- Print Topic - Archive

Quoted from MarinerMart

League 2 clubs would never vote for it....the only time they would want it is when they end up in the conference

They might because if they do go down at least it makes it a lot easier to come back up!

Don't forget it used to be zero, then one, then two promotion places so they have already voted for it to go up twice..

It's a good piece and I hope it increases popular support and a change in the rules.

I'd actually prefer league 2 and the conference to merge and become L2 north and south. But that's another story.

It makes sense for League 2 clubs TO vote for it. Currently, if they get relegated they are likely to spend an average of 5-7 years in NL before they back into the League again.

Relegation can happen to big teams such as Grimsby, Luton, Bristol Rovers, Wrexham and Tranmere etc.

With 3 up and 3 down they have a 50% better chance every season of getting back into League 2. This represents a much better risk to all teams than the current arrangements.

It's fine as it is. Too many tinpot clubs are in the league as it is. We'll get out of it next season, then we'll never look back again.

Quoted from 75

It's fine as it is. Too many tinpot clubs are in the league as it is. We'll get out of it next season, then we'll never look back again.

Seasons ago your comment would have been justified but now you have Towns bigger than Grimsby being funded by multi millionaires.

Fleetwood only got their financial backer because he was refused a place on Blackpools board and now you have foreign investment.

Ground safety and facilities for fans should be the decider if a tin pot team is able to go higher up the football pyramid.

After all, it's the only real thing left in football, a non league team making their way up the football pyramid.

great article - well argued
It will happen one day, not sure when..perhaps when more traditional, well supported clubs drop out of the football league
Top of Conf is no worse than much of League Two
It's unfair, unsustainable and undemocratic to have only one automatic promotion spot
Conference to me is no longer the poor relation - it's League Three in all but name - but it's the stigma of being classed non league
Three up and three down needs to happen sooner rather than later

They should get rid of 4 up from League 2 and change that to 3 up as well it's a total anachronism. We got relegated from League 1 in fourth bottom place as I recall.

Quoted from 75

It's fine as it is. Too many tinpot clubs are in the league as it is. We'll get out of it next season, then we'll never look back again.

What an arrogant attitude! What criteria do you use to define a club as " tinpot". Surely the whole point of the football league pyramid is to allow any team, given time , to achieve success through promotions? There are many teams in the league who have become " established league teams" even though they have only achieved league status in the last 50 or 60 years. Wigan Athletic are a prime example. They were only formed in 1932 and only got Football League status in the 1977-78 season. This was under the old system of being " voted " into the league and this was at the expense of Southport who failed at their attempt of re-election. I would imagine Wigan might come under your description of " tinpot " if you had expressed a view at the time.
IMO their should be an equal number of promotion places in each of the leagues, this would give a more balanced structure. The greatest anomoly is the fact that 4 teams are promoted from League 2 to League 1 yet only 2 teams are relegated from League 2. 4 teams are promoted into the Vanarama Conference , which seems to indicate a bias towards teams attaining Football League status.

Quoted from jimgtfc

I'd actually prefer league 2 and the conference to merge and become L2 north and south. But that's another story.

Stuff that. I miss the long distance trips as it is being at our level!

So, the sooner we get back to the Conference. The sooner I can enjoy long trips away to Torquay etc.

Maybe the 3rd place team in the Conference should play off against the team that finishes 3rd bottom in League 2? One off game neutral ground..........or considering that attendance between Southern and Wycombe yesterday it could be the curtain raiser for the league 2 play off final.

Leave it as it is. Get out of this league and stay out, don't make it easier to fall back down here. Care about town first and foremost - once we're out of here, this league is the least of our concerns. None of us cared before we got relegated.

All this moral high-ground people are taking is a load of balderdash. How many of us care about the conference north??

Again a totally selfish attitude! The WHOLE structure of the Football League needs looking into and a fair system for the whole of the pyramid needs to be agreed. The same promotion and relegation for all the structure is the only way to go. The system is bigger than any single club and that is the point.

Quoted from rancido

What an arrogant attitude! What criteria do you use to define a club as " tinpot". Surely the whole point of the football league pyramid is to allow any team, given time , to achieve success through promotions? There are many teams in the league who have become " established league teams" even though they have only achieved league status in the last 50 or 60 years. Wigan Athletic are a prime example. They were only formed in 1932 and only got Football League status in the 1977-78 season. This was under the old system of being " voted " into the league and this was at the expense of Southport who failed at their attempt of re-election. I would imagine Wigan might come under your description of " tinpot " if you had expressed a view at the time.IMO their should be an equal number of promotion places in each of the leagues, this would give a more balanced structure. The greatest anomoly is the fact that 4 teams are promoted from League 2 to League 1 yet only 2 teams are relegated from League 2. 4 teams are promoted into the Vanarama Conference , which seems to indicate a bias towards teams attaining Football League status.

That's right, they were as tinpot as they came at the time.
I'd argue they aren't where they are on merit but rather the money thown at them which show's in my opinion that you can indeed polish a turd.

Quoted from GYinScuntland

That's right, they were as tinpot as they came at the time.
I'd argue they aren't where they are on merit but rather the money thown at them which show's in my opinion that you can indeed polish a turd.

The amazing thing about the whole situation about Wigans' promotion is that they finished 2nd in their league ( the Midland League I think ). Boston finished top but their application to join the league was refused because their ground didn't meet current league regulations at the time! If Boston had had a better ground at the time then it's possible that Wigan would still be a " tinpot club " !

Just started a #threeupthreedown on twitter highlighting that only 1200 more at league one play off final than conference final..

Quoted from rancido

The amazing thing about the whole situation about Wigans' promotion is that they finished 2nd in their league ( the Midland League I think ). Boston finished top but their application to join the league was refused because their ground didn't meet current league regulations at the time! If Boston had had a better ground at the time then it's possible that Wigan would still be a " tinpot club " !

You're absolutely right. History is a funny thing, events happen and over time it's all forgotten. In an alternate reality Hull could be the Chelsea/Man City of today.

It's all about population though. All of the top teams are in places where lots of people live. Forest Green Rovers will never be the next Wigan because they are based in a Gloucestershire village. Boston would never have been the next Wigan because it's a small town in a rural area. MK Dons have done well because they in a large, growing metropolis - 38,000 have moved to MK in the last ten years.

Quoted from GrimRob

It's all about population though. All of the top teams are in places where lots of people live. Forest Green Rovers will never be the next Wigan because they are based in a Gloucestershire village. Boston would never have been the next Wigan because it's a small town in a rural area. MK Dons have done well because they in a large, growing metropolis - 38,000 have moved to MK in the last ten years.

MK Mongs are not a real club though, they are a parasite that took over their host and it seems they infected fans of other teams too ;)

Quoted from GrimRob

It's all about population though. All of the top teams are in places where lots of people live. Forest Green Rovers will never be the next Wigan because they are based in a Gloucestershire village. Boston would never have been the next Wigan because it's a small town in a rural area. MK Dons have done well because they in a large, growing metropolis - 38,000 have moved to MK in the last ten years.

It's not just about population though is it ? There are many conurbations with teams in the football league that are smaller than Grimsby or NE Lincs. Facilities, population and infrastructure will all provide a limiting factor as to how far any club can progress unless of course you have a billionaire who is prepared to pump any amount of money into that club just to satisfy his own ego. When we played at Championship level we revelled at playing and competing with " the big boys " of the Football League. It's quite likely that their supporters regarded us as " tinpot " with an outmoded ground and average gates of around 7,000. Teams should be promoted on merit regardless of whether they represent a large town or some small rural outpost. The majority of fans on this site are very scathing about the Premiersh*t and all it represents, especially their elitist approach. If you deny the right of any club to gain promotion through the leagues, based on performance, then all you are doing is promoting an elitist approach further down the Football League pyramid and that is detrimental to football in general.

We were the same as you lot when we were down there with this question. Now we'd never vote for it as a straight 3 relegation spots. There is though mileage in the 3rd bottom Lge 2 going into playoffs with 3rd, 4th and 5th in t'Conference as it gives the Lge 2 team a last chance to prove they are worthy of such a sought after and precious position.... that they are in fact better than such as Eastleigh, FGR etc.

Once you are out though (and believe me boys it's been too long now, you are better than that) you'll not vote for 3 up 3 down if the vote comes in the next 4-5 years.

To get to the FL has to be won the hard way it has to really be that important, that precious, and would devalue it if it was made easier.

There's no getting away from the fact that the best two (not by much I admit) went up this year.

The stage is set for you lot to lead the pack next season. All the very best.

Promotion should only be on  "playing" merit.  Same about Boston United not being promoted because of their ground.  Which is not that bad anyway.

The current example is Bournemouth.  They are now in the Prem on merit but have a ground that holds only 12,000. The club want to use this small capacity to their own advantage.

Very interestingly, Eddie Howe wants the away fans to still be located in a corner.  He believes his team get a pyschological advantage from having home fans behind both goals.

The club have rejected the opportunity to increase the capacity to 15,000.  Away fans must have up to 10% of the overall capacity.  Increasing the capacity would mean that having more away fans would mean that they would have to be located behind the goal.  Howe has rejected any plans that stop home fans being both goals.

(Are you listening Town re having home fans inthe Osmond Stand more next season?.