HibeeJibee Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 I worry that they might hark back to what happened in the last few Pre-SPL years. After season 93/94, they went from three divisions to four. For teams in the second division - then the bottom tier - it was decreed that places 2-6 would join the new second division, which became the second bottom tier. To create meaning however, the winners got to jump all the way to division 1, the 2nd tier of 4. That year, it was Stranraer. I can still see something happening that would take Rangers into the new middle division and reduce their top flight exile by a year. The fact that a precedent of sorts, exists, might make it possible that they'd try. There are a few differences, obviously. Firstly, weren't the arrangements in 1994 settled before the season began? Secondly, winning SFL2 had normally meant promotion to SFL1. It still did for 1 club via the 'Stranraer slot'. Rangers don't need to be lifted into SPL2 to be promoted (from tier 4 to tier 3). Thirdly, it's further different since in 1994 loads of places meant more relegation than standardly occurred. Fourthly, there was no taint and subsequent outcry that the reconstruction was arranged to help Stranraer. There would be regarding Rangers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 6, 2013 Share Posted January 6, 2013 There are a few differences, obviously. Firstly, weren't the arrangements in 1994 settled before the season began? Secondly, winning SFL2 had normally meant promotion to SFL1. It still did for 1 club via the 'Stranraer slot'. Rangers don't need to be lifted into SPL2 to be promoted (from tier 4 to tier 3). Thirdly, it's further different since in 1994 loads of places meant more relegation than standardly occurred. Fourthly, there was no taint and subsequent outcry that the reconstruction was arranged to help Stranraer. There would be regarding Rangers. Correct on all points. I'm not entirely sure about the first one actually, but I'd imagine you are. That however is why I described it only as a precedent of sorts. What it did in '94 was prevent the team that won a league having the same fate as ones finishing five places behind them. That, in normal circumstances would seem reasonable. It is relevant in that it involved a team leapfrogging others to have success rewarded. You're right that there was no outcry because it was understood for a long time - Can you incidentally confirm that it was known before the season began? The fact that it was also little old Stranraer winning their first ever title made the bonus prize a good news story in a way it sure as hell wouldn't be if Rangers benefited from something similar. As I say, the circumstances were far from identical. There's enough similarity as far as I can see however, for something like it to be possible. The alternative of Rangers winning the league by 40 points and basically staying put would obviously be hilarious, but I can see it being challenged too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 You're right that there was no outcry because it was understood for a long time - Can you incidentally confirm that it was known before the season began? Yes. I've a copy of the 1993-94 SFL Review book infront of me (published summer 1993)... in the introduction, Yule Craig discusses May's AGM vote to go to 4 divisions of 10 and elect 2 new members the following year. EDIT: Vote was on 27th May 1993. As I say, the circumstances were far from identical. There's enough similarity as far as I can see however, for something like it to be possible. The alternative of Rangers winning the league by 40 points and basically staying put would obviously be hilarious, but I can see it being challenged too. Easier still, of course, would be deciding things by June and introducing any new structure for 2014-15!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Easier still, of course, would be deciding things by June and introducing any new structure for 2014-15!! Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthEnclosure Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Looks like the fans are about to be utterly ignored again, the failed top league of twelve is about to be kept. shocking, the lunatics really run the asylum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpungoMcGoo Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 All your questions about 12-12-18 answered: http://wingsland.podgamer.com/all-change-for-no-change/ Basically it's about making it easier for The Rangers to get back into the top division, and pretty much nothing else will change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Looks like the fans are about to be utterly ignored again, the failed top league of twelve is about to be kept. shocking, the lunatics really run the asylum. I have to say, I find this clamour for the fans to be "listened to" and to decide what shape reconstruction should take to be a little bizarre. What other sport, in the world, is governed by the fans? I realise that the fans are the customers, but surely all the fans want is to go along and watch their team play football and be as successful as possible? Would it even be possible for the fans to agree on what they want anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 I realise that the fans are the customers, but surely all the fans want is to go along and watch their team play football and be as successful as possible? Would it even be possible for the fans to agree on what they want anyway? No. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Would it even be possible for the fans to agree on what they want anyway? Almost certainly not. Clearly this isn't fully representative... although at the same time, what would be... but I started threads with polls when SFL then SPL released their plans: I think the SFL plan saw about 2/3 against, and the SPL plan about 4/5. Almost everyone opposed 10-team SPL, and it seems a majority would like to change the existing 12 set-up. It's likely that a larger minority support each of 16, 18 or 20 but they're not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Homer Thompson Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Almost certainly not. Clearly this isn't fully representative... although at the same time, what would be... but I started threads with polls when SFL then SPL released their plans: I think the SFL plan saw about 2/3 against, and the SPL plan about 4/5. Almost everyone opposed 10-team SPL, and it seems a majority would like to change the existing 12 set-up. It's likely that a larger minority support each of 16, 18 or 20 but they're not going to happen. And for good reason - or at least reasons the clubs can justify and explain. The problem is that the fans want to see bigger leagues, lower gate prices and better quality. Economically, it just isnt going to work. We should certainly be trying to work towards better quality and theres no doubt that prices are too high, especially compared to other leisure activities but the lost income cant just be ignored. Personally, Id be happy with any move away from playing the same teams four times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoodedClaw Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 The monotiny of playing teams four times will continue, except for the bottom league which will have 18 teams. Luckily those teams will probably be playing each other once home and once away, which is what most fans want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mushroom Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 I kind of see why they're reluctant to go for 16/18/20 in the top leagues, it would make the 2nd teir predominantly part time. The idea of dropping from a league with Celtic in it to a league that is mainly part time is odd. Then there's 4x a season. A league of 18 in P/T football would be excellent - nobody south of Aviemore would want 2 trips to Elgin a season - not just because it's miles away but because it's not a lot special about these games - if they happen less often, it might provide more incentive for people to go. Maybe that Wings of Scotland blog has a point about teams at the top level not minding playing each other 4x but I'm not sure the 2nd tier would see it that way, I remember being particularly sick of the sight of Ross County, and I've only ever been to Dingwall twice. If there was more promotion relegation to make the leagues less stagnant then it might negate the 4x a season issue. The blog also makes a point about the potential for the split to make it even more stagnant if teams don't get relegated often - last years middle 8 could have been (I can't be arsed checking what the table looked like after 22 - Aberdeen, ICT, Hibs, Dunfermline, Ross Co. Dundee, Falkirk, Hamilton. Would the outcome of that have been any different from what actually happened? Probably not. Christ this is tricky. edit - they can't really get this in time for next season since it would move the goalposts for promotion/relegation, you can't do that or I'd you find yourself in difficult legal territory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 No way last season's Hibs would have finished in the top 4 there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hampden Diehard Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 So, the guy charged with looking after the SFL is ignoring his own clubs, ignoring the vast majority of their fans and lying back and having his tummy tickled by the SPL. Whooda thunk it- the SPL get their way. And watch out for some magic tricks to get the jolly Gers straight into the new SPL top division. And the top job will go to agent Longmuir. And the two top clubs in the SPL will continue to get a ridiculously skewed amount of money for finishing first and second. This stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheHoodedClaw Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Every team competing in the SPL should get the same money, that would even things up a bit. The winners obviously get the bonus of being crowned champs. Oh yes, and back to two points for a win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jagsman411971 Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Scottish football will never change as long as the clubs continue to run with inflated budgets. Over the past 4 or 5 years, everybody has had to cut back their finances, so now its about time the football fraternity done the same. They also need to be told that improving Scottish football cannot be done overnight using ideas jotted down on the back of a fag packet. The only serious way to fix our game, requires a system that is not dependant on; a minimum amount of games being played, how much money the TV companies will pay for the rights playing certain teams as much as possible letting teams continually overpay 3rd rate players Any new system worth its salt should certainly contain; lower ticket prices, possibly fewer games, definitely fewer games against the same teams definitely have a pyramid system included. If the miracle happened and somehow a radical new system was voted in, the clubs would need to be given the time to adjust their budgets accordingly, and that would need at least a couple of seasons. It would then take at least another 5 years for the clubs to see the benefits of the system. And if you think they will vote in something like that, then you must be mad. We should just get used to having these same reconstruction arguments every few seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RoddyGrantLegend Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Ayrshire (Kilmarnock Ayr st Johnstone) That's the biggest load of shite ever heard!st Johnstone playing in Ayrshire?why the f**k would we want to travel nearly an hour an half to watch them?i vote for 16 16 10 set up 2 up 2 down and a play off f**k the 12 12 18 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Scottish football will never change as long as the clubs continue to run with inflated budgets. Over the past 4 or 5 years, everybody has had to cut back their finances, so now its about time the football fraternity done the same. You're on another planet if you think football hasn't felt a pinch in the last few years. The only serious way to fix our game, requires a system that is not dependant on; a minimum amount of games being played, how much money the TV companies will pay for the rights playing certain teams as much as possible letting teams continually overpay 3rd rate players Professional football has to depend on such factors to a degree, particularly the first 2. We should just get used to having these same reconstruction arguments every few seasons. Agreed. But that's been the case for over 100yrs, and always will be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted January 7, 2013 Share Posted January 7, 2013 Splitting into mini leagues of 8 is laughable, halfway through a season and your season could be over depending on how it turns out. 16 or 18 makes more sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hampden Diehard Posted January 8, 2013 Share Posted January 8, 2013 So, the guy charged with looking after the SFL is ignoring his own clubs, ignoring the vast majority of their fans and lying back and having his tummy tickled by the SPL. Whooda thunk it- the SPL get their way. And watch out for some magic tricks to get the jolly Gers straight into the new SPL top division. And the top job will go to agent Longmuir. And the two top clubs in the SPL will continue to get a ridiculously skewed amount of money for finishing first and second. This stinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.