Just before Christmas, League Chairman Dave Tomlinson made some suggestions regarding restructuring within the Non-League Pyramid. We received a number of e-mails about Dave's comments, here's a selection of the responses.
Mike Avery: I have put Dave Tomlinson's suggestion for a Step 1-4 restructure into map format on my website. Click here to see the map.
Also interestingly, Step 5 could then be split into 12 Divisions of 24, simply merging the 3 remaining county leagues at step 5 (Kent, Essex and Sussex) into a new South East Counties league.
This would ease the Step 5 to 4 promotion bottle neck, as we could have 3 down from each Step 4 division replaced by 1 team from each of the 12 Step 5 Leagues.
Angus Gordon-Farleigh: It's nice to see folks continuing to think positively about the complete structure of the non-league pyramid still.
Like Dave, I have long realised that a fourth Step Three 'Midlands League' is necessary to the logical construction of non-league's upper echelons.
I'd respectfully suggest that Dave's 1-2-4-4 model would be imperfect, simply because of the huge gap in expected size of these divisions' 'geographical footprint' (with associated increase in travelling/expenses) experienced by teams moving up from his proposed Step 5 to Step 4.
However, with some little lateral thought this may be effectively remedied - although there would be a need to be able to accept slightly 'non-traditional' ways of organising the season !
Overall Pattern...
A divisional structure of 1-2-4-4 over four successive Steps. Each division of 22 teams, excepting those in the putative Step 4 - which would each be 28-strong (I did say non-traditional !).
Split-Divisions
Step 4 divisions would each be split into two geographically organised 'Conferences' of 14-teams each , those teams in each Conference spending the first sixty percent or so of the season competing in a straight round-robin (play 26 matches) first phase tournament. This could be arranged to conclude (say) at the New-Year's-Day Round of fixtures - for impact.
This initial competition's placings then informs two sets of teams to go forward to a second phase tourney wherein they are split into 'upper' and 'lower' groupings (based upon first phase finishing positions) and where (at least) the two (regionalised) upper groupings are recombined into a (league-wide) 'Promotion Division' and the lower groupings either do likewise - into a 'Status-preservation Division' - or alternatively, just continue to play amongst themselves in their now reduced regional Conferences.
Upper/Lower Splits.
May be operative at the halfway mark - i.e. separating 7th. from 8th. placing. Otherwise could be arranged (say) between 6th. & 7th. places, ensuring bye-rounds avoided and altering match schedules & divisional constitutions some.
Note here that it may be opportune to acknowledge that certain Divisions/Conferences may contain teams unsuited for promotion at season's end - think: grading issues - yet may have been allowed a period of grace at this particular level...
These would simply be deemed as having finished in the 'lower' portion of the initial first-phase Conferences notwithstanding their actual playing record and each lower-placed team would thus leapfrog one position (per occurrence) for consideration to join the Promotion Division.
Avoiding too many games.
If every phase of this type of competition required a fully realised and separate round-robin to be played-out - there would be far too many fixtures produced to be sensibly arranged.
Acknowledging this, it may be seen that such a requirement as above would certainly bring the duplication of several fixtures - which could instead be played out in the first phase of competition, with the relevant ones being preserved as being 'pre-played' in the second phase of competition.
If each regional Conference begins with 14 teams and then splits between 6th./7th. places into the second phase, then the Upper Division teams would play 26+12=38 matches. The Lower Division teams would play 26+16=42 matches per season if recombined in the same manner as the Upper Divisional teams -or- 26+14=40 matches if they alternatively remain in their regional groupings.
Those two scenarios would give second phase models with two 14-team divisions in the first instance -or- an Upper Division of 12 teams and two regional 8-team conferences in the second.
Promotions/Relegations to/from.
If each Division of 28 is feeding a 22-team higher echelon, then four-up/four-down would be easily implementable. I'd advocate provision for two immediate promotion positions plus two positions to be won via play-offs (as these seem popular). The play-offs would be contested by those teams in the Upper Conference finishing in positions 3 to 8 inclusive, plus two further teams qualifying from the topmost positions in the Lower Conference (there MUST be some reward offered for those second-phase teams at this level).
Play-offs would be single matches, always played at the home of the higher-placed side and would always be in the form of highest-placed-team v. lowest-placed-team; second-highest-placed-team v. second-lowest-placed-team; etc. as appropriate in each of three rounds.
There are eight initial regional Conferences, so were relegation of two-teams-per-Conference instituted, this would allow for sixteen possible promotion opportunities to Step 4, slightly more than at present.
It is assumed that Step 5 would continue to be populated by between 12 & 16 divisions for this example.
Note that in the example where the Lower Divisions are combined from two first phase regional Conferences, then this would naturally lead to there being four relegation positions from each such combination.
Advantages.
Myriad.
- Less travelling.
- Graduated increase in divisional footprint size.
- More 'local interest' - e.g. derbies more likely/frequent.
- Double number of 'First-Place' Awards possible in two phases.
- 'Natural' winter-break possible between phases if desired.
- Completely fair non-round-robin format allows 33% more teams to compete for same number of games as a 'regular' round-robin.
...and that's just off the top of my head !
Disadvantages.
Few.
- Getting used to' the new format... This is NOT the same as the unfair current SPL format.
- Second phase fixtures unknowable prior to end of first phase... doesn't have to be a problem unless one lets it.
- Teams becoming 'defunct' during season - would make 'recombinations' a little awkward, but may easily be solved by writing in a shift to Points-Per-Game into the rules to cater.
Brian Miller: I have followed the league restructuring from the start, and across the board it is all wrong. The Isthmian League travel less than some step 5 leagues. This league should cover the whole of the south coast. Then there should be a league from North of London to South Wales up to the south Midlands. Then 2 leagues covering North Midlands and the North.
But the North East must be catered for and fully included. Some clubs in the North are well supported but financially are scared of progressing, whilst the Isthmian clubs have hardly any support and if they get promoted, probably don't travel any further. Below this level I feel some leagues areas are too big, including yours and others. Kent/Essex are too easy to progress up from. Also teams that are in different leagues from step 5 that travel past each other needs to be sorted out.
Update:
Since Dave's comments were published, we have been made aware of two related issues, which can also be thrown into the restructuring debate.
There has been some recent discussion with regard to the Staffordshire County Senior League (currently at Step 7 in the Non-League Pyramid) looking to move up to Step 6. There is an interesting article on their league website written by Barry Smith of Rocester FC, who weighs up the pros and cons of such a move. To read the article click here.
Also, a review at Step 7 level has been initiated by the FA, and a review panel headed by Ray Kiddell OBE submitted to the National Leagues Committee their proposal for the restructure of the lower levels of the National League System.
The review has revealed that there is an overwhelming majority in favour of a restructure at the lower levels of the National League System. The recommendations from the Step 7 Review Group were fully endorsed, and the National Leagues Committee agreed that the proposals should be developed further with a view to implementation for the commencement of season 2010/2011.
The review and plans are explained in detail on the Carlsberg West Cheshire League website, and can be found by clicking here.
