Proposals for a new system
This section gives my proposals for a new system for the associations main competition, together with some comments. A word document giving the same information can be downloaded here. In the document there is a separate list of amendments, whereas here I have interwoven the amendments with the main propsal.
Contents
A Brief introduction (below)
Procedural Proposal suggesting how the main motion should be dealt with at AGM.
Main proposal together with some suggested amendments.
Some objections to the scheme.
My response to the question 'Whats wrong with Promotion and Relegation?'
If an opponent to the scheme wishes to publish their reasons, then I am willing to create an extra page for them in this section.
A Brief Introduction
That the association has moved back and forth between strict and non-strict promotion and relegation over the last 25 years suggests that it has been difficult to find a league structure that everyone is happy with, yet in all that time no other way of structuring our main competition has been widely discussed. Thus it is not possible to know whether we have a league with promotion and relegation because that is what is wanted, or because nothing else has ever been on offer.
These proposals offer an alternative.
They are based on two principles
- No team should be forced to play in a competition in which they are out of their depth,
- In any competition the competing teams should be distinct entities.
Without the second of these principles you may find yourselves having to overcome the same opposition three or more times as they play both for their own team and as reserves for another one.
Clearly if you do not agree with these principles you may not like the proposals, and thus will vote against them. What should not happen is for people to use the proposals as a Trojan Horse, putting forth amendments that produce a competition based on completely different principles. Rather the proper approach would be to vote down these proposals and put forward a new set based on the preferred principles in accordance with the procedure for proposals laid down in the constitution.
These proposals are put forward in the hope that enough people will see sufficient merit in them that the scheme outlined can be tried for a season, and then an informed decision made on the basis of experience rather than of hopes and fears. Consequently 'compromises' that only give some taste of the full experience are unlikely to be helpful.