League Improvement

[Kingsmills]

It seems that the SPL clubs are due to meet again to discuss whether any consensus can be reached on any of the individual elements of the proposals recently rejected as a 'take it or leave it' package.

 

Most prominently, they are to discuss and possibly vote on the introduction of play offs between the SPL and First Division. While clearly not the whole answer, it must be a step in the right direction. Personally, I have not spoken to a single fan who doesn't think that play offs are a good idea.

 

They will, on their own, increase excitement and interest both at the foot of the SPL and the top of the First Division thus increasing the interest of fans and income of clubs towards the end of the season when often there is very little to play for. For those clubs who are involved there will be meaningful games with large crowds after the end of the regular season and it is bound to be of appeal to the broadcasters with any additional income spread among all clubs not just those directly involved in the play offs.

 

I realise that out of self interest some clubs are not enthusiasts as it will increase the chances of demotion but surely that will be balanced by the fact that, if relegated, they also stand a better chance of going back up the following season.

 

Not the whole answer by any means but please please let us take what can only be a sensible step in the right direction.

[starchief]

Have everything exactly as it is, except for a more equitable distribution of money to encourage challenge at the top and play offs to reward ambition in the SFL1.

 

Such a simple change makes everything vastly better, without the ridiculous splitting of the middle 8.

[bishbashbosh]

It seems that the SPL clubs are due to meet again to discuss whether any consensus can be reached on any of the individual elements of the proposals recently rejected as a 'take it or leave it' package.

 

Most prominently, they are to discuss and possibly vote on the introduction of play offs between the SPL and First Division. While clearly not the whole answer, it must be a step in the right direction. Personally, I have not spoken to a single fan who doesn't think that play offs are a good idea.

 

They will, on their own, increase excitement and interest both at the foot of the SPL and the top of the First Division thus increasing the interest of fans and income of clubs towards the end of the season when often there is very little to play for. For those clubs who are involved there will be meaningful games with large crowds after the end of the regular season and it is bound to be of appeal to the broadcasters with any additional income spread among all clubs not just those directly involved in the play offs.

 

I realise that out of self interest some clubs are not enthusiasts as it will increase the chances of demotion but surely that will be balanced by the fact that, if relegated, they also stand a better chance of going back up the following season.

 

Not the whole answer by any means but please please let us take what can only be a sensible step in the right direction.

 

 

i know this isnt speaking directly, but here is your first contact, i am against play offs.

seen them before gash games, end of season on bumpy rock hard pitches. neither team wanting to lose.

 

scraped from bbc sport

 

"Some clubs would like a play-off between the clubs finishing 10th and 11th in the SPL and another between the clubs in second and third (or possibly second, third and fourth) in Division One, with the winners meeting one another in the final."

 

same arguement from me as before ----------- finish 10th in spl say 10-15 points in front of 11th.

 

lose play off and you get, wait for it, another play off against 1st div play off winners to try and stay up again.

 

so spl teams gets 2 cracks at staying up. how is that fair

 

 cant see many fans of any spl club finishing 10 th out of 12 and getting relagated being happy with this crock of sh1t.

 

football is played over a season where you determine your fate good or bad.

 

we have cups to allow smaller teams to giant kill the better teams. we have done it a few times ourselves over the years

 

leave it the way it is for me

 

this isnt about the better of scottish football. various chairmen have remarked it is all about money. they need these games to generate cash.

 

teams like sj, du,hearts, aberdeen, killie have all come to our club offered our players better wages and taken them.

 

get their houses in order and live within their means and we wouldnt need any change from the status quo

[The Mantis]

[

"Some clubs would like a play-off between the clubs finishing 10th and 11th in the SPL and another between the clubs in second and third (or possibly second, third and fourth) in Division One, with the winners meeting one another in the final."

 

same arguement from me as before ----------- finish 10th in spl say 10-15 points in front of 11th.

 

lose play off and you get, wait for it, another play off against 1st div play off winners to try and stay up again.

 

so spl teams gets 2 cracks at staying up. how is that fair

 

Not disagreeing with everything you say, just cannot see what you're on about here. How is anybody getting 2 cracks? You lose a playoff, that's it. No second chance.

But how can a playoff work anyway if its 2 clubs from each league? There would be no need for a final in that case.

The current system means one div 1 club and three div 2 clubs all fighting for one spot in div 1. The div 1 club has to win both to stay up, no second cracks as you seem to be saying.

[Kingsmills]

I agree with Mantis. Looking as though there will not be play offs now as the clubs cannot even agree on this.

[IMMORTAL HOWDEN ENDER]

Pishgashtosh

[bishbashbosh]

 

[

"Some clubs would like a play-off between the clubs finishing 10th and 11th in the SPL and another between the clubs in second and third (or possibly second, third and fourth) in Division One, with the winners meeting one another in the final."

 

same arguement from me as before ----------- finish 10th in spl say 10-15 points in front of 11th.

 

lose play off and you get, wait for it, another play off against 1st div play off winners to try and stay up again.

 

so spl teams gets 2 cracks at staying up. how is that fair

 

Not disagreeing with everything you say, just cannot see what you're on about here. How is anybody getting 2 cracks? You lose a playoff, that's it. No second chance.

But how can a playoff work anyway if its 2 clubs from each league? There would be no need for a final in that case.

The current system means one div 1 club and three div 2 clubs all fighting for one spot in div 1. The div 1 club has to win both to stay up, no second cracks as you seem to be saying.

 

 

the way i read it from the bbc scrape

 

spl 10 v 11    11 wins and stays in spl.  10 moves on to play winners of 1st div playoff. 1st div winners win game so 10 relegated

 

looks like 2 cracks to me for spl side

 

i may be reading it wrong wouldnt be the first time.

[Bluesman]

Good point about certain clubs complaining of lack of income and debt worries, then offering higher wages than clubs who stick within a balance the books budget. 

[The Mantis]

[

"Some clubs would like a play-off between the clubs finishing 10th and 11th in the SPL and another between the clubs in second and third (or possibly second, third and fourth) in Division One, with the winners meeting one another in the final."

 

same arguement from me as before ----------- finish 10th in spl say 10-15 points in front of 11th.

 

lose play off and you get, wait for it, another play off against 1st div play off winners to try and stay up again.

 

so spl teams gets 2 cracks at staying up. how is that fair

Not disagreeing with everything you say, just cannot see what you're on about here. How is anybody getting 2 cracks? You lose a playoff, that's it. No second chance.

But how can a playoff work anyway if its 2 clubs from each league? There would be no need for a final in that case.

The current system means one div 1 club and three div 2 clubs all fighting for one spot in div 1. The div 1 club has to win both to stay up, no second cracks as you seem to be saying.

 the way i read it from the bbc scrape spl 10 v 11    11 wins and stays in spl.  10 moves on to play winners of 1st div playoff. 1st div winners win game so 10 relegated looks like 2 cracks to me for spl side i may be reading it wrong wouldnt be the first time.

That makes more sense but the first time you said the winners would meet in the final.

So in fact the SPL team has to lose to get to the final!

[bishbashbosh]

 

 

 

[

"Some clubs would like a play-off between the clubs finishing 10th and 11th in the SPL and another between the clubs in second and third (or possibly second, third and fourth) in Division One, with the winners meeting one another in the final."

 

same arguement from me as before ----------- finish 10th in spl say 10-15 points in front of 11th.

 

lose play off and you get, wait for it, another play off against 1st div play off winners to try and stay up again.

 

so spl teams gets 2 cracks at staying up. how is that fair

Not disagreeing with everything you say, just cannot see what you're on about here. How is anybody getting 2 cracks? You lose a playoff, that's it. No second chance.

But how can a playoff work anyway if its 2 clubs from each league? There would be no need for a final in that case.

The current system means one div 1 club and three div 2 clubs all fighting for one spot in div 1. The div 1 club has to win both to stay up, no second cracks as you seem to be saying.  the way i read it from the bbc scrape spl 10 v 11    11 wins and stays in spl.  10 moves on to play winners of 1st div playoff. 1st div winners win game so 10 relegated looks like 2 cracks to me for spl side i may be reading it wrong wouldnt be the first time. That makes more sense but the first time you said the winners would meet in the final.

So in fact the SPL team has to lose to get to the final!

 

 i just scraped from the bbc sport page. sorry for any confusion

 

this playoff scenario was seemingly one of 4  discussed today

[RiG]

After tonight's shameful actions by Rangers and Celtic fans at the Glasgow Cup U17 Final let's start by getting rid of both Old Firm clubs from our league altogether. 

[+DoofersDad]

When you get these pathetic bigotted morons behaving like that at an U17 match, one dreads to think how they will behave when the first teams next meet. Punt Celtic off to the League of Ireland where they would presumably feel much more at home and The Rangers down to England (Evo-Stick North league should be about their level) and then the rest of us can get on with a proper football league watched by proper football fans.

[+bughtmaster]

If only dreams come true DD 

[Kingsmills]

I see Peter Lawwell is at the forefront of those calling for alcohol to be made available in Scottish stadia.

 

After the events of last night, I agree with him but with the exception of any game involving either member of the Old Firm at any age level.

[Bluesman]

According to our political leaders (during the recent Rangers meltdown) these two clubs are 'great Scottish institutions' and it would be disastrous if they were to move away. This will of course be 'only a small minority' causing the trouble - last night, in Manchester, amongst themselves etc...

 

Of course they have many decent fans, but both clubs have always had a smirk when talking of dealing with bigotry. Its always been more than a rivalry and more than football, its the very reason they both exist and sadly it's why no-one else will probably ever have them.

 

Last night was a minor skirmish and we've seen worse recently in England but it still depressing for our game, already low in many eyes, again tainted with this nonsense.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Bluesman

[Kingsmills]

Both clubs need to be seen to be paying lip service to eradicating bigotry but neither really wants to upset too many of their core support as pandering to Irish sectarianism is how they have both derived the bulk of their income for well over a hundred years. coffers

 

Accident and Emergency units being stretched to breaking point at least four times a year and huge spikes in domestic violence in west central Scotland with more than the odd fatality over the years appears to be an acceptable price to pay for filling their respective coffers.

Edited April 30, 2013 by Kingsmills

[Kingsmills]

There is a suggestion coming from Hampden that we might just have play offs in place for next season. I believe that the proposals of the First Division clubs for a 'Championship' under the umbrella of the SPL has not found much favour.

[starchief]

Have everything exactly as it is, except for a more equitable distribution of money to encourage challenge at the top and play offs to reward ambition in the SFL1.

 

Such a simple change makes everything vastly better, without the ridiculous splitting of the middle 8.

Can I sue the SPL for stealing my idea?

 

12, 16 or 18 can be left for a later date - this is the most important bit.  An 8 split would have made the league worse but this improves it, plus leaves the door open for massaging the league size.  But this guarantees competition and excitement in the future, if implemented properly.  That made the 80s a special time in Scottish league football history, despite only 10 teams.  This decision is crucial. Competition via a level(ish) playing field is all.

[gingerjaggy]

From what i have seen on the bbc is that the main structural changes has been agreed by the SPL clubs without the league format changing.If tht is the case then this last 6 months has been a huge waste of time trying to pass through a league structure which was hated when what is needed was the main structural changes. I believe they have agreed to form under one league body, the financial distribution that is needed to stop the financial Armageddon of relegation and allow the clubs in the first division to remain full time, a extra relagation spot in the SPL via play offs. This will make the bottom of the SPL more intriguing if we get some one cut adrift and make the first division competitve until the end of the season as 2nd, 3rd and 4th will remain active for a chance of promotion. Lastly they also talked about implementing a Pyramid to allow non clubs to get in on the act. The league format will remain 12-10-10-10 so what i want to know is why did everyone involved waste time on this new format when having these 4 major concessions would do. No one could understand why they couldnt cherry pick the best parts as the main elements of the pyramid, money, play off and sole govening body was agreed by all clubs. Anyway rant over im glad they have seem to come to there senses.

[Alex MacLeod]

SPL Press Release

 

At an all-club meeting earlier today at Hampden Park, the 12 Scottish Premier League clubs unanimously agreed on a package of measures that would deliver a merged league in time for season 2013/2014.


The principles include:
- a single merged league of 42 clubs, in line with the stated preference of SFL1 clubs
- a 12-10-10-10 divisional structure
- an all-through distribution model involving substantial redistribution to the second tier
- a ‘pyramid’ for the entire game
- play-offs involving team 11 in the SPL and teams 2, 3 and 4 in the division below

A formal proposal to deliver the above will be brought back to the SPL clubs for voting this month.

The SPL looks forward to working with the Scottish FA and Scottish Football League to deliver vibrant change for the game as a whole.

Chairman Ralph Topping commented: “I am pleased that SPL clubs have today agreed on a way forward for the game in this country.  We have tremendous sympathy with the SFL1 clubs and their plight and with their shared ambition for a 42-club solution. Much work needs to be done in a short space of time to achieve our objective of a single merged league this summer.  But, where there is a will, there is a way.  The time for action is now.”

[Alex MacLeod]

So no changes to the SPL voting policy. One league body is a must but who's going to be left jobless and how will they decide who's running the league?

[Scotty]

how will they decide who's running the league?

 

[Kingsmills]

At last a chink of light and no ludicrous 8 8 8 split. A lot of credit must go to Roy MacGregor. I wish that we had had the stomach to stand with the 'rebel two' last month but never mind, we have got there in the end.  Although a lot of work still needs to be done and it will not be an overnight panecea we seem to be on the right track at long last.

 

I don't suppose that Stewart Milne will now retract the outrageous comments he made about Stuart Gilmore. That would be too much to expect.

Edited May 7, 2013 by Kingsmills

[Sneckboy]

LOL ^^^ The same thought had crossed my mind! Neil Doncaster and David Longmuir will have to have a penalty shoot out or play rock, scissors, stone (best of 3)...

[Sneckboy]

Scotty and me of the same mind! I just posted but was beaten to it!