Jump to content

Post split fixtures


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 557
  • Created
  • Last Reply


What?

They will end up playing at least 2 of the top 6 3 times at home. I'd read that their away record was better than at home and hadn't thought much about it. But then I looked at who they had played... By the time of the split their 15 games against the rest of the top 6 (atm) will have seen them at home 10 times against them. They're due to play everyone post split away.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take Kilmarnock out of the equation (desperate not to jinx us...) - and Rangers were given two home games against ALL of Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts, and Hibernian prior to the split - as well as getting 17 home games and 16 away.

I'm not going to go back to the preseason prediction threads to get a statistic on this, but I'd imagine the overwhelming majority of supporters would have predicted those four to be in the top six, along with Rangers and one other, come April.  Sometimes I wish the footballing authorities in Scotland would at least try to make it less obvious, it's bad for morale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, paul wright scores said:

That would be brilliant if it was to happen, but you can bet your last dollar they will not get 3 home games against Celtic, others will have to struggle.

The smallest team in the top 6 would have to go to Ibrox 3 times - Us, Motherwell or St Johnstone. 

The law that says the OF game is utterly untouchable in post split fixture compromises sums up the unhealthy nature of the governing bodies' relationship with Rangers and Celtic. The other, balancing law that states "If you're going to shaft a club, make sure it's the one with the least ability to make a noise about it in the press" is equally risible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Swello said:

The law that says the OF game is utterly untouchable in post split fixture compromises sums up the unhealthy nature of the governing bodies' relationship with Rangers and Celtic. The other, balancing law that states "If you're going to shaft a club, make sure it's the one with the least ability to make a noise about it in the press" is equally risible.

100% correct, which just proves how corrupt the SPFL are.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The law that says the OF game is utterly untouchable in post split fixture compromises sums up the unhealthy nature of the governing bodies' relationship with Rangers and Celtic. The other, balancing law that states "If you're going to shaft a club, make sure it's the one with the least ability to make a noise about it in the press" is equally risible.

 

For that matter they will, quite rightly, try to avoid sending us to Easter Road for a 3rd time.

 

They have previously sent Rangers to Easter Road and Hearts to Ibrox rather than playing a 3rd derby at Easter Road

 

 

I know that the Strathclyde country park rivalry isn’t quite as fierce as some others but if you miss the cut and they have to move one of your bottom 6 fixtures then surely a 3rd trip to Hamilton irritate you a bit

 

The idea that the home/away balance of some pairings being more important than others is self evident in the context of one teams fixture list shouldn’t be too controversial as a general proposition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UEFA don't get a lot right, but now they've moved away from the whole getting-around-a-table nature of organising the fixtures, this new system is a lot fairer.  Throw it into a computer and that's your lot.  Playing in 40 degree temperatures?  Tough.  Playing your greatest rivals at 5pm on a Saturday?  f**k off polis.  

Still throws up its problems, but it's certainly fairer than looking on certain games and teams as more important than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

The idea that the home/away balance of some pairings being more important than others is self evident in the context of one teams fixture list shouldn’t be too controversial as a general proposition.
 

 

It is controversial only in that Killie, Motherwell or St Johnstone (as the clubs nearest 6th place) would never be afforded that privilege due to having no "big derby" -treating teams equally should surely be the basis for making a fixture list. If there are fixtures that are seen as untouchable, that would only be to the benefit of four teams in the current league, which doesn't seem equitable.

You could make the argument that moving a derby has a financial impact on these teams - but the league has shown no compunction in the past of making us go to Ibrox/Parkhead for a 3rd time and depriving us of our biggest home gates of the season - so I'm not particularly open to that argument either.

If "avoiding controversy" is a criteria in the choice of fixtures, let them publish that and make it transparent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lebowski said:

 

Am I reading this right, the post split fixtures will have seen *Rangers having played every one of the current top 6 twice at home and once away?

 

SPFL pure taking a stand tapatalk_1512506424403.jpeg

 

Thistle will have played them twice at home m9 306197DB-B9E7-45E4-81AE-993DC9E8403F.jpeg.dc09873fad5442f6f2b0c8f469a98921.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Estragon said:

Take Kilmarnock out of the equation (desperate not to jinx us...) - and Rangers were given two home games against ALL of Celtic, Aberdeen, Hearts, and Hibernian prior to the split - as well as getting 17 home games and 16 away.

I'm not going to go back to the preseason prediction threads to get a statistic on this, but I'd imagine the overwhelming majority of supporters would have predicted those four to be in the top six, along with Rangers and one other, come April.  Sometimes I wish the footballing authorities in Scotland would at least try to make it less obvious, it's bad for morale.

Hibs complicate matters because they're newly-promoted which means they were predicted to be a bottom six team.  To be honest, regardless of expectation, I'm not sure there was a fair way of changing that. And it is the method used every season - yes, including when Sevco were promoted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Swello said:

It is controversial only in that Killie, Motherwell or St Johnstone (as the clubs nearest 6th place) would never be afforded that privilege due to having no "big derby" -treating teams equally should surely be the basis for making a fixture list. If there are fixtures that are seen as untouchable, that would only be to the benefit of four teams in the current league, which doesn't seem equitable.

You could make the argument that moving a derby has a financial impact on these teams - but the league has shown no compunction in the past of making us go to Ibrox/Parkhead for a 3rd time and depriving us of our biggest home gates of the season - so I'm not particularly open to that argument either.

If "avoiding controversy" is a criteria in the choice of fixtures, let them publish that and make it transparent.

I wouldn't agree with your assumption that all fixtures are equally interchangeable and think that the bigger issue isn't which head to head fixtures are unbalanced but which teams end up with 20:18 Home/Away splits or vice versa

But your last point is spot on

If Motherwell were to finish 6th and get a 20th away game because the rules  clearly stated that when the stick has a shitty end then the team in 6th get it that would be preferable to it just happening with no explanation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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