelty were clearly the better footballing side. They were more attacking, with LTHV coming for a draw. Even when they were losing, they didn't create much. Granted, them having played more games recently won't have helped them, but I have no doubt the better footballing side won. Also results against other opposition show that Kelty are a more attacking side, while LTHV are good at holding on a small lead.

As much as I dislike Feyenoord, their ground and atmosphere are better than at Ajax generally.

I think it makes sense for EOS to accept all these teams. I think quantity is going to bring quality in the end. They will now have the chance, after an intermediate season now, to split in 2 divisions and have the best teams together. The standard in the new EOS Premier from 2019 is going to be a fair bit higher than in the EOS this season (barring Kelty & LTHV). The poorer clubs can play each other in EOS Div 1. Sounds to me like the best for all sides, the bigger and the smaller ones.