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

THIS FORUM IS NOW READ ONLY - PLEASE HEAD OVER TO THE NEW FORUM HERE (CLICK LINK) TO REGISTER A NEW ACCOUNT - THANKS

Home: Non-League Football Discussion: Other British Isles Football:
Scottish licensing update

 

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All


Cowden Andy
Reserve Team Regular

May 8, 2019, 7:29 PM

Posts: 707
Location: Cowdenbeath
Team(s): Cowdenbeath FC

Post #26 of 95 (5354 views)
Shortcut
Re: [buckielugger] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
This really does seem utterly harsh on Bonnyrigg and quite ludicrous.


The situation of allowing existing Lowland League members to NOT have floodlights whilst denying a promotion place earned and deserved to another club which will in fact have lights in time for the coming season seems bizarre. And even if Bonnyrigg's lights were not ready prior to season commencement, they would surely expect to have them in place very soon thereafter, but they WILL have them before Whitehill, Civil Service and Vale of Leithen!


I think lawyers could have a field day with this one, especially as the licence rules were changed less than one day before Bonnyrigg's assessment!!


I would imagine it would be very expensive getting lawyers invoved!

As the don't have the actual planning permission for the lights who knows how long it will take to get them if ever.


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 8, 2019, 8:54 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #27 of 95 (5239 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Cowden Andy] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I think the issue of whether or not BR will have lights in 12 months time is a red herring in the present discussion.

The question is, did the SFA follow due process?

They invited application and charged £2k on the basis of the rules at the time.

They then imposed a moratorium on assessing the applications, changed the rules and then declared that some clubs had failed the assessment because they did not meet one of the newly-introduced regulations.

BR's position should be no different from the other licensed club with no lights. They should have 12 months to erect them or they lose their licence.


(This post was edited by PaulC on May 8, 2019, 8:56 PM)


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


May 8, 2019, 10:20 PM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #28 of 95 (5097 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
I think the issue of whether or not BR will have lights in 12 months time is a red herring in the present discussion.

The question is, did the SFA follow due process?

They invited application and charged £2k on the basis of the rules at the time. No, clubs knew they would be assessed on the 2019 Manual. They also knew it would be published before the end of 2018. Most clubs had their preliminary audit before the 2019 Guide was published but they knew they would ultimately be assessed against 2019 criteria. Some clubs who are amongst the later applicants had seen the 2019 criteria before their preliminary audit.

They then imposed a moratorium on assessing the applications, changed the rules and then declared that some clubs had failed the assessment because they did not meet one of the newly-introduced regulations.
Assessment continued during the moratorium, which was brought in as the Licencing department were dealing with 17 applications, many times more than any previous year. Had they started more clubs on the process none would be licenced by now.




PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 8, 2019, 10:58 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #29 of 95 (5036 views)
Shortcut
Re: [prorege] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

The official Bonnyrigg statement includes:

"As a reminder, we applied for SFA membership on October 26th based on the criteria published in 2018 and the application fee was paid on the same date. November 22nd I received notice from SFA licensing that they would audit the club on December 12th at 10 a.m. At 6 p.m. on December 11th I received notification from SFA licensing of revisions to the SFA criteria for 2019 which now included a provision for the existence of floodlights."

They make it clear the first they knew of any changes to licensing fprovisions was on the day before their audit.

What a shambles!


ArchieB
First Team Sub

May 9, 2019, 1:28 AM

Posts: 1024
Location: Ayrshire
Team(s): Pollok, Man City, Schalke04

Post #30 of 95 (4942 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
The official Bonnyrigg statement includes:

"As a reminder, we applied for SFA membership on October 26th based on the criteria published in 2018 and the application fee was paid on the same date. November 22nd I received notice from SFA licensing that they would audit the club on December 12th at 10 a.m. At 6 p.m. on December 11th I received notification from SFA licensing of revisions to the SFA criteria for 2019 which now included a provision for the existence of floodlights."

They make it clear the first they knew of any changes to licensing fprovisions was on the day before their audit.

What a shambles!


At the very least, Bonnyrigg and the other clubs in the same boat should have their £2k fee returned!



Awa' and bile yer heid, ya Sassenach!


pokal02
First Team Star

May 9, 2019, 12:16 PM

Posts: 2325
Location: Cockfosters
Team(s): Barnet, Cockfosters, Truro City, Udinese

Post #31 of 95 (4708 views)
Shortcut
Re: [ArchieB] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

How long do Vale of Leithen, Whitehill & CS Strollers now have to install lights or face expulsion from LL? Is it 12 months?


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 10, 2019, 9:49 AM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #32 of 95 (4304 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

St Andrews United statement on not being granted a licence:

https://m.facebook.com/...p;id=217764468559488


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


May 10, 2019, 10:34 AM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #33 of 95 (4248 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Broxburn's statement on being awarded a license:

"Broxburn Athletic Football Club have been granted SFA membership and with it we will be issued with our entry level Licence .This will be ratified at the SFA AGM on the 12th of June . I big thank you goes out to all involved with the processing in getting everything in place to satisfy the licence criteria . Well done to all with a special mention to Alan Cunningham and Christopher Townsley who worked tirelessly to collate all the material and documentation in place for our application .This gives us the opportunity to go forward and will be doing our utmost to improve and successfully lead the club to more success and build on our achievements this season .With your help we can make it happen so keep “Backing The Burn ” ."


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 10, 2019, 11:03 AM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #34 of 95 (4202 views)
Shortcut
Re: [prorege] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Yes, Broxburn were fortunate to have floodlights when they applied for their licence even though the possession of floodlights wasn't a requirement at the time.


Gladstone
Youth Team Star

May 11, 2019, 12:57 AM

Posts: 300
Location:
Team(s):

Post #35 of 95 (3774 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
The official Bonnyrigg statement includes:

"As a reminder, we applied for SFA membership on October 26th based on the criteria published in 2018 and the application fee was paid on the same date. November 22nd I received notice from SFA licensing that they would audit the club on December 12th at 10 a.m. At 6 p.m. on December 11th I received notification from SFA licensing of revisions to the SFA criteria for 2019 which now included a provision for the existence of floodlights."

They make it clear the first they knew of any changes to licensing fprovisions was on the day before their audit.

What a shambles!


If this is in fact the truth of the matter then it is indeed an utter disgrace and I am not surprised to read that Bonnyrigg are instructing solicitors. The attitude reminds me very much of that of the Welsh FA in the disgraceful and contemptible way they treated Barry Town United some five years ago, following which Barry took them to Court and won, and in which the Judge likened the Welsh FA to 'the Mad Hatter's Tea Party'.

Maybe someone at Bonnyrigg might profitably make a friendly call to Gavin Henderson for some ideas........


Two questions however come to mind.

1. When Bonnyrigg submitted their licence application were they led to believe it would be assessed on 2018 rules, or that new 2019 rules would apply, even if they did not and could not know in advance what these 2019 rules were going to be?

2. When Bonnyrigg did receive the new rules the day before the audit did they make any representations about this at the time : if so with what result and if not then why not?

That said, and either way, the facts of the matter ought to be fairly clear (as they were in Barry Town United's case) so it ought to be a similarly simple procedure to get a Court ruling. I appreciate that Scots and English Law are more than somewhat different, nor am I exactly au fait with current Scots procedure; but I should have thought that an application for a declarator and/or interim interdict or similar could be heard, presumably by the Sherriff Court, or even the Court of Session if appropriate, in fairly short order. [Barry's case was quite quickly resolved and I think by High Court Judge sitting in Cardiff.] On the face of it (unless there are other facts not disclosed in this thread) the whole episode appears so contrary to the rules of natural justice that a case brought against the SFA could well succeed on that basis alone.



Gladstone

(This post was edited by Gladstone on May 11, 2019, 1:15 AM)


bluedragon
Junior Team Regular

May 11, 2019, 2:12 PM

Posts: 53
Location:
Team(s):

Post #36 of 95 (3529 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Gladstone] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

You would hope that common sense will prevail and not let the rules unreasonably withhold a promotion won on merit.

The Licensing Committee has done its job in assessing clubs. As I understand it there are various levels of appeal against a decision of the Licensing Committee.

While the Licensing Committee cannot re-open any application decision it has made, it does have the authority to review licensing criteria and to recommend amendments to the SFA Board. You would hope that in the light of recent experience it might look again at the practical and financial implications for clubs for floodlights. They could propose to the SFA Board a derogation to operate for a short period (three to five years?) and would only be given to clubs promoted to the Lowland League from the East of Scotland and South of Scotland Leagues and would only apply if floodlighting was the only issue preventing the issue of a club licence. The benefits of full membership would only apply when the lights were installed i.e. the derogation would only allow them to play in the Lowland League and could not play in the Scottish Cup.

They could draw from the English National League rules that apply, or certainly did until recently, when a club gets promoted up to the step where floodlights are required. By 31 March they need to be able to demonstrate they have sound plans in place for their installation. If so, they would be able to take their place in the higher league if they had won promotion on merit. They have until 30 September to have them up and working. If not, there is a sanction. If they are not installed by the following 31 March they are relegated. That seems to be clear, simple and, most important of all, reasonable.

The SFA Club Licensing Manual says: “The Licensing Administration, in consultation and agreement with the club, may amend the scope of any audit up to and including the day of the audit visit itself.” I am not sure that is a reasonable requirement on clubs or whether when it was drafted it envisaged such a major change as floodlighting being given such short notice. I can understand the SFA wanting to reserve the right to do that, e.g. a serious emerging health and safety issue, but they should declare in the rules a simple annual timetable showing the date of updated criteria and the dates they will be applied during audits.

As I said at the start let us hope common sense will prevail. It would be very sad if it did not as the East of Scotland League has done a great job in integrating the former Junior clubs into the league for this season and then produced a thrilling round robin tournament full of goals, incident and drama to see Bonnyrigg Rose deservedly winning the championship title.

[


(This post was edited by bluedragon on May 11, 2019, 2:17 PM)


Gladstone
Youth Team Star

May 17, 2019, 2:46 PM

Posts: 300
Location:
Team(s):

Post #37 of 95 (3023 views)
Shortcut
Re: [bluedragon] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I should hope so but somewhat doubt it.

The SFA have acted in blatant bad faith and out of spite at the prospect of good clubs bring denied promotion on merit as they challenge the status quo.

Bonnyrigg aplied for their licence last October. It took the SFA two months to get round to attend to audit, and they quite deliberately withheld giving notice of this major change till the very last minute. This is gross delay. These SFA timeservers have been sitting on their backsides pretty much all season.

And evidently it is after the playoff result that the licence was refused. Since existing LL clubs like Vale of Leithen can have a year's leeway common sense dictates that so should Bonnyrigg. Erection of floodlights involves a lot of bureaucracy involving planning and other reulations and is bound to take a considerable time.

What a contrast to the impeccable administration of the EoS league in handling the unprecedented events a year or so backalong.



Gladstone


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


May 17, 2019, 4:23 PM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #38 of 95 (2940 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Gladstone] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
What a load of tosh.
I should hope so but somewhat doubt it.

The SFA have acted in blatant bad faith and out of spite at the prospect of good clubs bring denied promotion on merit as they challenge the status quo. SIX new clubs were admitted to the SFA, more than in the last umpteen years put together. The denial of promotion to Bonnyrigg is a Lowland League decision, not an SFA decision.

Bonnyrigg aplied for their licence last October. It took the SFA two months to get round to attend to audit, and they quite deliberately withheld giving notice of this major change till the very last minute. This is gross delay. These SFA timeservers have been sitting on their backsides pretty much all season. Bonnyrigg were the last of the 17 applicants to apply. New applications were dealt with in order of application. The SFA licensing department handles the annual re-audits for 90 plus clubs, as well as new applications. They were stretched to the limit this year to get the work done as quickly as they did. All clubs should have known that a new Licensing Manual would be published in December. If any clubs didn't, then they were negligent.

And evidently it is after the playoff result that the licence was refused. Since existing LL clubs like Vale of Leithen can have a year's leeway common sense dictates that so should Bonnyrigg. Erection of floodlights involves a lot of bureaucracy involving planning and other reulations and is bound to take a considerable time. The rule about having a Licence to play in the Lowland League is not an SFA rule - it is a Lowland League rule. It has been in place since 2013. The Lowland League has given a grace period to their 3 existing member clubs to install lights. In the meantime they must play home midweek games at a floodlit venue. Bonnyrigg could have arranged a temporary groundshare at Nitten or the Hooses as a backstop to their Licence application in which case I'm sure it would have been looked on favourably (as Edusport, BSC and Cumbernauld Colts all did). Bonnyrigg's grievance is really with the Lowland League, not the SFA. The Lowland League could offer Bonnyrigg a grace period. That would depend on either a vote of the member clubs, or it may be a LL Board decision, I'm not sure which.

What a contrast to the impeccable administration of the EoS league in handling the unprecedented events a year or so backalong. I agree that the EOS has been well-run this year. However, it has not been faultless. Credit to the clubs for not making a big fuss about some of the problems, as they recognised there would be teething problems.




Dog Man
Junior Team Sub


May 17, 2019, 7:33 PM

Posts: 17
Location: Bury St Edmunds
Team(s): Bristol Rovers, Bury Town

Post #39 of 95 (2801 views)
Shortcut
Re: [prorege] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

 Bonnyrigg Statement

http://www.bonnyriggrosefc.co.uk/...-update-2427081.html

Direct appeal to SFA rejected.

As an update to our statement released last week we received a reply from SFA CEO Ian Maxwell yesterday to our direct appeal and are disappointed but not altogether surprised to reveal that it has also been rejected. (Full reply to direct appeal at the foot of the page). This is despite testimonials sent on our behalf by MSPs, our council and not least the platinum Quality Mark Community Club of which we are an associate who have previously represented the SFA at the Scottish Parliament.
We have invested upwards of six figures in ground and facility improvements at New Dundas Park over the past four seasons, not counting the work completed and substantial capital purchases made by our two main sponsors (The McDermott Group & Grant Fitzsimmons & Son) as part of their sponsorship. It also doesn't count the labour costs which a lot of the friends of the club have given free gratis. A significant element of that investment was with licensing criteria in mind, for example when we had to make several costly adjustments to our changing rooms in order to meet the criteria.
This is however not the end of the road for us, as despite the labyrinthine nature of the different articles and licensing documents, there is still one option open to us which we are seeking guidance on from parties outside of the club whether to pursue. We owe it to our players and supporters to explore every available option open to us until each of those options have been exhausted. We sold a vision to our supporters at our EGM last March of what the future would look like if we joined the East of Scotland league after 120 years of Scottish Junior Football membership, but the stark reality at present is that we have swapped one glass ceiling for another.
In parallel we are pleased to announce that we have received planning consent from Midlothian Council today for our floodlights installation. We agreed several months ago to acquire floodlights from Midlothian Council which were previously used at the old Newbattle High School campus and have concluded that purchase as a result of receiving planning consent today. Work will commence early next week on the installation of these floodlights, which means that we will have to forego some grant funding which we could have availed of had we stuck to our original plans. We feel however that it is imperative we have these in place as soon as is possible. G Fitzsimmons and Son are covering a significant portion of the costs as part of their sponsorship for next season and we are extremely grateful for their continued support of the club. There is still a substantial figure to cover so we are asking our supporters and local businesses, indeed any supporters for their help with this by donating to our funding page that we have set up this evening on this link. We are indebted to our supporters for the response received in our fundraising efforts so far.
People can draw their own conclusions on the reasons given for our direct appeal rejection but at a very high level:
- On the subject of the Scottish Cup there are seven clubs with National Club License awards that currently don’t have floodlights. In addition there are several other clubs who will enter the preliminary rounds as winners of other leagues/cups who also don’t have floodlights, based on the current Scottish Cup format. We are one of those having won the East of Scotland League (but we will have lights by then)
- Still on the Scottish Cup the last time an actual game was held on a midweek afternoon was eight years ago. Also under the current format Scottish Cup replays up to and including round 3 are played the following Saturday.
- Changes made at short notice to the Licensing system is one of the reasons the derogation procedure exists. We were given an undertaking as recently as April at a meeting of Lowland League & East of Scotland League delegates at Easter Road by the SFA VP that derogation requests would be reviewed and assessed based on the requests submitted; i.e. if there were plans in place to meet the criteria. This is completely contrary to what has actually taken place.
- The biggest concern for all clubs at our level should be paragraph four, where it appears that the board of our national association have taken proactive steps in order to curtail a membership ‘influx’. This has meant that five clubs along with ourselves were denied membership by the actions of the SFA board. This is despite scope to allow up to 200 members, with only 90 member clubs at present. This is completely at odds with the SFA values and their overarching principle to help develop clubs at all levels.
We should be celebrating our league title, looking forward to a cup final next Sunday against the Lowland League champions and promotion to that league, wondering along with the rest of the country who the next manager of the men’s national team will be and getting ready to cheer on Shelley Kerr’s side at their first World Cup.
What we shouldn’t be doing is this – it isn’t right, fair or proper.


SFA - reply to direct appeal

“Having checked internally, I can confirm that there is no appeal route available for clubs going through the application process.

The Board rejected all applicant club derogations as a matter of policy. All applications must be treated equally with the minimum criteria being met in full rather than the Board subjectively deciding which clubs have met ‘enough’ of the criteria enough to allow approval.

Additionally, in the build up to a new season, leagues and clubs require certainty around their membership to allow proper planning on and off the pitch. Situations where league membership requires to be changed last minute are impractical and must be avoided.

I appreciate that the floodlighting criteria was added during your application process. We found ourselves in the unusual position of having 12 clubs apply for membership at roughly the same time and had to consider the impact this influx would have.

One major consideration is the Scottish Cup and we receive consistent feedback from members that postponed/replay fixture dates which, due to a lack of floodlighting, are required to be Saturday afternoons as opposed to midweek evenings are hugely problematic. Clubs are required to cancel league fixtures, with associated hospitality and match income being severely impacted. We have also had issues – one such this season – which meant that a 5th round tie would have to have been played on a midweek afternoon had it gone to a replay, which would have had a serious impact across a number of areas.

As you are aware the new Scottish Cup broadcasting contract includes televised fixtures in rounds 1, 2 and 3 which will provide an excellent platform for the lower levels of the game in this country. The BBC have the right to choose matches at variable kick off times, which may well require floodlighting at venues given the time of year, meaning that the number of games available for selection could be severely limited.

Please be assured the decision wasn’t taken lightly. We were aware of the implications for your club in particular and I understand the frustration and disappointment you must feel, however the Board must take decisions considering the impact on the Scottish game as a whole, rather than considering individual circumstances.

I appreciate this is not the reply you were hoping for however trust you can appreciate the Boards position.”



The picture appears a little different to the one portrayed by prorege above. In my view the key factor appears to be the SFA restricting the number of successful Licence applications on the grounds of preventing an influx of new members. This is a somewhat surprising position for a national football association to be taking

Surely the SFA for could have provided a derogation / dispensation for Bonnyrigg Rose on the grounds of exceptional circumstances.

As a footnote Bonnyrigg Rose received planning permission for their floodlights yesterday and will shortly erect them.


(This post was edited by Dog Man on May 17, 2019, 8:13 PM)


Gladstone
Youth Team Star

May 17, 2019, 8:37 PM

Posts: 300
Location:
Team(s):

Post #40 of 95 (2718 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dog Man] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

I wholly concur with Dog Man in all respects.

I do not accept that the number of applicants for licences is a legitimate excuse for such inordinate delay nor for Bonnyrigg not to have been given notice of the new requirement for floodlights till the eleventh hour. It reeks of calculated injustice. Just because other applicants by chance happened to have installed them prior is neither here nor there: the requirement had not been there when the application was made.
The reference to the Scottish Cup is a total irrelevance. Many clubs who qualify to play in the early rounds do not have floodlights.
But if, as @prorege indicates, the decision ultimately rests with the LL, then maybe it is the LL who can even now cut the Gordian Knot and admit Bonnyrigg in any event on terms equivalent to Vale of Leithen et al. I hope they do. I should like to see the SFA and LL Regulations thereanent.
I should also like to know: who are these members of the SFA LIcencing Committee? I find their identities on the SFA site conspicuous by their absence. Do any of them have any connection (share ownership or membership or directorship or whatever) of any SFA or LL club? If so, what? I think we should be told who they are and whether or not they do.

The whole episode smacks of the outrageously dirty treatment given to Barry Town United five years back wherein there was some evidence (never proved) that someone at Treharris Athletic Western who had influence on the Welsh FA was behind their desicion to consign Barry to oblivion. Fortunately Gavin Henderson for Barry had the guts to take them to the High Court and won. I hope that if all else fain then Bonnyrigg will pursue a similar course to the Sheriff Court/Court of Session: I am not sure which has jurisdiction.



Gladstone


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


May 18, 2019, 9:09 AM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #41 of 95 (2440 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Gladstone] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Ther members of the SFa Licensing Committee are listed on their website;
They are:


Chair: Allan Cowan (independent member)
Vice Chair: Ewen Cameron (SPFL)
Members: Donald McNaught (independent member), Anne McKeown (SPFL), Craig Paterson (SPFL), Richard Shaw (independent member), John McCabe (Lowland League), Roddy Morrison (independent member), Brian Urquhart (independent member)
Allan Cowan is a lawyer and former Partick Thistle director. He led the Save The Jags campaign in the early 2000s but has not been involved witht he club since 2011. Ewen is Secretary / Director of Alloa Athletic and a Lawyer by profession. Richard Shaw is associated with the Southern Counties FA. John McCabe is Secretary / Director of Spartans and a former Head Teacher. Donald McNaught is a CA with no club affiliation. Anne McKeown is a Lawyer and Director of Arbroath FC. Craig Paterson is a Celtic fan and the Chairman/ Founder of the Football Aid charity. I am not certain enough of the backgrounds of Roddy Morrison and Brian Urquhart to post information but I do know that neither have any club links.


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 18, 2019, 12:00 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #42 of 95 (2283 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dog Man] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

“We can’t be having a dozen new memberx, so tough on you.”

"We don't want you in the Cup without lights" Next season BR and others will be in the cup without lights.

Unbelievable!


(This post was edited by PaulC on May 18, 2019, 12:18 PM)


buckielugger
Youth Team Star


May 18, 2019, 12:49 PM

Posts: 288
Location: on a hill top in wales
Team(s):

Post #43 of 95 (2224 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

The SFA's Licensing Committee's response does indeed seem bizarre.

To give one of the reasons for rejection as being not wanting too many new teams is hardly a legitimate basis of any sort.

Interestingly, looking at this year's SFA Cup, the opening Preliminary Round had five teams given byes. So five new licensed teams would "fill up" that round with given the current number of ties. Was that part of their thinking??
If so, it can only be unfair and wrong.

What it also wrong is that Bonnyrigg also have lack of floodlights given as a reason when firstly is was not a condition when they applied and that secondly it was only added at the last moment and that thirdly several other clubs with licenses and/or in the Lowland League do not themselves have floodlights.
If exceptions are made for some then it cannot be legally correct for exceptions not to be made for others. Particularly as Bonnyrigg, despite the very last minute imposition of needing floodlights can demonstrate that they actually will have floodlights for the coming season.

I actually find the whole situation quite outrageous.
I hope Bonnyrigg can successfully pursue this through whatever channels are available to them.


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 18, 2019, 12:52 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #44 of 95 (2220 views)
Shortcut
Re: [Dog Man] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To




The picture appears a little different to the one portrayed by prorege above. In my view the key factor appears to be the SFA restricting the number of successful Licence applications on the grounds of preventing an influx of new members. This is a somewhat surprising position for a national football association to be taking

Surely the SFA for could have provided a derogation / dispensation for Bonnyrigg Rose on the grounds of exceptional circumstances.

As a footnote Bonnyrigg Rose received planning permission for their floodlights yesterday and will shortly erect them.


Yes, the SFA is so absolutely incompetent that it admits to changing the rules, after applications had been made to keep down numbers
.

Just who does the SFA serve?

The court of sporting arbitration would have a field day.


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


May 29, 2019, 7:21 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #45 of 95 (1585 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately




PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


Jun 1, 2019, 12:54 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #46 of 95 (1185 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Bonnyrigg not hanging about:




buckielugger
Youth Team Star


Jun 2, 2019, 3:31 PM

Posts: 288
Location: on a hill top in wales
Team(s):

Post #47 of 95 (937 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Which only makes this decision to bar them from promotion even more ridiculous.
A team WITH floodlights denied promotion for not having floodlights whilst teams who are in the said league STILL don't have any lights or prospect of them despite several seasons membership.

Football authorities gone mad.


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


Jun 2, 2019, 3:54 PM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #48 of 95 (931 views)
Shortcut
Re: [buckielugger] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

Taking all the emotion out of things, the facts are:

Dundonald and Bonnyrigg did not have floodlights at the time of their licensing inspection. They were therefore not awarded licenses. Six clubs who did meet all the requirements were awarded licences. The unsuccessful clubs were informed of what was required to be done before the next round of licensing visits in June.
Two of them reached the Championship Play off only to lose out to the team with no licence.

Those revisits take place later week. Bonnyrigg and Dundonald will then be recommended for licences at the next SFA Board Meeting.

It is up to the Lowland League to decide if they can accept a late application from Bonnyrigg. They were originally given an extension from the end of March to the date of the AGM, on June 3rd.
The Lowland League may or may not grant a further extension at their AGM tomorrow. Obviously Whitehill Welfare are the club with most to lose and they will be extremely unhappy if Bonnyrigg are granted a second extension.
Now moving into the realms of informed conjecture:

Suggestions that the Lowland League operate with 17 clubs have been ruled out as this is impractical. Adding a further two match days at this late stage without bringing forward the start date for the new season will not be done. Running with 17 teams may also be unconstitutional.
I am unsure if the constitution can be changed at the AGM - I suspect an EGM would be required and that requires a period of notice.


PaulC
Man City Transfer Target!


Jun 2, 2019, 5:21 PM

Posts: 11894
Location: Ayrshire, Midlothian
Team(s): AFC Darwen, Troon, Ayr Utd, Burnley

Post #49 of 95 (870 views)
Shortcut
Re: [prorege] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately


In Reply To
Taking all the emotion out of things, the facts are:

Dundonald and Bonnyrigg did not have floodlights at the time of their licensing inspection.


To be fair, those are just some of the facts.. Additional facts are:


The SFA imposed a moratorium on new licensing in April 2018. In the same month clubs were given an undertaking at a meeting of Lowland League & East of Scotland League delegates at Easter Road by the SFA Vice President that derogation requests would be reviewed and assessed based on the requests submitted; i.e. if there were plans in place to meet the criteria.

When the moratorium imposed by the SFA ended Bonnyrigg Rose submitted their application, on 26 October 2018. The SFA at that point took their £2k. They submitted their application in good faith based on the published licensing criteria.

Bonnyrigg fulfilled the requirement for licensing at the time of application.

The SFA informed the club on November 22 that they would audit the club on December 12.

At 6 pm on December 11 the club was notified by the SFA of the change to licensing requirements which now included the need to have floodlights.

Bonnyrigg's application was rejected. Derogation was rejected. Licensed clubs without floodlights, with no evidence that they are going to acquire them, are permitted to retain their licence and participate in the Scottish Cup.


(This post was edited by PaulC on Jun 2, 2019, 7:33 PM)


prorege
Man City Transfer Target!


Jun 2, 2019, 6:51 PM

Posts: 7047
Location: Kingdom of Fife
Team(s): Fife teams

Post #50 of 95 (815 views)
Shortcut
Re: [PaulC] Scottish licensing update [In reply to] Can't Post or Reply Privately

You are wrong in one key area.
Clubs were aware, or should have made themselves aware, that they would be assessed against 2019 licensing criteria. The question was aked by at least one club at the time of their initial visit in late 2018 and they were told that they would have to meet any changing criteria for 2019 and for 2020 if their application continued that long.

Happily for the club they had the foresight to install floodlights some years ago.
It makes sense - surely clubs who applied in 2018 and there are several who have made little or no progress and are unlikely to get their licenceuntil 2020 or 2021, should not be admitted on the basis of 2018 guidelines?

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All
 
 


free hit counters

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