Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
SNCL has had its share of defaults as well. Not sure why you were asking but I have the figures to hand.
Team wise
2015/16 36 teams
2014/15 38
2013/14 36
2012/13 36
2011/12 32
2010/11 30
2009/10 30
2008/09 32
Hoping to get the magical 40 next season! Should add when Glynis took over 20 years ago there was 12. She has worked wonders
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 354
Threads: 29
Joined: Jul 2013
I wasn't asking Andy  was actually saying we surely don't need the SNCL stats as the success is there for all to see, but thanks for the info. I only noted the defaults to add some balance to the stats on Rich/Spens as there has been seasons where a team(s) have entered but not played a match and that props the numbers up somewhat.
Who knows what increased support the Rich/Spens would gain from a central venue? Time would tell, but if we don't give it a try we will never find out. The SNCL has demonstrated what can be done. A safe assumption is the Rich/Spens would not be any less supported and would gain significant new entries.
Posts: 944
Threads: 127
Joined: May 2012
Reputation:
4
Adam Bremner Wrote:Div 1/2 Regional 18/11/2016
Div 1/2 Regional 13/01/2017
Div 1/2 Regional 10/02/2017
Div 1/2 Regional 17/03/2017
Div 1/2 Regional 28/04/2017 Adam
where did you get this information ? and do you have it for the other divisions. For example as well as allowing for divisions 1 and 2 we need to allow for the other divisions , for example there was a scottish team in Div 3 this year. We would need to allow for all divisions and I know I couldnt get the necessary information for the 4NCL. I may be looking in the wrong place so any info would be appreciated
Posts: 294
Threads: 8
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
It's quite possible (although not guaranteed) that we will have promoted to division 2 by the end of this season, which would make Richardson timing much easier. Last rounds are this weekend so we can let you know after that!
Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Just to be clear on something, we are objecting to a central venue but you want us to avoid dates for a competition that takes place at a central venue
Or am I getting this wrong?
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 294
Threads: 8
Joined: Sep 2011
Reputation:
1
I couldn't care less about 4NCL dates, I have played it twice now and found it an awful lot of money for two games. I was providing information because others (including an entire team that ended up defaulting their match) do want to take into account 4NCL. In other words yes you are getting this wrong, I was just trying to be helpful for Ian by clarifying that he probably doesn't need to take 4NCL division 3 fixtures into account at all.
It is in any case absurd that you are comparing 4NCL to Richardson, the formats are completely different, the make up of teams is totally different and it is much more akin to a weekend congress because people are staying at the venue which I sincerely hope is not what you expect BA to have to do for the Richardson. If you don't have any sympathy then that is fine but this noticeboard is meant for open discussion and I am not doing anything wrong in pointing out why a "central" venue for every round would ruin the Richardson for Bon Accord. Ian and Jonathan do not seem to need to make snide remarks and I would appreciate if you would emulate them in this. I apologise if your comment was a joke but I hope you can see why I am tense about the prospect of my favourite tournament being ruined for my team.
Posts: 1,003
Threads: 101
Joined: Mar 2012
Reputation:
1
Andy Howie Wrote:Just to be clear on something, we are objecting to a central venue but you want us to avoid dates for a competition that takes place at a central venue
Or am I getting this wrong?
The objection seems to be mostly that using a 'central' venue which is only 'central' for those in the 'central' belt is somewhat unfair to the less 'central' clubs
Would it be possible to have the different rounds in venues spread across Scotland? Round 1 in Aberdeen, round 2 Dundee, rd3 in Glasgow, rd4 in Edinburgh or whatever? Would that put off some clubs or perhaps make it more appealing?
I'm not really sure why the number of teams participating is hugely important to be honest. The SNCL covers mass team participation, the Richardson should cover quality and the Spens/Campbell can perhaps find its own niche.
Posts: 247
Threads: 6
Joined: Dec 2011
Reputation:
0
Ianbrownlee Wrote:where did you get this information ? and do you have it for the other divisions. For example as well as allowing for divisions 1 and 2 we need to allow for the other divisions , for example there was a scottish team in Div 3 this year. We would need to allow for all divisions and I know I couldnt get the necessary information for the 4NCL. I may be looking in the wrong place so any info would be appreciated
It is what I have been told, and it will be published soon probably. Div 3 I have no idea about, but as Hamish says, this year was an exception. There is a 99% chance no Scottish teams involved in div 3 next season.
Andy Howie Wrote:Just to be clear on something, we are objecting to a central venue but you want us to avoid dates for a competition that takes place at a central venue
Or am I getting this wrong?
I think you are missing the point. Again, I am saying the solution to getting more top players involved next season is to avoid those dates. I am definitely not a top player, as many people will tell you I am in fact pretty junk, it has nothing to do with me personally. Due to the quality of the 4NCL being so high, and some people getting appearance fees, it will be prioritised. Where you hold it is irrelevant to a clash that will cause problems. I am genuinely looking to give solutions here to improve the event. I have already said I think it would be a good step to email the top players directly, and ask their thoughts.
The central venue for Richardson is a completely separate issue for Bon Accord (we only have one regular 4NCL player anyway), because of the excessive time taken to travel on the day. Most people who have posted seem to agree that there is an issue there. There is currently a solution (playing in Dundee) that all teams seem happy enough with. It's not about being unreasonable and suggesting every team comes to Aberdeen to play, it's just about finding a fairer solution. Would you not agree that if and when Inverness want to enter a team, that a central venue would make it impossible for them?
Posts: 1,929
Threads: 263
Joined: Aug 2011
Reputation:
5
Adam,
Sorry was having a bit of fun over the two points. As one of the two people who has to be available each round to allow it to be FIDE graded, I want the tournament to grow not decline as it has done.
With the changes that we have to make to be FIDE compliant I am concerned we may lose more clubs. The only way we can ensure everyone has digital clocks, good playing conditions, arbiters present etc is to consider moving to a central venue. There is no guarantee this will happen next season. Ever5uthing is very much under discussion. Cost calculations are being done etc. But I would say it is going to happen at some point
"How sad to see, what used to be, a model of decorum and tranquility become like any other sport, a battleground for rival ideologies to slug it out with glee"
Posts: 354
Threads: 29
Joined: Jul 2013
andyburnett Wrote:I'm not really sure why the number of teams participating is hugely important to be honest. The SNCL covers mass team participation, the Richardson should cover quality and the Spens/Campbell can perhaps find its own niche.
I disagree with that and think the number of teams is relevant for numerous reasons.
1. The Spens & Richardsons are supposed to be 'National' cup competitions. Neither are really 'national' if it is just the bigger clubs competing in them and the odd other club. There are many clubs from various regions within the country not involved.
2. CS has a duty and obligation (in my view anyway) to provide the best and most inclusive cup competitions it can. Can we honestly say that is happening when we look at the numbers previously posted? It means showing consideration to all clubs in the country which of course includes those far up in the North as much as any other club.
The SNCL is completely different being a League competition and I can't really see how Knockout competitions would have that mass level of participation. A reasonable increase in teams and regional participation would be expected however, and should be welcome if it can be facilitated in a fair and reasonable way.
Today Debenhams called into the administrators because it continued doing what it has always done, and failed to modernise. It would be a shame if the Rich/Spens had to call in the administrators somewhere down the line, that's where both are headed?
|
