Promotion and Relegations Roundup (steps 2-5)

[Aberstone]

Stamford are saved due to having the highest points per game of a team placed 21st in a step 3 division. This was a 2 horse race rather than 3 as Farnborough have already been relegated and caused a reprieve for Burgess Hill in the Isthmian who had a better PPG.

Seems to go against what the FA have previously said about reprieves staying within leagues, but that's the decision they have made. If I was on the board at Bedworth I'd be looking at an appeal which would drag this one out somewhat.

No idea when that was said but this rule has been in place for at least a couple of years. Wingate & Finchley were reprieved from the Isthmian Premier in 2014 when Worksop Town resigned from the Northern Premier.

 

[Jemfy]

No idea when that was said but this rule has been in place for at least a couple of years. Wingate & Finchley were reprieved from the Isthmian Premier in 2014 when Worksop Town resigned from the Northern Premier.

It's certainly been applied the other way in the past - when teams from above go under/resign. IIRC when Hereford went under reprieves were handed out in the Southern League when there were more appropriate teams for them to go to under the normal rules. Sometimes this means that a reprieve that would have gone to one club now goes to another due to the preferential nature so it appears like it doesn't apply in effect, whereas technically it does.

Your example is even weirder though as I thought when teams resigned the technical way of doing it was awarding them last place in the league table and automatic relegation (thus effectively reprieving the highest relegated side, but not in the way that it would matter for reprieves that go across leagues). Maybe it's the exact timing of when they resign that matters for this case. See Daventry this season being awarded last place (although they did finish in an automatic relegation spot to begin with).

I've got to assume there was something where the top relegated side in the Northern Premier that year was already reprieved?

Edit: It *might* be that this is how the rules changed when they did the re-shuffle to make it 14 up/down from 12 at step 4/5 - which is when I really started paying attention

 

[Jemfy]

Evesham are appealing the decision made to move them to the Northern Premier League Division 1 South. Their appeal appears to be based around the idea that they should stay in the SLD1S&W either by kicking out Cinderford from the league, or forcibly promoting them. Cinderford have expressed support for the idea of promoting Taunton in their place.

I can't see a way that kicking out Cinderford would keep Evesham in the SLD1S&W unless they propose that the NPLD1S runs a team short, otherwise pretty much all the options involve pushing Evesham north. Only promoting a team from the SLD1S&W such that Stamford are relegated from the NPL pushes Evehsam back south.

Hopefully this is all feeding in to the FA about how these divisions will need to change in the next few years due to the way promotions from below practically work out.

 

[Tivvyultras]

I say good riddence to evesham should make them play in the highland leagues thugs

 

[Tivvyultras]

I say good riddence to evesham should make them play in the highland leagues thugs

 

[DarkSithLord]

Evesham United have won their appeal - http://www.eveshamunitedfc.com/robins-win-appeal-at-football-association/

This means Cinderford are forced to take Promotion to Southern Premier.
Stamford are relegated to Northern Premier Division one South and Corby move over to the Northern Premier Premier Division.

Will Cinderford now resign?

 

[Chris FGR]

Cinderford should just run with no playing budget next season and get smashed every week. Then they can sort themselves out next summer and be back in the league they wanted to be in this year.

If they resign they'd end up back in the Hellenic, which would be a shame for them after all them years of hard work building the club up in the Southern League.

 

[Jemfy]

Agreed resigning gets Cinderford nowhere. They can at least have a go at putting together a team of cheap/free players and see if they can find some talent.

Ridiculous that Evesham were allowed to appeal the move. Ridiculous that it was accepted. Ridiculous that Cinderford were allowed to reject promotion after the season had completed. A series of incorrect decisions has resulted in the fairest outcome, but the system is broken. You shouldn't be able to appeal a sideways move. You should have to take promotion if you finish in the promotion spot and are eligible once the last game has kicked off - otherwise automatic promotion and playoffs can take place without you.

At least they didn't promote Taunton in their place. As much as all parties would have been happy with that (except Stamford I'm sure), it doesn't make it the right move.

 

[SGW]

Well, I disagree with you there, Jemfy. Personally, I think Evesham staying in "their" league is the best result. Granted, though, that I've no idea what the precedents are and I'm sure you're right in what you're saying based on what has happened before.

For me, though, I get hacked off with this mania for everything being regimented and don't see any reason at all why leagues at the same level always have to have exactly the same number of teams. What is wrong with running one short or one too many? The odds are it will even out the following season anyway.

Evesham are in a historical Southern League area and I would guess they've always played in that league or its feeders. So what earthly reason is there for them being pushed into the NPL other than a bureaucrat's mania for neatness? Of course, the same argument applies equally to you lot but you personally seem happy enough to be stuck in the NPL1S with some pretty big away trips coming up: I suppose you're more used to it from your bigger days?

 

[Jemfy]

Well, I disagree with you there, Jemfy. Personally, I think Evesham staying in "their" league is the best result. Granted, though, that I've no idea what the precedents are and I'm sure you're right in what you're saying based on what has happened before.

For me, though, I get hacked off with this mania for everything being regimented and don't see any reason at all why leagues at the same level always have to have exactly the same number of teams. What is wrong with running one short or one too many? The odds are it will even out the following season anyway.

Evesham are in a historical Southern League area and I would guess they've always played in that league or its feeders. So what earthly reason is there for them being pushed into the NPL other than a bureaucrat's mania for neatness? Of course, the same argument applies equally to you lot but you personally seem happy enough to be stuck in the NPL1S with some pretty big away trips coming up: I suppose you're more used to it from your bigger days?

We are mostly not happy about it but accept it as a fact of life. There is no right for us to appeal as far as I am aware, and even if there was it wouldn't get us anywhere. Maybe we're more accepting due to our desire to go up that will increase the travelling anyway. It's more clear that we are on the borderline than Evesham to be fair, but there is nobody that should be moved north ahead of them that wasn't.

Leagues have to have the right amount of teams as it changes relegation/reprieve criteria, effective season lengths and interferes with cup dates etc. Having an odd number of teams means every Saturday there is at least one team not playing through no fault of their own. We've played in the UCL with odd numbers of teams and it shouldn't be like that.

It also makes relegation less fair. For now at least the Isthmian is compensated for running with 24 teams and 3 relegation spots in each division by having first right to reprieves. What if one was "traditionally" from the other division on the border so one division ran with 25 and one with 23, how many should be relegated from each? Should the 25 team league get reprieves first? It throws a lot of complication in to the mix, more at step 4 than it would at step 3. Say the SLD1S&W ran with 23 and the NPLD1S ran with 21, should 2 teams get relegated from both? Which division should be first in line for reprieves? Is it fair that it's harder to be one of 2 teams promoted from a 23 team league than from a normal 22 team league or a 21, when the only causal factor is that someone doesn't fancy travelling north?

Evesham shouldn't have been moved in the first place because Cinderford shouldn't have been allowed to reject promotion. If they don't want to play at that level so badly they can resign now or after the AGM and go play below.

I also don't agree that just because a team are historically from one league they shouldn't go in to another. Corby are historically a Southern League team, should they be put in the SLD1P? With the creep of divisions south you'd get more and more in the Southern/Isthmian and less in the Northern (due to promotion from below being an issue...)

Really it's endemic of a bigger problem that needs to be fixed.

 

[SGW]

Really it's endemic of a bigger problem that needs to be fixed.

That bit I agree with but the rest we'll have to agree to disagree.

Yes, I think Corby should be in the SLP because they're from that neck of the woods.

No, I still don't really see any big issue with slightly uneven divisions (not ideal but not the end of the world and better IMHO than this annual fannying around).

I take your point that this is all caused by Cinderford but I dislike your solution that promotion should be compulsory: clubs should be free to play at the level they feel best suits them.

I would like to see the Southern League move back into its traditional stamping grounds just north of Birmingham (and the NPL shrink back into its more traditional areas) but that isn't going to happen without radical change. For me, a short-term fix would be to reduce all 3 NPL divisions by 2 teams each to slightly reduce the ongoing pressure to move more and more southern based teams into the NPL simply to keep the numbers even. Let's be honest, what kind of a rational reason is that? What it seems to amount to is: let's completely ignore geography but instead move clubs willy nilly just because it looks neat on a piece of paper.

Or in other and better words "“a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen."

 

[Jemfy]

That bit I agree with but the rest we'll have to agree to disagree.

Yes, I think Corby should be in the SLP because they're from that neck of the woods.

No, I still don't really see any big issue with slightly uneven divisions (not ideal but not the end of the world and better IMHO than this annual fannying around).

I take your point that this is all caused by Cinderford but I dislike your solution that promotion should be compulsory: clubs should be free to play at the level they feel best suits them.

I would like to see the Southern League move back into its traditional stamping grounds just north of Birmingham (and the NPL shrink back into its more traditional areas) but that isn't going to happen without radical change. For me, a short-term fix would be to reduce all 3 NPL divisions by 2 teams each to slightly reduce the ongoing pressure to move more and more southern based teams into the NPL simply to keep the numbers even. Let's be honest, what kind of a rational reason is that? What it seems to amount to is: let's completely ignore geography but instead move clubs willy nilly just because it looks neat on a piece of paper.

Or in other and better words "“a foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen."

Agree to disagree on the havoc caused by odd numbers of clubs, and keeping teams in certain divisions because it' "traditional".

I'm not saying promotion should be compulsory. I'm saying that once you have applied and committed to it during the season (which Cinderford have), you should only have until the last game to change your mind so a fair solution can be carried out. Cinderford had the option of not applying for promotion, or informing the league all along they weren't going to take promotion. They had intended to take promotion all season and then changed their mind after the last ball had been kicked. For me that should be the deadline on this one rather than the AGM a couple of months later - both are reasonably arbitrary but at least pre-playoffs you could work a solution without them.

I also think in extreme situations failing this (i.e. if Cinderford resigned/folded) the FA should have applied the rules that they apply when a reprieve comes from above - that it stays in division then in league - which would have saved the 4th bottom SPL club and all this hassle (since Stamford wouldn't have been reprieved in the first place). It's not an ideal rule but it saves this crap mostly.

For me you need 4 leagues at step 3 and 4 (making 8 divisions at step 6), and (or at the very minimum) fixing the mentality of the step 5 northern league of rejecting promotion. The solution you propose wouldn't be great. As you point out it would just move the few most southerly clubs out, but there would be potential for them to come back quickly if the problem isn't fixed.

 

[SGW]

The solution you propose wouldn't be great. As you point out it would just move the few most southerly clubs out, but there would be potential for them to come back quickly if the problem isn't fixed.

Agreed.

I did say it would be a short-term fix only. Longer term, the only realistic answer if the NPL isn't to end up in Hertfordshire is for 4 divisions at step 3, I agree with you there.

Where I disagree with you is that it then follows that there should be 8 divisions at step 4. For me, that's just "foolish consistency" as I quoted before. The way I look at it is that a) there's already a shedload of shit grounds at step 4 and flooding that level with 40+ new clubs from step 5 will just make that worse, and b) I seriously doubt there are enough clubs willing and able to make the step up anyway.

Without wanting to bore the pants off you and everybody else, I would also say you shouldn't create a brand new league at step 3 but just allow the Southern League to run 2 side-by-side divisions at that level. Doubtless the anoraks over on the Tony Kempster site will disagree with me but I just want a practical solution which has at least a nodding acquaintance with geography and reality and also some token effort to preserve leagues and clubs in their traditional areas (yep, I'm a stick in the mud).

 

[Paddy]

Without wanting to bore the pants off you and everybody else, I would also say you shouldn't create a brand new league at step 3 but just allow the Southern League to run 2 side-by-side divisions at that level. Doubtless the anoraks over on the Tony Kempster site will disagree with me but I just want a practical solution which has at least a nodding acquaintance with geography and reality and also some token effort to preserve leagues and clubs in their traditional areas (yep, I'm a stick in the mud).

If the Southern League ran 2 side by side leagues at Step 3, in the interest of streamlining the upper ends of the NLS (which has been the FA's aim since the Conference North & South were invented) it would require an additional 2 leagues at Step 4, which would pretty much be identical as splitting the Southern League territory with a new league.

I've always agreed with the idea of a 4th feeder league to the Conference because then you can have a more even split with Northern Premier League in the North, a new division in the Midlands, Isthmian for the South East & Southern League takes up the South West. It will semi-solve the 70/30 geographical split at Step 2 over a period of time if you strictly say that Southern/Isthmian go up to Conference South & NPL/new league go up to Conference North. At the same time, to reduce the amount of park/village/pub teams you'd need to promote you could reduce all Step 3 & 4 divisions to 20 teams each - something that will also help clubs on a financial level.

That's my opinion anyway. Mind you, for me it's all this just to fuck off Lowestoft out of my league

 

[DarkSithLord]

Interesting article here. http://www.nonleagueyorkshire.com/2016/06/19/promotion-made-mandatory/

The FA plan to force promotion upon League winners which will go down like a lead balloon in the NL.

Also further mumurs here of plans to have a "Midland League" at Step 3/4.

 

[SGW]

Interesting article here. http://www.nonleagueyorkshire.com/2016/06/19/promotion-made-mandatory/

The FA plan to force promotion upon League winners which will go down like a lead balloon in the NL.

Also further mumurs here of plans to have a "Midland League" at Step 3/4.

Hmm, fascists of the world unite.

People volunteer (doubtless a strange concept to the paid bureaucrats at the FA) to run clubs at that level and they do it because they love their club not the national league system. Let's face it (Northern League aside), 9 out of 10 promoted clubs want to be promoted. But if the 1 out of 10 decides that promotion is not right for the club, that decision should be respected. I take Jemfy's point that Cinderford perhaps left it too late to withdraw their promotion request and forced promotion probably is right for them but, in general, I'm totally opposed to the idea. This is supposed to be a sport where people go to enjoy their spare time not an obligation where rules are passed down from on high and remote dictators tell local clubs what they should do, what league they should be in and proceed to move them around willy nilly as if it were a chessboard.