Grandmas Enigma Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 . 13 hours ago, Voice of Reason said: Gretna 2008 and Edinburgh University are now detached from the rest of the league. Should the SLFL invest some of the funds they have received from the 'B' teams to give a parachute payment to both clubs to resign? I’ve read the thread. I think the reason it has encouraged such passionate responses is because what you are proposing is ridiculous in a competitive way. In some of the other threads EK spending big on lots of players has been widely condemned and their ‘sporting integrity’ questioned. I think what you are proposing is far worse. Effectively what you appear to be suggesting is that since Gretna and Edinburgh Uni are performing poorly this season they should take a payment to escape the sporting challenges they face. In essence get paid to lose their sporting integrity! Like I said at the start, Ridiculous! I understand both teams are struggling to compete successfully on the pitch. But that must be a result of both of their whole clubs failures. The boards, committees, staff, coaches and players are all contributors to their current status. However no matter how tough it is on and maybe off the pitch the reason they exist it sto compete as best they can in the environment they chose and if they can’t they will find their level - in this case get relegated. As some one said above if they chose to resign they’d probably have to rejoin at the bottom of the pyramid. Is a potential parachute payment worth losing the clubs earned place in whatever respective league they fall into on top of losing their sporting integrity and respect? I don’t think so. And neither should you especially if you are affiliated to Edinburgh uni (or Gretna). 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 13 hours ago, Burnieman said: If you take voluntary relegation when you haven't actually been relegated, it is effectively resigning. In Edinburgh Uni's case, that would mean applying to join the EoS at Third Division level. For Gretna it would probably be easier as the SoS is only one division. There's no reason this has to be the case though, all it would require is a bit of common sense from the people running the EoS. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bestsinceslicebread Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 4 hours ago, Grandmas Enigma said: . I’ve read the thread. I think the reason it has encouraged such passionate responses is because what you are proposing is ridiculous in a competitive way. In some of the other threads EK spending big on lots of players has been widely condemned and their ‘sporting integrity’ questioned. I think what you are proposing is far worse. Effectively what you appear to be suggesting is that since Gretna and Edinburgh Uni are performing poorly this season they should take a payment to escape the sporting challenges they face. In essence get paid to lose their sporting integrity! Like I said at the start, Ridiculous! I understand both teams are struggling to compete successfully on the pitch. But that must be a result of both of their whole clubs failures. The boards, committees, staff, coaches and players are all contributors to their current status. However no matter how tough it is on and maybe off the pitch the reason they exist it sto compete as best they can in the environment they chose and if they can’t they will find their level - in this case get relegated. As some one said above if they chose to resign they’d probably have to rejoin at the bottom of the pyramid. Is a potential parachute payment worth losing the clubs earned place in whatever respective league they fall into on top of losing their sporting integrity and respect? I don’t think so. And neither should you especially if you are affiliated to Edinburgh uni (or Gretna). Agreed with your assessment here Yes I think its ridiculous what the Op is asking or stating. Your comment that I have put in bold is that its been a few years for these two in the relegation end but it should be by the normal conventional way of relegation that they are demoted. We are in a situation in this competitive league which is wrong, (no automatic relegation), the bottom team, actually the bottom two should be relegated, you finish last your moved out but both could be saved this season. Think everyone is agreed that the bottom performing teams which everyone expected again is Edinburgh Uni and Gretna and I cant see any changes until they are both relegated over a few seasons One thing is we have to remember, everything could change for a team who are in despair, any team, a major sponsor, a new chairman, committee, a new manager, players etc.. Just let it run its course and see who is relegated over the next few years as most that I expect to be relegated over the next 5 years from the Lowland league I don't expect them to be back anytime soon 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
To B or not B Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 18 hours ago, Voice of Reason said: Gretna 2008 and Edinburgh University are now detached from the rest of the league. Should the SLFL invest some of the funds they have received from the 'B' teams to give a parachute payment to both clubs to resign? What happens when they leave and the next team becomes stranded, just keep handing out money to sub standard teams??? An absolutely ridiculous suggestion. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
It's Me Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 What a nonsense idea. There is lots of chat on here about more relegation from the Lowland League - last season there were no play-off as only one champion club was eligible to be promoted - I think that weakens the argument for more relegation places. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekok Posted January 28 Share Posted January 28 Exactly, sometimes this point is lost in the zany world of the Pyramid in Scottish Football. The ridiculous and convoluted arrangements for relegation from and promotion to the SPFL are entirely to blame. The rules around this need to accommodate numerous possibilities, which can see two, one or no teams relegated from the Lowland League. Just read that last sentence again and try not to laugh or cry. That said, none of these arrangements can ever prevent a promotion into the Lowland League for a licensed team from East/ South/ West which wins their league. Either straight up , as It's Me said, or via Playoffs. Suggest that is very important to remember , bottom line is there is automatic promotion into Lowland League if a team meets the requirements. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 7 hours ago, ekok said: Exactly, sometimes this point is lost in the zany world of the Pyramid in Scottish Football. The ridiculous and convoluted arrangements for relegation from and promotion to the SPFL are entirely to blame.... What the SPFL does is not directly linked to what the LL does so that's a completely disingenuous argument. Three up three down is the norm throughout the rest of the southern pyramid. There's no obvious reason why it should not also apply between tiers 5 and 6. There's also no obvious reason why it only has to be the WoS, EoS or SoS champion that is eligible for promotion. Why not include the runner-up in the playoff format if the champion has no licence? The goal should be to create the strongest possible Lowland League rather than protect "longstanding members" in an it's ma baw an you're no playin sort of way. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekok Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Beg to differ, the reams of rules around all of this are completely interconnected, never mind linked. You might not be happy with my take on this , but calling it disingenuous is just plain wrong. One illustration, the rules require every team in the Lowland League to have a licence, obviously applies to teams coming up. All teams in SPFL , as from next season require at least a Bronze License , obviously applies to any teams coming up. Suggest backs up my take on all of this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 (edited) 3 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said: What the SPFL does is not directly linked to what the LL does so that's a completely disingenuous argument. Three up three down is the norm throughout the rest of the southern pyramid. There's no obvious reason why it should not also apply between tiers 5 and 6. There's also no obvious reason why it only has to be the WoS, EoS or SoS champion that is eligible for promotion. Why not include the runner-up in the playoff format if the champion has no licence? The goal should be to create the strongest possible Lowland League rather than protect "longstanding members" in an it's ma baw an you're no playin sort of way. Why look at the pyramid below - shouldn’t LL have at most 1 up and a play off involving second bottom? That gives you 4 clubs in a play off system with a possible two being promoted. Again looking at pyramid if the LL looks upwards which surely it should be if it aspires to raise standards that is the system that largely applies in SPFL - so there is a case for that. The HL of course is different. Edited January 29 by Cowden Cowboy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnieman Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 On 28/01/2024 at 11:18, craigkillie said: There's no reason this has to be the case though, all it would require is a bit of common sense from the people running the EoS. EU would have to apply to the EoS as a new member club given they haven't actually been relegated, they would have resigned from the LL. The last thing the Pyramid needs is encouraging clubs to resign from leagues. It's a ridiculous suggestion anyway, EU wont resign (or Gretna). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stag Nation Posted January 29 Share Posted January 29 Not long after I joined this forum in 2011, it went into meltdown over the Rangers/Sevco fiasco. Almost everyone (apart from”Rangers” supporters) banged on - correctly - about “Sporting integrity”). Whatever happened to that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 5 hours ago, Burnieman said: EU would have to apply to the EoS as a new member club given they haven't actually been relegated, they would have resigned from the LL. The last thing the Pyramid needs is encouraging clubs to resign from leagues. It's a ridiculous suggestion anyway, EU wont resign (or Gretna). I have no idea why you're getting hung up on this notion of "resigning from leagues" like there's some sort of vast difference between a voluntary relegation and an on-pitch one. It is clearly much better for the concept of a pyramid if clubs realise that they would be better off playing at a lower level and there is a mechanism for them to drop down a division through choice, thus freeing up a spot for another club who may be better suited to that level. Aside from pointless blazer logic about the sanctity of different organisations, why would anyone have any actual problem with that idea as a principle? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 7 hours ago, craigkillie said: It is clearly much better for the concept of a pyramid if clubs realise that they would be better off playing at a lower level and there is a mechanism for them to drop down a division through choice, thus freeing up a spot for another club who may be better suited to that level. There's absolutely nothing to demonstrate that clubs would be better off playing at a lower level. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 1 hour ago, virginton said: There's absolutely nothing to demonstrate that clubs would be better off playing at a lower level. I'm not saying they will be, my question is about whether a club should be able to decide that they think they would be. For example if you're struggling financially with the travelling at a regionwide level, or are losing support as a result of getting pumped every week, then I could see why a club might think they'd prefer to go down a level. It's a theoretical idea rather than one I think any specific club would necessarily be looking to actually do right now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darwizzy Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 If people are so averse to the B team situation, then why not use this as a compromise. Boot (or at least give a small sum to) EU and Gretna out. Celtic and Rangers B back in, and rid of Hearts because nobody really cares about them. 16 team league, Bottom team in 4 way playoff with winners of west/south/east. -5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) 1 hour ago, craigkillie said: I'm not saying they will be, my question is about whether a club should be able to decide that they think they would be. For example if you're struggling financially with the travelling at a regionwide level, or are losing support as a result of getting pumped every week, then I could see why a club might think they'd prefer to go down a level. It's a theoretical idea rather than one I think any specific club would necessarily be looking to actually do right now. Requesting relegation voluntarily at the end of the season is one thing, but the OP is suggesting that clubs can be encouraged by other parties to resign from the league by being given cash. You can call it a parachute payment, but it's essentially a bribe. Edited January 30 by Cyclizine 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekok Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) The absolute disrespect being shown by some in this thread is a disgrace. As usual the entitlement regarding Tier 6 raises its head from some posters as well. Funny, don't recall much or any of that before West came to the party. Edited January 30 by ekok Spelling -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 2 hours ago, ekok said: The absolute disrespect being shown by some in this thread is a disgrace. As usual the entitlement regarding Tier 6 raises its head from some posters as well. Funny, don't recall much or any of that before West came to the party. The pyramid should belong equally to all clubs that participate in it. The goal should be to have all clubs playing at the appropriate level for their playing standards as rapidly as possible and not to have selfish self-preservation policies in place to protect the clubs who found it easiest to apply for the Lowland League ten years ago. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burnieman Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 (edited) 13 hours ago, craigkillie said: I have no idea why you're getting hung up on this notion of "resigning from leagues" like there's some sort of vast difference between a voluntary relegation and an on-pitch one. It is clearly much better for the concept of a pyramid if clubs realise that they would be better off playing at a lower level and there is a mechanism for them to drop down a division through choice, thus freeing up a spot for another club who may be better suited to that level. Aside from pointless blazer logic about the sanctity of different organisations, why would anyone have any actual problem with that idea as a principle? I've actually pointed out to you that a club dropping a level does have repurcussions through all subsequent lower levels. So aye, I'm sure more than a few people would have a problem with "voluntary relegation" to the next level becoming a thing, and bumping an extra club downwards as a result to accomodate. If a club is struggling at the level they are playing at, then they have to be aware that if they resign, they start at the bottom of the Pyramid. For EU that is EoS 3rd Division. They're not going to do that though. Edited January 30 by Burnieman 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Left Back Posted January 30 Share Posted January 30 3 hours ago, Darwizzy said: If people are so averse to the B team situation, then why not use this as a compromise. Boot (or at least give a small sum to) EU and Gretna out. Celtic and Rangers B back in, and rid of Hearts because nobody really cares about them. 16 team league, Bottom team in 4 way playoff with winners of west/south/east. That's some effort to actually top the table of the most stupid comment in this thread. Well done. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.