Hampden Diehard Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 I believe sporting merit is getting it correct on and off the park. Absolutely correct! If there is a merit in any pyramid system, it's to raise standards. There are plenty of people on here saying that if any SPFL club doesn't hack it, they have no excuse if they go down. That works both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Absolutely correct! If there is a merit in any pyramid system, it's to raise standards. There are plenty of people on here saying that if any SPFL club doesn't hack it, they have no excuse if they go down. That works both ways. Isn't the real point of any pyramid system to reward success on the park and punish failure - the same as promotion and relegation between any other leagues? All a pyramid system should do is allow clubs who are failing at a national level to find their feet at a local level, and enable clubs who are successful at a local level their chance to succeed in national leagues. The tying of licencing to that is understandable but artificial. I wouldn't be so absolutist about the LL. Give the currently unlicenced clubs another year to get up to scratch and allow promotion from the EoS & SoS, giving those clubs 3 years to get up to scratch. If they can't manage it, give someone else a go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 A pyramid system is obviously about rewarding success on the park but it's also about improving things off the park. Other pyramid systems have similar requirements for each level. For example, my English team are Slough Town (in the Southern League Premier Division-level 7 on the pyramid). When they were promoted to level seven last season, there were certain things they had to improve about their ground (they actually groundshare but that's irrelevant) this season to remain at that level. They'd also have to make further improvements if they were to be promoted to level six. I'd possibly go for a system where a team is allowed to be promoted and given a season to make the required improvements to remain at that level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VodkaTap Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Isn't the real point of any pyramid system to reward success on the park and punish failure - the same as promotion and relegation between any other leagues? All a pyramid system should do is allow clubs who are failing at a national level to find their feet at a local level, and enable clubs who are successful at a local level their chance to succeed in national leagues. The tying of licencing to that is understandable but artificial. I wouldn't be so absolutist about the LL. Give the currently unlicenced clubs another year to get up to scratch and allow promotion from the EoS & SoS, giving those clubs 3 years to get up to scratch. If they can't manage it, give someone else a go. I could see some merit in your argument if this was summat new - but it's not. We have been living with this need for a licence for the last couple of years - and it was well documented as a probable requirement long before that. One of the issues that i have a problem with is that you could end up with not having a level playing field at those levels below. You could have some clubs possibly spending on players rather than their infrastructure in the expectation that they can then think about upgrading facilities afterwards, while having others spending on the infrastucture first to the detriment of the quality of the team. To my mind - get the basic facilities right first and you have then earned the right to any rewards of success on the park. If not, then are you really serious about participating in the pyramid system? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 A pyramid system is obviously about rewarding success on the park but it's also about improving things off the park. Other pyramid systems have similar requirements for each level. For example, my English team are Slough Town (in the Southern League Premier Division-level 7 on the pyramid). When they were promoted to level seven last season, there were certain things they had to improve about their ground (they actually groundshare but that's irrelevant) this season to remain at that level. They'd also have to make further improvements if they were to be promoted to level six. I'd possibly go for a system where a team is allowed to be promoted and given a season to make the required improvements to remain at that level. Yes, but do other pyramid systems state that there'll be no direct promotion to a league per se? From what you are saying, it sounds like promotion is allowed on merit, with clubs then being given time to make the necessary improvements. In the LL we have clubs excluded on the basis of licencing, regardless of how they do on the pitch. In a reasonable pyramid system you would have promotion first, with licencing being a requirement within a set time period - although I doubt a single season to make the changes is enough without external funding. I could see some merit in your argument if this was summat new - but it's not. We have been living with this need for a licence for the last couple of years - and it was well documented as a probable requirement long before that. One of the issues that i have a problem with is that you could end up with not having a level playing field at those levels below. You could have some clubs possibly spending on players rather than their infrastructure in the expectation that they can then think about upgrading facilities afterwards, while having others spending on the infrastucture first to the detriment of the quality of the team. To my mind - get the basic facilities right first and you have then earned the right to any rewards of success on the park. If not, then are you really serious about participating in the pyramid system? I think that you have to give clubs the chance to do both. Which means having the opportunity for promotion on merit combined with a time-limited licencing requirement. If you ask clubs just to focus on off the pitch matters then how much money is left over to put a team on the park that folk will actually want to go along to watch? And would people keep going along if there's no eventual promotion to play for? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VodkaTap Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Yes, but do other pyramid systems state that there'll be no direct promotion to a league per se? From what you are saying, it sounds like promotion is allowed on merit, with clubs then being given time to make the necessary improvements. In the LL we have clubs excluded on the basis of licencing, regardless of how they do on the pitch. In a reasonable pyramid system you would have promotion first, with licencing being a requirement within a set time period - although I doubt a single season to make the changes is enough without external funding. I think that you have to give clubs the chance to do both. Which means having the opportunity for promotion on merit combined with a time-limited licencing requirement. If you ask clubs just to focus on off the pitch matters then how much money is left over to put a team on the park that folk will actually want to go along to watch? And would people keep going along if there's no eventual promotion to play for? If having a minimum of 2 years so far aint enough, what will be ?? All the rest of the clubs in the LL seems to have been able to raise the funds to secure a licence yet still put out a decent competitive team as well. The teams in the LL have managed to provide a highly competitive league and i dont think that any team that gains a licence in the future would be anything other than just as competitive. Another point is that some of the clubs outwith the LL are also members of the SFA. This means they have also enjoyed access to the funding that the Scottish cup provides. I do feel that you are trying to bend over backwards to have promotion as a must, despite this possibly being achieved by skewed priorities over other teams in the leagues. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 You could have some clubs possibly spending on players rather than their infrastructure in the expectation that they can then think about upgrading facilities afterwards, while having others spending on the infrastucture first to the detriment of the quality of the team. To my mind - get the basic facilities right first and you have then earned the right to any rewards of success on the park. If not, then are you really serious about participating in the pyramid system? This 100% You only have to look at the situation with the Juniors where clubs are effectively punished for spending money on facilities over players, which has led to the situation where Auchinleck Talbot and Linlithgow Rose - clubs that spent off the field as well as on it thanks to very astute stewardship - are now light years ahead of the rest reliant on fickle fairweather fanbases. The whole "take it or leave it" attitude towards off field concerns is no longer acceptable in 21st century semi-pro football in Scotland. If you expect people to pay to get into your ground, they should expect a certain standard within to spend two hours of their precious free time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 If having a minimum of 2 years so far aint enough, what will be ?? All the rest of the clubs in the LL seems to have been able to raise the funds to secure a licence yet still put out a decent competitive team as well. The teams in the LL have managed to provide a highly competitive league and i dont think that any team that gains a licence in the future would be anything other than just as competitive. Another point is that some of the clubs outwith the LL are also members of the SFA. This means they have also enjoyed access to the funding that the Scottish cup provides. I do feel that you are trying to bend over backwards to have promotion as a must, despite this possibly being achieved by skewed priorities over other teams in the leagues. Not at all. Promotion is the normal state of affairs in most divisions in most leagues outwith the top flight. It's attaching licencing to allowing clubs into a league that skews priorities. Many of the clubs may have been able to raise the funds necessary, but some haven't. And no seniors outwith the LL have yet either. Is it okay, in your view, for Selkirk, Threave or Preston to finish bottom and not to be relegated? Saved each year because of facilities they've previously invested in, yet can't put a decent team on the park year in, year out? You wouldn't expect a business to neglect its product once it's invested in infrastructure. As I've said, the two really need to go hand in hand: allow teams to be promoted and give them 3 years to get licenced. On the Scottish Cup point, it's my view that all senior clubs should be automatic entrants to what is, after all, the senior Scottish Cup. It seems bizarre that they are not. And if the SFA were really serious about promoting a senior pyramid league system they would support it by allowing those same clubs who are expected to form that league system access to the commensurate cup competition - the Scottish Cup. If funding comes along with that then so much the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 The sfl had the right to require clubs to make off the park improvements in order to get promoted, the norm in my lifetime has been for off-field requirements to be sticker as you go up the leagues. It's true in the spfl as well. As it is pretty much everywhere else but the juniors. 3 years behind everyone else in the league isn't acceptable. Can't have teams on public parks one week and playing out of Hampden(potentially) the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 Okay, but does anyone really want to watch a league where there's no promotion or relegation? We've seen from the SPL with their bogus stadium requirements and lack of opportunities for promotion how well that works. It just makes for very stale competition that folk don't want to watch, and good-but-empty facilities. It should be an integrated approach, not an either/or. Clubs need to be given the time and opportunity to develop their facilities whilst being able to progress on the pitch. -------- EDIT: My sense is that you (and others) are looking at the juniors and reacting by simply opting for the polar opposite approach. It's too absolutist an approach, in my view. Competition is the essence of the game that I want to watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanley Posted March 21, 2015 Share Posted March 21, 2015 The Lowland League only started in 2013. This is the first season that clubs have ever had the chance to be promoted into the SPFL. These things take time. There will slowly become more clubs eligible for promotion to the Lowland League (the league is still two short of having 16 teams anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidAl Posted March 25, 2015 Share Posted March 25, 2015 Some info. relating to league vacancies and licencing: 6.9 Only those clubs in full membership of the Scottish FA are permitted to participatein professional leagues, save in respect of those clubs in membership of the ScottishLowland Football League to which the foregoing will not apply until the commencementof Season 2015/16. {p.81} 4.5 From the commencement of Season 2016/17, in order to retain their full membershipof the Scottish FA, members, which have a Club Licence, are required to maintain theirClub Licence throughout their entire period of membership. Failure to so retain the ClubLicence shall be a cause for the Judicial Panel to consider the status of such member’smembership of the Scottish FA in accordance with the terms of Article 15. {p.78} {Scottish FA Handbook 2014/15} 3.8 Time Period of the Licence A licence is awarded on a continuous basis. Clubs will be assessed each year to verify standards. An overall award will be determined at one point in a year unless exceptional dispensation is granted by the LC. Exceptional dispensation may include instances where a club fails to meet licencing standards at the time of assessment and a licence award is suspended or refused by the Licencing Committee. It is a matter for the Licencing Committee to decide whether a club may be considered at a second point in the year or not in its sole discretion. Clubs may be advised at the time of the original decision if they will be given the opportunity of a second referral. Derogation applications will not be considered at this second referral. 3.12 Failure to meet the licencing requirements The Scottish FA Board has determined that any club which fails to obtain a licence award will be subject to the following - Scottish Cup 2015 (2015/16 season) - 100% reduction on any Scottish Cup bonus payments for any SPFL and SHFL club. 2015 (2015/16 season) - 50% reduction on any Scottish Cup bonus payments for any member club outwith the SPFL and SHFL. {Scottish FA Club Licencing Manual 2015: National Club Licencing - The Club and the Licence Award, 2015; pp.4-8} 021014CL Ground Standards.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 I'm sure it's been mentioned in this thread already but what's the deadline for new LL applications to bring the league to the full complement for season 15/16? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Think it's tomorrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 30, 2015 Share Posted March 30, 2015 Cheers. Hope there's a few decent applicants, ideally including Clydebank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seethrough Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 5 teams applied iv been told , edusport and others who will ground share with alloa and airdrie! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bankies Alive Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Boys club teams sharing at other clubs senior grounds. Is that really a pyramid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mediocre Pundit Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 If that's all that applies then yes, it's a pyramid. If other teams would prefer to continue to wallow in national irrelevance then that's their prerogative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lowlandleaguer Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 National irrelevance?? These type of applicants will not enhance the league IMO. At the very least they should be able to present a plan detailing when they will have their own ground and be able to satisfy the entire entry criteria. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bankies Alive Posted March 31, 2015 Share Posted March 31, 2015 Clubs ground sharing with existing small clubs in front of 20 people is the true meaning of irrelevant! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.