Lowland League 2021-22 General Chat

[LongTimeLurker]

13 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

The founders of the Lowland League recognised that there was a huge gap in the West of Scotland and that "Junior" clubs, particularly in the West, were much stronger both on and off the field than many of the clubs who took the plunge to join the SLFL. The plan was always to expand the SLFL to 32 clubs when/if more traditionally Junior clubs from the West joined. The SLFL has now done a 180 degree turn on this and does not wish to expand...

Sounds interesting. Can you expand a bit on when this was and whether the LL clubs as opposed to some officeholder ever agreed to this in a formal vote? From what I have heard people in west region junior circles were being told all kinds of weird and wonderful things about the possibility of a split into LL East and LL West around January 2020 or so and how it would facilitate SJFA pyramid entry that soon turned out to be a complete non-starter when it went to the LL clubs at a general meeting.

[Gordon EF]

1 hour ago, Cyclizine said:

You can argue the same for any club in the league though. No-one can survive on gate receipts alone. Some clubs are better than others at getting sponsorship. As long as it's sustainable, I don't really see the problem, it's always been so.

Of course but there's a huge difference between local businesses chucking a bit of money at East Fife, Annan, or Forfar for shirt sponsorship or pitch side hoardings and a group of business owners pumping money into a club via sponsorship that gives them a budget well above similarly sized clubs with similar crowds.

Cove absolutely are receiving outside investment from people who want to pump money into a football club. They're just doing it via sponsorship and then weirdly pretending that it's a sustainable model.

If most other part time SPFL clubs lost their main sponsor, they'd find another one without it affecting their budget too much. With Cove, if the Balmoral group pulled out, there's no way on Earth they'd find another company who was willing to plug that gap. Because it's not 'real' sponsorship.  It's like Roy MacGregor pumping his money into Ross County through the company he owns. That level of funding is just as unsustainable as every other club with a sugar daddy.

[Voice of Reason]

10 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

I think this is pretty accurate for how things developed in the Central Belt. From a North of Scotland point of view, for years, when spaces became available in the Scottish Football League, any applications from Highland League clubs were always voted down by the League clubs. Until 1994, the only SFL club in the historic Highland footprint was Aberdeen! This meant that the Highland League was a very strong (and historically senior) league, difficult to compare to the West and East Juniors of the time as they'd never meet in competition, but generally a far higher standard than the East and South of Scotland Leagues of the time. The junior game in the North has never been at the level that it was in the West and East. Once Ross County and the combined Inverness clubs were elected to the league, followed several years later by Elgin City and Peterhead, the Highland League lost a lot of its depth. This in turn had a knock-on effect on the North Juniors and North Caledonian League (another story in itself!), as ambitious clubs there were elected to the Highland League.

I'm not fully au fait with the Kelty situation, but Cove have been very successful in courting corporate sponsorship, even back in Highland League days. There does seem to be a bit of a myth that they have a rich sugar daddy bankrolling them, but in truth they actually have multiple sponsors (and the advantage of being able to offer jobs in those sponsors to part-time players). It will be interesting to see how this goes next season when they go to a hybrid model.

 

You can't have increased promotion without increased relegation, for the sake of sporting integrity. Is there any evidence for the 32 clubs plan? You're implying that the ultimate aim is to have a two division set-up: is this e.g. Premier/First or East/West divisions? Not that I doubt you, but the original SFA plan was for two 10 team North-South regional divisions. The Highland League petitioned to become the North feeder in its own right, leading to the creation of the Lowland League. You're implying you've got some insider knowledge here. If the plan is truly to have 32 clubs, why haven't the Lowland League invited any more applications in the last several years (disregarding the controversial "guest" teams)?

I think I explained that the original SLFL Board and the SFA recognised that they needed to make space in the future  for the progressive Junior clubs, both in the East (where there was an entry route) and the West. The Juniors continued to oppose participation in the SLFL on the basis that it would probably fail and the Junior superleagues would become tier 5. Whatever the rights and wrongs (and there were plenty on both sides) we are now in the position where the original vision of a 32-team SLFL makes sense. The current Chairman campaigned for an expanded SLFL when he was standing for election and that received general support. Sorry but I can't tell you why expansion (other than for guest clubs) is now opposed.

[John S]

The LL website's has not been updated for a while

[boheesian]

5 hours ago, John S said:

The LL website's has not been updated for a while

It is a very poor website. Why? When it could be a marketing tool to the great benefit of the LL. Surely with the ‘B’sides possible financial input a gratuity could be offered to someone to improve and update on a regular basis. 
A project for some Senior school kids perhaps.

[Ginaro]

On 26/04/2022 at 21:28, Voice of Reason said:

The founders of the Lowland League recognised that there was a huge gap in the West of Scotland and that "Junior" clubs, particularly in the West, were much stronger both on and off the field than many of the clubs who took the plunge to join the SLFL. The plan was always to expand the SLFL to 32 clubs when/if more traditionally Junior clubs from the West joined. The SLFL has now done a 180 degree turn on this and does not wish to expand. 

I do wish people would stop asking for increased relegation from the Lowland League. What is needed is increased promotion. Relegation is important to allow less successful clubs to drop to their natural level but the overpowering need is to increase promotion opportunities. The plan was to grow the SLFL gradually to 32 clubs over four seasons by promoting 6 clubs and relegating 2 each season.

Of all the silly ideas I've read on here, going to 32 clubs over four seasons is right up there with the worst of them. 

The LL doesn't need to expand, it just needs to give the EOS and WOS champions automatic promotion. And the SOS if they want it (or a play-off). Relegation then comes naturally when you have a fixed league of 16.

[Voice of Reason]

23 hours ago, Ginaro said:

Of all the silly ideas I've read on here, going to 32 clubs over four seasons is right up there with the worst of them. 

The LL doesn't need to expand, it just needs to give the EOS and WOS champions automatic promotion. And the SOS if they want it (or a play-off). Relegation then comes naturally when you have a fixed league of 16.

Apologies. Giving three EoS and WoS clubs that have invested in reaching licensing standards a chance to be promoted for the next four years rather than one from either seemed like a good idea. Silly me. 

[FairWeatherFan]

6 minutes ago, Voice of Reason said:

Apologies. Giving three EoS and WoS clubs that have invested in reaching licensing standards a chance to be promoted for the next four years rather than one from either seemed like a good idea. Silly me. 

I'm still not sure where on the timeline this was all meant to be happening? Definitely don't remember anything at the time of the founding of the Lowland League.

[Voice of Reason]

You are correct that no timeline was set. Various issues with the SJFA had to be overcome first. Specifically, the SJFA wanted to run a tier 5 league and that was opposed by the Highlands and Lowlands.

[archieb]

4 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

You are correct that no timeline was set. Various issues with the SJFA had to be overcome first. Specifically, the SJFA wanted to run a tier 5 league and that was opposed by the Highlands and Lowlands.

SJFA = Tom "Vladimir" Johnstone

opposed by = Highlands, Lowlands and most of the clubs then members of SJFA

[Cyclizine]

On 27/04/2022 at 19:46, Voice of Reason said:

I think I explained that the original SLFL Board and the SFA recognised that they needed to make space in the future  for the progressive Junior clubs, both in the East (where there was an entry route) and the West. The Juniors continued to oppose participation in the SLFL on the basis that it would probably fail and the Junior superleagues would become tier 5. Whatever the rights and wrongs (and there were plenty on both sides) we are now in the position where the original vision of a 32-team SLFL makes sense. The current Chairman campaigned for an expanded SLFL when he was standing for election and that received general support. Sorry but I can't tell you why expansion (other than for guest clubs) is now opposed.

I still don't remember anything when the Lowland League was set up about it being a 32 team league, you are the only person ever to mention it as a supposed fact. There's been mention by various people over the years of a hypothetical "Lowland League Two", but no-one has ever claimed this was a policy of the Lowland League form the start. I am unsure if you are claiming this based on insider knowledge at the time or if this is just speculation on your part.

Edited April 30, 2022 by Cyclizine

[Voice of Reason]

19 hours ago, Cyclizine said:

I still don't remember anything when the Lowland League was set up about it being a 32 team league, you are the only person ever to mention it as a supposed fact. There's been mention by various people over the years of a hypothetical "Lowland League Two", but no-one has ever claimed this was a policy of the Lowland League form the start. I am unsure if you are claiming this based on insider knowledge at the time or if this is just speculation on your part.

You make a fair point. The Lowland League was sensitive to the difficulties in getting established as a 12-team league without beating a drum for a 32-team league. However, there was always a recognition that it could not be truely a "Lowland" league without clubs from the west. At that time, the SJFA position was that they should be "Tier 5" and that the Lowland League would not survive five years. The move of East of Scotland Junior clubs to the EoS and then the formation of the West of Scotland League changed the dynamics. 

The position of the Lowland League may not have been publicised at the time of its formation but it was always to create space for ambitions, licensed clubs throughout the Lowlands. There was also a recognition that this had to be achieved carefully because taking all the eligible, licensed clubs from the East and West would damage these leagues. Hence the proposal that the Lowland League expands - gradually - to 32. My personal opinion is allowing four new "full" member clubs per season for four years in addition to the established promotion and relegation is a win-win for everyone.

Thomas Brown was a great advocate of an expanded Lowland League and I hope he maintains that while he is Chair

 

Edited May 1, 2022 by Voice of Reason

[Cyclizine]

4 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

You make a fair point. The Lowland League was sensitive to the difficulties in getting established as a 12-team league without beating a drum for a 32-team league. However, there was always a recognition that it could not be truely a "Lowland" league without clubs from the west. At that time, the SJFA position was that they should be "Tier 5" and that the Lowland League would not survive five years. The move of East of Scotland Junior clubs to the EoS and then the formation of the West of Scotland League changed the dynamics. 

The position of the Lowland League may not have been publicised at the time of its formation but it was always to create space for ambitions, licensed clubs throughout the Lowlands. There was also a recognition that this had to be achieved carefully because taking all the eligible, licensed clubs from the East and West would damage these leagues. Hence the proposal that the Lowland League expands - gradually - to 32. My personal opinion is allowing four new "full" member clubs per season for four years in addition to the established promotion and relegation is a win-win for everyone.

Thomas Brown was a great advocate of an expanded Lowland League and I hope he maintains that while he is Chair

 

You still have not provided any evidence that this was (and is) the ultimate goal of the Lowland League and not just your own opinion or interpretation.

Edited May 1, 2022 by Cyclizine

[Pyramid Watcher]

4 hours ago, Voice of Reason said:

You make a fair point. The Lowland League was sensitive to the difficulties in getting established as a 12-team league without beating a drum for a 32-team league. However, there was always a recognition that it could not be truely a "Lowland" league without clubs from the west. At that time, the SJFA position was that they should be "Tier 5" and that the Lowland League would not survive five years. The move of East of Scotland Junior clubs to the EoS and then the formation of the West of Scotland League changed the dynamics. 

The position of the Lowland League may not have been publicised at the time of its formation but it was always to create space for ambitions, licensed clubs throughout the Lowlands. There was also a recognition that this had to be achieved carefully because taking all the eligible, licensed clubs from the East and West would damage these leagues. Hence the proposal that the Lowland League expands - gradually - to 32. My personal opinion is allowing four new "full" member clubs per season for four years in addition to the established promotion and relegation is a win-win for everyone.

Thomas Brown was a great advocate of an expanded Lowland League and I hope he maintains that while he is Chair

 

I think he is on record as saying there is no appetite for LL2 from the current board.

[Ginaro]

Gretna being evasive when asked about how they voted, having said in a previous tweet that they don't make the rules.

 

[AlansHotBath]

Results of the fan-voted LL team of the year: 

Not sure why they have went for a massive squad rather than an 11 plus subs, maybe a concern a smaller group would end up dominated by OF fans voting? 

[Lowland team]

On 01/05/2022 at 17:47, Voice of Reason said:

You make a fair point. The Lowland League was sensitive to the difficulties in getting established as a 12-team league without beating a drum for a 32-team league. However, there was always a recognition that it could not be truely a "Lowland" league without clubs from the west. At that time, the SJFA position was that they should be "Tier 5" and that the Lowland League would not survive five years. The move of East of Scotland Junior clubs to the EoS and then the formation of the West of Scotland League changed the dynamics. 

The position of the Lowland League may not have been publicised at the time of its formation but it was always to create space for ambitions, licensed clubs throughout the Lowlands. There was also a recognition that this had to be achieved carefully because taking all the eligible, licensed clubs from the East and West would damage these leagues. Hence the proposal that the Lowland League expands - gradually - to 32. My personal opinion is allowing four new "full" member clubs per season for four years in addition to the established promotion and relegation is a win-win for everyone.

Thomas Brown was a great advocate of an expanded Lowland League and I hope he maintains that while he is Chair

 

When the lowland league was first formed with these 12 clubs you did not need a licence. these clubs had to work towards gaining a licence.i can only think of 2 clubs from the junior league who would have qualified girvin.and linlithgow at the time or just after.dont know how many present west clubs have theirs.?

[glensmad]

35 minutes ago, Lowland team said:

When the lowland league was first formed with these 12 clubs you did not need a licence. these clubs had to work towards gaining a licence.i can only think of 2 clubs from the junior league who would have qualified girvin.and linlithgow at the time or just after.dont know how many present west clubs have theirs.?

I believe it is 7 clubs who currently have their licence in the WoSFL - Auchinleck Talbot, Clydebank, Cumnock Juniors, Darvel, Girvan, Glasgow University, Irvine Meadow XI.

I think there are 5 teams trying for it this summer - Benburb, Bonnyton Thistle. Kilwinning Rangers, Pollok, Rutherglen Glencairn.

Apologies if I have missed anybody.

[Glenconner]

3 hours ago, glensmad said:

I believe it is 7 clubs who currently have their licence in the WoSFL - Auchinleck Talbot, Clydebank, Cumnock Juniors, Darvel, Girvan, Glasgow University, Irvine Meadow XI.

I think there are 5 teams trying for it this summer - Benburb, Bonnyton Thistle. Kilwinning Rangers, Pollok, Rutherglen Glencairn.

Apologies if I have missed anybody.

I notice looking at this year's big Scottish Cup the EoSFL had 24 teams in it.

The Wosfl had 7.

Hopefully the West can match the East within the next few years.

Taking into account the Wosfl will lose a club going upwards into the LL, fingers crossed.

Edited May 3, 2022 by Glenconner

[LongTimeLurker]

On 01/05/2022 at 22:36, Cyclizine said:

You still have not provided any evidence that this was (and is) the ultimate goal of the Lowland League and not just your own opinion or interpretation.

From Voice of Reason's old posts it looks like he is probably linked to Preston Athletic in some way who along with Spartans and Threave Rovers were heavily involved with the process of forming the LL as I think they were the first EoS and SoS clubs to get licensed. Don't doubt something like this may have been said at some point in meetings but that's very different from something being voted on by LL clubs at a general meeting after that league had been constituted.

I think it's quite telling that people who followed this topic closely over the years don't remember anything being said publicly about this at the time. I certainly don't. If west junior clubs had known that there was a 16 club west division to potentially be filled at tier 5 it probably would have been a lot easier to turn the various expressions of interest on surveys from clubs like Clydebank into applications. Can remember accusations from well-connected Clydebank fans on here that Spartans were the ones primarily running the show and had treated junior clubs as an afterthought.