Hillonearth Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 I think it's one of those old-school rules, based on "why should a team who are used to having lights have an advantage over a team whose ground doesn't have lights". However, it's a nonsense in my opinion, as teams do not train in the dark over the winter period, every single team trains under lights from round about September to March. It's a rule that should be revisited if the rationale behind it is merely that the team with lights might gain an advantage in getting games played midweek and avoiding fixture pileups at the end of the season. Going down that archaic line of thinking, they might as well do something equally ridiculous like go the whole hog and ban games from being played on artificial surfaces if that's the case - they help avoid fixture pileups too, and we can't have that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peasy23 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 AFAICS, there is nothing in the SJFA or West Region rules (available on their website) actually forbidding the use of artificial light. I presume it's same in East Region. However, as covered elsewhere on here often before there is effectively a block on such games through: (1) some kind of principle or standing order, which means that both clubs have to agree to playing by artificial light; and (2) the regions don't schedule such games themself, even to the extent of midweek fixtures in August or the spring being put out at 6:45pm or similar when the host has lights. Effect of this is that a game could only be moved to a Friday after a suitable one was issued for a Saturday - often at just 1-2 weeks notice; then one club took the initiative; then their opponent agreed. Things are seemingly more liberal up North. We've moved the occasional midweek game to a later kick off, mainly in the KO stages of the Sectional at the start of the season when ko was scheduled for 6.30. With the agreement of the opposition we've started at 7.15 giving players and fans alike more time to get there. Iirc we moved one league game against Beith which was back in May 2011. It hasn't been an issue for us later in the season as we haven't played many midweek games in the last few years after the April madness starts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HTG Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 It's a rule that should be revisited if the rationale behind it is merely that the team with lights might gain an advantage in getting games played midweek and avoiding fixture pileups at the end of the season. Going down that archaic line of thinking, they might as well do something equally ridiculous like go the whole hog and ban games from being played on artificial surfaces if that's the case - they help avoid fixture pileups too, and we can't have that! Spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hertha/BJFC1938 Posted January 7, 2016 Share Posted January 7, 2016 Only in junior football can it be assumed that teams who have floodlights gain an advantage yet when we play some midweek games towards the end of the season during poor weather we can hardly see the baw for the last half hour of a game when natural light is poor due to overcast conditions. Wheres the fairness in that for teams and fans when you can hardly see the baw yet these big things called floodlights that help us see it are frowned upon . You honestly couldn't make it up . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fan of the juniors Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shanner Posted January 8, 2016 Share Posted January 8, 2016 Got to admit to finding the idea of artificial lighting being unfair hilarious. You see the nick of some of the coo fields we play on with their avalanche-warning gradients or the artificial surfaces that so many folk hate but these are completely permissible? Aye, that makes sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loughal Posted January 12, 2016 Share Posted January 12, 2016 Basically, no. Players can refuse to play but SJFA can force clubs to play latter stage cup ties regardless. There have been a few high profile dissenters to Senior football on a Sunday for religious reasons - Brian Irvine is one that sticks in the mind. County chairman Roy MacGregor another. Clubs and Players rule 6: Cup Competition Rule 28 Basically, no. Players can refuse to play but SJFA can force clubs to play latter stage cup ties regardless. There have been a few high profile dissenters to Senior football on a Sunday for religious reasons - Brian Irvine is one that sticks in the mind. County chairman Roy MacGregor another. Clubs and Players rule 6: Cup Competition Rule 28 Basically, no. Players can refuse to play but SJFA can force clubs to play latter stage cup ties regardless. There have been a few high profile dissenters to Senior football on a Sunday for religious reasons - Brian Irvine is one that sticks in the mind. County chairman Roy MacGregor another. Clubs and Players rule 6: Cup Competition Rule 28 Basically, no. Players can refuse to play but SJFA can force clubs to play latter stage cup ties regardless. There have been a few high profile dissenters to Senior football on a Sunday for religious reasons - Brian Irvine is one that sticks in the mind. County chairman Roy MacGregor another. Clubs and Players rule 6: Cup Competition Rule 28 With the increase in various ethnic groups in Scotland, does this mean followers of Islam could not be compelled to play on a Friday. Likewise the followers of Judaism on a Saturday and with Humanists it would be no go on their 'holy day' Wednesday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.