Junior Takeover

[FairWeatherFan]

19 minutes ago, Shanner said:

Reasonable concerns about the impact of the SJC are one thing, entitled whining is another. The former can usually be dealt with more easily than the later however we seem to be at a point where only the latter will be good enough for some.

Year 1 - SJC didn't exactly go in people's favour

Year 2 - WoSFL rule change to make sure the SJC is catered to from now on.

Year 3 - Still not good enough, need an extra date for the two-legged semi-finals

Year 4 - Looks to be undermining the SCC. Which would allow the SJC to pick more favourable dates. As with the Strathclyde/SJC divide. There's going to be teams that pick both or the SCC over SJC. Which just creates an even more cluttered league fixture list.

Year 5 - Who knows maybe there is a vote to make the SJC mandatory for WoSFL clubs.

 

[Burnieman]

Just now, Shanner said:

No real insight into why people think that the answer to the manageable inconvenience experienced by a few ideologically driven anti Junior clubs merits the complete cessation of a tournament that brings benefits to other clubs. Other than that you've only provided strawman points that I've given my thoughts on earlier.

You don't seem to appreciate how the competition is viewed elsewhere.  The fact that the EoS have maybe 4 SJFA member clubs illustrates than many have moved on.  Not all WoS clubs are members either.  

A Talbot fan will view it differently from almost anyone else and that's understandable, same with a few other clubs.  It's always been held in higher regard in Ayrshire than anywhere else.

What cannot be denied is that many of it's "traditional" clubs have left the SJFA, have left the Junior Cup behind for their own benefit. They haven't suffered because of it and most now play at a higher level, two in the SPFL.

If there's enough clubs who want it and can keep it viable then carry on, but that should come without any impact to senior Pyramid leagues and cups.  I personally think winding it all up and distributing much needed funds to all members to be more of a benefit, certainly to those in the North and Tayside.

[Shanner]

Just now, FairWeatherFan said:

Year 1 - SJC didn't exactly go in people's favour

Year 2 - WoSFL rule change to make sure the SJC is catered to from now on.

Year 3 - Still not good enough, need an extra date for the two-legged semi-finals

Year 4 - Looks to be undermining the SCC. Which would allow the SJC to pick more favourable dates. As with the Strathclyde/SJC divide. There's going to be teams that pick both or the SCC over SJC. Which just creates an even more cluttered league fixture list.

Year 5 - Who knows maybe there is a vote to make the SJC mandatory for WoSFL clubs.

 

A vote aka a democratic process.  I don't see the problem with that. It also seems varnishingly unlikely that a majority would go for it. 

 

[Shanner]

Just now, Burnieman said:

You don't seem to appreciate how the competition is viewed elsewhere.  The fact that the EoS have maybe 4 SJFA member clubs illustrates than many have moved on.  Not all WoS clubs are members either.  

A Talbot fan will view it differently from almost anyone else and that's understandable, same with a few other clubs.  It's always been held in higher regard in Ayrshire than anywhere else.

What cannot be denied is that many of it's "traditional" clubs have left the SJFA, have left the Junior Cup behind for their own benefit. They haven't suffered because of it and most now play at a higher level, two in the SPFL.

If there's enough clubs who want it and can keep it viable then carry on, but that should come without any impact to senior Pyramid leagues and cups.  I personally think winding it all up and distributing much needed funds to all members to be more of a benefit, certainly to those in the North and Tayside.

I really really do appreciate how the competition is viewed elsewhere. 

[Burnieman]

Just now, Shanner said:

I really really do appreciate how the competition is viewed elsewhere. 

So it's not "anti-Junior" to hold a different opinion about the SJFA/Cup.  I doubt the committee's of Bonnyrigg or Linlithgow or Bo'ness or Penicuik or Broxburn or Musselburgh are idealogically anti-Junior, just that they understood that in order to better themselves some things needed to change and be left behind, the Junior Cup / SJFA being one.

Although of course to move to the EoSFL, clubs had to resign from the SJFA anyway as they were the baddies (or "traitors" as used by some in the SJFA heirachy).

[FairWeatherFan]

10 minutes ago, Shanner said:

A vote aka a democratic process.  I don't see the problem with that. It also seems varnishingly unlikely that a majority would go for it. 

 

Its partly because people knew what the WoSFL was being set-up to do and its the only reason why the LL, EoSFL, SoSFL, accepted it into the pyramid.

[clansman]

Talbot apparently had a big game Friday no doubt attended by SJFA officials. Any of their supporters on here get round to asking one of their committee why they are nominating this guy ?

 

[GNU_Linux]

Here me out I've got a revolutionary take on this

the current situation of the SJC & SCC is a an adequate middleground. Not perfect but adequate at least

[GordonS]

1 hour ago, Shanner said:

A vote aka a democratic process.  I don't see the problem with that. It also seems varnishingly unlikely that a majority would go for it. 

 

A vote to force a minority to do something they don't want to do and don't need to do isn't necessarily democratic. 

[santheman]

9 minutes ago, GordonS said:

A vote to force a minority to do something they don't want to do and don't need to do isn't necessarily democratic. 

So what's your idea of democracy.

Letting a minority dictate to the majority.

I always thought it was the other way around, silly me.

[Shanner]

9 minutes ago, GordonS said:

A vote to force a minority to do something they don't want to do and don't need to do isn't necessarily democratic. 

Well it seems to be a vote that only exists in the minds of people of a certain viewpoint. There's way too much hypothetical it's and buts masquerading as solid information on this thread. 

All we really have is Pyramidy sorts catastrophising about a future that very likely won't come to pass. 

[Shanner]

21 minutes ago, GNU_Linux said:

Here me out I've got a revolutionary take on this
 

  Hide contents

the current situation of the SJC & SCC is a an adequate middleground. Not perfect but adequate at least

 

Not hysterical enough. 

[Dev]

18 hours ago, Cairn Cheerleader said:

The full academy use our facilities and they are going to be further upgraded over the summer 

Hi

Thanks.  Looks good.

[Shanner]

1 hour ago, clansman said:

Talbot apparently had a big game Friday no doubt attended by SJFA officials. Any of their supporters on here get round to asking one of their committee why they are nominating this guy ?

1 hour ago, Burnieman said:

So it's not "anti-Junior" to hold a different opinion about the SJFA/Cup.  I doubt the committee's of Bonnyrigg or Linlithgow or Bo'ness or Penicuik or Broxburn or Musselburgh are idealogically anti-Junior, just that they understood that in order to better themselves some things needed to change and be left behind, the Junior Cup / SJFA being one.

Although of course to move to the EoSFL, clubs had to resign from the SJFA anyway as they were the baddies (or "traitors" as used by some in the SJFA heirachy).

Again, I'm aware of what is sensible good faith argument v's foot stamping spoiled wean level stuff.  I can't really list the extent to which particular clubs or committees are anti Junior, I'm commenting on the collective sleep of obfuscation and speculation on this thread. This is all stuff I've said umpteen times on this very thread.

[Dev]

FWIW

Let's have a meaningful competition for ALL Pyramid clubs - albeit with regionalised early rounds  so clubs aren't faced with expensive long distances to travel unless they make the later rounds  - with clubs not forced to enter. Surely the SFA has the funding now to set this up having qualified for a major competition for the first time in so long. 

The SFA could also now properly fund its' own Licencing Department - failure to do so at present is shambolic.

[clansman]

5 minutes ago, Shanner said:

 

That would no you didn't ask and continue to deflect or yes you did and continue to deflect 

[wow-wee]

14 minutes ago, santheman said:

So what's your idea of democracy.

Letting a minority dictate to the majority.

I always thought it was the other way around, silly me.

The sjfa can't take control of the wosl even if 70 of the 80 clubs vote to go back under their control they would need to start up a new league with a new name and start from scratch just like the wosfl had to do and any assets or monies that were left from the West region juniors belonged to the sjfa? So if 70 clubs vote to leave the wosfl they leave with nothing and the 10 remaining clubs then continue as.  The new sjfa West league would no longer be part of the pyramid.

[Dev]

3 minutes ago, wow-wee said:

The sjfa can't take control of the wosl even if 70 of the 80 clubs vote to go back under their control they would need to start up a new league with a new name and start from scratch just like the wosfl had to do and any assets or monies that were left from the West region juniors belonged to the sjfa? So if 70 clubs vote to leave the wosfl they leave with nothing and the 10 remaining clubs then continue as.  The new sjfa West league would no longer be part of the pyramid.

Is there an SFA rule or reg which actually states that this would be the case? Just asking!

[santheman]

2 minutes ago, wow-wee said:

The sjfa can't take control of the wosl even if 70 of the 80 clubs vote to go back under their control they would need to start up a new league with a new name and start from scratch just like the wosfl had to do and any assets or monies that were left from the West region juniors belonged to the sjfa? So if 70 clubs vote to leave the wosfl they leave with nothing and the 10 remaining clubs then continue as.  The new sjfa West league would no longer be part of the pyramid.

And here was me just querying what the definition of democracy was but thanks anyway.

 

 

[GordonS]

32 minutes ago, santheman said:

So what's your idea of democracy.

Letting a minority dictate to the majority.

I always thought it was the other way around, silly me.

People confuse majoritarianism with democracy. Democracy includes the idea of giving people as much freedom to make their own choices as you can.

It's not just the majority getting their own way over minorities no matter what.