Jump to content

Cornishman

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    77
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cornishman


  1. 10 hours ago, Crossbar said:

    Here’s a simple proposal. It’s a straight repeat of this null and void season, removing Eyemouth and adding in the 11 new clubs in the ‘Third Division’. The Third Division champions get a ‘double promotion´ to the First Division for 2022/23 as an extra incentive for the newcomers. But no team is unfairly treated. Plenty to play for for everyone. (*Obviously detailed additional scenarios would need to be added in case numbers in the Premier go up or down as a consequence of promotion to and relegation from LL but this will always be needed in the pyramid).

    I like this idea in every detail, excepting that I'd prefer to see at least two, if not three 'double promotions' to your 2022/23 First Division. The eleven newbies should at very least be considered to be Tier-7½.


  2. On 10/04/2021 at 12:06, Dev said:

    The SPFL doesn't like the reality of the Pyramid i.e. promotion and relegation up and down all of the Tiers.

    Having done down its' reputation twelve months ago it seems likely that it's perceived as about to do the same thing again this time.

    Maybe the time is approaching when the  HL and LL should go it alone and create a jointly run National Conference made up of the best HL and LL clubs. The HL and LL would be directly feeding into it from below as follows:

    [1] The initial National Conference of 16 clubs would be made up of the top 8 clubs from both the HL and the LL.

    [2] Unless the SPFL agrees to automatic promotion and relegation with two up and two down there would be no agreement to movement between the leagues for the time being. 

    [3] The bottom two clubs in the Nat Conf would be automatically relegated to either the HL or the LL, depending on which side of the Tay Bridge line the ground is located. 

    [4] The third bottom club in the Nat Conf would play-off to retain its' place against the winners of play-offs between the runners-up of the HL and LL leagues. [Edit]

    With guaranteed mobility between the leagues beneath the National Conference would quickly fill up with the strongest 16 clubs currently "below" the SPFL. It seems likely that the Nat Conf would quickly become as strong in playing standards as SPFL2, with some clubs close to SPFL1 level in playing standard. 

    Imagine if another 10 or more WoS/EoS/SoS clubs gain their club licences this summer they will play in the 2021/22 SFA Cup. As more leading clubs gain licences the numbers of SPFL clubs being knocked-out of the SFA cup each year by "lesser" clubs will increase until it becomes a complete embarrassment to Scottish football. 

    This, in turn, will destroy the myth that the HL and LL (now their top clubs in the National Conference) aren't capable of providing a league suitable for relegated SPFL2 clubs.

    While an interesting idea, I think this is going about things the wrong way.

    An alternative that guarantees no relegation from SPFL2 for several years would be very much easier to sell... A slow drip-feed expansion by two fresh teams per season over twelve seasons into the SPFL is what I'd suggest. It isn't diffiult to devise fair fixture programs for 12, 14 & 16-team divisions to give between 34 to 38 matches per season. I'd increment each division by a pair of teams sequentially in Championship - League 1 - League 2 order, repeating every three seasons and ending  when all three divisions contain 18 teams.

    League prize funding would require just an extra ±5% each season for parity over the dozen expansion seasons. That should be eminently feasible, if not, much bettered.

    This plan ignores any possible interest the Premiership might have in expansion itself. It also ignores any Colts involvement, but I'd see such teams being limited to fifth tier and below.


  3. A rule book doesn't trump the law, regardless of any 'catch all' clause.

    Hearts will almost certainly be arguing there's a disconnect between the rule book and the law in their particular situation (as opposed to arguing the rule book wasn't properly followed). In what regards we can only guess.

    Nick de Marco QC recently wrote a piece in the Sports Law Bulletin about the implications of the failed South Shields appeal. His final concluding paragraph indicates areas where such disconnects may occur:

    "The case is not, however, a carte blanche to governing bodies in these uncertain times. The FA, and other regulators in sport, remain bound by ordinary public law and contractual principles. Irrational decisions will continue to be challenged; and procedural fairness must be achieved notwithstanding the unprecedented times in which we live. The ability to amend or vary rules due to COVID-19 must be exercised in accordance with the rules or articles of association of each relevant league. Where decisions are made collectively by votes of member clubs (as is the case in levels above those considered in this case) unfair prejudice and/or competition law principles may also come into play."

    The full article is at: https://www.sportslawbulletin.org/football-time-covid-19-lessons-be-learned-recent-decision-south-shields-fc-v-fa/

     

    thanks to Paulh66 at Non League Matters for this.


  4. 3 hours ago, Lebowski said:

    I'd say that the team bringing through the last Scottish player to win the Champions League being Queen's Park negates quite a bit of his argument there.

     

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with teams being semi professional. He's talking about England and the national league. That's the clubs 93rd to 112th in their football. Adjust Scotlands population for England and the sides at the bottom of our leagues would be 400th or so in their pyramid. Are the sides at that level professional to the extent he's talking about in England, I don't think so. They're at a much much lower level than the Scottish ones playing wise, and their crowds are worse.

     

    Us existing next to England fucking warps people's brains.

     

    If you follow hugely experienced Europe-wide groundhopper, Leo Hoenig, you'll know that he has a fairly accurate theory that team/match quality bears a strong positive corelation with average attendances, wherever you go.


  5. 3 hours ago, Lebowski said:

    I'd say that the team bringing through the last Scottish player to win the Champions League being Queen's Park negates quite a bit of his argument there.

     

    There's absolutely nothing wrong with teams being semi professional. He's talking about England and the national league. That's the clubs 93rd to 112th in their football. Adjust Scotlands population for England and the sides at the bottom of our leagues would be 400th or so in their pyramid. Are the sides at that level professional to the extent he's talking about in England, I don't think so. They're at a much much lower level than the Scottish ones playing wise, and their crowds are worse.

     

    Us existing next to England fucking warps people's brains.

     

    In England the 400th.-odd team would be playing in the 8th.-tier of their pyramid. Average attendances vary from 820 at Guernsey, 607 at Hastings, down to 54 at FC Romania.


  6. 10 minutes ago, TonyFerrino said:

    Sounds plausible right enough - a 42 team league.  Auld Auntie Anne and her pals in the media are starting to reek of desperation now.  

    Actually, let's go for a 20-20 league, excluding the gruesome twosome from the tables... but, every team in the two divisions gets one home & one away match against an ugly sister each season to make a total of 40 matches.

    Old Firm thus get 40 matches and could have four games against each other thrown on at Xmas/Easter, say to make 44 matches.


  7. This is just a little musing upon the idea of restructuring... and while constructive criticism/debate is welcomed, let's please not have any flaming &/or ad hominem attacks, okay?

    Firstly. I know many folks carry an irrational dread of odd-numbered divisional memberships. To those persons, please forgive me for giving youse both barrels in the heid with this idea!

    As the title suggests, I see a 15-15-15 divisional restructure as a possibility. It won't allay the objections of those objectors to anything but the present 12-10-10-10 structure, but would possibly return a more interesting/entertaining season than the 14-14-14/16 ideas out there.

    I envisage 2-up/down + 1 play-off candidate at each end of all divisions, save the bottom of the third tier, which would be 1-up/down + 1 play-off candidate, although team#44 & team#45 would play-out for the right to reach the play-off vs. the loser of the HFL/LFL play-off.

    The season would consist of the usual double-round-robin(28-matches over 30 fixture dates) and then a three-way split: - 1st.-5th. places; 6th.-10th places &11th.-15th places (8-matches over 10 fixture dates) ~ providing motivation prizes/penalties in each of the three latter groupings.

    In the Top-groupings, the prizes on offer are going to be obvious = Champions, European places, promotions...
    Likewise, the Bottom-groupings playing against relegations.
    Both Top & bottom will provide three of four play-off candidates.

    The Middle-grouping will be playing for one extra play-off position, both up & downward! 6th.-place for promotion, 10th.-place against relegation.
    Note that in Teir One, 6th.-place would be playing to challenge for a European place.

    All play-offs would be of the formats  A~10th. (H) vs. 13th.; B~11th. (H) vs. 12th.; C~3rd. (H) vs. 6th. & D~4th. (H) vs. 5th. in a single legged preliminary, followed respectively by loser A vs. loser B & winner C vs. winner D, again in single legged matches with higher placed team at home ~ to produce the final two play-off candidates. Play-off finals could be 2-legged home/away games or single-legged neutral venue ones.

     

    Apart from giving every team four match days off with a 36-game season spread over the 40 match days, are there any likes/hates out there &/or constructive critique?
     


  8. This is just a little musing upon the idea of restructuring... and while constructive criticism/debate is welcomed, let's please not have any flaming &/or ad hominem attacks, okay?

    Firstly. I know many folks carry an irrational dread of odd-numbered divisional memberships. To those persons, please forgive me for giving youse both barrels in the heid with this idea!

    As the title suggests, I see a 15-15-15 divisional restructure as a possibility. It won't allay the objections of those objectors to anything but the present 12-10-10-10 structure, but would possibly return a more interesting/entertaining season than the 14-14-14/16 ideas out there.

    I envisage 2-up/down + 1 play-off candidate at each end of all divisions, save the bottom of the third tier, which would be 1-up/down + 1 play-off candidate, although team#44 & team#45 would play-out for the right to reach the play-off vs. the loser of the HFL/LFL play-off.

    The season would consist of the usual double-round-robin(28-matches over 30 fixture dates) and then a three-way split: - 1st.-5th. places; 6th.-10th places &11th.-15th places (8-matches over 10 fixture dates) ~ providing motivation prizes/penalties in each of the three latter groupings.

    In the Top-groupings, the prizes on offer are going to be obvious = Champions, European places, promotions...
    Likewise, the Bottom-groupings playing against relegations.
    Both Top & bottom will provide three of four play-off candidates.

    The Middle-grouping will be playing for one extra play-off position, both up & downward! 6th.-place for promotion, 10th.-place against relegation.
    Note that in Teir One, 6th.-place would be playing to challenge for a European place.

    All play-offs would be of the formats  A~10th. (H) vs. 13th.; B~11th. (H) vs. 12th.; C~3rd. (H) vs. 6th. & D~4th. (H) vs. 5th. in a single legged preliminary, followed respectively by loser A vs. loser B & winner C vs. winner D, again in single legged matches with higher placed team at home ~ to produce the final two play-off candidates. Play-off finals could be 2-legged home/away games or single-legged neutral venue ones.

     

    Apart from giving every team four match days off with a 36-game season spread over the 40 match days, are there any likes/hates out there &/or constructive critique?
     


  9. 1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

    So wait, relegating a team 30/38 games into a season for being in an automatic relegation place is less fair than promoting a team at same stage of season who aren't in an automatic promotion place?

    Riiiiight.

    Yes. Exactly. Although, you'd allow for play-offs, just excusing those 2nd.-last teams from them. If EFL & NL can have their play-offs in England, SPFL can, too.


  10. 1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

    So who else comes up to reshuffle this? 2nd in the respective leagues?

    There's not an automatic 2nd promotion place in Championship, League One or League two so surely going by the same 'logic' being applied through this thread, that's not fair to the teams below 2nd in each division who still had a realistic shout of promotion via the playoffs and now have that door closed in their faces because reconstruction has been retroactively applied.

    Why should promotion via method of 'let's just let 2nd placed teams come up, even though that's not a promotion place' after three quarters of a season be classed as 'fair' but relegation for being shite through three quarters of the season isn't?

    As I've said, no-one has presented a truly fair scenario. Because there isn't one.

    Hence, 'is as 'fair' as it can get.'!


  11. In the 'philosophy of the league style competition' it is accepted that there is no such thing as a league table until all matches in the league program; i.e. all have played each other once at home and once away in a traditional round-robin tourney; have been completed. Obviously, it's a bit different in the SPFL Premier due to their 'odd' schedule, but the point remains... there are no champions, no wooden-spoons and indeed, no other positions achieved until every planned match has been completed.

    In effect, this means that any unfinished league season is naturally null and void. As much as I despise n&v, the philosophy is definite on this.

    Another thing I want to mention is the argument that teams being elevated to higher divisions cause any teams already in those divisions some palpable harm. I guess that there's a truth in that these latter teams would no longer be playing matches versus the teams that they might've been playing otherwise, that'd likely have brought bigger supports with them.

    However, also in that scenario, such teams swap that factor for the one in which they now likely become 'the big fish' within their newly created division, concommittant with a likely much improved playing record in a technically easier division. Which fact in itself likely draws a better average home support, due to those improved results.

    The 'but we're effectively relegated to the bottom division' argument, while kinda true, is somewhat 'straw-man', as of course, their standing within their division is much improved & further proof against relegation to Tier 4. Further, they'd have greatly improved promotional chances (that itself will also build crowds) and with promotion they'd enter a Tier 2 division of rather easier average oppositional strength than before restructuring.

     

×
×
  • Create New...