Junior football, what is the future?

[BS7]

Lochee have choice of trips to wick or Dalbeattie if they get to tier 5???

[Born To Run]

15 minutes ago, BS7 said:

Lochee have choice of trips to wick or Dalbeattie if they get to tier 5???

Yup. Such is the nature of the pyramid, there will always be tougher breaks for clubs in certain areas.

They could always "decline" a promotion to tier 5 and above by not becoming licensed...

[Auld Heid]

What were the 3 questions?

[Ginaro]

50 minutes ago, BS7 said:

Lochee have choice of trips to wick or Dalbeattie if they get to tier 5???

It would be once a season, unlike Dalbeattie who have to travel north every second week. And if they are in tier 5 it means they have a won tier 6 in a large east area, got a licence, and should be ready for the step up.

Being near the dividing line isn't great for travel, but the only way you avoid it is with more regions - LL east/west or four regions at tier 5 - but then it makes the jump to tier 4 even bigger.

Edited March 29, 2018 by Ginaro

[Afrojim]

I was reading through the various comments on this thread today and took note of some of the concerns/issues that people have about their clubs joining the non-league structure and the flaws in the structure as it currently stands. The main issues seem to be the potential cost of travel, the disparity between probable regions from tier 6 and below (SoSL at tier 6 etc.), the loss of traditional rivalries and some clubs getting cut adrift without a relevant senior league to play in.

When it comes to population within regions and the disparity of the number of clubs that operate within these regions there is, unfortunately, nothing which can be done about that. Scotland's population distribution would make it impossible to create  regions that have roughly the same number of people and clubs in each region. 

However, it is possible to create four regions from tier 6 downwards that cover roughly the same geographic area and retain most of the traditional rivalries that exist in the current senior and junior set-ups respectively. Assuming there is going to be no revision of the Highland/Lowland boundary, which is currently set at the mouth of the Tay, a North West, North East, East and West structure could be implemented with the NW and NE clubs feeding into the Highland League and the other two into the LL. 

Each region would cover these council areas:

North West Senior League: Highland, Argyll & Bute (North), Na h-Eileanan Siar , Shetland, Orkney.

North East Senior League: Aberdeenshire, Aberdeen City, Perth & Kinross (North Tay), Dundee City, Angus, Moray.

 East of Scotland Senior League: City of Edinburgh, Fife, West Lothian, Falkirk, Perth & Kinross (South Tay), Scottish Borders, East Lothian, Stirling, Midlothian, Clackmannanshire, Borough of Berwick-Upon-Tweed (England). 
 
West of Scotland Senior League: Glasgow City, North Lanarkshire, South Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, North Ayrshire, East Ayrshire, South Ayrshire, East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, West Dunbartonshire,  Argyll & Bute (South), Inverclyde.

Area of these regions:

NW: 31,186 km2  (Excluding vast underpopulated areas and areas that have no senior or junior clubs: approx. 15,000km2-17,000km2)
NE: 12,979 km2
EOS: 13,710 km2
WOS: 20,050 km2  (Excluding Argyll & Bute which currently has no senior or Junior Clubs: 13,141 km2)

These regions are about as even as you could possibly make them in terms of size when Scotland's complex geography is taken into consideration. In the West and North West there is always the possibility that an outlier club may want to join in the future, say a club in Dunoon wanting to join the West for example. In that scenario it would only be one difficult/costly away trip a season for the other member clubs in that region.

Likely Greatest Distance Between Member Clubs (taking into consideration all current Senior & Junior Clubs):

NW: Fort William to Kirkwall = 220 Miles (Fort William to Thurso 170 Miles)
NE: Dundee to Burghead = 140 Miles
EOS: Tweedmouth to Tayport = 120 Miles
WOS: Wigtown to Greenock = 110 Miles

In the West even if the SoSL and Juniors were merged into the one regional set-up those clubs would be playing in the second smallest area and possibly have the least amount of travelling to do. 

Total Number of Clubs by Region* (SPFL, HFL, LFL, NCL, EoSL, SoSL, SJFA & Glasgow University included):

NW:   20 Clubs: (2 SPFL Clubs + 6 HFL Clubs + 9 NCL Clubs + 3 North Region Junior Clubs)
NE:   68 Clubs: (9 SPFL Clubs + 12 HFL Clubs + 31 North Region Juniors + 16 East Region Juniors)
EOS:  82 Clubs: (14 SPFL Clubs + 11 LFL Clubs + 12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 44 East Region Junior Clubs)
WOS:  100 Clubs: (17 SPFL Clubs + 5 LFL Clubs + 14 SoSL Clubs + 63 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)

Total Number of Clubs by Region* when Junior Clubs that Responded 'No' to Pyramid Survey are Excluded (SPFL, HFL, LFL, NCL, EoSL, SoSL, SJFA & Glasgow University included):

NW:   19 Clubs: (2 SPFL Clubs + 6 HFL Clubs + 9 NCL Clubs + 2 North Region Junior Clubs)
NE:   53 Clubs: (9 SPFL Clubs + 12 HFL Clubs + 21 North Region Juniors + 11 East Region Juniors)
EOS:  72 Clubs: (14 SPFL Clubs + 11 LFL Clubs + 12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 34 East Region Junior Clubs)
WOS:  71 Clubs: (17 SPFL Clubs + 5 LFL Clubs + 14 SoSL Clubs + 34 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)

*Excluding reserve teams - Stirling University, Stranraer & Annan Athletic. 

Number of Clubs to be Integrated from tier 6 and Below*:

NW: 11 (9 NCL Clubs + 2 North Region Junior Clubs) - one division of 11 Clubs
NE: 32 (21 North Region Juniors + 11 East Region Juniors)  - two divisions of 16 Clubs
EOS:47 (12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 34 East Region Junior Clubs)  - two divisions of 16 + one of 15
WOS:49 (14 SoSL Clubs + 34 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)  - two divisions of 16 + one of 17

*assuming no junior clubs have a change of heart and all senior clubs would be willing to participate in new regional structure

The only big disparity in terms of number of clubs appears between the NE and NW but you couldn't expect clubs from Dundee and Perthshire to travel to Thurso and Orkney at tier 6, the only reasonable solution is to have those two separate regions feeding into the HL - from tier 5 upwards clubs should be expected to/be capable of travelling further distances anyway as preparation for potentially moving up into the SPFL.  

Obviously there are double the number of clubs in the Lowland area than there are in the Highland area. In time that anomaly could be dealt with simply by increasing the number of promotion places to the SPFL to 2 and having a play-off in which the LL champions play the HL runners-up and HL champions play the LL runners-up with both winners being promoted to the SPFL. That way if the LL becomes far stronger than the HL due to the area having more clubs then the difference can be settled on the pitch.

 

 

 

 

Edited March 30, 2018 by Afrojim

[BoomShakalaka]

So let me get this right ....

Easthouses said no to the pryamid but have applied and Arniston said yes to the pryamid but they or their fans said no? To me the Arniston commitee should just pack in now.  There is zero sense in Mayfield and Gorebridge. Ty

[archieb]

Afrojim, that's a helluva lot of work you've done on that post but all utterly, totally pointless.

[who ate all the pies]

Sadly the best supported teams probably playing to 100 odd fans in 10 years time!!! 

[theesel1994]

2 hours ago, archieb said:

Afrojim, that's a helluva lot of work you've done on that post but all utterly, totally pointless.

It won't be the last. I await the colour co-ordinated versions.

[cmontheloknow]

Greenie for the work Afrojim but I feel any solution we get in the next 10 years is going to look a bit more like  sticking plaster on a leaky wound than intricate keyhole surgery!

Edited March 30, 2018 by cmontheloknow

[the rambler]

When Clubs were asked to complete a survey, not take part in a vote, how much background information was provided to make an informed response?

Was there information on proposed format of Leagues in a pyramid structure,  governance, Senior Cup entry qualification, future of Junior Cup, fixture lists, licensing criteria for advancement?

[cmontheloknow]

52 minutes ago, the rambler said:

When Clubs were asked to complete a survey, not take part in a vote, how much background information was provided to make an informed response?

Was there information on proposed format of Leagues in a pyramid structure,  governance, Senior Cup entry qualification, future of Junior Cup, fixture lists, licensing criteria for advancement?

I don't think Senior cup entry qualification needs to  change too much - as it stands, the winners of Level 6 leagues qualify (if not already holding Club Licence), just as the Junior winners and the Amateur Cup winners do, and there's also another route for clubs to qualify from L6 via the new South/East region Cup contested by the Alba Cup winners (from South) and the Alex jack Cup winners (from East). Tynecastle have qualified under this method for next season after they beat Mid Annandale at Oriam back in November - these latter cups are for the clubs who do not have automatic Scottish Cup entry but play in East or South.

League format obviously up for discussion but does it have to change too much? Budge the current top flight in West up a level (with invites to other teams if South being demoted / superceded) and rebrand as WoSL. The junior leagues in new format below that, the South's place I guess to be decided / negotiated. The North's top division could go in at L6 asa effectively HFL D2, again with consideration of the role / place of the North Caley. The biggest headache is East but there's the greatest desire there for change so I'm sure it can be worked out. 

I think the Junior Cup can remain, and be even bigger than it is as a cup for all non-league teams. Presently it's a certainty the winner will be East or West. Throw in the strength of the Highland and the cup becomes a much greater prize.

Fixture lists - we're moving towards that now, aren't we? Albeit slowly.

Licencing criteria for advancement - you only need a licence for L5. That's in the manual. I can't see why it should change because of this? 

I'm not on a committee so don't know the exact level of briefing clubs got but I don't think whatever clarity is lacking is enough to make a club consider the jump to be akin to falling off a cliff.  The only real point I have tried to make all thread is that the change is coming, in some way shape or form, but as with any change, those driving it get the results they want.

Unwilling passivity here will not give the Juniors a strong hand.

Imagine a rented house was being painted a new colour and tenants were informed. They might not want their house painted, but it's going to happen. They can choose the colour but they don't want the house painted unless the colour is the same as before. That's not an option, but they refuse to choose the colour. They get a house painted a shade they dislike and complain to the landlord about it.

Edited March 30, 2018 by cmontheloknow

[Whitburn Vale]

11 hours ago, AlanCamelonfan said:

Most east teams voted for itapart from smaller clubs exception Broxburn and whitburn never learn their lesson

Whitburn once again at the coo's tail.

The not joining the super league a number of years ago and now this !!

Am i surprised.....no i'm not,knowing a few of the committee member's,t-rex dosnt get a look in .

[Kilbowie's Finest]

I was reading through the various comments on this thread today and took note of some of the concerns/issues that people have about their clubs joining the non-league structure and the flaws in the structure as it currently stands. The main issues seem to be the potential cost of travel, the disparity between probable regions from tier 6 and below (SoSL at tier 6 etc.), the loss of traditional rivalries and some clubs getting cut adrift without a relevant senior league to play in.
When it comes to population within regions and the disparity of the number of clubs that operate within these regions there is, unfortunately, nothing which can be done about that. Scotland's population distribution would make it impossible to create  regions that have roughly the same number of people and clubs in each region. 
However, it is possible to create four regions from tier 6 downwards that cover roughly the same geographic area and retain most of the traditional rivalries that exist in the current senior and junior set-ups respectively. Assuming there is going to be no revision of the Highland/Lowland boundary, which is currently set at the mouth of the Tay, a North West, North East, East and West structure could be implemented with the NW and NE clubs feeding into the Highland League and the other two into the LL. 
Each region would cover these council areas:
North West Senior League: Highland, Argyll & Bute (North), Na h-Eileanan Siar , Shetland, Orkney.
North East Senior League: Aberdeenshire, Aberdeen City, Perth & Kinross (North Tay), Dundee City, Angus, Moray.
 East of Scotland Senior League: City of Edinburgh, Fife, West Lothian, Falkirk, Perth & Kinross (South Tay), Scottish Borders, East Lothian, Stirling, Midlothian, Clackmannanshire, Borough of Berwick-Upon-Tweed (England). 
 
West of Scotland Senior League: Glasgow City, North Lanarkshire, South Lanarkshire, Renfrewshire, Dumfries & Galloway, North Ayrshire, East Ayrshire, South Ayrshire, East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, West Dunbartonshire,  Argyll & Bute (South), Inverclyde.
Area of these regions:
NW: 31,186 km2  (Excluding vast underpopulated areas and areas that have no senior or junior clubs: approx. 15,000km2-17,000km2)
NE: 12,979 km2
EOS: 13,710 km2
WOS: 20,050 km2  (Excluding Argyll & Bute which currently has no senior or Junior Clubs: 13,141 km2)
These regions are about as even as you could possibly make them in terms of size when Scotland's complex geography is taken into consideration. In the West and North West there is always the possibility that an outlier club may want to join in the future, say a club in Dunoon wanting to join the West for example. In that scenario it would only be one difficult/costly away trip a season for the other member clubs in that region.
Likely Greatest Distance Between Member Clubs (taking into consideration all current Senior & Junior Clubs):
NW: Fort William to Kirkwall = 220 Miles (Fort William to Thurso 170 Miles)
NE: Dundee to Burghead = 140 Miles
EOS: Tweedmouth to Tayport = 120 Miles
WOS: Wigtown to Greenock = 110 Miles
In the West even if the SoSL and Juniors were merged into the one regional set-up those clubs would be playing in the second smallest area and possibly have the least amount of travelling to do. 
Total Number of Clubs by Region* (SPFL, HFL, LFL, NCL, EoSL, SoSL, SJFA & Glasgow University included):
NW:   20 Clubs: (2 SPFL Clubs + 6 HFL Clubs + 9 NCL Clubs + 3 North Region Junior Clubs)
NE:   68 Clubs: (9 SPFL Clubs + 12 HFL Clubs + 31 North Region Juniors + 16 East Region Juniors)
EOS:  82 Clubs: (14 SPFL Clubs + 11 LFL Clubs + 12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 44 East Region Junior Clubs)
WOS:  100 Clubs: (17 SPFL Clubs + 5 LFL Clubs + 14 SoSL Clubs + 63 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)
Total Number of Clubs by Region* when Junior Clubs that Responded 'No' to Pyramid Survey are Excluded (SPFL, HFL, LFL, NCL, EoSL, SoSL, SJFA & Glasgow University included):
NW:   19 Clubs: (2 SPFL Clubs + 6 HFL Clubs + 9 NCL Clubs + 2 North Region Junior Clubs)
NE:   53 Clubs: (9 SPFL Clubs + 12 HFL Clubs + 21 North Region Juniors + 11 East Region Juniors)
EOS:  72 Clubs: (14 SPFL Clubs + 11 LFL Clubs + 12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 34 East Region Junior Clubs)
WOS:  71 Clubs: (17 SPFL Clubs + 5 LFL Clubs + 14 SoSL Clubs + 34 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)
*Excluding reserve teams - Stirling University, Stranraer & Annan Athletic. 
Number of Clubs to be Integrated from tier 6 and Below*:
NW: 11 (9 NCL Clubs + 2 North Region Junior Clubs) - one division of 11 Clubs
NE: 32 (21 North Region Juniors + 11 East Region Juniors)  - two divisions of 16 Clubs
EOS:47 (12 EoSL Clubs + 1 West Region Junior Club + 34 East Region Junior Clubs)  - two divisions of 16 + one of 15
WOS:49 (14 SoSL Clubs + 34 West Region Junior Clubs + Glasgow University)  - two divisions of 16 + one of 17
*assuming no junior clubs have a change of heart and all senior clubs would be willing to participate in new regional structure
The only big disparity in terms of number of clubs appears between the NE and NW but you couldn't expect clubs from Dundee and Perthshire to travel to Thurso and Orkney at tier 6, the only reasonable solution is to have those two separate regions feeding into the HL - from tier 5 upwards clubs should be expected to/be capable of travelling further distances anyway as preparation for potentially moving up into the SPFL.  
Obviously there are double the number of clubs in the Lowland area than there are in the Highland area. In time that anomaly could be dealt with simply by increasing the number of promotion places to the SPFL to 2 and having a play-off in which the LL champions play the HL runners-up and HL champions play the LL runners-up with both winners being promoted to the SPFL. That way if the LL becomes far stronger than the HL due to the area having more clubs then the difference can be settled on the pitch.
 
 
 
 

Outstanding work [emoji106]You should give Teresa May a phone and see if you can sort out that Brexit mess too[emoji23]

[the rambler]

Cmonloknow thanks for your response.

A fair bit of educated surmising there, and that's my point. There needs to be much more clarity for Clubs to vote on change.

A lot of it's the right thing to do from the pro pyramid guys but needs more substance.

If the majority decide to go then every Club should go, Whitburn being the obvious example, but decisions should be taken on facts not supposition.

[FairWeatherFan]

54 minutes ago, cmontheloknow said:

The North's top division could go in at L6 asa effectively HFL D2, again with consideration of the role / place of the North Caley.

The North might end up being a little more complicated if the SFA continue with their boundary between the Highland & Lowland Leagues. There's approximately 16 teams in the East Region that fall into the Highland League catchment area. As with all things relating to the pyramid there are a myriad of ways to deal with this issue. But just like the North Caledonian's standing, it's an issue best addressed before placing the North Region under the Highland League.

[cmontheloknow]

3 minutes ago, the rambler said:

Cmonloknow thanks for your response.

A fair bit of educated surmising there, and that's my point. There needs to be much more clarity for Clubs to vote on change.

A lot of it's the right thing to do from the pro pyramid guys but needs more substance.

If the majority decide to go then every Club should go, Whitburn being the obvious example, but decisions should be taken on facts not supposition.

You'd hope the greater clarity would now come. The answers are out there though, or a workable solution to.

[cmontheloknow]

1 minute ago, FairWeatherFan said:

The North might end up being a little more complicated if the SFA continue with their boundary between the Highland & Lowland Leagues. There's approximately 16 teams in the East Region that fall into the Highland League catchment area. As with all things relating to the pyramid there are a myriad of ways to deal with this issue. But just like the North Caledonian's standing, it's an issue best addressed before placing the North Region under the Highland League.

As far as I know, the shifting of the boundary to above Montrose, is under consideration.

[archieb]

8 minutes ago, the rambler said:

Cmonloknow thanks for your response.

A fair bit of educated surmising there, and that's my point. There needs to be much more clarity for Clubs to vote on change.

A lot of it's the right thing to do from the pro pyramid guys but needs more substance.

If the majority decide to go then every Club should go, Whitburn being the obvious example, but decisions should be taken on facts not supposition.

Just like the Brexit referendum eh?

[the rambler]

Absolutely, but have we made the wrong choice?