Breedon Highland League chairmen have welcomed the withdrawal of the Conference League proposal.
Clubs were set to vote on the idea for a new fifth tier between the SPFL and the Highland and Lowland Leagues at the Scottish FA’s annual general meeting at Hampden on Tueusday.
However, tonight the proposal was dramatically withdrawn following increasing public opposition to the plan.
The withdrawal appears to signal the end of the road for the new league which would have been made up of four Premiership B teams, four Lowland League clubs and two Highland League sides.
Dialogue could have been much better, says Brechin chief – as he calls for bigger SPFL and easier route up from Highland and Lowland League
The Press and Journal asked four Highland League chairmen for reaction to the news.
Brechin City chief Kevin Mackie would like to see changes to Scottish football’s structure – but would prefer to see the size of the SPFL increased, rather than a new league inserted beneath it.
He also believes the Highland and Lowland Leagues should receive a greater share of the money distributed within Scottish football to narrow the gap between the SPFL and the leagues below.
Mackie said: “I think it’s wrong that the Highland League and Lowland Leagues don’t get a better distribution of the SFA’s money.
“The two leagues get a pittance.
“It shouldn’t be that teams are handcuffed to a league – if they have ambition to progress they should have a better opportunity.
“We won the league this season and I’ve never felt as low as I did at the end of the season (after losing in the pyramid play-offs).
“Whether it’s Brechin, Buckie, Brora, Fraserburgh or any club, if you’ve won the Highland League you should be rewarded with an easier pathway to move up.
“I would like to see a move to a 48-team SPFL with the bottom club in League Two going down and being replaced by the winners of the Highland and Lowland League play-off, and the losers of the play-off taking on the second bottom team in League Two.
“That way it would be like the other leagues where there’s the potential for two up and two down.
“I think that makes it fairer and it would be more interesting for the fans.
“The bigger the league the more exciting it is – managers, players and supporters don’t want to see teams playing each other four times a season.
“It’s good that it’s been withdrawn and hopefully in the future there can be some more focused discussion about the structure of Scottish football which is broadcast to the fans as well.
“There could have been much better dialogue in terms of delivering the proposal and getting it out to a wider audience.”
Clubs would have been disadvantaged by Conference League
Those behind the Conference League proposal felt it could help develop better players for the national team with some of country’s best young players in academies at Premiership clubs being exposed to football against experienced players at young age.
Clachnacuddin chairman Alex Chisholm wants to see Scotland produce better players, but added: “We didn’t feel the Conference League was the right way to go.
“I think every club in the country would want to produce better Scottish players, but this didn’t seem like the right path to go down.
“I think it needs to be something where no-one is going to be disadvantaged.”
One of the major negatives of the Conference League idea was that every team below the SPFL, other than those involved in the new set-up, would have been bumped down a tier in the pyramid.
Lossiemouth chairman Alan McIntosh was pleased to see the proposal withdraw and said: “I’m glad that common sense has prevailed and it’s been thrown out.
“It was an idea that was going to demote a lot of clubs.
“At the moment I don’t think there’s much wrong with the structure we’ve got.
“The only change we’ve argued for is that club 42 should go straight down, the winners of Highland and Lowland League play-off go up and the loser plays club 41 in a play-off.”
Put B teams in new reserve league
Deveronvale chairman James Mair also welcomed the news and admits the prospect of the Conference League being introduced had been concerning for clubs.
He said: “From our point of view, it’s a sensible decision because clearly there are a body of clubs against the idea who haven’t been convinced by the rationale that’s been put forward.
“Initially the status quo option wasn’t available and I think that gave a lot of clubs concerns.
“For those who want to move up the pyramid there is a mechanism for them to do it.
“It may not be ideal because club 42 doesn’t go straight down, I do think we need to look at the make-up of the league system, but I’m not convinced by the B teams and would prefer them to play in a reserve league if that was a possibility.
“Another issue with it in my opinion was it being a 10-team league with clubs playing each other four times a season.”
Conversation