Premier Relegation spots

[Burnieman]

8 hours ago, bluebell1 said:

A bit of over reaction here.  All we have asked is for the management committee to consider finishing the league season on a ppg basis in the same way as the lowland and highland league have.

Then why circulate a proposal amongst certain clubs looking to gain support in order to "If we get 10 then we could if required call an EGM to allow all clubs to vote on it."

That's not asking the board to consider an alternative, you're trying to force their hand.  As you very well know, the board invite clubs to raise any topic in advance of the monthly meeting, so why didn't you just do that?

Edited April 5, 2021 by Burnieman

[Truthteller]

50% can be achievable IMO given that the season officially ends on 30th June, however some teams may not even wish this to reach 50%, look at the league table.

Some may argue that they need a 3 week break between the season end and the season starting, if so start the season slightly later and then catch up, especially with all these new floodlit facilities springing up.

[TheGeneral10]

7 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

I stand by the attempt the clubs involved have made to look at a solution, especially given it doesn’t seem to be self serving.
 

I can see your point however and Perhaps a mail round all clubs could have avoided the view of underhand approach. I get your frustration on that. 
 

As I said, me personally, have no desire to enforce relegation, but I do believe the decision in lowland/highland means the minimum outcome has to be all tiers receive that reward (integrity of pyramid). 

We will just agree to disagree on that one. There are processes in place and Dundonald have not followed due process. Each club can make their own judgment and act accordingly. I would not be surprised if the EoS Board have received/ will receive numerous letters from member clubs raising concerns. Just my opinion. It’s done now though - nobody has a DeLorean - move on to more important issues. Over to the Board to deal with Dundonald (or not) as they see fit. 

[Truthteller]

So obvious that certain clubs do not want to attempt to play 50% of their games for obvious reasons despite the prospect of outdoor contact sport resuming soon.

[Lowerleaguelover]

4 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Let's take a look at that.   Both the LL and HL would have went down the road of declaring null and void, the LL had the same plans in place as the EoS.

Their hand was forced by the SFA to declare on PPG if they wanted to enter a club in the SPFL play-off, that is the only reason they did not N&V, so the comparison is false as the EoS are under no such pressure.

So then we have a back door proposal which not only relegates and promotes clubs who haven't even reached 50% of games played - Luncarty promoted after only 7 league games & Leith after 9, Jeanfield Champions after 9 - we have clubs who just fall above and below the qualifying line when it comes to forming the new First Division, some "condemned" to tier 8 on goal difference. Then there is the Dunbar/Tranent/Crossgates situation which is far from clear with Dunbar having played Tranent twice.  These clubs are unable to react to the situation on the pitch.

I understand that clubs may not be happy with potentially 13-14 new clubs coming into the structure alongside them next season.  I think the EoS should follow what the WoS are likely to do and restrict those new clubs ability to get promotion to the Premier and place them all in a Second Division Conference with only First Division spots available to them for season 2022-23. That then allows existing Conference clubs the same shot at Premier promotion as they had this season.

 

Whilst I get the point you make, I don’t see the relevance in the ‘why’ the ll/HL made the decision. The point is, they did and to be selective of where it’s appropriate now goes against the very grain of pyramid integrity.  Brora played 3 games, all of our leagues are beyond that stage. My challenge with this is and I don’t begrudge those two teams getting opportunity in a, hopefully, one off circumstance, is that we should not place elevated importance on ‘the big guns’ whilst diminish the efforts of the lower tiers.  If it’s ppg, it should cascade to all tiers. If that’s promotion and relegation, all tiers, if that’s promotion only, all tiers. 

The teams who are in that position deserve to be (their form was better than anyone else over the available fixture set).  Null and void gives those outside of promotion and relegation no upside, it does however give an escape door to those in trouble. 
 

Priority 1 should be trying to fit the remainder of games to 50%. It’s possible. 

[Malty Guy]

19 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Let's take a look at that.   Both the LL and HL would have went down the road of declaring null and void, the LL had the same plans in place as the EoS.

Their hand was forced by the SFA to declare on PPG if they wanted to enter a club in the SPFL play-off, that is the only reason they did not N&V, so the comparison is false as the EoS are under no such pressure.

So then we have a back door proposal which not only relegates and promotes clubs who haven't even reached 50% of games played - Luncarty promoted after only 7 league games & Leith after 9, Jeanfield Champions after 9 - we have clubs who just fall above and below the qualifying line when it comes to forming the new First Division, some "condemned" to tier 8 on goal difference. Then there is the Dunbar/Tranent/Crossgates situation which is far from clear with Dunbar having played Tranent twice.  These clubs are unable to react to the situation on the pitch.

I understand that clubs may not be happy with potentially 13-14 new clubs coming into the structure alongside them next season.  I think the EoS should follow what the WoS are likely to do and restrict those new clubs ability to get promotion to the Premier and place them all in a Second Division Conference with only First Division spots available to them for season 2022-23. That then allows existing Conference clubs the same shot at Premier promotion as they had this season.

 

Yes I’m more than supportive of your comments above.

you’re bang-on with the TJFC/Crossgates/Dunbar situation. That data has to extrapolated from the table. It should also apply to any others teams in similar circumstances

[TheGeneral10]

14 minutes ago, Truthteller said:

50% can be achievable IMO given that the season officially ends on 30th June, however some teams may not even wish this to reach 50%, look at the league table.

Some may argue that they need a 3 week break between the season end and the season starting, if so start the season slightly later and then catch up, especially with all these new floodlit facilities springing up.

If we are indeed part of the Pyramid - and the most used statement for the past few months has been ‘to protect the integrity of the pyramid’ - then as per the SFA’s press release earlier this year when league 1 and 2 were allowed to return - the curtain comes down on the professional Scottish Football Season with the glamour occasion of the Scottish Cup Final’  (22nd May 2021).

I honestly don’t think you can reasonably ask players, coaches and club volunteers to prioritise football over family, work, holidays and general physical and mental well-being  after what would be 5 months of lockdown for a crazy 6 week period. Personal opinion but I do not think that is a realistic option. 

Edited April 5, 2021 by TheGeneral10

[Burnieman]

Just now, Lowerleaguelover said:

Whilst I get the point you make, I don’t see the relevance in the ‘why’ the ll/HL made the decision. The point is, they did and to be selective of where it’s appropriate now goes against the very grain of pyramid integrity.  Brora played 3 games, all of our leagues are beyond that stage. My challenge with this is and I don’t begrudge those two teams getting opportunity in a, hopefully, one off circumstance, is that we should not place elevated importance on ‘the big guns’ whilst diminish the efforts of the lower tiers.  If it’s ppg, it should cascade to all tiers. If that’s promotion and relegation, all tiers, if that’s promotion only, all tiers. 

The teams who are in that position deserve to be (their form was better than anyone else over the available fixture set).  Null and void gives those outside of promotion and relegation no upside, it does however give an escape door to those in trouble. 
 

Priority 1 should be trying to fit the remainder of games to 50%. It’s possible. 

If you're so concerned about integrity, then trying to undermine contingencies that were put in place and agreed to by all clubs at the start of the season should be your primary concern.  What the LL decided (or were forced) to do has little bearing on the EoS, the WoS have already N&V.  Nothing has changed in the interm to justify an about turn of the agreed contingencies.

[Lowerleaguelover]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

If you're so concerned about integrity, then trying to undermine contingencies that were put in place and agreed to by all clubs at the start of the season should be your primary concern.  What the LL decided (or were forced) to do has little bearing on the EoS, the WoS have already N&V.  Nothing has changed in the interm to justify an about turn of the agreed contingencies.

Nothing has changed apart from declaring a ppg champion in the very league that the east teams aim to join through promotion...To detach the Lowland from the East like they are an unrelated entity is to detach the concept of a pyramid. 

You missed the part about the priority being to achieve the very contingency you reference, presumably you are in support of that part. 

[Malty Guy]

1 minute ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

Nothing has changed apart from declaring a ppg champion in the very league that the east teams aim to join through promotion...To detach the Lowland from the East like they are an unrelated entity is to detach the concept of a pyramid. 

You missed the part about the priority being to achieve the very contingency you reference, presumably you are in support of that part. 

You’re just not getting it,,,,, the due process is already in place. The earlier agreement at the season start  was acknowledged. Until this moment in time it’s still applicable. 
The Dundonald mob have needlessly set the cat amongst the pigeons. 

[Burnieman]

9 minutes ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

Nothing has changed apart from declaring a ppg champion in the very league that the east teams aim to join through promotion...To detach the Lowland from the East like they are an unrelated entity is to detach the concept of a pyramid. 

You missed the part about the priority being to achieve the very contingency you reference, presumably you are in support of that part. 

That has little to do with the EoS.  It may come as a surprise, but each league within the Pyramid is run by its members and makes it's own decisions, and just like the LL had a contingency to null and void if 50% isn't reached then so does the EoS, except the LL's hand was forced.

Regarding playing to get to 50%, unless the date of 17th May is brought forward then that isn't achievable either (as the EoS has communucated to clubs) and as has been pointed out by others a few pages back, is exceptionally unfair to those involved with clubs to expect them to give up the first two months of their non-lockdown lives in order to play football.  A 17th May resumption would effectively set off a year long run of football with few breaks, as if the season concluded on 30th June you'd then be into a pre-season run of friendlies for a few weeks and then the following season kicks-off.

Some common sense needs to be applied here.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Burnieman

[Malty Guy]

12 hours ago, Scrappydoo said:

i have no idea whats going on and i really dont give a fk , 

How anyone can honestly expect us , players,to go back is not only a farce but a total narrow minded approach by what appears to be few idiots on their own agenda

So what if its another season as was , we have and are STILL on lock fffking down its a pandemic , get a life you bunch of tossers 

as already advised the only reason ll and hl went PPG was to get their teams in the playoffs , no one argues with that it made sense as it was the same 2 teams as last season

 

This has nothing to do with the EOS  is that clear enough

lets just move on to next season as what was agreed and planned for and have a premier of 16 , or 18 

4 conferences if thats what required , and look forward the next season 

 

really dont need this stress of thinking we will be forced to go back early to keep some idiots sitting at home happy 

 

very well stated. Says it all and more. I just wish that many others would accept this point of view that you’ve made.

[gaswork]

Shambles already.

No joined up thinking.

None of the regions or tiers communicating and acting as one, all doing whatever they want.

Clubs and officials looking after number one instead of doing what's right for this new 'pyramid' in name only.

Even a pyramid skeptic didn't see things unravel as quickly as this.

It's a sham.

[Burnieman]

6 minutes ago, gaswork said:

Shambles already.

No joined up thinking.

None of the regions or tiers communicating and acting as one, all doing whatever they want.

Clubs and officials looking after number one instead of doing what's right for this new 'pyramid' in name only.

Even a pyramid skeptic didn't see things unravel as quickly as this.

It's a sham.

You're ill, ask for help.

[Black & Red Socks]

The point is, they did and to be selective of where it’s appropriate now goes against the very grain of pyramid integrity.

Both the WoSFL and the SoSFL have already declared season 2020/21 null and void - no procrastination, no delay just a pragmatic decision made in the interests of all - so “the very grain of pyramid integrity” that you seem to believe the EoSFL must protect above all else by backing out of previously made decisions has already been damaged.

Priority 1 should be trying to fit the remainder of games to 50%. It’s possible. 

Priority should quite clearly be given to the welfare of all those you seem to wish to see thrown back into a Saturday-Wednesday-Saturday playing routine (not to mention training commitments and all organisational, management and testing commitments) to the detriment of re-establishing a proper balance to their lives with their friends, family and work demands.

Goodness, there is even a post from a player in this thread voicing his angst at the very thought of what you ask. He may or may not be in the majority but he will, at the very least, represent a sizeable minority who must be listened to. The stresses and strains brought about by what you ask may very well be intolerable for many.

[Lowerleaguelover]

9 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

That has little to do with the EoS.  It may come as a surprise, but each league within the Pyramid is run by its members and makes it's own decisions, and just like the LL had a contingency to null and void if 50% isn't reached then so does the EoS, except the LL's hand was forced.

Regarding playing to get to 50%, unless the date of 17th May is brought forward then that isn't achievable either (as the EoS has communucated to clubs) and as has been pointed out by others a few pages back, is exceptionally unfair to those involved with clubs to expect them to give up the first two months of their non-lockdown lives in order to play football.  A 17th May resumption would effectively set off a year long run of football with few breaks, as if the season concluded on 30th June you'd then be into a pre-season run of friendlies for a few weeks and then the following season kicks-off.

Some common sense needs to be applied here.

In  what will be 15 months,there has been little football played. In my experience a large number of players are desperate to return, perhaps you see a different opinion (football is not a burden on anti-lockdown life in many peoples eyes). 
 

With regards to members running the league, perhaps a vote will ensue. I respect your alternative opinions. I have an opinion that null and void suits those who want a reset because of the performances to date and where they lie in the table and those who don’t find the team at the top very attractive. 

[Che Dail]

36 minutes ago, Truthteller said:

So obvious that certain clubs do not want to attempt to play 50% of their games for obvious reasons despite the prospect of outdoor contact sport resuming soon.

 

16 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

That has little to do with the EoS.  It may come as a surprise, but each league within the Pyramid is run by its members and makes it's own decisions, and just like the LL had a contingency to null and void if 50% isn't reached then so does the EoS, except the LL's hand was forced.

Regarding playing to get to 50%, unless the date of 17th May is brought forward then that isn't achievable either (as the EoS has communicated to clubs) and as has been pointed out by others a few pages back, is exceptionally unfair to those involved with clubs to expect them to give up the first two months of their non-lockdown lives in order to play football.  A 17th May resumption would effectively set off a year long run of football with few breaks, as if the season concluded on 30th June you'd then be into a pre-season run of friendlies for a few weeks and then the following season kicks-off.

Some common sense needs to be applied here.

 

Adults ages 18 or older will not be allowed to return to full contact training until Monday, May 17.  

Allow 3-4 weeks 'pre-season' to start w/c Monday 14th June.  Players may be out of contract on 30th June.  

So 3-4 weeks preparation and cost for just 2 weeks competitive football (?), playing 3 or 4 games a week to get to 50%? It makes no sense at all.  

If the league can agree upon a winner based on PPG (over the past 2 incomplete seasons) to replace Vale of Leithen in the LL that's one thing - but when it starts to affect everyone else to their detriment, that's quite another.

Edited April 5, 2021 by Che Dail

[Lowerleaguelover]

2 minutes ago, Black & Red Socks said:

 

Both the WoSFL and the SoSFL have already declared season 2020/21 null and void - no procrastination, no delay just a pragmatic decision made in the interests of all - so “the very grain of pyramid integrity” that you seem to believe the EoSFL must protect above all else by backing out of previously made decisions has already been damaged.



Priority should quite clearly be given to the welfare of all those you seem to wish to see thrown back into a Saturday-Wednesday-Saturday playing routine (not to mention training commitments and all organisational, management and testing commitments) to the detriment of re-establishing a proper balance to their lives with their friends, family and work demands.

Goodness, there is even a post from a player in this thread voicing his angst at the very thought of what you ask. He may or may not be in the majority but he will, at the very least, represent a sizeable minority who must be listened to. The stresses and strains brought about by what you ask may very well be intolerable for many.

 

Fair enough, if the well-being is a concern for some I understand. The well-being of those not playing and wish to do so is an alternative perspective (expressed by many on many social platforms). 

[Burnieman]

1 minute ago, Lowerleaguelover said:

In  what will be 15 months,there has been little football played. In my experience a large number of players are desperate to return, perhaps you see a different opinion (football is not a burden on anti-lockdown life in many peoples eyes). 
 

With regards to members running the league, perhaps a vote will ensue. I respect your alternative opinions. I have an opinion that null and void suits those who want a reset because of the performances to date and where they lie in the table and those who don’t find the team at the top very attractive. 

You clearly have skin in the game and want to push an agenda.  What club are you involved with?

[Burnieman]

1 minute ago, Che Dail said:

Adults ages 18 or older will not be allowed to return to full contact training until Monday, May 17.  

Allow 3-4 weeks 'pre-season' to start w/c Monday 14th June.  Players may be out of contract on 30th June.  

So 3-4 weeks preparation and cost for just 2 weeks competitive football (?), playing 3 or 4 games a week to get to 50%? It makes no sense at all.  

If the league can agree upon a winner based on PPG (over the past 2 incomplete seasons) to replace Vale of Leithen in the LL that's one thing - but when it starts to affect everyone else to their detriment, that's quite another.

Well there you go, I had overlooked the fact that 17th May isn't a resumption date for actual games.