Jump to content

Who will have an A licence and why?


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, MattSantos said:

Yes in principle to all of that. It may be difficult with respect to numbers of women and PDRL teams, but an active community foundation should be a doddle for any club

Aye, it's a case of showing activity and engagement. A senior men's pathway shouldn't be the only one.

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites


2 hours ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   Bradford only need to sort out the ground,on field performance and finance.Then they could be a B with ambition to be A by the end of the decade.

Apart from the facilities, the on-field performances and the finances, what else is there??

Bulls are Cat C.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, dboy said:

Apart from the facilities, the on-field performances and the finances, what else is there??

This is a good question.

As I've said before, I think the Football Association of Wales's licensing system sets an unexpected gold standard in how to run a process and in what (and how) they assess.

They head the sections they look at in the following ways:

  • Sporting (This is: what teams you run, what youth development you have, what women's teams you run)
  • Social Responsibility
  • Infrastructure
  • Personnel
  • Legal
  • Financial

Plus you need to end the season in a qualifying place (so, for example, you might pass all of these, but if you don't finish in a promotion place then you won't be promoted).

Have a look

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As someone said the vast majority will be CAT B but spread across the 3 leagues. Only CAT A is exclusive to the top tier.

I would argue that any CAT A club in a relegation dog fight is overrated unless all other clubs in the division are CAT A. My criteria would be that if a CAT A club finished in the bottom 2,3,4? they would be downgraded to CAT B for the coming season.

CAT C will be teams (not "clubs") without a definitive structure or plan. Hanging in their either because of tradition or new footprint but no money. CAT C should be exclusive to league 1.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Damien said:

I'm not sure what you are going on about now or where you are going with this. It's like you always have to reply with something even when its nothing to do with what you originally said. Saints ground is new enough, I don't think anyone would consider it not to be.

Just look back at the post by Binosh, he was simply comparing the original gradings which had Saints in the second Tier, and saying since the went into the "new Stadium" expects them to be a grade A.

Now if you where getting humpty because I said should clubs in rented accommodation be downgraded Inc your own, that is up to you, I never replied with anything different, you never answered the original question.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Ackroman said:

As someone said the vast majority will be CAT B but spread across the 3 leagues. Only CAT A is exclusive to the top tier.

I would argue that any CAT A club in a relegation dog fight is overrated unless all other clubs in the division are CAT A. My criteria would be that if a CAT A club finished in the bottom 2,3,4? they would be downgraded to CAT B for the coming season.

CAT C will be teams (not "clubs") without a definitive structure or plan. Hanging in their either because of tradition or new footprint but no money. CAT C should be exclusive to league 1.

Totally agree with with downgrading if an 'A' team finishes in I would say the bottom 4, the 'B's will be striving to get better all season and trying to win games it should also apply to the 'A' teams, give them a reason not to play weakened teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Realistically we only have about 5 Cat A clubs (Leeds, Wigan, Saints, Wire, Cats) then around 10 Cat B (rest of SL plus a couple of Championship clubs) clubs and everyone else is Cat C. So not a lot will change really.

 

  • Like 1

I’m not prejudiced, I hate everybody equally

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Just look back at the post by Binosh, he was simply comparing the original gradings which had Saints in the second Tier, and saying since the went into the "new Stadium" expects them to be a grade A.

Now if you where getting humpty because I said should clubs in rented accommodation be downgraded Inc your own, that is up to you, I never replied within anything different, you never answered the original question.

If you want to make up your own criteria that is up to you. Don't expect me to play along with a nonsensical argument.

It's a fact that 2 of the 4 clubs that got a grade A before Saints played in rented stadiums. Therefore ownership of a stadium wasn't a key consideration. What mattered were facilities. Saints weren't pushed up because they owned a stadium, they were pushed up because they then played in a better one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

This is a good question.

As I've said before, I think the Football Association of Wales's licensing system sets an unexpected gold standard in how to run a process and in what (and how) they assess.

They head the sections they look at in the following ways:

  • Sporting (This is: what teams you run, what youth development you have, what women's teams you run)
  • Social Responsibility
  • Infrastructure
  • Personnel
  • Legal
  • Financial

Plus you need to end the season in a qualifying place (so, for example, you might pass all of these, but if you don't finish in a promotion place then you won't be promoted).

Have a look

 

Diolch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Damien said:

If you want to make up your own criteria that is up to you. Don't expect me to play along with a nonsensical argument.

It's a fact that 2 of the 4 clubs that got a grade A before Saints played in rented stadiums. Therefore ownership of a stadium wasn't a key consideration. What mattered were facilities. Saints weren't pushed up because they owned a stadium, they were pushed up because they then played in a better one.

OK, but just for the record I have not made up any criteria I simply asked a question, which is what people do on sites such as this.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, paul hicks said:

the one thing nobody seems to be mentioning is social media awareness.

There's a massive section on it in the IMG/RFL press release.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, paul hicks said:

the one thing nobody seems to be mentioning is social media awareness. a very few clubs are quite good getting there brand out there with it but to be honest some clubs hardly make a serious effort with it  

This should also apply to outspoken rants from chairmen and club officials. 

Edited by Damien
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gingerjon said:

This is a good question.

As I've said before, I think the Football Association of Wales's licensing system sets an unexpected gold standard in how to run a process and in what (and how) they assess.

They head the sections they look at in the following ways:

  • Sporting (This is: what teams you run, what youth development you have, what women's teams you run)
  • Social Responsibility
  • Infrastructure
  • Personnel
  • Legal
  • Financial

Plus you need to end the season in a qualifying place (so, for example, you might pass all of these, but if you don't finish in a promotion place then you won't be promoted).

Have a look

 

This is very good but it really is the kind of thing the RFL/SL ought to have been able to put together without IMG input.

From what you say about Welsh football, clubs either meet or fail to meet these standards. For our B clubs, the IMG/RFL plan seems to be to quantify each measure and then weight each score to produce a coefficient. That way madness lies IMO. I would be so much happier with B clubs being lumped together and performance on the pitch being decisive within that group - which is what seems to be the case with Welsh football.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Archie Gordon said:

This is very good but it really is the kind of thing the RFL/SL ought to have been able to put together without IMG input.

From what you say about Welsh football, clubs either meet or fail to meet these standards. For our B clubs, the IMG/RFL plan seems to be to quantify each measure and then weight each score to produce a coefficient. That way madness lies IMO. I would be so much happier with B clubs being lumped together and performance on the pitch being decisive within that group - which is what seems to be the case with Welsh football.

I'm more hopeful than you but I will need to see what they are actually scoring and how objective it is.

And I do not want to see the word 'potential' anywhere.

  • Like 2

Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, gingerjon said:

There's a massive section on it in the IMG/RFL press release.

indeed, but it seems on this thread it's not deemed important. which is noe reason our game has so little coverage across the country i would suggest

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Harry Stottle said:

So if Saints Stadium pushes them up a grade, shouldn't Wigan and Hull FC not owing but being in rented accommodation push them down one?

At the time saints were playing at Knowsley Road so no... don't see why renting is an issue as long as a secure lease is in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, sentoffagain2 said:

   Bradford only need to sort out the ground,on field performance and finance.Then they could be a B with ambition to be A by the end of the decade.

If your not an A you are a B by default.  No C in the new system

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gingerjon said:

Not sure, I could probably be convinced either way.

I do think that running a women's team to the equivalent standard to the men's, alongside PDRL and other teams, and having a properly active community foundation should be in there.

Thats a solid point as they said a big drive was within the womens game. Maybe running a female team will be a criteria.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way is to set minimum standards.

Ground capacity

 Financial stability

Anything else like number of season ticket holders,  number of non-playing staff etc can either be manipulated or be influenced by on field performance which will be cyclical.

For example, you could give very cheap or free season tickets to kids or say you owned a sundeck company, you could second staff to a club. Leigh fans - just a real life example, could be done by any club owner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, ShropshireBull said:

Have to say really excited about the future for Wakefield,been naff for years but if they can just sink the moeny into infrastructure feels like they will be close to an A license.

Aye, under this system clubs can and will invest in the infrastructure, putting good entertaining teams on the field will be a secondary requirement, it should really get the punters flocking in.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Harry Stottle said:

Aye, under this system clubs can and will invest in the infrastructure, putting good entertaining teams on the field will be a secondary requirement, it should really get the punters flocking in.

I don't go to headingly as the facilities for away supports is shocking, I would go to watch my team regardless.

The quality of product is subjective as to what you want to see. For many its just their team to win or at least try to win.

Your argument falls down when you look at non league and lower division attendances for UK soccer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...