Dev
-
Posts
2,592 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Dev
-
-
1 hour ago, Craig fae the Vale said:
I don't think you'll find many clubs who would want to reduce to 22 games. 11 home games isn't financially viable for most.
In order to fit in all cup games what number of League games would be best. The present 30 seems to be to many. The cup games alone would bring in some home ties, depending on how well a club does it could be quite a few.
0 -
21 hours ago, Arthurlie1981 said:
I take your point regarding player well being but to play devils advocate they will receive more money for playing further into the season recompenses them for that.
I have said before the league season should be better planned out but the job is to get the champions decided by a certain date and that was achieved.
Maybe one way forward is to reduce the size of the Divisions beneath the Premier Division. Is it really necessary for the clubs at the lower Divs to play 30 League matches?
The Premier Div is a feeder (one day) to the LL so it needs to be 16 clubs so they're used to that number of League games each season, although the LL is currently scheduling more than that!
Reducing the Divs 1 through 4 to 12 each may be on the low side. Don't know. It would mean 8 extra relegations in the preceding season and the creation of Div 5, or regionalise Div 4. This would create space for four new clubs. Maybe not such a bad idea? Surely the SFA could get its' head around that? Especially if any refusal was given enough oxygen via the media?
-1 -
Voluntary entry into any competition is ok. No problem. However, the way the WoS clubs are currently dealing with it impacts clubs, including those clubs which have not entered such competitions and, more importantly, those clubs which have entered but get problems fitting in re-jigged fixtures.
There is also the matter of player well-being, as more fixtures are voluntarily crammed into a season means an extension to the playing season, so less time for players to rest and recover and, obviously, the more chance of serious or persistent less serious injury. Still I suppose that has all been taken into account by clubs?
0 -
On 31/05/2024 at 18:45, Arthurlie1981 said:
Any club is free to propose and amendment to the rules but given that the vast majority (rightly or wrongly) play in the SJC it is unlikely to change. The board has no power to force through a change to the constitution as I read it.
I get the frustration of some (mainly Bankies) fans on here about this 1 regarding the league fixture, but the issue is 2 separate issues regarding the SJC and wanting promotion and I have yet to see any club public say they do not want promotion and we need to stop conflating the 2 issues Into if your club is in the SJFA it doesn't want promotion
Nice try to deflect from the real issue!
If clubs voluntarily enter an outside WoS competition to the detriment of completing any WoS fixtures they have no justification for complaints re getting fixtures completed. Maybe such clubs should re-consider their priorities?
1 -
2 hours ago, welshbairn said:
Have you been working with it?
No I don't work with this. My comment was based upon issues which have cropped up associated with the use of a version of Comet elsewhere. May be or may not be the same version. Hope that helps.
0 -
1 hour ago, welshbairn said:
The juniors website is usually excellent, but they've frozen it while trying to integrate the new Comet system for Scottish football data.
Good luck to clubs and leagues needing to use this system!
0 -
5 hours ago, glensmad said:
The WoSFL Constitution and Rules 2023-24 states the following :-
B56. It is mandatory for all eligible Clubs to compete in the Scottish FA Cup and South Region Challenge Cup each
season as well as any cup competition under the auspices of the League. The Board will also prioritise
participation in the Scottish Junior Cup for those member clubs in membership of the SJFA.
B57. Only competitions listed in rule B56 shall take precedence over any league or cup fixture organised by the
League. The League competition shall take precedence over any other competition.Thanks for this.
There seems to be an issue directly arising from too few fixtures at the start period of the season, especially for clubs playing on grass pitches. However, there is no sign that this has been dealt with as, according to other posters, there's no change from last season.
Similarly are no visible signs of action to show any acknowledgement of the knock-on effects of league matches being shifted around/fitted in to fit in Junior cup games. Clearly, when there is a problem re fitting in the other priority fixtures, the Junior competition should not be provided with the same status as other named competitions under B57. That would not prevent any club from entering that competition should it choose to do so but it would help to deal with all other fixture issues.
It is easy to conclude that the Board isn't leading the way in dealing with such practical issues. Has this even been seriously considered at Board level? I understand that you may not be in a position to provide a full or even a meaningful response on a Forum.
0 -
2 hours ago, glensmad said:
Remember that the Scottish Junior Cup affects not just the WoSFL fixtures, but also the East and North Region SJFA leagues. It's not as simple as Kennie just deciding how to fit the SJFA cup fixtures into the WoSFL's schedule.
Thanks for being so helpful but it does show the inconsistent priorities which the clubs have supported through the current Rules.
Is it not down to the Board of the WoS to show some leadership over matters which clearly directly affect the fixtures issues i.e. by giving the appropriate priority to competitions such as:
[a] League fixtures
the League's own Cup competitions
[c] the SFA Cup
and, not least, the Scottish FA Cup?
This is particularly so as not all clubs choose to also become members of a lower status organisation (in the sense that the WoS is a senior competition and the junior association is officially lower down the hierarchy of Scottish football i.e. alongside the amateurs, welfare, etc.).
Presumably a club or clubs chose to re-join the amateur FA as well as remaining in the senior status WoS that would be unacceptable to the Board. I don't know - just asking?
0 -
10 minutes ago, To B or not B said:
Any club can propose rule changes at anytime, so in effect the B teams could do nothing if enough teams voted for the new rule.
I wasn't clear enough. I was meaning what could be done legally. It's difficult to see how the B teams do anything other than show a small definable financial loss for their clubs during a season in the LL.
My previous post was partly done Tongue in Cheek but it did attempt to put together some of the other posts so maybe it was an attempt at a summary.
It has long been said that the OF are responsible for lots of things - good and not so good. Maybe, if they want something so much they could be approached by the LL to do a trade-off?
If they want B teams in the LL/HL then the cost is the same promotion and relegation method as between e.g. SPFL1 and SPFL2. There would need to be a play-off firstly between the top clubs from the LL and HL. The winners go into SPFL2 with the losers going into a Play-Off with the 9th placed club in SPFL2. The bottom SPFL club, obviously, going straight down to the LL/HL.
1 -
33 minutes ago, Sparticus said:
The last lowland league vote to allow b teams for another three years was a complete shocker.
How can anyone propose that and who actually did?
Surely such votes can only be for one season as there will be new member the season after.
Farce.
23 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:Bit like the all or nothing vote on 3 clubs, I'm guessing they said 2+1 or nothing.
Since the current rules are only for a single season the league is probably going to put in a rule amendment
If the LL now decide to go back on the three year agreement what could the B team clubs do about it?
0 -
SPFL TRUST TROPHY: 1st Round losers Prize money: £5,000
SPFL League Cup: First round group stage: Fifth position - £30,000
......... so any non-SPFL club invited to play in both competitions pockets a minimum £35,000. Why aren't such clubs selected entirely using merit as the basis for their selection?
It is, of course, (and this is put forward merely in jest!) entirely unfair to suggest that reasons for the selection of clubs against merit may include:
[a] The Pyramid isn't working properly as yet so, inconveniently, the best non "B" teams don't finish in the top positions and may even be sliding downwards to the trap-door of relegation to the W0S/EoS/SoS, which, of course, must not be allowed as it goes against History.
The ex SPFL clubs need extra support in order to retain their current status so some extra funds will help with that - although, eventually, even that may not be enough for them to avoid the Drop out of the LL in particular.
[c] The two feeder Leagues to SPFL2 are cr.p so only ex-SPFL clubs merit recognition and financial support via e.g. the Trust Trophy and, more helpfully, the League Cup.
[d] The SPFL considers that there are "special" ties with ex-SPFL. These "special ties" could conceivably come in handy in the future on those rare occasions when the SPFL may like to pass on "favourable advice" to the LL and HL - whilst recognizing that these Leagues are entirely independent and rely upon their own clubs to make important decisions upon matters such as:
(i) regarding the non-opening up of automatic promotion and relegation between them and SPFL2,
(ii) the inclusion of SPFL "B" teams in their Leagues and
(iii) adjustments to the Club Licencing requirements in order to keep non ex-SPFL clubs away from the SPFL.
Amen.
9 -
3 hours ago, roy of the rovers said:
Mmmm....nah I won't be! The minimum £5k income is huge to us and once we dispatch whichever abominable B team we're paired with in round 1 it'll be an interesting distraction from more mundane games.
It's almost like "buying" votes in the LL isn't it?
2 -
It's the inconsistent approach that under-mines, not just this competition, but the reputation of football.
About time that the SFA took responsibility for what goes on as all leagues and their rules/regs need to be registered and approved by them - but they seem to just say "nothing to do with me".
1 -
1 hour ago, Piorek said:
Can’t see how removing the Lowland League and having Highland League, East Scotland and West Scotland on equal footing somehow stops there being a pyramid
Maybe that will happen eventually, but perhaps not the greatest need at present.
0 -
14 hours ago, patriot1 said:
I knew it would be one of the two but they haven’t announced which yet.
This.
Guessing this will have to be dealt with at the AGM so the Agenda should cover it.
Cheers.
0 -
On 25/05/2024 at 22:43, Deanburn Dave said:
Starting point would be :-
1) Club 42 automatically relegated.
2) HL/LL playoff winner promoted to League 2.
3) East and West tier 6 champions both promoted.
4) SoSFL needs to drop into somewhere in the WoSFL structure.
Of course there are other suggestions which are fully justified but the above would be a starting point.
This.
Except, whilst the SoS remains at Tier 5:
Retain the existing Play-Offs from WoS/EoS/SoS but two are promoted from it with the third placed club (likely from the SoS) to Play-Off with the 3rd bottom LL club. Built in to this would be:
Ditch the "must be champions" non-sense and go instead with the highest placed Licenced WoS/EoS/SoS clubs in each league and put them into the play-Offs. There would have to be a limit on how far down the table that club could finish and still qualify. Maybe needs to be just down to the 2nd or 3rd placed clubs.
If the SoS made the approach to the WoS to become a feeder league to say WoS Div. 2 or 3 would the WoS accept that? Then, of course, would the gloriously disinterested SFA come up with some poor idea to prevent it e.g. by being against, in effect, regionalisation of a Tier 6 league?
1 -
Will Ormiston be reprieved to make up the numbers again to 16 for next season? Or will Stoneyburn come up instead? Anyone know yet or will it be decided at the AGM?
0 -
On 20/05/2024 at 18:23, Kennie said:
There's a link on the WoSFL website that'll take you to the rules.
I don't know of any moves towards regionalisation.
If a space becomes available there will be a procedure to follow for new applications.
The sizes of the Divisions was agreed to be manageable and balanced.
Bringing in new clubs would upset that balance and as would most likely to happen the slack would be taken up by the lowest league but that would only allow 2 or a max of 4 clubs before the fixtures would exceed the time available to play them.
From my point of view the only way to increase the members would be to start another Division, but that would need at least 10 clubs to make it practical.
Cheers!
0 -
22 minutes ago, Kennie said:
As Glensmad said there was no poaching by the WoSFL.
The SoSFL were asked if they wanted a boundary, but they said no.
Probably thinking they might pick up a couple of teams that thought going South would be a shortcut to the Lowland.
Remember Wellington FC anyone?
What do the WoS rules actually say about the size of the League and the matter of relegation from it and the matter of new clubs possibly coming in? Is there a link available showing the rules?
Also, what is the current situation regarding any club which wishes to apply to join the WoS i.e. there were reports of working with others, outside the WoS, (Amateurs?) about this?
The question of Regionalisation of the WoS has been mentioned from time to time. Is there any restriction at all on doing this? If Yes then what has to be done if the majority of WoS clubs decide they want this brought in e.g. at the lowest Division(s) level?
I understand that you may not be in a position to respond meaningfully - no problem - but these are issues which have been raised on P&B and it would be good to see answers, if possible.
0 -
54 minutes ago, glensmad said:
It's not a technicality. They applied to join the league, the clubs accepted their application. If the clubs had voted against them, then they wouldn't have got in.
The SoSFL were given the opportunity to have a boundary which the WoSFL would recognise, the same way as we do with the EoSFL, but the SoSFL said they didn't want a boundary. So we were duty bound to pass Threave's application to join the league onto the member clubs, and they accepted the application. We couldn't "politely tell Threave that they weren't in our catchment" (the way we have done when an East team has applied), because we wouldn't have been telling the truth.
Any idea what happens if a club from the south is relegated from the Lowland League, having nominated, by the start of the season, the WoS as the league which moves down to in the event that it finishes in a relegation position in the LL?
E.G. If Dalbeattie Star had nominated the WoS instead of the SoS?
0 -
2 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:
Buzzing to see North End in the big Scottish next year. Would be great to get a good tie in what's a proper football ground.
Which club would you like them to draw?
Their ground looks decent enough. Would they be allowed to play at home if they get a home draw?
0 -
2 hours ago, Burnieman said:
So which specific part do you disagree with? that a club, when expelled from a league within the pyramid is no longer part of the pyramid, and they then apply for inclusion in a new league? None of that is even up for debate surely, it's obvious.
As Morrison says we'll all have to wait and see what happens!
0 -
On 11/05/2024 at 23:32, Burnieman said:
OK I'll try again.
If a club is expelled from the SPFL for not meeting their rules, at that point they do not belong to any league at all, so they're not in the pyramid.
If they want to continue, they would need to apply to another league and re-enter the Pyramid.
The Lowland League do not have any vacancies and if they did, that would be open to applications from any club eg. I'm sure Clydebank would be interested if there were.
The East of Scotland League in EC's case would be the natural place to re-start if it came to that.
As Morrison says we'll all have to wait and see what happens, but a pyramid doesn't work in the way you are believing, no matter what individual league rules wording may say.
If you don't agree with that it's ok but expulsion from any pyramid league isn't the same as expulsion from the whole pyramid - unless the club goes bust. It would make the so called pyramid a bigger farce than it is already, from some perspectives.
Let's disagree, leave it there and see what actually happens!
0 -
Could the formation of a lower division for part of the season encourage one or two new clubs to apply to join?
0
West of Scotland AGM
in West of Scotland Football League
Posted
I see that my figures are wrong. Apologies. Reducing to 12 for 4 Divisions would be 16 extra relegations - does not work.
Maybe 16 - 14 - 14 - 14 - 14. With an extra Division of 14. If my figures are right this time it would open up space for 6 new clubs. Regionalisation of the lowest two Divisions could help if the SFA would 'play ball'.