2 pointsTongue may be firmly in cheek but its a valid point and symptomatic of the cluster**** that is the SPFL management .... the whole thing leaves the SPFL wide open to litigation if people had the stomach (and finances) for it ... you relegate teams based on partial season points ... potential litigation from 3 teams. You decide not to promote teams from lower divisions - potential litigation from 3 more teams. You deny entry to the league for two teams who could get there - 2 more sets of potential litigation ... and finally, however unlikely, and harder to quantify, teams in playoff spots in all 3 divisions could make a case that they have lost out on an opportunity for promotion and the associated financial windfall it would bring to them based on the decisions of the SPFL .... You bully your wayto retain the status quo and everyone feels just a little cheated and that we lost an opportunity. Amazingly, allowing 14-10-10-10 would take away all those litigation criteria in one fell swoop yet it is basically not considered because increasing the Premiership from 12 to 14 would reduce prize money a fraction ... probably not even enough to buy some new silks for the QCs involved let alone the cost of any action itself !! If they had come out with this at the start they could have looked progressive, forward thinking and mindful of making sure their members were not disadvantaged during this crisis. Maybe those in charge of the North Caledonian League who just made a quick and decisive change to their own format should act as consultants to the SPFL !!
This leaderboard is set to London/GMT+01:00