Premier Relegation spots

[Burnieman]

11 minutes ago, themillerman1979 said:

It’s a strong point. Decisions are made and I agree only exceptional circumstances should merit changing them.

Whether these circumstances are exceptional is what the discussion will centre around at the EOSFL.

What is different from these circumstances and those experienced in the Lowland / Highland however?

They are voting to change rules and keep the pyramid moving. The argument could be that they’ve not completed a season so how can they be promoted and Brechin (example purposes) be relegated if they win a playoff?

the HL and LL committee have reviewed the options and decided that a mistake was made in saying they’d null and void if 50% of games weren’t completed. Exceptional circumstances which could be to the detriment of Vale of Leithen and circumstances which mirror the situations Jeanfield, Luncarty and Leith are currently in.

 

That's incorrect. 

The HL and LL were going to null and void until the SFA told them they had to settle on PPG if they wanted to enter the SPFL  play-off. Otherwise, it was wipe the slate clean and come back next season.

[themillerman1979]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

That's incorrect. 

The HL and LL were going to null and void until the SFA told them they had to settle on PPG if they wanted to enter the SPFL  play-off. Otherwise, it was wipe the slate clean and come back next season.

Would this not have been known at the outset?

In agreeing null and void they would be ineligible to declare a champion club surely?

If so, they’ve changed the rules to adapt to the current situation. A change which, from what I read, was voted on but the members and passed.

So again, why is it ok for the LL and HL to do so and match their clubs ambitions but not for the EOSFL to do so?

Edited April 5, 2021 by themillerman1979

[Burnieman]

2 minutes ago, themillerman1979 said:

Would this not have been known at the outset?

In agreeing null and void they would be ineligible to declare a champion club surely?

If so, they’ve changed the rules to adapt to the current situation. A change which, from what I read, was voted on but the members and passed.

So again, why is it ok for the LL and HL to do so and match their clubs ambitions but not for the EOSFL to do so?

No, they were lead to believe they could null and void and nominate a play-off participant, the SFA told them they couldn't as it had to be on merit so we had the ludicrous situation of the HL declaring on PPG when some clubs hadn't actually played a game.  Yet some people talk about the integrity of the Pyramid.

The circumstances are wholly different, the SFA aren't telling tier 6 leagues how to end the season, hence why the WoS and SoS have already N&V.

[lowenan]

Should never use null and void. Always aim to finish, even by postponing next season.

[Malty Guy]

1 minute ago, lowenan said:

Should never use null and void. Always aim to finish, even by postponing next season.

So this staccato season continues ad Infinitum then we blow out next seasons completion. Can’t follow that particular logic

[FairWeatherFan]

10 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

No, they were lead to believe they could null and void and nominate a play-off participant, the SFA told them they couldn't as it had to be on merit so we had the ludicrous situation of the HL declaring on PPG when some clubs hadn't actually played a game.  Yet some people talk about the integrity of the Pyramid.

The circumstances are wholly different, the SFA aren't telling tier 6 leagues how to end the season, hence why the WoS and SoS have already N&V.

But in every instance they're in a position to not negatively impact member clubs. The HL and SoSFL don't have relegation. The WoSFL had already said they would repeating their structure and are looking to add new members in a division below their Conferences if possible. The EoSFL it's an unknown what they're going to do if they null and void.

[Anychance]

4 hours ago, Malty Guy said:

You clearly don’t appreciate anyone’s circumstances or the severity of the situation.

I hope that you haven’t been personally affected and that things stay that way for you.

However I don’t think you should be firing off ultimatums to others. 

It’s not an ultimatum he’s scared of covid

I’m not having a go but he doesn’t speak for every player some players will agree with him or like me some players would play every night to get the season finished 

unfortunately I’m a key worker Ive not had furlough and can’t work from home 

[Burnieman]

16 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

But in every instance they're in a position to not negatively impact member clubs. The HL and SoSFL don't have relegation. The WoSFL had already said they would repeating their structure and are looking to add new members in a division below their Conferences if possible. The EoSFL it's an unknown what they're going to do if they null and void.

In reality not enough of the season had been completed to legitimately claim clubs in the promotion hunt have had promotion snatched away.  Luncarty 7/28 games, Leith 9/30 games, neither have played even a third of the season, lots of other clubs were also in the hunt, HWU were top of one Conference but had played the most, still only 11/28 games.

Same goes from the Premier, nobody can say with any certainly who would have gone on to win it, Tranent? Jeanfield? Linlithgow? Penicuik? Jeanfield played only 9/34 games.

Would anyone really be negatively impacted in the EoS by null and void? not IMO, we've not played enough games.

As for next season, I have a feeling that the new member clubs will come in below the existing Conferences and be unable to gain promotion to the Premier next season in order to keep the opportunities the same for existing members.

 

Edited April 5, 2021 by Burnieman

[RossBFaeDundee]

20 minutes ago, lowenan said:

Should never use null and void. Always aim to finish, even by postponing next season.

lmao what

[Burnieman]

3 minutes ago, Bigbro19 said:

As someone who was dead against starting this season knowing a second wave was inevitable thus rendering another farce I think starting whenever possible where we left off is the only fair option. We don’t know what’s ahead of us but chances are heavily stacked in further disruption down the line. This way we’d have a head start and a good chance of completing a full season which nobody could argue they were hard done by. 

What happens to the new member clubs?

[themillerman1979]

3 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

What happens to the new member clubs?

Place them in a tier below the current conferences?

Top gets promoted or top 2?

Easy enough to establish the permutations for that I’m sure.

 

[Anychance]

1 hour ago, Sidney Lumet said:

 

But it IS entirely unreasonable to ask players to commit to that schedule just because of its similarity to schedules they may have endured previously in a pre-pandemic world.

There are life experiences and necessities that have been missed for many months and that will take precedence over play-play-play (as you seem to suggest that training can simply be shelved, itself an entirely unrealistic proposition) as demanded by your route map to end the season. In previous seasons where demanding schedules were the norm near the end of the campaign these demands weren’t placed in a climate where a form of house arrest had proceeded them so it was indeed then something that had to be factored into life as a football player or committee member.

Simply to imply that if a return to football after lockdown impinges on your family life and prevents what to some is their desired ‘finish’ to a season then the solution is for individuals to choose not to return is also unreasonable. This indiscriminate course will impact the potential strength of teams on their enforced return and thus potentially impact performances and therefore results meaning the season is again adversely affected. It also has the potential to put additional stresses and strains on those behind the scenes - where many committees are short handed during the best of times - should some committee volunteers not return due to an entirely understandable desire, nay need, to put a return to normal family life first.

For me, it is entirely unrealistic, and therefore unreasonable, to shoehorn games in to reach a 50% watermark to avoid a null and void decision already agreed upon twice.

 

Players will play if they can if they can’t managers find solutions 

Same for the boys who help run clubs 

I really don’t think it’s a big deal there is always solutions 

[Burnieman]

1 minute ago, Bigbro19 said:

The same as what will happen if we extend the season and play out the 50% . There is no way it has to be completed by May 22nd.

We can't kick a ball in training until 17th May.

[Burnieman]

3 minutes ago, themillerman1979 said:

Place them in a tier below the current conferences?

Top gets promoted or top 2?

Easy enough to establish the permutations for that I’m sure.

 

Are you now seriously suggesting we abandon next season and just play out this one? how about everyone starts afresh in July?

[themillerman1979]

Just now, Burnieman said:

We can't kick a ball in training until 17th May.

That’s incorrect.

you can’t have contact training until 17th May.

Teams can implement training methods that work players with the ball. Fitness, shooting, passing, crossing etc can all be worked on.

the 17th May date is for contact training as I read it and for organising inter club matches.

if teams were to spend 3/4 weeks working in fitness, touch, shooting, passing etc prior to this then come 17th May straight into a couple of warm up games then competition, SFA/government relaxations permitting of course.

[themillerman1979]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Are you now seriously suggesting we abandon next season and just play out this one? how about everyone starts afresh in July?

But surely that’s unfair to everyone Burnieman?

if your teams been good you are punished. If you’re team has been poor you’re rewarded/reprieved.

 

[Lowerleaguelover]

2 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

We can't kick a ball in training until 17th May.

We can kick a ball now, non contact. Fitness can be resumed. Contact begins May 17th as it stands. 
 

Genuine solution could be pause, if we are viewing this as early in the season then carry on from July. Bring in the cups, place the new teams in a new bottom tier. Sorted! 

 

3 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

We can't kick a ball in training until 17th 

[Burnieman]

1 minute ago, themillerman1979 said:

That’s incorrect.

you can’t have contact training until 17th May.

Teams can implement training methods that work players with the ball. Fitness, shooting, passing, crossing etc can all be worked on.

the 17th May date is for contact training as I read it and for organising inter club matches.

if teams were to spend 3/4 weeks working in fitness, touch, shooting, passing etc prior to this then come 17th May straight into a couple of warm up games then competition, SFA/government relaxations permitting of course.

You're being pedantic now.  We'll leave it there as your "solutions" are becoming even more desperate.

[Burnieman]

Just now, themillerman1979 said:

But surely that’s unfair to everyone Burnieman?

if your teams been good you are punished. If you’re team has been poor you’re rewarded/reprieved.

 

Who is getting punished with the season not even a third done?

[Anychance]

20 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

In reality not enough of the season had been completed to legitimately claim clubs in the promotion hunt have had promotion snatched away.  Luncarty 7/28 games, Leith 9/30 games, neither have played even a third of the season, lots of other clubs were also in the hunt, HWU were top of one Conference but had played the most, still only 11/28 games.

Same goes from the Premier, nobody can say with any certainly who would have gone on to win it, Tranent? Jeanfield? Linlithgow? Penicuik? Jeanfield played only 9/34 games.

Would anyone really be negatively impacted in the EoS by null and void? not IMO, we've not played enough games.

As for next season, I have a feeling that the new member clubs will come in below the existing Conferences and be unable to gain promotion to the Premier next season in order to keep the opportunities the same for existing members.

 

Yes the teams in the conferences would be impacted as it was agreed there would be a first division 

there is teams in the conferences that are having to pander to the old junior teams season after season the eos should start looking after there own teams who have been members for years