Jump to content

Old Firm Colts in L2


Recommended Posts

If it's going through the usual SPFL votes then everyone needs to email or phone their clubs to voice their displeasure. Online petitions and the like will serve no purpose. Clubs care about their bottom line, threatening boycotts will get their attention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, clyde_r_us said:

I already stated if this goes ahead I would happily drift about  the north and Midlands of England watching football never again setting foot in a senior ground again.... After 50 years

 

Will there be Colts in the Lowland League?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Desperate state of affairs. I don't care of Robbo is in favour of an ICT colt team, I am vehemently against it.

Did the SPFL ever let us know what the response was to the consultation with the clubs on the issue which took place last summer?

https://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spfl-consults-with-clubs-on-colt-teams/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be livid if my season ticket price is increased to take account of the 4 extra matches. I'm unlikely to attend them.

Why state that they will purchase 250 tickets at £10 each. What league two club has adult tickets at that price?

If it's a two year pilot, I hope all fans will boycott

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RiG said:

Desperate state of affairs. I don't care of Robbo is in favour of an ICT colt team, I am vehemently against it.

Did the SPFL ever let us know what the response was to the consultation with the clubs on the issue which took place last summer?

https://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spfl-consults-with-clubs-on-colt-teams/

What on Earth makes you think that fans have any right to be consulted on SPFL decisions?

Outrageous entitlement. Sit doon and eat yer gruel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Desperate state of affairs. I don't care of Robbo is in favour of an ICT colt team, I am vehemently against it.

Did the SPFL ever let us know what the response was to the consultation with the clubs on the issue which took place last summer?

https://spfl.co.uk/news/article/spfl-consults-with-clubs-on-colt-teams/

No - as it was a consultation so no requirement to publish the feedback received
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be livid if my season ticket price is increased to take account of the 4 extra matches. I'm unlikely to attend them.

Why state that they will purchase 250 tickets at £10 each. What league two club has adult tickets at that price?

If it's a two year pilot, I hope all fans will boycott


Presumably the £10 is an average price taking into account the fact that some purchasers will be entitled to concession prices at lower than standard adult price
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, edinabear said:

I'm not for this at all. If colts are to be added them it needs to be beneath the current structure. A west of Scotland league at Tier 6 would be ideal for this scenario. To jump ahead of LL/HL clubs is just wrong

You are for it then, just in a slightly different format,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

You are for it then, just in a slightly different format,

I don't think it's the end of the world as some on here but if it is to happen it needs to be done correctly eg:

Colts sides start at the bottom of the Pyramid

It's not just limited to Old firm sides

The colt teams have 'defined' squads

They can only progress to a certain level, probably League 2 at the very maximum.

Parachuting them in at league 2 is a bad idea

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, edinabear said:

I don't think it's the end of the world as some on here but if it is to happen it needs to be done correctly eg:

Colts sides start at the bottom of the Pyramid

It's not just limited to Old firm sides

The colt teams have 'defined' squads

They can only progress to a certain level, probably League 2 at the very maximum.

Parachuting them in at league 2 is a bad idea

 

Of course it's not the end of the world, it's only football. I've long since bumped the seniors for the utter contempt, corruption and incompetence  shown by the authorities and clubs so it'll have little impact on me. But it is another step in the wrong direction that will alienate long standing supporters. Bumping them down a level and lumbering someone else with them seems a bit selfish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever people think of the Lowland & Highland league, you'd be as well knocking them off the bottom of the pyramid if this goes ahead. What's the point in all the teams in those leagues putting in the effort to get licensed / join the pyramid if they get usurped by SPFL youth teams?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, gaz5 said:

Whatever people think of the Lowland & Highland league, you'd be as well knocking them off the bottom of the pyramid if this goes ahead. What's the point in all the teams in those leagues putting in the effort to get licensed / join the pyramid if they get usurped by SPFL youth teams?

Has sporting integrity disappeared again. No club should have more than one team in the system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not following the financial "benefit" theory here, i.e. that clubs motivation to ignore everything else would be the "bribe". (Clearly their £15,000 figure is 6 games x 250 tickets x £10, btw, and is the maximum - the other possible format envisaged produces £7,500).


Currently everyone play 36 games = 18 home games, all against proper clubs. Across the division as a whole in recent years the average attendance is about 500.

This proposal envisages playing 33 games. That means:
* 16-17 home games under normal arrangements (assuming Celtic 'B' and Rangers 'B' played were set opposite each other in the rota)
* 19-20 home games if 'B' teams only played away from home

Even if we assume £10 is a fair average of adults/concession, the "bribe" of 250 tickets only breaks-even if 250 people still attend.

That's just to break-even, not deliver some meaningful increase.


Therefore under normal arrangements clubs would lose 1-2 home games outright, and lose money on 3-4 more games if <250 are prepared to watch "B" teams. They would get 1-2 more home games if "B" teams only played away from home... but fully one-third of all their home games, no fewer than 6 out of 19-20, would be against "B" teams which are of course exposed to this "who will watch them" issue.

This also doesn't consider possible overall crowd decline through disillusionment/lower ST sales/etc... STs become 13-14 "proper" games, down from 18, plus 3/6 versus "B" teams.

Experience from the Challenge Cup indicates 250 may be very optimistic, anyway. If it was dressed-up as a "2-year trial" there'd be even more incentive to boycott, too.


Obviously that's the financial aspect, based on the article. There are many other issues, matters of principle or practicality... many covered before, but others new e.g.:
* surely any "transfer window only" rule could be totally undermined by triallists/development loans/emergency transfers/etc.
* playing everyone x3 is competitively imbalanced - it was got rid of in 1995 partly for that reason
* how could you justify not having "B" teams finishing positions count for promotion/relegation, yet their points + scores are counting in the records of other clubs?
* how on earth could "B" teams be exempt from relegation? They potentially do worse and finish bottom, but someone finishing 1-2 places higher goes down?!

Edited by HibeeJibee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...