Jump to content

Community Club?


Guest

Recommended Posts

With the debate raging on other threads regarding the pros and cons of the supposed pyramid system in place, can I ask, how can you have a community club that has little or no engagement with the local community?  

A community club under the SFA's Quality Award scheme only needs to put in place certain criteria, mainly a stated amount of youth teams. There is no entitlement to have engagement with the local community. The Lowland League has a number of clubs lauded for there community status and activity. EDU Sports Academy conceived to assist foreign students here in Scotland is one of them. They play at Annan who have a club in the SFL and have little or nothing to do with the community. This model of "community club" seems to be whole heartedly embraced by funders and the SFA alike. However for me this club and the SFA's very limited interpretation of the concept of community is flawed. Clubs can fulfill the SFA's community status while effectively being nomads, swapping their base and area on an annual basis. Clubs emerging from the ranks of boys football, encouraged by the men at the top with financial incetives, all to fill the bottom tier of the so called pyramid which would be sparse otherwise. The fact that they have little or no real allegiance  with any town or community results in the enevitability that no one cares to turn up to watch and support them, they have effectively no support from the actual community they purport to ply their trade. 

I consider that this interpretation of the word community reflects what is wrong with the SFA's concept of what a football club is, and subsequently the culture within the lower reaches of our so called pyramid. Nothing wrong with EDU as a sports academy, or creating a facility for foreign students to train etc. But they, and one or two others, are not community football clubs, being lauded as such and encourged into the so called pyramid is in my opinion not the way to create a thriving footballing culture or a proper pyramid system. A football club should really be part of the community. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 minutes ago, Isabel Goudie said:

With the debate raging on other threads regarding the pros and cons of the supposed pyramid system in place, can I ask, how can you have a community club that has little or no engagement with the local community?  

A community club under the SFA's Quality Award scheme only needs to put in place certain criteria, mainly a stated amount of youth teams. There is no entitlement to have engagement with the local community. The Lowland League has a number of clubs lauded for there community status and activity. EDU Sports Academy conceived to assist foreign students here in Scotland is one of them. They play at Annan who are in the SFL but have little or nothing to do with the community. This model of "community club" seems to be whole heartedly embraced by funders and the SFA alike. However for me this club and the SFA's very one limited interpretation of the concept of community is flawed. Clubs can fulfill the SFA's community status while effectively being nomads, swapping their base and area on an annual basis. Clubs emerging from the ranks of boys football, encouraged by the men at the top with financial incetives, all to fill the bottom tier of the so called pyramid which would be sparse otherwise. The fact that they have little or no real allegiance  with any town or community results in the enevitability that no one cares to turn up to watch and support them, they have effectively no support from the actual community they purport to ply their trade. 

I consider that this interpretation of the word community reflects what is wrong with the SFA's concept of what a football club is, and subsequently the culture within the lower reaches of our so called pyramid. Nothing wrong with EDU as a sports academy, or creating a facility for foreign students to train etc. But they, and one or two others, are not community football clubs, being lauded as such and encourged into the so called pyramid is in my opinion not the way to create a thriving footballing culture or a proper pyramid system. A football club should really be part of the community. 

Edusport should be no where near the Pyramid system would agree with all of the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Isabel Goudie said:

With the debate raging on other threads regarding the pros and cons of the supposed pyramid system in place, can I ask, how can you have a community club that has little or no engagement with the local community?  

A community club under the SFA's Quality Award scheme only needs to put in place certain criteria, mainly a stated amount of youth teams. There is no entitlement to have engagement with the local community. The Lowland League has a number of clubs lauded for there community status and activity. EDU Sports Academy conceived to assist foreign students here in Scotland is one of them. They play at Annan who are in the SFL but have little or nothing to do with the community. This model of "community club" seems to be whole heartedly embraced by funders and the SFA alike. However for me this club and the SFA's very one limited interpretation of the concept of community is flawed. Clubs can fulfill the SFA's community status while effectively being nomads, swapping their base and area on an annual basis. Clubs emerging from the ranks of boys football, encouraged by the men at the top with financial incetives, all to fill the bottom tier of the so called pyramid which would be sparse otherwise. The fact that they have little or no real allegiance  with any town or community results in the enevitability that no one cares to turn up to watch and support them, they have effectively no support from the actual community they purport to ply their trade. 

I consider that this interpretation of the word community reflects what is wrong with the SFA's concept of what a football club is, and subsequently the culture within the lower reaches of our so called pyramid. Nothing wrong with EDU as a sports academy, or creating a facility for foreign students to train etc. But they, and one or two others, are not community football clubs, being lauded as such and encourged into the so called pyramid is in my opinion not the way to create a thriving footballing culture or a proper pyramid system. A football club should really be part of the community. 

 

It's called the SFA Quality Mark, there are four levels, Standard, Development, Community and Legacy

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/football-development/clubs/club-accreditation/quality-mark-criteria/

Edusport are at the Standard level and Auchinleck are at the Development level. 

In your haste to criticise, you're misinterpreting the wording of one of the award levels.  A club being part of its local community for 100 years has nothing to do with the SFA Quality Mark scheme.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Edusport are a total farce , please don't ever mention them in the same breath as auchinleck talbot , regardless of quality marks or any other modern day fancy jargon they aren't a club to be looked up to one bit .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That SFA pay a lot of cash to the clubs under their licence. When a licenced club like Falkirk decides to ditch ALL its youth programmes to concentrate on promotion it tells you all that is wrong with Scottish football. 

I am no genius but if the SFA money gifted to the top clubs was ring fenced for investment in kids football how much would that improve our football all the way up to national level? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The SFA scheme is more to do with coaching qualifications and how the club is run, and not how you've given wee Jimmy fae doon the road a free pie every home game for the last 50 years to be nice, or go round the pubs selling raffles. 

Scottish fitba suffers from too many unqualified coaches running kids teams and this is trying to change that with standards and safeguards. That's my understanding anyway.

Agree though, Edusport are a plook on the face of the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

 

It's called the SFA Quality Mark, there are four levels, Standard, Development, Community and Legacy

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/football-development/clubs/club-accreditation/quality-mark-criteria/

Edusport are at the Standard level and Auchinleck are at the Development level. 

In your haste to criticise, you're misinterpreting the wording of one of the award levels.  A club being part of its local community for 100 years has nothing to do with the SFA Quality Mark scheme.

 

My apologies for surmising that Edusport had reached the community level of the Quality Mark Scheme, in a way it raises even more question as to why this type of set up is part of the so called pyramid.  I am aware that this scheme has nothing to do with 100 years of being part of a community. I am however asking why this type if community involvement is not recognised by the SFA, and suggest that their apparent obsession with a certain model of football club reflects why we have the current flawed system. You seem knowledgable,  perhaps you can update? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Isabel Goudie said:

My apologies for surmising that Edusport had reached the community level of the Quality Mark Scheme, in a way it raises even more question as to why this type of set up is part of the so called pyramid.  I am aware that this scheme has nothing to do with 100 years of being part of a community. I am however asking why this type if community involvement is not recognised by the SFA, and suggest that their apparent obsession with a certain model of football club reflects why we have the current flawed system. You seem knowledgable,  perhaps you can update? 

I'm not that knowledgeable, I know my club (the whole club, not just the Juniors) has the Legacy award and work hard for it, and then Googled to see exactly what was involved, I had a rough idea but no more than that. It seems the Legacy award has some sort of community requirement.

Talbot are involved in the scheme, so presumably your club sees it as a benefit rather than a flawed system?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Goalie Hamish said:

The SFA scheme is more to do with coaching qualifications and how the club is run, and not how you've given wee Jimmy fae doon the road a free pie every home game for the last 50 years to be nice, or go round the pubs selling raffles. 

Scottish fitba suffers from too many unqualified coaches running kids teams and this is trying to change that with standards and safeguards. That's my understanding anyway.

Agree though, Edusport are a plook on the face of the game.

Yes I get that, but they do use the term "community" within their jargon, but appear to have no interest in promoting club inter-community culture and are happy to have students sports clubs and boys clubs make up the so called pyramid. As for the free pies and raffle analogy, nothing better when you visit a ground and the locals are right behind the home team. That my friend is what it's all about at any level! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

I'm not that knowledgeable, I know my club (the whole club, not just the Juniors) has the Legacy award and work hard for it, and then Googled to see exactly what was involved, I had a rough idea but no more than that. It seems the Legacy award has some sort of community requirement.

Talbot are involved in the scheme, so presumably your club sees it as a benefit rather than a flawed system?

Talbot have ambitions for a club licence, once their application came to an abrupt halt the flaws in the so called pyramid system became apparent. Nothing wrong with the Quality scheme per se. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

9 hours ago, Isabel Goudie said:

Clubs emerging from the ranks of boys football, encouraged by the men at the top with financial incetives, all to fill the bottom tier of the so called pyramid which would be sparse otherwise.

Do you have the same level of contempt for Rossvale and Gartcairn setting up senior age sides, or do they get a pass because they chose the Junior grade?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the free pies and raffle analogy, nothing better when you visit a ground and the locals are right behind the home team. That my friend is what it's all about at any level! 


But not what the quality mark is about. You've made a bit of a plook of yourself as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Isa and Burnie are both right to a degree. Unfortunately there are two versions of the word community. The conventional one and the SFA Quality version.

Again unfortunately, senior clubs mainly, use the community as a cash cow. Setting up youth teams paid for by parents and call it community involvement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Goalie Hamish said:

 


But not what the quality mark is about. You've made a bit of a plook of yourself as well.

 

As I said H, I get that, what you seem to me missing is my point and what zits all about! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

I think Isa and Burnie are both right to a degree. Unfortunately there are two versions of the word community. The conventional one and the SFA Quality version.

Again unfortunately, senior clubs mainly, use the community as a cash cow. Setting up youth teams paid for by parents and call it community involvement.

Yes my man, that is true. I am suggesting that the policy and structure at the SFA create misnomer, as  with the use of the word community. Their policy and strategy is one which encourages the fabrication of clubs like EDU which are fast tracked into the feeder for the SPl. They are able then to fill this division and on paper they have what they have been pressurised to provide, a pyramid. The strategy has created a league which is so far removed from the no ceiling, free movement, find the level concept that pyrimiders plug and is in my opinion an abomination. Instead of blaming the Junior grades intrancegence, perhaps the real blame is with those at the top and those who refuse to concede that what we have has massive issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FairWeatherFan said:

 

Do you have the same level of contempt for Rossvale and Gartcairn setting up senior age sides, or do they get a pass because they chose the Junior grade?

No, because they are not being  encouraged into fast track promotion, way above their station, in order to fulfill the promise of the provision of a pyramid. Sports clubs and boys clubs getting punted on the fast track bus to pyramid land while there is no real progression route for any Junior club in the West, who have some of the biggest clubs in the semi professional grade, and a total barrier in the north. My good man, a man with cork for eyes could see this is not right! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't understand the level of derision/spite aimed at the likes of Edusport. They are there out of circumstance and taking advantage of the possibilities open to them. It looks unlikely but in the long term they may offer something to a progressive set up. If not, they are still the wrong folk to aim any anger at, the governing bodies are the only folk culpable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Burnie_man said:

The SFA Quality Mark also has nothing to do with a club getting an SFA Licence, which you need you enter the LL.

Not directly perhaps, but would suggest that not to comply would not look good in an application. Also not being on the Quality Mark list would mean financial aid would be harder to come by. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Ross. said:

I don't understand the level of derision/spite aimed at the likes of Edusport. They are there out of circumstance and taking advantage of the possibilities open to them. It looks unlikely but in the long term they may offer something to a progressive set up. If not, they are still the wrong folk to aim any anger at, the governing bodies are the only folk culpable.

Correct, but the SFA are not held accountable for fabricating this, clubs in the pyramid are happy to play along while the Juniors are derided for being cynical. The division is helpful to the governing body and those already in the pyramid (so called) as they, despite the fact it's a complete mess, get what they respectfully want. So, the Juniors will continue to be the fall guys and the pyrimiders will continue acting out " The Emperors New Clothes". Plus ca change!   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...