Dons_1988 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 28 minutes ago, Ric said: I don't think I've made a single assumption about you, none of this has been about you, it's been about the position you have taken on this. Why on Earth should you seek out my comments? Presumably because they are about this very topic and refute the claims you have made. Now, let's get past the personal, let's deal with the meat of the issue. On this we actually agree. However, could you tell me how a temporary reconstruction (say.. a season or two) benefits these club more than a permanent one. Temporary simply kicks the can down the road, leaving these clubs equally unsure what will happen once the league structure "returns to normal". This is where your "I'm supporting all clubs here" argument falls down. So go on then, what does it mean? Clearly if you use the term temporary it cannot be in place for anything longer than a season or two, and certainly Budge's comments would hint at that. So can you confirm if you see temporary in the same way as Budge? Yes let's move past the personal, because we could go back and forth for hours saying one another is taking it personally. On your first actual point, you're missing my point. I'm not saying temporary reconstruction is better than permanent. I'm saying we're in no position to be making long term decisions and furthermore, it's almost impossible to get the required support, so a short term solution that protects as many clubs as possible from unnecessary financial harm could be desirable. I'm sure you'll say that clubs will just find a way to go back to the status quo and you'd be right that certain parties will want that but there would need to be something in place to hold their feet to the fire. If you're expecting me to find a solution that benefits all clubs then I concede defeat. Such a solution does not exist. What I mean is you could say let's do this for next season (or two), but a collective commitment to do the required due diligence into all long term solutions. So time to agree the model, distribution, talks with TV, sponsorship, every other factor that goes into completely re-shaping the leagues. A permanent reconstruction now is asking clubs to vote on a long term solution when their short term survival is foremost in their mind. Hearts would take a far more pragmatic, long term and objective view for example if they knew they had a place in the top flight in the immediate term. To your final point, if Budge want temporary then back to normal then no I don't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DA Baracus Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 12 hours ago, Arch Stanton said: You're thinking of the other Saints. They are the only side to go from the top tier to the third tier in successive seasons. 11 hours ago, djchapsticks said: Are they? I'm sure I remember Partick Thistle going from 2nd division to SPL and back to 2nd division again in successive seasons in the 2000s. 11 hours ago, invergowrie arab said: They did. Did Hamilton not do it too? We did it as well, only a few years ago. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dunning1874 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said: And to your final point, it is clear that the motivation for league reconstruction talks is preventing relegation for a handful of clubs while giving promotion to some others. That is not the basis to be starting any conversation on long term reconstruction, and why I believe it is doomed to fail. Of course it's not the basis for a long term reconstruction, and that's why no reconstruction should happen at all. If there's a potential reconstruction which is workable and desirable enough to be accepted then fine, but if that reconstruction isn't acceptable as a long-term solution then it isn't acceptable at all. You can't reconstruct your way out of unfairness. You just move the unfairness onto other clubs, so a temporary reconstruction to save Hearts and Partick at the expense of someone else is a ridiculous notion if we're just going to abandon that reconstruction after a season. If it's actually a permanent solution that clubs want to stick with and believe is a sensible long-term plan then there's a justification for doing it; bailing out three clubs who have been shite all season with a one season switch is not a justification. 13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybeee Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 3 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: 17 hours ago, invergowrie arab said: Shite. Who are last team that went bust because they were relegated? You're applying normal times logic. If relegation were to send Hearts bust in normal circumstances I'd say f**k them, accept their fate. These are not normal circumstances. We're talking about putting significant additional financial strain on clubs that are already looking into the abyss, to implement league results that haven't actually happened. As @topcat(The most tip top) said, the temporary reconstruction avoids that penalty whilst not denying clubs like your own the promotion they deserve. What a load of bollocks that is, OK so you view the club being promoted as deserving to be promoted, in that case the bottom team (if my recollection is correct) get demoted / relegated, if one comes uo (deservedly) then one goes down........................................ah well but it's Hearts! pity it wasn't Hamilton or Ross County or St Mirren cause we wouldn't give a feck then , would we . What a lot of sanctimonious two faced barstuards we have on here trying to justify all kinds of shite. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Just now, jaybeee said: What a load of bollocks that is, OK so you view the club being promoted as deserving to be promoted, in that case the bottom team (if my recollection is correct) get demoted / relegated, if one comes uo (deservedly) then one goes down........................................ah well but it's Hearts! pity it wasn't Hamilton or Ross County or St Mirren cause we wouldn't give a feck then , would we . What a lot of sanctimonious two faced barstuards we have on here trying to justify all kinds of shite. Mind you if Morton were top then nobody would seriously argue that they should be promoted at St Mirren's expense 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coventry Saint Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Just now, topcat(The most tip top) said: If Morton were top Behave. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthBank Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Life ain't fair. Coronavirus ain't fair. Losing your income through no fault of your own ain't fair. The world is full of ain't fairs at the moment. Changing a League structure for 12 months to accommodate one team ain't fair. Passing the consequences of that temporary League structure on to other teams ain't fair. Hearts have played 30 games this season and are where they are on merit. The fairist we can do is draw a line as things stand and start again at some point in the future. Its not the end of the world. It's relegation, and in Hearts' case for 12 months only. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaybeee Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said: You have a significant chip on your shoulder about Hearts here. You think your own views are the only ones who have all of Scottish footballs interests at heart. You support this with bluster and grand statements such as 'Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.' It might sound good in your head but it doesn't really mean anything. The same with 'I guarantee this wouldn't happen if it was St Mirren'. It's all semi-articulate bollocks. Still better than your inarticulate bollocks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 (edited) 53 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: On your first actual point, you're missing my point. I'm not saying temporary reconstruction is better than permanent. I'm saying we're in no position to be making long term decisions and furthermore, it's almost impossible to get the required support, so a short term solution that protects as many clubs as possible from unnecessary financial harm could be desirable. I'm sure you'll say that clubs will just find a way to go back to the status quo and you'd be right that certain parties will want that but there would need to be something in place to hold their feet to the fire. I find a lot of merit in that comment, and I apologise if I may have been missing some of the nuance to the point you are making. I'd say that is a two parter in many ways. One is the fact we can't plan for the future, and that I think is something we can all agree with. The second is whether we should aim for temporary rather than permanent (although, both terms are fraught with difficulty in regard to precise definition), and as a long term advocate of reconstruction I am happy to see it put into place purely because it's "one foot in the door" as it were. It's the latter bit that is of the most concern here. Some may say that is self interest, and sure that is justified as there is an element to that, but league reconstruction has a huge ripple effect and it's important we let the initial "splash" settle before adding more ripples. 53 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: If you're expecting me to find a solution that benefits all clubs then I concede defeat. Such a solution does not exist. No, I don't think there is. I'd maybe say that not all solutions are equal. Which sounds a "Captain Obvious" comment, but it still needs to be said. 53 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: Hearts would take a far more pragmatic, long term and objective view for example if they knew they had a place in the top flight in the immediate term. This is quite telling because I think you are 100% spot on, but a solution should not be predicated solely on whether Hearts are pragmatic or not. 53 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said: To your final point, if Budge want temporary then back to normal then no I don't. Thank you for the clarification. I have many reasons to be quite annoyed at Hearts fans as my club is constantly castigated because of their failure. However I don't, football can be tribal and distinctly myopic, but even then I know the emotions involved so I get it. Most of their fans on here are decent posters, even those I've been happy to disagree with, and I really wouldn't wish this situation upon them. The difficulty I have is that claiming they were about to make some Lazarus like climb from the bottom of the league is just not backed up in the data we have seen up to the point of the league being suspended. Was it possible? Of course it was possible, was it plausible? No, not really. What I do have, in abundance it has to be said, is an absolute loathing in the two-faced attitude of Budge. I see no reason to give her the benefit of the doubt when it's clear she has acted in a manner that not only goes beyond her club but actively seems to be applying negatives to the very clubs that are above hers in the league. I noticed Scott, our guy, is on the League Reconstruction committee now - was that to replace Dempster or that a different committee I'm thinking of - so I feel at least our position will have some airing rather than relying on others to do so. Should Scott have more weight to his opinion because the issue clearly affects us? No, but it shouldn't be counted as less. Edited April 28, 2020 by Ric ...for minor typos 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grangemouth Bairn Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 59 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: Are you saying it Whinney Happen Yip, that idea has well and truly bolted. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dons_1988 Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 5 minutes ago, Ric said: I find a lot of merit in that comment, and I apologise if I may have been missing some of the nuance to the point you are making. I'll not quote your whole post but will attempt to respond to it all. I think we've maybe misunderstood each other throughout so I'll return an apology and glad we can discuss more amicably. I get the foot in the door point but I feel that there's an inherent contradiction between the motivation here (short term relief for a handful of clubs) and the solution (a permanent implication for all clubs). I don't see any way that works, never mind in the timeframe that's being discussed. My point around Hearts being more pragmatic was meant as an example of many, whereby teams have clarity on the immediate future so can have a more open mind about the longer term (in theory). To be clear, my reluctant acceptance of a temporary measure is not based on some romantic notion of fairness, but more that the ultimate priority is the protection of clubs in the short term. It may be the case that we just press on with relegation and support clubs financially by another means. There seems to be one or two (not you) that think I have some desire to see Hearts in the league because it's Hearts. Nothing could be further from the truth, they're in my top 5 clubs I enjoy seeing suffer. I absolutely would not support a null and void result to keep them in the league for example. I also get the mistrust in Budge, she is obviously out for herself and her club. Part of that is justified, part of it is crass self interest. But she will have to compromise, she might want temporary changes and then back to normal but I'd say that has no hope of going through. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RandomGuy. Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said: Or to put it another way Punishing a club that is deemed likely to have have finished 12th or punishing a club that actually does finish 12th. No. It's a case of either "punishing" a team who are adrift in bottom after 28 games, or saving them and then punishing the team who finishes 3rd bottom next season, in a situation that will never be repeated. Theres even an argument that 4 teams could be relegated next season if the leagues temporarily expanded. You're looking at Hamilton here, they survive every season, look like surviving this season, yet through no fault of their own their chances of relegation and then being stuck in the Championship is trebled, all to save the club adrift at the bottom of the league after 28 games. Is that fair on them? All this situation does is punish smaller clubs by increasing relegation risk. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akuram Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Let's have a look at the positions Hearts have been in since their return: 6, 6, 5, 3. During that time not a peep about league reconstruction, in fact quite the opposite with Budge stating that the number of clubs in Scotland as a whole is too many. They have a large squad, they have a large stadium and gate revenues, they have all the benefits that a large club in Scotland brings. So you will forgive me for taking anything that somehow temporarily resolves their situation while fucking over every other club that may reside in the relegation places in proceeding years when the league is "returned to normal" with an extremely large dose of salt. Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.Well said. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ftk Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Cant really see any real negatives with 3 leagues of 14. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FREDDYFRY Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 7 minutes ago, ftk said: Cant really see any real negatives with 3 leagues of 14. This.. disadvantage to at least 4 teams and Highland / lowland league http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52453329 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scotty Tunbridge Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Cant really see any real negatives with 3 leagues of 14.Making it a closed shop again just to save League 2 no marks like Brechin, Albion Rovers, Stirling Albion etc. From any future relegation threat is my biggest issue. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigbulllywee Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 There shouldnt be any reconstruction at all, a reversal of the original decision would be the best solution to right a wrong. Because all this reconstruction nonsense is all about righting a wrong. Two wrongs dont make a right imo. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ftk Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 This.. disadvantage to at least 4 teams and Highland / lowland league http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52453329Not really. Clyde will be in the 3rd tier same as before. All playoffs have been scrapped so that's why no promotion from non league. I would introduce automatic places for non league teams for next season though (2 down from new league 1). I'm an Ayr fan and scrapping playoffs has also affected my team but we need to move forward. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ftk Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 Making it a closed shop again just to save League 2 no marks like Brechin, Albion Rovers, Stirling Albion etc. From any future relegation threat is my biggest issue.I agree in future there should be automatic relegation from bottom league. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FREDDYFRY Posted April 28, 2020 Share Posted April 28, 2020 1 minute ago, ftk said: 7 minutes ago, FREDDYFRY said: This.. disadvantage to at least 4 teams and Highland / lowland league http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52453329 No really. Clyde will be in the 3rd tier same as before. All playoffs have been scrapped so that's why no promotion from non league. I would introduce automatic places for non league teams for next season though (2 down from new league 1). I'm an Ayr fan and scrapping playoffs has also affected my team but we need to move forward. Aye but only be playing 3 of the teams we faced last year despite being well clear of relegation spot. Obvious disadvantage if it’s agreed. It’s essentially a relegation 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.