Vale of Leithen

[Marten]

4 minutes ago, It's Me said:

But it does. Because it’s a pyramid. So you only want change at the bit that affects the tier 6 leagues? 

The issues aren't connected. This issue needs to change first, then you're in a stronger position to get the SPFL to change as explained above. 

[Burnieman]

4 minutes ago, It's Me said:

But it does. Because it’s a pyramid. So you only want change at the bit that affects the tier 6 leagues? 

I don't think you quite understand how it all works.  Let's look at it another way, next season, tiers 6 to 9 in the EoS and WoS will have three up/down, so why does tier 5 not have 3 up/down when the rest of the Pyramid below does?

To repeat, the issue between the LL and SPFL is a completely separate issue of the LL and the EoS/WoS/SoS.  The LL do like to imply otherwise though.  That doesn't mean that everyone doesn't want to see auto relegation from League Two, just that the two issues are unconnected.

[FairWeatherFan]

6 minutes ago, It's Me said:

But it does. Because it’s a pyramid. So you only want change at the bit that affects the tier 6 leagues? 

The LL have now had multiple votes on change to the promotion/relegation between Tier 5 & 6. None of those votes related to changing the SPFL Playoff. The Lowland Board have never linked the two.

The most recent vote went 9-7 for the status quo. By the time the AGM takes place with two different clubs in the league it might have flipped to 8-8 or 7-9 in favour. T6 leagues are quite happy to change and 7 Lowland clubs are in favour. Safe to say the majority are willing to change without worrying about the SPFL Playoff.

[It's Me]

12 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

How on earth do you work that out?  

This season the three Champion clubs have to play-off for only 1 promotion spot, they will all be licenced.  Come this time next year, even more WoS clubs will be licenced. If the EoS Champion does not win the 3 way play-off, an extra club in the EoS Premier will have to be relegated to accommodate Vale of Leithen (so 5 down).

But the play-off off champion will get automatically promoted and take the place of Vale. Remember the current pyramid is nine years old. It has changed significantly in the past two years and needs to develop further. Until then we just need to get on with it until the leagues seek the changes that works. 

[Burnieman]

2 minutes ago, It's Me said:

But the play-off off champion will get automatically promoted and take the place of Vale. Remember the current pyramid is nine years old. It has changed significantly in the past two years and needs to develop further. Until then we just need to get on with it until the leagues seek the changes that works. 

Erm......they shouldn't have to play-off in the first place, that's the point.  The Champion club of each league should be promoted.

The LL is an 18 team league with one down.  The EoS Premier is an 18 team league with 4 down, possible 5 this season, but from next season will be 3 down, but possibly 4, every season.  Similar in the West.  There is no reason why the LL cannot follow suit, none.

[FairWeatherFan]

30 minutes ago, It's Me said:

Remember the current pyramid is nine years old. It has changed significantly in the past two years and needs to develop further. Until then we just need to get on with it until the leagues seek the changes that works. 

2017-18 Kelty Hearts? Put out a list of pros/cons to pyramid versus junior leagues. BSC Glasgow tried to start a WOSFL. 

All of which sparked debate across the the Lowland area. Almost started an EOS West Division and in the end saw a seismic shift in the EoSFL. 

At the 2018 LL AGM they had a vote to increase promotion /relegation and took a wait & see approach. Soon after starting a working group to investigate a LL2 as the PWG was already at a stand still. 

Since then they removed the guarantee bottom was relegated. Reduced the opportunity for the EOS/SOS champion being promoted. All while benefitting from the increased attendances across some of the inter-league cups. 

The Lowland League clubs know what works. As they've seen every team promoted on the field stay clear of relegation. Even Edusport Academy. 

EDIT: As a PS. If it hadn't been for COVID we wouldn't be having this conversation.

Edited April 7, 2022 by FairWeatherFan

[It's Me]

26 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

Erm......they shouldn't have to play-off in the first place, that's the point.  The Champion club of each league should be promoted.

The LL is an 18 team league with one down.  The EoS Premier is an 18 team league with 4 down, possible 5 this season, but from next season will be 3 down, but possibly 4, every season.  Similar in the West.  There is no reason why the LL cannot follow suit, none.

I agree that we need change but they have voted to keep it as it is until there is change at the top. So why not focus on that change and that would then result in changes at the bottom of the LL which is clearly what you want. 

[stanley]

On 07/04/2022 at 16:51, FairWeatherFan said:

The Lowland League clubs know what works. As they've seen every team promoted on the field stay clear of relegation. Even Edusport Academy. 

Also worth looking at what's happened to the relegated teams. 

Preston Athletic - tier 7 

Hawick Royal Albert - tier 7 (heading for tier 8 next season)

Whitehill Welfare - tier 6 (heading for tier 7 next season)

The next few relegated clubs have very little chance of surviving at tier 6 (other than the SoS clubs) and some will be heading even further down.

Edited April 8, 2022 by stanley

[FairWeatherFan]

2 minutes ago, It's Me said:

I agree that we need change but they have voted to keep it as it is until there is change at the top. So why not focus on that change and that would then result in changes at the bottom of the LL which is clearly what you want. 

I think it's important at this point not to say they. A majority of 9 voted to retain the status quo. Since it was reported it happened in secret it would be impossible to say they all voted on the basis that the SPFL had to change their playoff.

The 9-7 dynamic is more likely to flip and the Lowland Playoff is the only one under the control of the Lowland area clubs and leagues. It seems better to focus on that.

[LongTimeLurker]

Just now, It's Me said:

I agree that we need change but they have voted to keep it as it is until there is change at the top. So why not focus on that change and that would then result in changes at the bottom of the LL which is clearly what you want. 

Ludicrous logic. The LL clubs only have it in their power to address one of those issues. On an LL subforum people are going to focus on the promotion bottleneck that the LL clubs can change and you better believe that they are going to continue to highlight their selfishness on here until that change is made.

[It's Me]

8 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

I think it's important at this point not to say they. A majority of 9 voted to retain the status quo. Since it was reported it happened in secret it would be impossible to say they all voted on the basis that the SPFL had to change their playoff.

The 9-7 dynamic is more likely to flip and the Lowland Playoff is the only one under the control of the Lowland area clubs and leagues. It seems better to focus on that.

I think you’ll find that is the case. Clubs don’t want this brought back to the table until there is a change at the top. Speaking to a club rep who was the meeting Edinburgh Uni and Civil Service Strollers reps put that proposal forward if the vote was for status quo……. So as a majority of club voted for status quo then that proposal was carried. 

[It's Me]

10 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said:

Ludicrous logic. The LL clubs only have it in their power to address one of those issues. On an LL subforum people are going to focus on the promotion bottleneck that the LL clubs can change and you better believe that they are going to continue to highlight their selfishness on here until that change is made.

Why Labour the point though? Looking at these threads there is only about 15 people commenting anyway. Things need to change across the board. I’m glad I’m down south and not really affected by it anymore. 

[FairWeatherFan]

2 hours ago, It's Me said:

Speaking to a club rep who was the meeting Edinburgh Uni and Civil Service Strollers reps put that proposal forward if the vote was for status quo…….

I've seen that said. Don't know if that actually happened in the sense that it passed. Even if it did it's not something that's going to go in a rulebook anywhere and members can bring up proposals whenever they like.

Edited April 7, 2022 by FairWeatherFan

[It's Me]

9 minutes ago, FairWeatherFan said:

I've seen that said. Don't know if that actually happened in the sense that it passed. Even if it did it's not something that's going to in a rulebook anywhere and members can bring up proposals whenever they like.

I would hope clubs do bring proposals forward whenever they can but if the league voted for the status quo and on the basis of the proposal from Uni and Strollers that kicks into the long grass for a while anyway.  

[craigkillie]

14 minutes ago, It's Me said:

I think you’ll find that is the case. Clubs don’t want this brought back to the table until there is a change at the top. Speaking to a club rep who was the meeting Edinburgh Uni and Civil Service Strollers reps put that proposal forward if the vote was for status quo……. So as a majority of club voted for status quo then that proposal was carried. 

Which clubs? 7 of the clubs voted for it, so they presumably will want it back to the table, and of the other 9, likely one of them is about to get relegated to be replaced by a team who are going to be more open to the idea. I'd say that would make it 8-8 for next season barring any major surprises, and possibly 9-7 in favour if Cowdenbeath lose to Fraserburgh and thus Gretna go down.

That's assuming that the Vale of Leithen and Gretna turkeys avoided voting for their very own Christmas, which I'd assume was the case.

[It's Me]

2 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

Which clubs? 7 of the clubs voted for it, so they presumably will want it back to the table, and of the other 9, likely one of them is about to get relegated to be replaced by a team who are going to be more open to the idea. I'd say that would make it 8-8 for next season barring any major surprises, and possibly 9-7 in favour if Cowdenbeath lose to Fraserburgh and thus Gretna go down.

That's assuming that the Vale of Leithen and Gretna turkeys avoided voting for their very own Christmas, which I'd assume was the case.

I don’t know who the 9 clubs are but as the majority voted for status quo then the Civil Uni proposal for it not to come back to the clubs to vote will mean it will be another year at least so that means no change until the end of season 23/24 at the earliest. 

[Burnieman]

1 hour ago, It's Me said:

I agree that we need change but they have voted to keep it as it is until there is change at the top. So why not focus on that change and that would then result in changes at the bottom of the LL which is clearly what you want. 

If that is seriously the thinking (and you appear to be well connected to what happened), then it really is time to start looking at options to bypass the LL. I doubt it will be possible, but worth looking at options to get round the blockers.

The LL are trying to link the issue of pro/rel between tier 5 and 6, to the SPFL and that's duplicitous, just a way of attempting to deflect blame for their own self-preservation.

Bottom line is, and it is quite simple, the LL need to sort out their own pro/rel issues before the SPFL will take any notice.

The LL need rule changes agreed by the SFA to allow B teams another season, hopefully the SFA use this as a lever (like they did with the boundary) to force the LL to do something about this.

Edited April 7, 2022 by Burnieman

[Burnieman]

1 hour ago, It's Me said:

I think you’ll find that is the case. Clubs don’t want this brought back to the table until there is a change at the top. Speaking to a club rep who was the meeting Edinburgh Uni and Civil Service Strollers reps put that proposal forward if the vote was for status quo……. So as a majority of club voted for status quo then that proposal was carried. 

So clubs at tier 6 pay the price for the SPFL not changing their stance.   How is that even remotely fair or remotely beneficial to the Pyramid?

The reputation of the LL really is circling the drain.

[Gordon EF]

3 hours ago, It's Me said:

I think you’ll find that is the case. Clubs don’t want this brought back to the table until there is a change at the top. Speaking to a club rep who was the meeting Edinburgh Uni and Civil Service Strollers reps put that proposal forward if the vote was for status quo……. So as a majority of club voted for status quo then that proposal was carried. 

There's absolutely no leverage though. Imagine saying to Annan, Forfar, East Fife, etc "If you don't vote for increased promotion/relegation between L2 and the LL, we're going to keep making it harder for Clydebank and Linlithgow to get into the LL".

It's like pointing a paper gun at their heads.

[The Mantis]

4 hours ago, stanley said:

Also worth looking at what's happened to the relegated teams. 

Preston Athletic - tier 7 

Hawick Royal Albert - tier 8 (heading for tier 9 next season)

Whitehill Welfare - tier 6 (heading for tier 7 next season)

The next few relegated clubs have very little chance of surviving at tier 6 (other than the SoS clubs) and some will be heading even further down.

I would say that WW is a poor example. More to do with the rapid decline of the club than a statement on the standard of the league.
They went into the LL as EOS champions and for the first 4 seasons they gathered around 40 points and were capable of competing with the likes of Edinburgh City, Spartans and East Kilbride, while not disgracing themselves in the Scottish. In 14-15 they were fielding a strike force of Wayne McIntosh and Aaron Somerville, who was the league’s top scorer.

For various reasons they dropped to 12th in the 5th season although they gained 34 points, but the bottom fell out the following year when they gathered only 12 points and were relegated due to Selkirk folding.

Their demise has coincided with the impressive rise of the Rose 2 miles down the road, who are now a magnificent example of how a club should be run, and the magnet for any sponsorship in Midlothian,  yet they themselves were close to folding a few years back.
WW’s decline has been compounded by the recent passing away of two long term stalwarts of the club, and the retirement of another who was a long term administrator. Whitehill for many years were the senior club in Midlothian, and Newtongrange Star the top Junior club, yet I’ve not seen anybody draw conclusions from the fact that they’re also heading for tier 7.