|
|
Post by honestref on May 30, 2009 6:42:14 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by pyromaniac on May 30, 2009 9:47:41 GMT 1
Perhaps teams not meeting the grade should be given a 10 point penalty (ie. start the league with minus 10 points) or similar. This would help resolve the problem mentioned above in that the 'worst offenders' get a punishment which means they're less likely to win the title, and gives those that have spent money on improving their ground a better chance.
|
|
swansong
Turned Up For Training
Posts: 27
|
Post by swansong on May 30, 2009 12:31:51 GMT 1
That is a solution that is so sensible, so obvious that the only reason I can assume that it is not already being implemented is that it isn't posssible. Maybe someone will be able to clear that up? The principle is a good one, introduced for clubs going into administration after Leicester were promoted in the same season as they went into administration. Of course it's not always the case that a club gains an advantage from that and it can appear harsh to some. Not all teams gain an advantage from not improving their facilities but the feeling is S&L did and that that will prompt some sort of action. We can just wait and see!
|
|
|
|
Post by pborohero on May 30, 2009 14:37:36 GMT 1
how i understand it is only 1 will be dropping to Division 1,
that will be the the lowest placed side in the premier Division not meeting the grade.
so S&L are safe.
excellent idea making the sides start on minus 10 but minus 20 would be much better.
that will make teams who spend money on players and not their grounds unable win the title.
then they will be forced to make the grades required.
|
|
swansong
Turned Up For Training
Posts: 27
|
Post by swansong on May 30, 2009 21:14:48 GMT 1
Yes, that's another I've heard although it seems to me if only 1 go down it should be the highest place team ie the one that's gained the most advantage?
My feeling is that we are getting deifferent messages, possibly from different committee members who all have their own ideas what they wish to happen and it will be resolved at AGM.
My own opinion always has been the points deduction, nothing concentrates a teams mind more than knowing they will have to keep making points up until they put their house in order.
But I haven't seen that proposal at any level so assume it's been ruled out. Perhaps someone should explain to us why?
The plus side is that this thread has produced an interesting and vigorous debate which is what this board should before rather than the abuse that occasionally breaks out.
Hope UCL members read it should give them food for thought.
|
|
|
|
Post by honestref on May 31, 2009 6:48:44 GMT 1
Points deduction makes a lot of sense but doesn't that mean that you just need to spend more to make sure you get them back. But if the facilities aren't up to scratch the club won't get promoted even if they do get them back so it will just be a good place to collect fat wedges. Not much incentive for players or committee so perhaps it could work. Gets my vote if there was one.
|
|
|
|
Post by desborokev on May 31, 2009 9:53:12 GMT 1
Personally believe this to make a lot of sense,that is, a points deduction known at the start of the season. However,it would be safe to say that the top 6 or 7 are likely to be the same next season (add Desborough to this group for next season I promise you!)...and there is such a wide gap to the Pottons and Corinths of the world,with all due respect to them.
With 21 clubs in the Premier and 16 in Div One,there needs to be a plan in place to either even the balance up or have less teams in the Premier which could help reduce budgets and allow more to be spent on helping clubs to reach the required grading. I'm not sure if restructuring 'with immediate effect' ie in time for next season is the right answer though as it is more likely and suitable to reduce the Premier clubs over the next three seasons with clubs understanding fully where they stand ahead of a season rather than hanging outside a ledge by their fingers with ten weeks to go before a new season starts. In hindsight,an amalgamation of the gradings, points deductions and divisional restructure could have been made known 2-3 seasons ago and we wouldn't all be affected by this quandry.
Fascinating few weeks ahead though. I note the full Steps 1-4 Pyramid structure is published in the Non League Paper today- one paragraph written about the FA ' with regard to relegation from Step 4 to Step 5, the following were recommended ( listed in the paper but I'm not doing that here) subject to the agreement of the leagues concerned...' makes the AGM have a bigger crowd than a Susan Boyle concert.
|
|
|
|
Post by pborohero on May 31, 2009 12:54:03 GMT 1
How does it work?
Can a new rule be suggested by letter to the UCL comittee before the AGM.
Then ask th F.A if its allowed.
Then get the member clubs to vote it into their rule?
"20 pt deduction for all teams if grade requirements are not met at the start of the season"
|
|
|
|
Post by desborokev on May 31, 2009 13:44:15 GMT 1
My guess would be a proposal at, or in advance of the AGM?
|
|
|
|
Post by footballfan on May 31, 2009 14:31:57 GMT 1
i have to say that every one who has managed to get there ground up to the required spec deserves a massive pat on the back for there achievements as i can speak from experience it can almost take over your life doing the day to day work with out the added pressure of ground grading to boot.
But am i feeling sight undertones of S&L only won the league because they spent all there money on players and not ground improvements?
I would love to see the league for budgets spent on players only and see what positions they were in, i dont know for sure but i bet they would be in the bottom half.
I dont think enough credit is being given to there manager for doing something that a lot of people have failed to do in the past and that is to bring probably the most under achieving club in the ucl together and win the league. Corby has always produced some great players with just a tad of unpredictability about them. and i will say this you know were you stand and i bet there are not many lads from there calling other teams or trying to put down there achievements.
football is the best game in the world rubbished by politics it isn't a fashion parade or who has the best ground these are only arguments used by people who lack a pair, its about every thing that is good about life and people, commitment friendship enjoyment freedom to have opinions and well the list is endless.
I am sure clubs are sorry that you have to clean your shoes after a game or god forbid some kids were kicking a ball around on a bit of grass or the sandwiches were tuna but please get a grip and your heads out of your backsides.
|
|
|
|
Post by ianh on Jun 1, 2009 21:52:08 GMT 1
This is a good thread, a good debate and some of the points could be workable, although new rules/sanctions cant be applied at will.
There seems to be an undercurrent that it costs tens/hundreds of thousands to get the requirements needed for a good ground grading,........... yes it can if there is extensive structural work needs doing, but most of the grounds that are inspected, half of the improvements can and are done in a weekend.
I can guarantee that half of the clubs in our league can meet a requirement of their grade by spending less than £100.
A lot has been done by our clubs in the past 2 seasons, of which the league should be proud of.
|
|
)
