It's Me

Will be interesting to see what they do. If they are so against it I would expect them to not be accepting money from it.

I haven't listened to this podcast much but was keen to hear you view on the Colts proposal - only reminded me why I don't listen. Unbalanced, ill-informed and generally rubbish. How is sporting integrity compromised? It's for one year......

One thing I haven't seen anywhere which intrigues me. So far none of the clubs who have opposed this proposal have said they won't accept the cssh that comes from it. Will they still accept the cash when it's handed out??????

I still think a second division in the LL is a good idea. Bring in 16 licensed clubs from East, South and West to create the league with second division winners go up, runners up into a play-off with club 15 and three clubs relegated each season. Allowing the winners of the South, West and East to go into division 2.

But there are three leagues in tier 6 so why only EOS / WOS what about the South winners? This idea means that the winner get into LL2 autmoatically every season. Would licensed clubs in the East, South and West not want to go into a LL2 and work up?

Yes I get that. And I totally agree that promotion should always happen from within the pyramid. However, as it stands the LL has 17 clubs - and needs to get to 16 - if they brought in 2 clubs from within then that would mean four possibly five clubs relegated next season. So why not give the OF colts teams a place to play for one season? Then they go and the LL can get back to 16 clubs. It seems that a lot of the anger about this is coming from people who just have an anti OF agenda. I still think that the leagues in tier 6 should have simply declared on PPG like the tier 5 clubs then the clubs you describe could be put forward to join the LL.

How about this for an idea. OF colts team takes part next season - for one year only - for season 2022/23 a new league is created for 16 clubs that are licensed at tier 6 made up from progressive teams from the West , South and East (a SLFL 2). Each year that league has three automatic relegation places to allow the winner of the leagues to go into SLFL2. From SLFL2 the winner goes up automatically and the runner up has a play off with team 16 that is in the SLFL1? The SLFL work with the OF to apply pressure and try and come to a solution where the winner of the HL / LL playoff goes straight up with no further playoff required. Or the winner of the HL / LL playoff goes up and the losers plays club 41 in a playoff. Would that help things and how would clubs that are currently at tier 6 feel about dropping to tier 7 to make way for the SLFL2?

Is that all these progressive clubs that went null and void rather than declare a champion and put a club up into the LL - they progressive clubs?

Here’s hoping streams are only for the rest of this season and we can then get back to football as we knew it.

I never said have crowds in. I have only watched the games on streams and yes I agree it’s different but at least it’s football. During these crap times it’s actually felt good having a game to look forward to watching on a Saturday or an evening game. Yes, I would rather be there. But if I can watch online from the safety of my home then that’s a good thing.

Yes I do understand that. But if it all gets closed now and not mush has changed in four weeks then how can it restart. I think the best thing to do is keep playing in the safe environment until the SG / SFA say otherwise. As you rightly said other sports are suffering so by closing it down will add another x thousand of people to that list. The west was in tier 4 for several weeks and just got on with it. No one has provided any stats or evidence that transmissions are taking place at club training or during a match so why stop it?

Yes I fully understand the point you are making. But what happens if there is a break for 3-4 weeks and things haven’t changed that much and tier 4 is still in place, then when does it start up? I fear if the leagues stop now they won’t start again until after the summer. I remember back to when football was first stopped and there was a worry about the impact that was having in player mental and physical health, that would still be a concern.

I really don’t see why there are now calls to suspend playing. When the season started the majority of clubs in the league were based in tier 3 and 4 with a handful in 1-2. The SFA / SG granted an exemption, that is still in place, so long as clubs followed all the guidance and rules. I have yet to see anyone produce real reasons that say the league should stop. Yes the virus is continuing to spread, but that will happen even if football is stopped. Have there been any transmissions in games or have clubs have high numbers of players testing positive? Has anyone or any of the clubs who want to stop actually provided any real reasons other than “they are concerned”. We are all concerned but surely in life we all take calculated risks every single day in life. If all clubs stick to the return the play protocol then where is the problem?

I heard earlier that this clause has now been removed by the SLFL.

Threave Rovers were not relegated, the champion club that year did not have a license therefore there was no relegation. They didn't want to continue in the LL so resigned and rejoined the SOS. The rules around promotion and relegation are known at the start of each season and have always been that relegation only happens if the champion club have a license.

Surely it's quite simple, the bottom club in the LL can only be relegated if there is a team who meet membership criteria to be promoted. As it stands there isn't a team who meet the criteria, therefore WW will not be relegated. It's in the rules. As for moving to 17 teams in the league that can't happen either as that would require rule changes - something which would take time and would also need the agreement of the SFA. Do Bonnyrigg have a process for appealing the decision? I thought that the SFA board decisions were final? It's the SFA board that have made this decision so who would they appeal too?

So we have more member clubs at tier 5&6?

Full members who can vote at the SFA AGM?.....

It seems the SFA are making a clear difference between current member club and non member clubs. Member clubs were told at a meeting last month that they will be granted derogation and need to provide a plan to the Licensing committee / board that lays out how they intend to install floodlights and give a timescale for doing so. - if the plan is accepted then the clubs will be given that period of time to install them. I think it's fair to say that all club in LL who don't have lights have taken steps to address the issue. Also, clubs that currently play in the LL who don't have lights have arrangements with another licensed venue to play any midweek game there - that seems to be the most sensible solution to this entire situation - but a solution the SFA so far haven't explored. What's the difference between a club having an 'ad-hoc' agreement to play the odd game at another venue and a club having full time ground share agreement - none IMO. Whilst I agree that clubs who applied under the old criteria and are now being marked on the new criteria have all be treated badly (to say the least) I suspect the SFA will just sit tight and do nothing. The real issue here is the SFA don't want too many licensed clubs at this level of football in Scotland because it will tip the balance of power - they will have too many teams at tier 5 and 6 and when it comes to the AGM these clubs will have a majority of votes and will be able to take control.

I don't think they will be in any danger - the second bottom club would only be relegated to maintain the league at sixteen clubs. As there is a space they should not be relegated. - even if EK go up and another team comes down.

Hearing WW are about to appoint a young manager with no management experience as their next boss........