change start off league

with news about english football to have there break in winter insted off may-august might seem a good idea .....
what about the alliance league starting there season end off feburary and season will end oct time may welll make things a lot easier with all this weather as teams havent played for weeks and feb/march time get season underway few weeks into season could bring in the midweek games with the summer season ahead would be great idea ..
whats all your thoughts ?

If you look at the other post you will see it cant be done, a lot of the fields used for footie in winter are used by other sports in summer....never going to happen....plus, you got to love the footie in the puddles and mud!

fc hoskins wrote:

with news about english football to have there break in winter insted off may-august might seem a good idea .....
what about the alliance league starting there season end off feburary and season will end oct time may welll make things a lot easier with all this weather as teams havent played for weeks and feb/march time get season underway few weeks into season could bring in the midweek games with the summer season ahead would be great idea ..
whats all your thoughts ?

my thoughts get a f**king JOB

my thoughts get some decent players might do well in prem ..
like us next year already got players in the pipe line

who needs a job when money floats out the sky

only needs to start two weeks before the season normally does and 2 weeks after that would cover all the winter posponments easily, and it can be done, 2 weeks is nothing, people just dont like change even when its despratly needed

think of al the teams that would complain about the pitch being too hard in june and july time

man in black, i totally agree

the oadby and wigston pitches tend to be used for cricket and therefore unavailable sundays

Cricket cannot be classed as a sport..........

New Road Inn wrote:

Cricket cannot be classed as a sport..........

Mmm?

certainly think if this weather is anything to go by and if it becomes the norm for the next decade or so we would have to look at starting season a month earlier

that means trying to get councils on board, not very likely!!!!

No umpire ?

The village teams were ready to begin their match but discovered that they were without an umpire. They decided that they would use a member of the crowd even though he knew nothing of the rules. When he was dressed in his white coat and hat, he went up to the captain of the home side.

"What do I do?" he asked

."It's very simple," said the home captain. "When I shout "HOWZAT!" you simply put up your finger and say "OUT".

When it's our turn to bat, I'll tell thee a little bit more!"



if you swap the umpire for a lino.

Paulo_MTFC wrote:

that means trying to get councils on board, not very likely!!!!

Not at the moment, but if the last 2 winters are anything to go by, it will be the only way forward and will be a test for the councils to see if they want to serve the public who actually pay to use their parks or if football is viewed as an irritation by them!

As there has always been a reluctance to start season early or finish late I think there may well be a reduction in division sizes meaning less games played, not my thoughts but seems the only logical solution.

we could have had that this year, but the league added another 14+ teams to the league (not blaming them- as its a popular league) but i cant see anything but more Aprils seeing games sunday,wednesday,friday,sunday.......

The idea of adding the extra division was so that the divisions had 12 team maximum. That didn't happen, though...

The 'Let's start earlier debate' has been well documented both now and previously, and there is little constructive to add.

We started off the season with 83 teams - which would have been 84 had Shakespeare Inn not resigned.

In an ideal position that would have been 7 divisions x 12 teams.

However, there is a general reluctance of some teams to meet the challenge of the Premiership and Division 1 - hence they are lower in numbers, with the knock on effect that Divisions 2 has 12 teams but Divisions 3 to 6 have a higher number.

To have forced teams to compete above their perceived level would probably have led to resignations.

This is not intended to start a debate about the constitution - I am aware that some teams could have been placed higher and some placed lower - but that is with knowing now, what was unknown when the sun was shining.

As for next season.....well I have had a number of enquiries already, so there is still a healthy demand for Alliance League membership.

In the meantime - experienced forum members will recall the past
debate about the use of 3G pitches. Well???

Fact - The only game in the County last weekend was played in the North Leicestershire League on the 3G pitch at Loughborough University.

They are increasing in number around the County, and the League permits their use.

3G is a good way to go if its permitted (although i would miss the scraped legs and bleeding arms from summer footie on dry grass!)....but the difficulty would be in getting a pitch, not sure of too many 3G 11 aside pitches....

Maybe we could ask the council to knock down The Curve theatre and replace it with more useful footie pitches!!! ;-)

Polska legend II wrote:

Paulo_MTFC wrote:

that means trying to get councils on board, not very likely!!!!

Not at the moment, but if the last 2 winters are anything to go by, it will be the only way forward and will be a test for the councils to see if they want to serve the public who actually pay to use their parks or if football is viewed as an irritation by them!

We weren't allowed to play a game past 3rd May in a previous year because of cricket and are not allowed the pitch til the first weekend in September. They pay for the use of the parks too (not defending the "sport", just commenting on use of pitches). One game of cricket at Uplands prevents 3 games of football!!!!

oh yes it is!!!

oh no it isn't

MT Sec wrote:

Polska legend II wrote:

Paulo_MTFC wrote:

that means trying to get councils on board, not very likely!!!!

Not at the moment, but if the last 2 winters are anything to go by, it will be the only way forward and will be a test for the councils to see if they want to serve the public who actually pay to use their parks or if football is viewed as an irritation by them!

We weren't allowed to play a game past 3rd May in a previous year because of cricket and are not allowed the pitch til the first weekend in September. They pay for the use of the parks too (not defending the "sport", just commenting on use of pitches). One game of cricket at Uplands prevents 3 games of football!!!!

fair point, but that's what I'm saying - I think in future the councils are going to have to become more accommodating

fc hoskins wrote:

my thoughts get some decent players might do well in prem ..
like us next year already got players in the pipe line

who's gunna pay there subs for them? your players cant afford there own subs!

bullshead lolol haha our club is in good sectary hands with two dedicated managers .
everyone is paying pal dont worry bout us worry about your league position .. ohhh and a little summit for everyone to know im pretty sure bullshead's players DONT i repeat DONT have to pay subs IF they WIN ummm looks like theve paid a few subs as youve only won 1 ...

hahahahaha

7 Bulls Head Athletic 6 1 1 4 29 21 8 4

9th Bulls Head Athletic 12 1 2 9 40 66 -26 5pts

the future haha

Gordon wrote:

The 'Let's start earlier debate' has been well documented both now and previously, and there is little constructive to add.

We started off the season with 83 teams - which would have been 84 had Shakespeare Inn not resigned.

In an ideal position that would have been 7 divisions x 12 teams.

However, there is a general reluctance of some teams to meet the challenge of the Premiership and Division 1 - hence they are lower in numbers, with the knock on effect that Divisions 2 has 12 teams but Divisions 3 to 6 have a higher number.

If this was the case, why did the league accept so many teams? You must had a rough idea how many teams you would have for the top dvisions. This seems like another example of favouring the top clubs, does it not matter if the lower divisions are less well organised than the top?

The league being so popular shouldn't be an excuse to just take on everybody. You should, by now, have the luxury to set paramiters (?) and stick to them.

Given that it was known that at least 2 weeks would be lost at Christmas, it was clear that fixtures could be a serious problem.

Maybe, just maybe, if more teams were turned down, the other leagues in the county would have more participants. As much as the LSL gets a slating on here, the Alliance League would be a lot worse if it didn't exist.

Gordon wrote:

To have forced teams to compete above their perceived level would probably have led to resignations.

This is not intended to start a debate about the constitution - I am aware that some teams could have been placed higher and some placed lower - but that is with knowing now, what was unknown when the sun was shining.

Nobody has questioned this (in this thread)

Gordon wrote:

As for next season.....well I have had a number of enquiries already, so there is still a healthy demand for Alliance League membership.

See my points above, I hope the league doesn't just go around accepting willy nilly (no doubt you will tell me this dopesn't happen anyway).

Gordon wrote:

In the meantime - experienced forum members will recall the past
debate about the use of 3G pitches. Well???

Fact - The only game in the County last weekend was played in the North Leicestershire League on the 3G pitch at Loughborough University.

They are increasing in number around the County, and the League permits their use.

They may be increasing in number but the cost to use them is not practical for the poorer clubs. I forget the actual price but i'm pretty sure it's at least double the cost of a council pitch.

I'm sure you're aware of the current conditions, asking players to pay over the odds is not a realistic option and sponsorship is not easy to come by.

Perhaps when there are more of them, they will be more affordable.

I have to say that the organisation of the lower leagues appears to be pretty good to be honest, i have found it a lot better than in other leagues that i have been in. I see a lot of people on here having a p!ss and a whinge about things, and to be honest, i sometimes think if i was one of the league officers, would i bother if i was them....

If people dont like it, then probably should run for the positions of league secretary etc (not having a pop at you Sparta 3 by the way)

the lower leagues are not run any less ably than the top ones. the bad weather / fixture debate runs on and on each year and wait until the March / April fixtures are out - then we'll have all the moaning again. I think the league have been pro-active by encouraging teams to start their seasons at least a week earlier and also now by offering Wednesday night games. This shows that we are thinking ahead - but how many clubs are?

Polska legend II wrote:

the lower leagues are not run any less ably than the top ones. the bad weather / fixture debate runs on and on each year and wait until the March / April fixtures are out - then we'll have all the moaning again. I think the league have been pro-active by encouraging teams to start their seasons at least a week earlier and also now by offering Wednesday night games. This shows that we are thinking ahead - but how many clubs are?

agreed personally think its a very hard job to organise it all and all parties included are doing a very good job
merry christmas

New Road Inn wrote:

I have to say that the organisation of the lower leagues appears to be pretty good to be honest, i have found it a lot better than in other leagues that i have been in. I see a lot of people on here having a p!ss and a whinge about things, and to be honest, i sometimes think if i was one of the league officers, would i bother if i was them....

If people dont like it, then probably should run for the positions of league secretary etc (not having a pop at you Sparta 3 by the way)

I wasn't trying to imply that the lower leagues are badly run. The league have done an awful lot for us in the past and are always on hand to help.

My remark was aimed at the fact that membership was restricted (due to quality, i admit) in the higher divisions, but not the lower ones. Considering the amount of new teams, some of the back-log could have been avoided.

New Road Inn wrote:

I have to say that the organisation of the lower leagues appears to be pretty good to be honest, i have found it a lot better than in other leagues that i have been in. I see a lot of people on here having a p!ss and a whinge about things, and to be honest, i sometimes think if i was one of the league officers, would i bother if i was them....

If people dont like it, then probably should run for the positions of league secretary etc (not having a pop at you Sparta 3 by the way)

Careful you'll be on his foes list...