FA proposing League Structure changes

Post a reply

Smilies
:goodpost: :lol: :rofl: :goal: :scarf: :keepie: :clap: :bow: :engflag: :-P :) :-D :nod: ;-) :-/ :( :'( :Z :@ :| :oops: :yellow: :red: :O :whistle: (*) (8) (D)

BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[flash] is OFF
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON

Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: FA proposing League Structure changes

FA proposing League Structure changes

by gullintwoplaces » 07 Jun 2014, 05:43

[quote="PlainmoorRoar"]Looks like its going to be rightly dismissed by FL clubs

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27743046/quote

Really glad to hear that. Time for Greg Dyke to resign and leave football alone. Dyke is a prat, I would say wa**er but that is rude.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by PlainmoorRoar » 06 Jun 2014, 20:37

Looks like its going to be rightly dismissed by FL clubs

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27743046

FA proposing League Structure changes

by ferrarilover » 14 May 2014, 18:28

DTG wrote:I don't see why you'd presume that a side with a home attendance of, say, 4000 would fail to raise a single away supporter. Hyde FC, who get about 400 at home were still taking a minibus full to away games last year and that's to watch a side which managed 10 points all year.

I think a number of people would see it as a cheap way to follow their team without having to stump up for an expensive first team ticket. Once teams are established, the away following would follow pretty naturally. Ok, Stoke B might not bring many, but then, I doubt that we'll be seeing the away end opened for Halifax or Dover FC next season either.

For some sort of evidence of success of brand new teams with an attachment to an existing PL giant (I know the circumstances are somewhat different), have a look at FCUM, FC United of Manchester. Alright, they started off as a protest vote, but the initial excitement of it being something new has long since passed (remember the Ebbsfeet thing, 25,000 supporters in year one, about 600 in year two once the initial gloss of "owning shares in a football club" wore off) and they still get anywhere between 3 and 6 times the gates of everyone else. I can't find their away figures, but there's talk on the website of offering coach travel, except where demand fails to suffice (so the presumption is that a coach will run. That's the same situation as at Torquay). This is in the Evo-Stik, which is so far down the pyramid that I'm not even sure how far down they really are.

I think there are still, just, enough genuine football fans left at the top of the pyramid that away attendances would be comparable with the Conference. On that score, the argument against looks extremely weak. Elsewhere, it's stronger, and it's in those areas that any sensible objection to the proposals should be concentrated.

Matt.

I am loving the irony of FL jacking off all enthusiastic about the B Team league and its promotion yet refuses to want or even acknowledge the sense of Marketing TUFC. Matt, dear boy, stick to carrying papers for other jumped up, self important chinless wonders.[/quote]

No one's this stupid. Not in real life.

Matt.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by Scorpion » 14 May 2014, 13:35

I read on the BBC yesterday that for these proposals to get off the ground they must be approved by:

75% of Premier League clubs AND
75% of Football League Clubs INCLUDING at least 75% of clubs in the Championship.

That's screwed that then!

FA proposing League Structure changes

by gullintwoplaces » 14 May 2014, 11:13

PhilGull wrote:I think it's worth pointing out that the Premier League declined an invite to join Dyke's panel. Premier League chief, Richard Scudamore has since come out in defence of the status quo, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27340856.
Indeed, this might be due to split opinions in the Premiership. Arsenal Wenger does not appear to support the B team proposals and I guess there are others. It might also be that Scudamore knows that Dyke is on a loser and will let him hang himself. With a tosser like Danny Mills onside with Dyke, Scudamore may well be distancing himself from an idea heading for the rocks.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by DTG » 14 May 2014, 11:11

I don't see why you'd presume that a side with a home attendance of, say, 4000 would fail to raise a single away supporter. Hyde FC, who get about 400 at home were still taking a minibus full to away games last year and that's to watch a side which managed 10 points all year.

I think a number of people would see it as a cheap way to follow their team without having to stump up for an expensive first team ticket. Once teams are established, the away following would follow pretty naturally. Ok, Stoke B might not bring many, but then, I doubt that we'll be seeing the away end opened for Halifax or Dover FC next season either.

For some sort of evidence of success of brand new teams with an attachment to an existing PL giant (I know the circumstances are somewhat different), have a look at FCUM, FC United of Manchester. Alright, they started off as a protest vote, but the initial excitement of it being something new has long since passed (remember the Ebbsfeet thing, 25,000 supporters in year one, about 600 in year two once the initial gloss of "owning shares in a football club" wore off) and they still get anywhere between 3 and 6 times the gates of everyone else. I can't find their away figures, but there's talk on the website of offering coach travel, except where demand fails to suffice (so the presumption is that a coach will run. That's the same situation as at Torquay). This is in the Evo-Stik, which is so far down the pyramid that I'm not even sure how far down they really are.

I think there are still, just, enough genuine football fans left at the top of the pyramid that away attendances would be comparable with the Conference. On that score, the argument against looks extremely weak. Elsewhere, it's stronger, and it's in those areas that any sensible objection to the proposals should be concentrated.

Matt.[/quote]


I am loving the irony of FL jacking off all enthusiastic about the B Team league and its promotion yet refuses to want or even acknowledge the sense of Marketing TUFC. Matt, dear boy, stick to carrying papers for other jumped up, self important chinless wonders.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by DTG » 14 May 2014, 11:06

I am loving the irony of FL jacking off all enthusiastic about the B Team league and its promotion yet refuses to want or even acknowledge the sense of Marketing TUFC. Matt, dear boy, stick to carrying papers for other jumped up, self important chinless wonders.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by PhilGull » 14 May 2014, 10:55

I think it's worth pointing out that the Premier League declined an invite to join Dyke's panel. Premier League chief, Richard Scudamore has since come out in defence of the status quo, http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27340856.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by tomogull » 14 May 2014, 10:08

gullintwoplaces wrote:The FCUM article posted by Jerry is excellent. Coherent, well argued and completely right. Just makes me hate Dyke and his cronies even more. I think that the level of anger amongst fans about this man and his pet dog Mills is very high indeed. They care as much for the fans as O'Leary from RyanAir cares about his passengers.
Yes - the FCUM article should be essential reading for every lower league and conference fan. It's concise and very well written. There have also been some excellent Press articles against the proposal - even in the Daily Wail. Personally, I will support Torquay Utd come rain or shine even if, heaven forbid, we descended to Conference South. But if Dyke's proposal goes through, I shall turn my back on football because it reeks of Premiership greed. The current Pyramid system has evolved over many years and in my view is fair and works well so sod off Dykes and Mills & co.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by gullintwoplaces » 14 May 2014, 07:32

The FCUM article posted by Jerry is excellent. Coherent, well argued and completely right. Just makes me hate Dyke and his cronies even more. I think that the level of anger amongst fans about this man and his pet dog Mills is very high indeed. They care as much for the fans as O'Leary from RyanAir cares about his passengers.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by ferrarilover » 13 May 2014, 22:29

Three excellent links, especially the one provided by Jerry. Recommended reading, since it's only short, but it gives a nice grounding as to the story behind the headlines. If the claims therein turn out to be true (I have about 80% confidence that they will), then the FA have got this decision almost as wrong as they possibly could have.

Matt.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by Jerry » 13 May 2014, 22:07

ferrarilover wrote: For some sort of evidence of success of brand new teams with an attachment to an existing PL giant (I know the circumstances are somewhat different), have a look at FCUM, FC United of Manchester. Alright, they started off as a protest vote, but the initial excitement of it being something new has long since passed (remember the Ebbsfeet thing, 25,000 supporters in year one, about 600 in year two once the initial gloss of "owning shares in a football club" wore off) and they still get anywhere between 3 and 6 times the gates of everyone else. I can't find their away figures, but there's talk on the website of offering coach travel, except where demand fails to suffice (so the presumption is that a coach will run. That's the same situation as at Torquay). This is in the Evo-Stik, which is so far down the pyramid that I'm not even sure how far down they really are.
Talking of FCUM, there's a good piece on their website about these proposals.

http://fc-utd.co.uk/m_story.php?story_id=5524

FA proposing League Structure changes

by gullintwoplaces » 13 May 2014, 15:59

Some evidence about Germany is in a previous comment. I believe that the situation in Spain is similar. The Germany article from 2007 is found through either of these links:

http://www.wsc.co.uk/wsc-daily/1177-may ... ague-clubs

http://www.wsc.co.uk/the-archive/923-Eu ... -killer-bs

FA proposing League Structure changes

by ferrarilover » 13 May 2014, 15:43

Now we're cooking with gas. It would fail miserably to do what it says it wants to do, and that's probably our best hope of stopping the plans in their tracks.
I know it would be different, and as Englishmen, we don't like change, but a league match against a B team would be just the same as a league match against Accrington Stanley. They're both worth three points and, from a personal point of view, I don't give a shit about either opponent.

Maybe we think differently as to the composition of these B teams? I imagine them full of promising young talent (of whom, perhaps 1% will ever get near the starting XI of the first team). Do you believe otherwise? I could well understand your malaise (and indeed, I'd support it) if I believed that the B teams would be made up of guys already on £150,000/week who are simply seeking fitness or some match time.

I know that Barca B play in Liga B (or whatever) and that Real Madrid Seconds exist, but that's as far as my understanding goes. What harm have they done to that national structure?

Matt.

FA proposing League Structure changes

by gullintwoplaces » 13 May 2014, 15:29

To be honest Matt, the best argument against the proposal is that it would not achieve what it is on paper aiming to do (and I say on paper, as I suspect that the real reason why B Teams in our League have been proposed is for another reason entirely). What it sets out to do on paper is improve youth player development, and it would clearly fail to do this. Investment in coaching, facilities and giving promising young players a genuine opportunity to play in the Premiership is what is required. I was shocked when I saw the comparative numbers for qualified coaches in England compared to Spain. Italy and Germany, due to the neglect of the utterly crap FA.

The away team attendance argument is not the strongest, but there is no doubt that enormous damage would be done to lower division clubs. I would never pay to see Torquay play a reserve side in anything other than a friendly, I believe that such games would be sterile and meaningless. The best evidence is the negative impact of B teams in Europe, the FA Commission has not addressed this at all.

Lower division club fans should fight this with every means at our disposal. I agree that it may go through anyway, but we should make life very uncomfortable for Dyke and his mates in the meantime. I remember some years ago Brighton fans holding vigils outside the house of the scumbag that sold the Goldstone, he hated this, as would Dyke,

Top