Non League Matters - The Continuation of Tonys english Football Site 



  Main Index MAIN
INDEX
Search Posts SEARCH
POSTS
Who's Online WHO'S
ONLINE
Log in LOG
IN

Home: Non-League Football Discussion: Restructuring Discussion:
Unibond 'Midland' in 2009?

 

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


acmold
Man City Transfer Target!

Jan 25, 2009, 9:56 AM

Posts: 14497
Location:
Team(s):

Post #26 of 50 (6318 views)
Shortcut
Re: [UKPunk] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or

In days of old Oxfordshire as far as the Thames was in Mercia, the Thames was not a river as such 1,000 years ago it was just a very wide marsh area going towards the Berkshire downs. Abingdon was in Wessex. Archers were placed in the centre of Oxford over looking the marsh areas to stop invaders from Wessex. For a number of years a daughter of the King of Mercia was always located in Oxford as his agent. In the last 80 or so years Oxford always had many tie ups with the West Midlands due to the car industry, which is much smaller than it was and is still on the decline as we speak. The MP for Banbury recently said the government should look at the M40 corridor (Oxford to Birmingham) as there was a risk of 35,000 jobs being lost in various aspects of the motor industry, from F1 through touring cars to car production. This figure was also quoted by the BBC. Pre war many football fans in Oxford (and Banbury) went on the "5 bob" special to see the Villa each home game, in those days the railway went to Snow Hill and you got a tram to Villa Park.

A Midlands county is defined as a county (or part of a county) ajoining Warwickshire, which Oxfordshire does, though an exception has to be made to Nottinghamshire ! A home county is one ajoining the old county of Middlesex (and Surrey ?). Adderbury just south of Banbury is the landmass centre of England, Bicester is currently "selling" it's self as Englands central location, this mainly due to it having a large railway freight yard in the C.O.D area which the military are willing to hire out, and the forthcoming re-instatement of the East - West rail link through the town and the connecting of that line to the Chiltern Line from Birmingham to London with a loop between the two stations.

North Leigh just outside Witney if quite often confused with Northleach about 15 / 20 miles away on the A40 in Gloucestershire, both are on the Cotswolds and have strong Roman links. Both have Roman Villa's of note. While on a "Time Team" theme, the map they keep showing on the programme has the Thames as rising as Charwelton, the source of the Cherwell, which is in Northants but very near to Warwickshire. Before 1897 the Thames did not run through any county, it only formed county boundaries.

Yours facts for the day ?.


fishy
Reserve Team Sub


Jan 25, 2009, 5:39 PM

Posts: 387
Location: Hull
Team(s): AFC Hull

Post #27 of 50 (6250 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hucknallite] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
That settles it then: Unibond Division 1 Kitchen Sealant & Unibond Division 1 No More Nails.


And the Tile Adhesive and Grout Premier Division?


Roman
First Team Sub


Jan 26, 2009, 2:40 PM

Posts: 1037
Location: Exiled in Staffordshire
Team(s): Arsenal, Rocester, Brentford

Post #28 of 50 (6145 views)
Shortcut
Re: [acmold] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

So is Staffordshire in the North, the Midlands, or the North Midlands? Cool


UKPunk
Man City Transfer Target!

Jan 26, 2009, 2:44 PM

Posts: 11786
Location:
Team(s):

Post #29 of 50 (6143 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Roman] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
So is Staffordshire in the North, the Midlands, or the North Midlands? Cool

With all this drift it could even be in the South. Wink



1-0-1-0-4-25-40-65-181-289=606

Last game: Mon 20/8/18
4. Basford United 1 Hednesford Town 2


Oxford Stone
Chelsea Transfer Target


Jan 26, 2009, 4:50 PM

Posts: 5511
Location: Abingdon-on-Thames
Team(s): Maidstone United

Post #30 of 50 (6120 views)
Shortcut
Re: [sanktpaulee] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To
That settles it then: Unibond Division 1 Kitchen Sealant & Unibond Division 1 No More Nails.

And British Gas Business League Division 1 Final Demand & British Gas Business League Division 1 Boiler Replacement...



The chant I'd like to hear would be from fans of a Vase-level team holding / beating a team from Truro / Abingdon U's league in a Cup competition. Surely they'd have the right to sing:

British Gas Business League Division 1 South and West? You're having a laugh!

British Gas Business League Division 1 South and West? You're having a laugh!


eldumpo
Youth Team Regular

Feb 1, 2009, 2:14 PM

Posts: 201
Location:
Team(s):

Post #31 of 50 (5978 views)
Shortcut
Re: [acmold] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

A Midlands county is defined as a county (or part of a county) ajoining Warwickshire, which Oxfordshire does, though an exception has to be made to Nottinghamshire ! A home county is one ajoining the old county of Middlesex (and Surrey ?).


Surely these are not in any way formal definitions?


DavetheGlassboy
Chelsea Transfer Target

Feb 1, 2009, 10:30 PM

Posts: 4520
Location: Oldbury, West Midlands
Team(s): Stourbridge FC, Warrington RLFC, Stourport HC

Post #32 of 50 (5921 views)
Shortcut
Re: [hunter] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To
Over in the Southern league, the northern of the two feeders has only 7 firmly midlands clubs, plus 5 in Gloucestershire. I'm never sure whether that county is midland or south-west or neither!

I got a bit mixed up, I presume we are working from this reading ?

AFC Sudbury Arlesey, Bury, Dunstable, Leighton, Leiston, Soham Town Rangers, Ware, Witham Town (these are all east of the Midlands)

Banbury United, North Leigh (these are Oxfordshire clubs only 40 or 50 miles from Birmingham)

Barwell, Rothwell Town, Woodford United (these are East Midlands clubs)

Bedworth United, Bromsgrove Rovers, Nuneaton Town, Stourport Swifts (these are West Midlands clubs)


Bishops Cleeve, Cinderford Town, Cirencester Town, Shortwood United (these are Gloucestrshire clubs, as far or further from Birmingham than the Oxfordshire clubs)



Re Gloucestershire, I think we could do with a region on the west of the country between the south west and the west midlands to mirror East Anglia, a Cotswolds and Malverns region, with 4 or 5 of the more rural counties.






My mistake as i thought North Leigh was in Gloucs, and thought Woodford was near London. I'd class Banbury as firmly midlands, some may not though. I'll be more thourough next time but at least the theme of the thread holds-up.


Banbury's in Oxfordshire so definitely not Midlands. I'd call it Thames Valley personally.



Last new ground (846): Vasil Levski Stadium, Sofia - Bulgaria v England 14/10/19
Last game: as above
Football seen in: England, Wales, Scotland, Italy, France, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Austria, Croatia, Jersey, Sweden, Switzerland, Republic of Ireland, United States of America, Ukraine, Montenegro, Estonia, San Marino, Slovenia, Northern Ireland, Malta, Lithuania, Russia, Belgium, Portugal, Czech Republic, Bulgaria


StokePriorAndy
First Team Star

Feb 10, 2009, 10:53 PM

Posts: 2118
Location: Blackwell Bromsgrove
Team(s): Bromsgrove Sporting, Bromsgrove Rovers, Tottenham H, Gainsborough Trinity

Post #33 of 50 (5759 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Oxford Stone] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To
That settles it then: Unibond Division 1 Kitchen Sealant & Unibond Division 1 No More Nails.

And British Gas Business League Division 1 Final Demand & British Gas Business League Division 1 Boiler Replacement...



The chant I'd like to hear would be from fans of a Vase-level team holding / beating a team from Truro / Abingdon U's league in a Cup competition. Surely they'd have the right to sing:

British Gas Business League Division 1 South and West? You're having a laugh!

British Gas Business League Division 1 South and West? You're having a laugh!



What about the "We sent Berkhamstead out of business because they're not in our league League" ?


Mr. T
Chelsea Transfer Target


Feb 11, 2009, 12:01 AM

Posts: 5371
Location:
Team(s):

Post #34 of 50 (5742 views)
Shortcut
Re: [DavetheGlassboy] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
Banbury's in Oxfordshire so definitely not Midlands. I'd call it Thames Valley personally.


It's so far north in the county that there are Warwickshire and Northamptonshire villages that are on more southerly lines of latitude. And the all but disappeared Banbury accent, almost urban, is more midland than that of south Oxfordshire and the Thames valley, which in places is not so dissimilar from the 'ooh-arr' caricature used by the lazy producers of third-rate TV and radio programmes to depict rural accents from Newlyn to Norwich.


(This post was edited by Mr. T on Feb 11, 2009, 12:02 AM)


cooksmad
Reserve Team Sub

Feb 12, 2009, 5:48 PM

Posts: 391
Location: Kettering
Team(s):

Post #35 of 50 (5585 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Mr. T] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

   
I don't understand why the Unibond League Division 1 South can't be scraped, with most of the teams going into the Southern League Midlands Division.

For Example teams like Loughborough Dynamo and Shepshed Dynamo are in Leicestershire and teams from the nearby Northamptonshire such as Corby Town and Rothwell Town are in the Southern league.

There will be teams such as Goole who will be against this, but why can't we go back to the old days of the Unibond League Divison One where teams from the North Division aswell as teams such as Goole can play in.

To stop congestion in the Southern League, i surgest that teams like Aylesbury United, Dunstable Town, Marlow...etc go into the Ryman League.

As that annoying meerkat of the telly says "simples"


bspittles
Reserve Team Regular

Feb 12, 2009, 7:04 PM

Posts: 614
Location: Shropshire
Team(s): Leek Town, Oxford United

Post #36 of 50 (5558 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cooksmad] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

I don't understand why the Unibond League Division 1 South can't be scraped, with most of the teams going into the Southern League Midlands Division.


The problem there is that a promotion would put such teams in the Southern League Premier. Clubs like us (Leek Town) and I'm sure many others, don't want to take that route.

Been there, done it (Crawley on a Saturday and Hastings on a Sunday), don't want to do it again!


KnowYourMarket
Man City Transfer Target!


Feb 12, 2009, 8:42 PM

Posts: 10964
Location: Longton, Stoke-on-Trent - Ar Bay a Brummie
Team(s): WBA, FC Saarbruecken, Brierley Hill Alliance (RIP)

Post #37 of 50 (5528 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cooksmad] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Don't you think we've got enough teams in the southern half of the pyramid?



Last ground visited(update requested by Spud): Wellington . New grounds 18/19: 38


buncranaboy
Qatar World Cup bid member!


Feb 12, 2009, 8:52 PM

Posts: 17959
Location: South Birmingham
Team(s): Barnstoneworth United; Bostock Stanley

Post #38 of 50 (5520 views)
Shortcut
Re: [modelhobbies] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
Don't you think we've got enough teams in the southern half of the pyramid?



................and there lies the nub of the problem. Two sub-feeders to the current Conference isn't adequate. There should be three (at least) covering Northern England, The Midlands and Southern England. And an even more radical thought (trotted out yet again) that these 3 leagues should feed FL1 and comprise the current FL2 and Conference as to have Darlington travelling to Exeter for a FL2 game is as nonsensical as Ebbsfleet travelling to Barrow. Other than the petrol companies, I can't see for the life of me who benefits from all these journeys ! Lunacy.


John Mills
Reserve Team Star

Feb 13, 2009, 6:26 AM

Posts: 897
Location:
Team(s):

Post #39 of 50 (5480 views)
Shortcut
Re: [buncranaboy] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or


In Reply To

In Reply To
Don't you think we've got enough teams in the southern half of the pyramid?



................and there lies the nub of the problem. Two sub-feeders to the current Conference isn't adequate. There should be three (at least) covering Northern England, The Midlands and Southern England. And an even more radical thought (trotted out yet again) that these 3 leagues should feed FL1 and comprise the current FL2 and Conference as to have Darlington travelling to Exeter for a FL2 game is as nonsensical as Ebbsfleet travelling to Barrow. Other than the petrol companies, I can't see for the life of me who benefits from all these journeys ! Lunacy.



However you define Southern England it will cover a lot more than a third of the population - unless you want most of North London in the Midlands and a southern division covering Dover to Truro. I hesitate to mention other sports outside of our newly-restored ghetto, but there's a lot to be said for the rugby union system of going from national, to north and south, and then to four regions (with fixed boundaries) which determine the structure from thence downward, usually passing along to county leagues along the way. This is demonstrated neatly at the bottom of this page http://en.wikipedia.org/...h_rugby_union_system although there are at least a couple of divisions omitted from Level 10 on this diagram. (NB. Different debate entirely, but the convention has been established in Rugby that counties can decide for themselves whether second and third teams can join the pyramid - but only within county levels.)

If football were to implement similar, the main question would be where to stop national divisions. From my formerly-Grecian-regular standpoint I refute the suggestion that Exeter, for example, would be better off if regionalisation started at League Two. I believe that crowds would fall significantly as people's perceptions of where 'serious football' ends would change - many people wouldn't pay 'league prices' to watch what they would now see as relatively minor football - making a significant reduction in the number of professional clubs in England likely. The fact that around a hundred clubs are viable in professional football in this country is a distinction that I wouldn't like to see threatened.


(This post was edited by John Mills on Feb 13, 2009, 7:02 AM)


cope1
Man City Transfer Target!

Feb 13, 2009, 10:08 AM

Posts: 7279
Location:
Team(s):

Post #40 of 50 (5451 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cooksmad] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

The reason there are two NPL Divisions 1 is to reduce travelling for NPL teams at step 4. The fact there are NPL 1 South teams near SL 1 Midland teams is academic as wherever you draw the line there will always be teams close to it who will have to travel further to play league games than they would if they played those neighbouring teams in another league. While the Leicestershire teams wouldn't have to go far for the Northamptonshire games they would for games down in Gloucestershire, for instance. In terms of congestion, moving SL clubs into the Ryman to accommodate a load of NPL clubs isn't going to solve anything. Where do you put the Ryman clubs who have been displaced by the influx of SL clubs?


cope1
Man City Transfer Target!

Feb 13, 2009, 10:16 AM

Posts: 7279
Location:
Team(s):

Post #41 of 50 (5448 views)
Shortcut
Re: [John Mills] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I agree with the fixed boundaries thing. I've posted another thread entitled 'German model' which, apart from exciting one or two of our members who misunderstood the post, lays out how I think English football should be organised. I would have 2 divisions at step 1 and then go to 4 and then 8. The 8 are 'Regional Premier Leagues' where regions are collections of counties. Clubs who are at this step or below do not deviate from their home county and the region it puts them in. The German reference is because this is how it works in German football below regionalliga level. Clubs return to their parent state association and play wherever that dictates. The main benefit is that it stops the shift that we have experienced where the Conference North occasionally slips towards Cambridgeshire and London. Regions would be allowed to arrange their leagues as they see fit but would only have one Premier at the top and would promote 2 teams from it. Apart from that, if they want 2 divisions at the step below they can have that, just with less promotion from each one in comparison with having 1 division.


buncranaboy
Qatar World Cup bid member!


Feb 13, 2009, 1:33 PM

Posts: 17959
Location: South Birmingham
Team(s): Barnstoneworth United; Bostock Stanley

Post #42 of 50 (5407 views)
Shortcut
Re: [John Mills] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To

In Reply To
Don't you think we've got enough teams in the southern half of the pyramid?



................and there lies the nub of the problem. Two sub-feeders to the current Conference isn't adequate. There should be three (at least) covering Northern England, The Midlands and Southern England. And an even more radical thought (trotted out yet again) that these 3 leagues should feed FL1 and comprise the current FL2 and Conference as to have Darlington travelling to Exeter for a FL2 game is as nonsensical as Ebbsfleet travelling to Barrow. Other than the petrol companies, I can't see for the life of me who benefits from all these journeys ! Lunacy.



. The fact that around a hundred clubs are viable in professional football in this country is a distinction that I wouldn't like to see threatened.


But the point is, John, that they are not viable - they exist on borrowed money - and the distances travelled are a major factor. I'm not sure that attendances would suffer that badly - most of our established clubs have historical fanbases and demotion to the conference (once seen as falling off the football map) for a lot of them hasn't seen the huge fall in attendances that once were the case when the trapdoor opened. In my view three national divisions is ample and sensible.
I agree the Rugby model is more sensible though there are still some horrendous journeys at "level 3" for clubs whose attendances are in the hundreds. But we digress. Sorry...........backing out the door............


vienna1964
Deleted

Feb 13, 2009, 2:29 PM

Posts:
Location:
Team(s):

Post #43 of 50 (5391 views)
Shortcut
Re: [cope1] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or

Firstly - to Mr. Mills - in which he stated that in Rugby Union leagues, the boundaries are 'fixed' between Regions... this is not so, as the example of Cheltenham North attests - having been shifted from South & West into Midlands for the current season. I am sure there are other examples as well over the years.

To cope1 - I still find nothing particularly compelling in these arguments and although I do grant that fuel-efficiency becomes an ever more persuasive factor, leagues and their constituent teams would need some serious incentive in order to accept the deliberate variation in the number of teams, the number of promotion/relegation places and the actual number of parallel divisions required on a seasonal basis - per your suggestions.



I APOLOGISE UNRESERVEDLY TO EACH AND EVERY PERSON ON THIS FORUM WHO HAS FELT LET-DOWN BY MY INIMICABLE AND DEPLORABLE BEHAVIOUR OF OCTOBER 28th. 2009. ESPECIALLY TO BRIAN, WHO IS A MARVELLOUS GENTLEMAN AND IS THE LAST PERSON HERE WHO SHOULD HAVE TO PUT UP WITH SUCH UNDESERVED PERSONAL CHARACTER-ASSASSINATION. LET IT BE KNOWN THAT A PRIVATE PERSONAL APOLOGY WAS SENT, BUT WAS SEEN INSUFFICIENT. FAIR ENOUGH.


MattRamLives
First Team Sub

Feb 13, 2009, 2:31 PM

Posts: 964
Location: Tibshelf Services - nearly
Team(s): Every Derbyshire team

Post #44 of 50 (5387 views)
Shortcut
Re: [vienna1964] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I heard that Rugby Union is probably going to be restructured next season - this was in to relation to Derby being in a relegation position but may be get reprieved


acmold
Man City Transfer Target!

Feb 13, 2009, 2:33 PM

Posts: 14497
Location:
Team(s):

Post #45 of 50 (5385 views)
Shortcut
Re: [vienna1964] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or


In Reply To
Firstly - to Mr. Mills - in which he stated that in Rugby Union leagues, the boundaries are 'fixed' between Regions... this is not so, as the example of Cheltenham North attests - having been shifted from South & West into Midlands for the current season. I am sure there are other examples as well over the years.

I think clubs in north Gloucestershire and north Oxfordshire can switch between the South West and Midland regions, Banbury Bulls and Stow on the Wold have done so in the past. At a higher level Rugby Lions switched from three North to three South this season.


Richard Rundle
Man City Transfer Target!

Feb 13, 2009, 4:46 PM

Posts: 8469
Location:
Team(s):

Post #46 of 50 (5357 views)
Shortcut
Re: [John Mills] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
If football were to implement similar, the main question would be where to stop national divisions. From my formerly-Grecian-regular standpoint I refute the suggestion that Exeter, for example, would be better off if regionalisation started at League Two. I believe that crowds would fall significantly as people's perceptions of where 'serious football' ends would change - many people wouldn't pay 'league prices' to watch what they would now see as relatively minor football - making a significant reduction in the number of professional clubs in England likely. The fact that around a hundred clubs are viable in professional football in this country is a distinction that I wouldn't like to see threatened.



This is where I would disagree. If Leagues One and Two were merged, I can't see crowds falling at all. If anything I reckon the average would increase as there would be more scope for travelling fans to make less arduous journies.


I also wouldn't have a problem with a reduction in the number of professional clubs - how "viable" are most of them in a normal business sense anyway?

--
Richard


John Mills
Reserve Team Star

Feb 13, 2009, 4:49 PM

Posts: 897
Location:
Team(s):

Post #47 of 50 (5356 views)
Shortcut
Re: [buncranaboy] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or


In Reply To
But the point is, John, that they are not viable - they exist on borrowed money - and the distances travelled are a major factor. I'm not sure that attendances would suffer that badly - most of our established clubs have historical fanbases and demotion to the conference (once seen as falling off the football map) for a lot of them hasn't seen the huge fall in attendances that once were the case when the trapdoor opened. In my view three national divisions is ample and sensible.



There is a difference between spending more than you've got, and not having enough (to run a professional club) in the first place. While I (more than)doubt the viability of clubs like Accrington, Morecambe and Dagenham that have probably never got up to the required attendance levels, I believe that there is a viable model for anyone that can get 2-2,500 a game. I'm as keen as anyone to see sanctions to discourage over-spending, so that clubs that do things properly find themselves higher up the pecking order without having to show 'ambition' by spending money they haven't got, which at the same time drives wage levels up for everyone else. If there were serious audit procedures on clubs, and sufficient deterrents to stop clubs operating beyond their means, then I guess we would find out which of us is right about how many would pass the test as a viable full-time club!

My point about what would cause attendances to drop is really about the loss of national status. You make a good point about recently-relegated traditional league clubs continuing to get good attendances in the Conference, but I think that every year that goes by, especially with two-up-two-down, there is less distinction in peoples minds between league and non-league at this level. With the pre-eminence of the Premiership there are fewer people who think of 'The League' as 92 clubs in the way most of us on this site would do, and I think a growing number of people would just think of there being five main leagues in this country. I believe nation-wide status is a major feature of that perception, and if taken away, I fear that there could gradually develop a gap in attendances between national and semi-national levels to rival that presently over the current break-point between Conference National and Conference North/South.


John Mills
Reserve Team Star

Feb 13, 2009, 5:00 PM

Posts: 897
Location:
Team(s):

Post #48 of 50 (5351 views)
Shortcut
Re: [vienna1964] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or


In Reply To
Firstly - to Mr. Mills - in which he stated that in Rugby Union leagues, the boundaries are 'fixed' between Regions... this is not so, as the example of Cheltenham North attests - having been shifted from South & West into Midlands for the current season. I am sure there are other examples as well over the years.



Apologies. I realised some time after posting that I got slightly carried away in suggesting that the boundaries are strictly fixed. While I believe each region is defined by which counties it covers, there are some reshuffles agreed as a result of the balance of clubs by region that are relegated/promoted between the regional and semi-national levels.


John Mills
Reserve Team Star

Feb 13, 2009, 5:06 PM

Posts: 897
Location:
Team(s):

Post #49 of 50 (5347 views)
Shortcut
Re: [MattRamLives] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or


In Reply To
I heard that Rugby Union is probably going to be restructured next season - this was in to relation to Derby being in a relegation position but may be get reprieved



There is indeed a reshuffle planned for the summer. This is due to most leagues from Level 3 downwards being increased in size due to the abolition of national cups, and the consequent freeing of extra dates for league matches. This makes it a lot easier to get promoted than relegated in the sport this season - unless you are at Level 2, which is supposed to be contracting by four clubs for different, and spurious, reasons.


TB&G
Youth Team Regular

Feb 13, 2009, 6:35 PM

Posts: 235
Location: Outskirts of Romford Town
Team(s): Romford FC

Post #50 of 50 (5327 views)
Shortcut
Re: [John Mills] Unibond 'Midland' in 2009? [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To

In Reply To
I heard that Rugby Union is probably going to be restructured next season - this was in to relation to Derby being in a relegation position but may be get reprieved



There is indeed a reshuffle planned for the summer. This is due to most leagues from Level 3 downwards being increased in size due to the abolition of national cups, and the consequent freeing of extra dates for league matches. This makes it a lot easier to get promoted than relegated in the sport this season - unless you are at Level 2, which is supposed to be contracting by four clubs for different, and spurious, reasons.



I suspect that the ESL would be delighted to have a constitution of 18 for 2009/10 but 20 would be marvellous please! Sly

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All
 
 


free hit counters

Search for (options) HOSTED BY SUMMIT SOCCER v.1.2.3