Burnie_man Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 39 minutes ago, Auld Heid said: Swings and roundabouts - if you are successful you face a backlog of fixtures. A few seasons ago we ended up playing 3 games a week (18 plus fixtures in 6 weeks) - a raft of meaningless league fixtures (the league was already won) and that eventually impacted on cup fixtures (tired/injured/suspended players) and we won nothing. Games poorly attended and with no sponsors as difficult to arrange when playing 3 games a week The so called smaller clubs - probably need bigger leagues (more games guaranteed) whilst the Super League have a smaller league - as they in theory are liable to play more cup ties - fatal flaw is a bad early draw could have some super league clubs with a long close season. If Superleague clubs want to reduce the burden of league games the solution is fairly straightforward within the current set-up. We have 60 member clubs, let’s assume its 61 if Harthill re-join. For next season, we alter promotion/relegation to give the Superleague 14 clubs, the Premier League 15 clubs, and the District Leagues 16 clubs each from 2018/19. If a new club joins, an extra promotion place is provided to the Districts to push the Premier upto 16, and so on and so forth for any new additions (or withdrawals). If we end up with 64 member clubs, then we go back to 16/16/16/16. So at the end of next season, relegate bottom three from Superleague and 4th bottom into play-off. Promote winners of Premier and second into play-off. Relegate bottom 5 in Premier, promote District League winners. That gets you to 14-15-16/16. Not great for the District clubs promotion wise with only one up, but it’s for one season only, it also lessens slightly the amount of clubs playing at full Regional level. In addition, given there are byes in the first rounds of the East of Scotland and Fife & Lothians Cups anyway, give these to the Scottish Cup entrants first, then Superleague clubs based on the previous seasons league finishes. All-in from second round onwards. Eases the burden slightly on those at the top end of the game. These are the sort of solutions that should be discussed to address some of the concerns, rather than trying to please everyone and coming up with a dogs dinner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 42 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: If Superleague clubs want to reduce the burden of league games the solution is fairly straightforward within the current set-up. We have 60 member clubs, let’s assume its 61 if Harthill re-join. For next season, we alter promotion/relegation to give the Superleague 14 clubs, the Premier League 15 clubs, and the District Leagues 16 clubs each from 2018/19. If a new club joins, an extra promotion place is provided to the Districts to push the Premier upto 16, and so on and so forth for any new additions (or withdrawals). If we end up with 64 member clubs, then we go back to 16/16/16/16. So at the end of next season, relegate bottom three from Superleague and 4th bottom into play-off. Promote winners of Premier and second into play-off. Relegate bottom 5 in Premier, promote District League winners. That gets you to 14-15-16/16. Not great for the District clubs promotion wise with only one up, but it’s for one season only, it also lessens slightly the amount of clubs playing at full Regional level. In addition, given there are byes in the first rounds of the East of Scotland and Fife & Lothians Cups anyway, give these to the Scottish Cup entrants first, then Superleague clubs based on the previous seasons league finishes. All-in from second round onwards. Eases the burden slightly on those at the top end of the game. These are the sort of solutions that should be discussed to address some of the concerns, rather than trying to please everyone and coming up with a dogs dinner. The solution almost needs to be a tiered approach - identifying what the real issues are for each league and clubs, as the best solution for an ambitious club isn't going to appeal for the team who is worried about travel. The danger is the way forward is dictated by numbers and not what's best. As at the moment there are 29 top tier votes (Super and Premier) and 32 lower league votes - which in theory gives the balance of power to lower leagues and their possible differing needs from any vote. (I appreciate that not every lower league team lacks ambitions) Maybe any vote should be tiered so each league has a vote to allow status quo for their league and this would identify where the real concern lies to be dealt with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Whilst that approach may looks good on paper, it’s not practical in this environment. A solution to a problem existing in one division has a knock-on effect on others. The Region sent out a questionnaire and invited clubs to mump and moan about the slightest issue then tried to solve them all in one proposal. It doesn’t work like that. What needs to happen is firstly the proposal needs binned with an acceptance that what we have is the best all-round solution. They then need to identify actual concerns that can be addressed with minimal disruption to the set-up. My example above is one way of dealing with the issue of Superleague clubs being faced with too many games at the end of the season, we have the size of the divisions the wrong way round at the moment. Travelling is already addressed within the North and South Districts, if that still causes certain clubs problems then as said by others, they maybe should be looking to play in a local amateur league instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kefc Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 2 hours ago, Auld Heid said: Swings and roundabouts - if you are successful you face a backlog of fixtures. A few seasons ago we ended up playing 3 games a week (18 plus fixtures in 6 weeks) - a raft of meaningless league fixtures (the league was already won) and that eventually impacted on cup fixtures (tired/injured/suspended players) and we won nothing. Games poorly attended and with no sponsors as difficult to arrange when playing 3 games a week The so called smaller clubs - probably need bigger leagues (more games guaranteed) whilst the Super League have a smaller league - as they in theory are liable to play more cup ties - fatal flaw is a bad early draw could have some super league clubs with a long close season. I can totally see Linlithgow's view on this having a 14 team Super League would benefit them and i accept with their licence and yearly participation in the William Hill Scottish Cup this hampers their domestic season. Remember they chose to go down that route (which i applaud) but from our club bearing in mind how fortunate we are to have our 3g pitch and lights (if allowed to use in the future) view the 16 team league as perfect and accept the price you pay for success is having a raft of games, more games mean more revenue how big or how small its still revenue. No one will win, some clubs will be upset, some will be happy at the end of the day each club has to go with whats best for them in a somewhat selfish way im afraid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 I can totally see Linlithgow's view on this having a 14 team Super League would benefit them and i accept with their licence and yearly participation in the William Hill Scottish Cup this hampers their domestic season. Remember they chose to go down that route (which i applaud) but from our club bearing in mind how fortunate we are to have our 3g pitch and lights (if allowed to use in the future) view the 16 team league as perfect and accept the price you pay for success is having a raft of games, more games mean more revenue how big or how small its still revenue. No one will win, some clubs will be upset, some will be happy at the end of the day each club has to go with whats best for them in a somewhat selfish way im afraid. Not Linlithgow's view - purely mine.I agree with the point re Scottish as personally whilst the benefits of entry are many - the downside for me is the competitive drop off.Prime example the high of Ross County to the abject failure the following week away to Kilwinning.Whilst many talk about how great Forfar and Ross County were - (great days I admit)But personally winning leagues and our own Scottish are my goals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kefc Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 1 minute ago, Auld Heid said: Not Linlithgow's view - purely mine. I agree with the point re Scottish as personally whilst the benefits of entry are many - the downside for me is the competitive drop off. Prime example the high of Ross County to the abject failure the following week away to Kilwinning. Whilst many talk about how great Forfar and Ross County were - (great days I admit) But personally winning leagues and our own Scottish are my goals. It is Linlithgow's view too from what im hearing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 5 minutes ago, kefc said: It is Linlithgow's view too from what im hearing. Always a first then that I'm in agreement!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 47 minutes ago, Burnie_man said: Whilst that approach may looks good on paper, it’s not practical in this environment. A solution to a problem existing in one division has a knock-on effect on others. The Region sent out a questionnaire and invited clubs to mump and moan about the slightest issue then tried to solve them all in one proposal. It doesn’t work like that. What needs to happen is firstly the proposal needs binned with an acceptance that what we have is the best all-round solution. They then need to identify actual concerns that can be addressed with minimal disruption to the set-up. My example above is one way of dealing with the issue of Superleague clubs being faced with too many games at the end of the season, we have the size of the divisions the wrong way round at the moment. Travelling is already addressed within the North and South Districts, if that still causes certain clubs problems then as said by others, they maybe should be looking to play in a local amateur league instead. I appreciate the flaws of what I posted - from your post the reality is asking the teams moaning that travel is an issue to decide if Juniors is really for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnie_man Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 I appreciate the flaws of what I posted - from your post the reality is asking the teams moaning that travel is an issue to decide if Juniors is really for them. Bottom line, aye Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meeks Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 With what has been said already about reducing the super league to 14 teams I would absolutely love Penicuik to be in the same position as Bonnyrigg will probably find themselves in very shortly playing 3 games a week with the possibility of winning everything available to them. A league reduced from 16 to 14 would make very little difference imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanCamelonfan Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Lowland League doesn't have the problems we have in terms of fixture congestion and they have 16 teams in their league. I know a few of their clubs, East Kilbride, shire, the Colts, Spartans play on astro but the others don't. Clubs with lights like Linlithgow should be allowed to use them during the season and maybe if clubs got to use them then other clubs would follow suit and get them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skipper Posted March 22, 2017 Share Posted March 22, 2017 Lowland League doesn't have the problems we have in terms of fixture congestion and they have 16 teams in their league. I know a few of their clubs, East Kilbride, shire, the Colts, Spartans play on astro but the others don't. Clubs with lights like Linlithgow should be allowed to use them during the season and maybe if clubs got to use them then other clubs would follow suit and get them I believe clubs can use lights from next season with no right of refusal by opposition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pipedreamer Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 The simple way to ease fixture congestion, in the super league anyway, is to have more midweek games at the start of the season and give teams with floodlights the option to have a scheduled mid week fixture for a postponed fixture at any point during the season. Games are more spread out and less of a backlog at the end of the season for teams that are fortunate to be successful in the cup competitions. This would also give incentive to other teams to install floodlights if backlogs were regularly an issue. It would also enable standardised kick off times at 2.30 all season rather than the 1.30pm kick offs in winter due to shorter days. Linlithgow, Kelty, Nitten, Broxburn, Hill of Beath all have floodlights already. Camelon and Bo'ness in the future if they go down the artificial surface route. Clubs won't put them in unless there is an incentive to do so. Allowing their use and encouraging their use to relieve backlogs of fixtures would go a way to doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 Linlithgow no longer have floodlights - in between old a new ones. The longest process ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Meeks Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 You can add Penicuik to the list that have lights Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 8 hours ago, pipedreamer said: The simple way to ease fixture congestion, in the super league anyway, is to have more midweek games at the start of the season and give teams with floodlights the option to have a scheduled mid week fixture for a postponed fixture at any point during the season. Games are more spread out and less of a backlog at the end of the season for teams that are fortunate to be successful in the cup competitions. This would also give incentive to other teams to install floodlights if backlogs were regularly an issue. It would also enable standardised kick off times at 2.30 all season rather than the 1.30pm kick offs in winter due to shorter days. Linlithgow, Kelty, Nitten, Broxburn, Hill of Beath all have floodlights already. Camelon and Bo'ness in the future if they go down the artificial surface route. Clubs won't put them in unless there is an incentive to do so. Allowing their use and encouraging their use to relieve backlogs of fixtures would go a way to doing so. Slight disagreement to your post - it's not just scheduling extra games at the start of the season that's the issue. The junior season ends the 3rd Saturday in June yet some teams are finished in April and others are playing in June. Finals played with teams who have not played for weeks as one team has a backlog. Ideally we should be finishing the season as One not in dribs and drabs. This can be achieved by targeted mid-week fixtures to alleviate backlogs as they occur. We already have solutions - unfortunately don't use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bravehearts dad Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 What about bringing back the Brown/RL Rae cups for the teams in the lower leagues in order to extend their season and a chance to win some silverware? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior_Arab Posted March 23, 2017 Share Posted March 23, 2017 I'm all for games under lights IF they're good enough. I have played friendlies under lights where I couldn't see my hand waving in front of my face. Any club wanting to use floodlights should have to have them assessed at the start of each season to ensure they're bright enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
budgie smuggler Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 Slight disagreement to your post - it's not just scheduling extra games at the start of the season that's the issue. The junior season ends the 3rd Saturday in June yet some teams are finished in April and others are playing in June. Finals played with teams who have not played for weeks as one team has a backlog. Ideally we should be finishing the season as One not in dribs and drabs. This can be achieved by targeted mid-week fixtures to alleviate backlogs as they occur. We already have solutions - unfortunately don't use them. Couldn't agree more. Like at the farcical situation last season with Sauchie. They went about 5-6 weeks without a game at the end of the season to having to play a play off game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Heid Posted March 24, 2017 Share Posted March 24, 2017 19 minutes ago, budgie smuggler said: Couldn't agree more. Like at the farcical situation last season with Sauchie. They went about 5-6 weeks without a game at the end of the season to having to play a play off game. Linlithgow have potentially 26 games (if making finals) with 12 weeks left to the official end of season - so potentially playing half a seasons fixtures within that period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.