Lowland League General Discussion

[The Moonster]

49 minutes ago, the jambo-rocker said:

I won't lie and say the B team is arguably benefiting us, but I'm not comfortable with it being to the detriment of the rest of Scottish football. I'd rather we took ourselves out of it tbqh. Maybe that would force Celtic to go anaw and then it's a 'well nobody wants to play anyway' so let's remove it.

I also don't get how the SFA can just say it's 16 teams and that's that for the league. The highland is 18 is it not? It's arbitrary nonsense and the league can be as fucking many as they want if they vote for it. I honestly find it amazing the league haven't pushed back on this.

I hate hoping for relegated teams, but if the Highland league winner were to win this year, and a Clyde /Forfar/East Fife come down that would be just grand from a lowland league perspective as the two teams at bottom could finally be flushed down to their level. 

I also don't like the idea of using spfl2 as an excuse not to have more relegation. Be the example and open it up to follow rather than 'aye what about them'. When is the next chance for a vote on that? Can it just be called?

What benefit have Hearts got from it? Genuine question btw, not having a go. Are there any players moving from the B team to the senior team?

[the jambo-rocker]

31 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

What benefit have Hearts got from it? Genuine question btw, not having a go. Are there any players moving from the B team to the senior team?

Honestly the jury is still out for me now that you're asking! But I'm encouraged enough to feel a competitive league is working better than friendlies. Most of the squad is still there from last year and there's clearly been an improvement in a league I'd argue has gotten stronger this year.

I think we're in a better position than ever in the last decade, which has been borderline f**k all. @Footballfirstis probably in a better position to comment but B Team players Pollock, Tait, Rathie, Forrester and Drysdale all look ready to step into the squad in the next couple months IMO. They've got roughly 30-40 competitive games at LL under their belt now. I think keeping these players in house has been the big help and I was quite encouraged by the article attached below.

https://www.heartsstandard.co.uk/news/24034431.steven-naismith-wants-hearts-produce-academy-talent/

The encouraging thing is we're not just launching them out to teams on loan at the first sign of no game time. They're staying part of the squad and given challenges in training with the breathing space to learn from those mistakes. I think it's really benefited Denholm in that regard as he's really come on this season. It wouldn't surprise me if Tait isn't replaying that sitter he missed in his head over and over against St. Mirren. Much rather he was around the team on the back of that rather than sent to a new environment.

Edited January 17 by the jambo-rocker

[lowenan]

[Bundesliga Boy]

3 hours ago, the jambo-rocker said:

I won't lie and say the B team is arguably benefiting us, but I'm not comfortable with it being to the detriment of the rest of Scottish football. I'd rather we took ourselves out of it tbqh. Maybe that would force Celtic to go anaw and then it's a 'well nobody wants to play anyway' so let's remove it.

I also don't get how the SFA can just say it's 16 teams and that's that for the league. The highland is 18 is it not? It's arbitrary nonsense and the league can be as fucking many as they want if they vote for it. I honestly find it amazing the league haven't pushed back on this.

I hate hoping for relegated teams, but if the Highland league winner were to win this year, and a Clyde /Forfar/East Fife come down that would be just grand from a lowland league perspective as the two teams at bottom could finally be flushed down to their level. 

I also don't like the idea of using spfl2 as an excuse not to have more relegation. Be the example and open it up to follow rather than 'aye what about them'. When is the next chance for a vote on that? Can it just be called?

 

Surely Forfar would be Highland bound? 

 

 

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

4 hours ago, The Moonster said:

I'm really shocked to hear that clubs up and down the country haven't been listening to what a bunch of sychophantic Rangers fans think. 

I dunno ‘weebilly1690’ and ‘ftpwearrupeepul1872’ had some really good points about the potential of the new proposal. 

[edinabear]

7 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

I dunno ‘weebilly1690’ and ‘ftpwearrupeepul1872’ had some really good points about the potential of the new proposal. 

How do you know my username?

[Bestsinceslicebread]

4 hours ago, the jambo-rocker said:

A.    I won't lie and say the B team is arguably benefiting us, but I'm not comfortable with it being to the detriment of the rest of Scottish football. I'd rather we took ourselves out of it tbqh. Maybe that would force Celtic to go anaw and then it's a 'well nobody wants to play anyway' so let's remove it.

B.   I also don't get how the SFA can just say it's 16 teams and that's that for the league. The highland is 18 is it not? It's arbitrary nonsense and the league can be as fucking many as they want if they vote for it. I honestly find it amazing the league haven't pushed back on this.

C.  I hate hoping for relegated teams, but if the Highland league winner were to win this year, and a Clyde /Forfar/East Fife come down that would be just grand from a lowland league perspective as the two teams at bottom could finally be flushed down to their level. 

D.  I also don't like the idea of using spfl2 as an excuse not to have more relegation. Be the example and open it up to follow rather than 'aye what about them'. When is the next chance for a vote on that? Can it just be called?

Some fantastic points raised here>
A...  Yip out of the 3 x B teams the teams who has benefited the most is Hearts as they have seen the young lads, 16,17,18 all doing great with experience playing in the Lowland men's league, having improved from last year with games that I have watched past couple of seasons but correct it is part, at the expense of Scottish football.  There is only one thing should happen, a reserve league.

B...  The Lowland with 16 teams officially and including two guests but the Highland is officially 18.  If the Lowland wanted more, take the SFA to task, the SFA/SPFL would lose. You cannot have it for one league on a level and not have it the same for the other league in the same level.

C... If teams are weak then they get relegated and your comments if it happened this season making both bottom clubs relegated would be ideal, not because the teams are weak but on a bigger scale, there is bigger movement relegation/promotion which does get people excited.

D... So true, every team relegated from the SPFL2 I bet, wishes now they had voted for relegation opened up from the SPFL2, especially Brechin as it would be a higher chance of going back up. 'Be an example', totally agree with you but the Lowland league, in their greed & self  is known for doing what's best for them even though they know its not the best thing for Scottish Football.  When you have Civil Service Strollers nominating that there should be no talk of relegation from the Lowland league until the SPFL2 open their relegation is a total joke.  Don't these teams realise that if they get relegated from the Lowland league, they will not automatically got straight back up.  if they opened it up it would give any relegated team a greater chance of going back.  Just look at Cowdenbeath, East Stirlingshire, Berwick Rangers, Albion Rovers and Brechin City.   

I wouldn't say the league is corrupt as they have been given power to veto relegation but there are people in position thinking of themselves to the detriment of Scottish football, again when the chairman Tom Brown was the deciding vote to allow B teams in the league in the first place and then recently telling everyone that the conference tier 5 league was a done deal and no matter what they Lowland and Highland leagues vote, the league is coming in, relegating some 200 teams, (His position to me is untenable but the league allow him to continue) and then you have Civil Service Strollers voting in the AGM that relegation from the Lowland league should not be talked about until the SPFL2 opens up their relegation.

I have been to games involving the Lowland, East, West, South, highland and North in past few years and its been enjoyable and personally all I was to see is our Scottish Pyramid thrive having an enthusiastic fan base of our Scottish pyramid, something we can all be, yes, all be proud of even if not right now but we are getting there, slowly. I will say that in the past 4 years we have actually came a long way from where we are, its still a long road but hopefully we will get it right and enjoy Scottish football and watch it thrive once more

 

Edited January 17 by Bestsinceslicebread

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

1 hour ago, edinabear said:

How do you know my username?

I just guessed when i saw your post on the thread about a lack of b teams in spfl2 being an anti-protestant conspiracy. 

[Alberto Spencer]

3 hours ago, The Moonster said:

What benefit have Hearts got from it? Genuine question btw, not having a go. Are there any players moving from the B team to the senior team?

I'd add to the comments in earlier replies that it was the promise of Lowland League playing time that helped convince James Wilson/Gus Stevenson to stay at Hearts, rather than go to an EPL U18 side. They are benefitting from playing against adults in competitive games. They still play occasional U18 games (Celtic/Rangers for example) but have slowly integrated into being regulars. Wilson is replacing Makenzie Kirk up front and scored a hat trick in the last game and that means more than 5 against a weak U18 side. 

Time will tell how they develop but quite a few of Hearts B players played in a bounce game at Rugby Park on Monday (RWB Adam Forrester scored the winner) so Naismith is involving them in 1st Team practice. 

Myself, I'd rather a proper Reserve League was introduced BUT some teams feel it a waste of their players' time (Celtic/Rangers) and many others resent having to have players who are "not good enough" for their 1st Team but needed to round out a squad.

[kevsmart]

4 hours ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:

I hope no team is relegated into this sham of a league. Even if they finish bottom and deserve to be relegated they don’t deserve to have to live with the consequences of what a few greedy clubs in the Lowland League voted for. Until it changes I’d happily see every current club fester here with the B teams and if was up to me the Lowland league would be removed from the pyramid until such times.

So what you are saying is that NO club in the LL, deserves to be in League 2? Rubbish.

[Burnieman]

7 hours ago, virginton said:

So in year 4 and onwards, you have no factual basis to support that claim. 

Well no because the SFA cannot force any organisation within the Pyramid to accept any of their utter shite, back of a fag packet proposals. 

And that is a fact. 

As I was saying about an open, serious debate.  Not that you will find it here, just head in sand stuff.  B teams aren't going away,

Edited January 17 by Burnieman

[kevsmart]

2 hours ago, Bundesliga Boy said:

 

Surely Forfar would be Highland bound? 

 

 

They would be yes.

[Burnieman]

7 hours ago, Bring Back Paddy Flannery said:

There is a very, very simple solution to the B team situation and it involves the   9 pathetic, joke outfits in this league not parting their arse cheeks at the flash of a couple of grand.

You do realise the LL wasn't against the introduction of the Tier 5 Conference?  you also realise that there's a good chance this idea won't go away.

The LL, HL and the tier 6 leagues have the chance to shape things.

[Burnieman]

47 minutes ago, Alberto Spencer said:

I'd add to the comments in earlier replies that it was the promise of Lowland League playing time that helped convince James Wilson/Gus Stevenson to stay at Hearts, rather than go to an EPL U18 side. They are benefitting from playing against adults in competitive games. They still play occasional U18 games (Celtic/Rangers for example) but have slowly integrated into being regulars. Wilson is replacing Makenzie Kirk up front and scored a hat trick in the last game and that means more than 5 against a weak U18 side. 

Time will tell how they develop but quite a few of Hearts B players played in a bounce game at Rugby Park on Monday (RWB Adam Forrester scored the winner) so Naismith is involving them in 1st Team practice. 

Myself, I'd rather a proper Reserve League was introduced BUT some teams feel it a waste of their players' time (Celtic/Rangers) and many others resent having to have players who are "not good enough" for their 1st Team but needed to round out a squad.

I think Hearts are definitely benefitting by the looks of it, they are playing a consistent squad and seem to have a structure towards it, no requests for weeks off because of, well just because.  Naismith starting out as B team manager probably also helps.  I do wonder what Rangers and Celtic get out of it, I'm not entirely sure there will be too many who make the step-up, and I'm surprised the likes of Hibs or even Motherwell or Killie don't look more closely at it ie clubs who really need to develop their younger players into the first team.

As you point out a proper reserve league would be desirable but really, nobody is interested. Even getting an U20 league together looks unlikely. Heads need banged together for a solution to the B team/Reserve issue but this is Scottish football, and everyone has their own self-interested position to defend first.

[EdinburghBlue]

Given the level of opposition to the Conference League proposal I don't think it will return, at least not in its original form. However, I think it's existence showed that there are problems that need to be addressed with the current structure, problems which won't be dealt with simply by opening up automatic promotion and relegation between the SPFL and the two tier 5 feeder leagues.

I think the major reason why the Conference League proposal was initially attractive to many boards of directors was that it partially addressed their concerns about relegation creating a financial black hole, with there effectively being no sponsorship/prize money available to teams in the two tier 5 feeder leagues. So relegation into a league that had some sponsorship/prize money would provide an opportunity for a team to recover and win promotion back into the SPFL before they were overwhelmed by financial problems, while still providing an opportunity for successful/ambitious teams to come through the pyramid. However, I don't think that the boards expected the level of fan opposition that the proposal attracted, and that's why I'm arguing that it won't come back in its current form. However that still leaves the underlying issues to be addressed.

I would suggest that two things need to be done. First, significantly expand the size of the fourth tier, thus facilitating the introduction of a couple of automatic relegation places. Two automatic relegations from ten is too many, and it would be almost impossible to persuade SPFL teams to go for this. Second, much greater effort to attract sponsorship for the feeder leagues, combined with much fairer sharing of the sponsorship cake. (Personally I think using the sponsorship money to provide prize money rather than sharing fairly to cover the costs of participation in the competition, participation which is needed to provide a competition which is available for and attractive to sponsors, is the wrong way to use this money.) I think the denizens of the part-time leagues would be much more sanguine about automatic relegation if there was not a 20% chance of this happening in any individual season, if relegation was to league which was not going to cause immediate financial problems for them, to a league with a decent level of competition, and to one from which there was a realistic opportunity for return if good enough on the playing field. This is achievable if everyone pulls together for the common good.

I think also causing some angst amongst the boards of the part-time clubs is the number of clubs which have been financially doped in order to get promotion. (You might argue Bonnyrigg the only exception so far.) But it might be more far-sighted of some if they accepted that a league structure which facilitated easier returns when financial doping is removed and the teams gravitate to the bottom of the SPFL would be better for them. (And perhaps the SPFL to stop allowing clubs which are technically insolvent to continue to operate on the basis of promises from the directors to pay the bills.)

But I'm optimistic. I think in 10 years, and possibly even in five, we'll have a better structure which allows teams to move up/down over time. And this will include seeing some of the teams that have exited the SPFL – and which will do so over the next few years – returning. I think there's only a handful of teams in Scotland that "belong" to a particular level. There's really no inherent reason why some of the club is currently at the top of the Lowland league are predestined to be "bigger" than an Albion Rovers, Berwick, Cowdenbeath et cetera.

[Burnieman]

6 minutes ago, EdinburghBlue said:

Given the level of opposition to the Conference League proposal I don't think it will return, at least not in its original form. However, I think it's existence showed that there are problems that need to be addressed with the current structure, problems which won't be dealt with simply by opening up automatic promotion and relegation between the SPFL and the two tier 5 feeder leagues.

I think the major reason why the Conference League proposal was initially attractive to many boards of directors was that it partially addressed their concerns about relegation creating a financial black hole, with there effectively being no sponsorship/prize money available to teams in the two tier 5 feeder leagues. So relegation into a league that had some sponsorship/prize money would provide an opportunity for a team to recover and win promotion back into the SPFL before they were overwhelmed by financial problems, while still providing an opportunity for successful/ambitious teams to come through the pyramid. However, I don't think that the boards expected the level of fan opposition that the proposal attracted, and that's why I'm arguing that it won't come back in its current form. However that still leaves the underlying issues to be addressed.

I would suggest that two things need to be done. First, significantly expand the size of the fourth tier, thus facilitating the introduction of a couple of automatic relegation places. Two automatic relegations from ten is too many, and it would be almost impossible to persuade SPFL teams to go for this. Second, much greater effort to attract sponsorship for the feeder leagues, combined with much fairer sharing of the sponsorship cake. (Personally I think using the sponsorship money to provide prize money rather than sharing fairly to cover the costs of participation in the competition, participation which is needed to provide a competition which is available for and attractive to sponsors, is the wrong way to use this money.) I think the denizens of the part-time leagues would be much more sanguine about automatic relegation if there was not a 20% chance of this happening in any individual season, if relegation was to league which was not going to cause immediate financial problems for them, to a league with a decent level of competition, and to one from which there was a realistic opportunity for return if good enough on the playing field. This is achievable if everyone pulls together for the common good.

I think also causing some angst amongst the boards of the part-time clubs is the number of clubs which have been financially doped in order to get promotion. (You might argue Bonnyrigg the only exception so far.) But it might be more far-sighted of some if they accepted that a league structure which facilitated easier returns when financial doping is removed and the teams gravitate to the bottom of the SPFL would be better for them. (And perhaps the SPFL to stop allowing clubs which are technically insolvent to continue to operate on the basis of promises from the directors to pay the bills.)

But I'm optimistic. I think in 10 years, and possibly even in five, we'll have a better structure which allows teams to move up/down over time. And this will include seeing some of the teams that have exited the SPFL – and which will do so over the next few years – returning. I think there's only a handful of teams in Scotland that "belong" to a particular level. There's really no inherent reason why some of the club is currently at the top of the Lowland league are predestined to be "bigger" than an Albion Rovers, Berwick, Cowdenbeath et cetera.

 

Good post, however isn't there a parachute payment plus League Cup and Challenge Cup participation for newly relegated SPFL clubs? that at least gives them breathing space to adjust to the new financial climate.  No former SPFL club has gone bust, yet.

Regarding SPFL prize money, long term perhaps they should be looking at giving both the LL and HL and slice of the sponsorship pie to help make it a less scary place for SPFL club to drop into, and/or help the leagues to find decent sponsorship.  Afterall, these leagues sit on the Professional Game Board just as the SPFL does.

 

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

50 minutes ago, kevsmart said:

So what you are saying is that NO club in the LL, deserves to be in League 2? Rubbish.

Correct. Any league that contains B teams should not be taken remotely seriously and should not be part of our national pyramid. 

[Bring Back Paddy Flannery]

51 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

You do realise the LL wasn't against the introduction of the Tier 5 Conference?  you also realise that there's a good chance this idea won't go away.

The LL, HL and the tier 6 leagues have the chance to shape things.

Define the “LL”. The same joke outfits who voted for B teams? The league as whole? The league board and chairman? 

[EdinburghBlue]

14 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

 

Good post, however isn't there a parachute payment plus League Cup and Challenge Cup participation for newly relegated SPFL clubs? that at least gives them breathing space to adjust to the new financial climate.  No former SPFL club has gone bust, yet.

Regarding SPFL prize money, long term perhaps they should be looking at giving both the LL and HL and slice of the sponsorship pie to help make it a less scary place for SPFL club to drop into, and/or help the leagues to find decent sponsorship.  Afterall, these leagues sit on the Professional Game Board just as the SPFL does.

 

You are correct on parachute/League Cup payments, but obviously time-limited.

Completely agree on on your points on a slice of the pie and assistance on finding sponsorship.

[The Moonster]

56 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

You do realise the LL wasn't against the introduction of the Tier 5 Conference?  you also realise that there's a good chance this idea won't go away.

The LL, HL and the tier 6 leagues have the chance to shape things.

Just as well the LL don't decide on structural changes by themselves then. 

It's really not difficult, SPFL sides have been threatened by the Old Firm with shite like this for years now and at every turn it was rejected. It's the LL that is keeping the idea alive, it would be dead if those clubs didn't let them in.