Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

The reason we ended up with smaller leagues is because attendances had collapsed. In the two decades after the Second World War until Celtic won the first of their 9-in-a-row; attendances fell from their peak by more than 50%.

This was in a period where 7 different clubs won the title, 8 years out of 20 the champions were not one of the Ugly Sisters, it cost the equivalent of about £3 to get in and there was no live football on TV. All the things people reckon would have fans flocking to football nowadays. And it failed spectacularly.

Don’t forget, in them days gate money was virtually all the income clubs had.

The first year of the Premier Division produced exactly the results they hoped it would; an extra 330,000 people watched the top ten clubs. Of course The Rest were, frankly, thrown to the wolves, the stupidest fucking decision ever in Scottish fitba was 2 X 14 playing just 26 games and the Spring Cup to make up the difference. An utter disaster.

Yes, that was then and this is now, a completely different world. Commercial income, TV money, sponsorship and all that.

But the reasons 18 failed in Scotland haven’t changed and they’ve got worse. There won’t be 7 different clubs winning the title over 20 years and there won’t be 8 seasons out of 20 when one of the US don’t win it and it won’t cost a fiver to get in. Anyone who thinks more people will turn up at Dens Park or Fir Park to watch Morton rather than a second game against Hamilton because of a novelty factor at £25 a head, particularly if the home clubs are coasting in mid-table, do not have fully functioning frontal lobes.

 Clubs know all this and there will never be a return to 18.

Personally, the only change I’d make is I’d make the Championship a 12 too, complete with a 33 game split.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bless, we haven't had one of those Hovis-themed lectures on the horrors of the old top flight in about a dozen pages or so.

Nobody is suggesting a model in which three teams only go straight up or down because That's The Way It's Done and the rest sit on their hands from January onwards every season. We now have European places to compete for as well as a modern understanding of how promotion and relegation can be kept as live issues until the very end of the campaign. An enlarged league with playoffs at both ends of the table is not even remotely comparable to your straw man.

It's also a wonder how the Portugese and Dutch have managed to stick with an 18 team top flight and not have their domestic game sink inevitably into the abyss.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

? I'm a few things. Stubborn, provocative, argumentative, occasionally vindictive, often childish. But not a liar.

Liar... you called me a racist on that thread and ran away. So again show me where I called Leo Varadkar a refugee or said anything remotely racist..  

You are a liar😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This. I would go to lots of Ayr Reserves or Colts games on a Saturday at 3PM if I couldn't make Ayr away. Or make them Sunday at 3PM. Think lots of teams would get decent crowds if priced correctly.

Do Ayr have enough players to name an 18 man matchday squad on a Saturday (plus maybe a couple on standby if there are injuries) and also at least 14 for a Reserve team? I doubt Killie do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bless, we haven't had one of those Hovis-themed lectures on the horrors of the old top flight in about a dozen pages or so.
Nobody is suggesting a model in which three teams only go straight up or down because That's The Way It's Done and the rest sit on their hands from January onwards every season. We now have European places to compete for as well as a modern understanding of how promotion and relegation can be kept as live issues until the very end of the campaign. An enlarged league with playoffs at both ends of the table is not even remotely comparable to your straw man.
It's also a wonder how the Portugese and Dutch have managed to stick with an 18 team top flight and not have their domestic game sink inevitably into the abyss.


Spot on VT. I remember the good old days. The clubs with nothing to play for used to experiment with different formations and a smattering of reserve players given their chance in competitive games. The worst thing about small leagues is the boredom of playing the same teams up to 6 or 7 times a season. One year in the 80’s St Mirren played Dundee United 4 times in a fortnight! Tedious
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

? I'm a few things. Stubborn, provocative, argumentative, occasionally vindictive, often childish and often to be found on The Championship thread.

ftfy

Funny Face Reaction GIF

Edited by Green Day
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, NorthBank said:

Say every team in the Premiership wants a Colt team in the lowest League. Shall we call it the Reserve League?

St Johnstone Colts v Kinnoull.

Bet that's what they were dreaming of when they fought like f**k to get a Pyramid system in place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, craigkillie said:


Do Ayr have enough players to name an 18 man matchday squad on a Saturday (plus maybe a couple on standby if there are injuries) and also at least 14 for a Reserve team? I doubt Killie do.

Just asking you as you seem the likeliest to know, but any idea how many Scottish players who have played for the OF Colt sides in the Challenge Cup have senior minutes since playing in that competition?

Must be 4 seasons into that now.

Edited by RandomGuy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:

Just asking you as you seem the likeliest to know, but any idea how many Scottish players who have played for the OF Colt sides in the Challenge Cup have senior minutes since playing in that competition?

Must be 4 seasons into that now.

I'm just going to limit it to appearances for the Celtic or Rangers first teams, since I assumed that's what you meant. Several of the players have gone on to play for other teams. I've also excluded the overage players for obvious reasons, but have included non-Scottish U20/21 players in italics.

Celtic

129 - Kristoffer Ajer
49 - Mikey Johnston
19 - Tony Ralston
9 - Ewan Henderson
5 - Calvin Miller
3 - Jack Aitchison
1 - Jamie McCart
1 - Aidan Nesbitt
1 - Scott Robertson
1 - Joe Thomson
1 - Stephen Welsh

 

Rangers

55 - Ross McCrorie
27 - Glenn Middleton
18 - Ryan Hardie
9 - Jamie Barjonas
8 - Myles Beerman
3 - Liam Burt
3 - Jordan Thompson
3 - Aidan Wilson
1 - Serge Atakayi
1 - Jordan Houston
1 - Kai Kennedy
1 - Josh McPake
1 - Dapo Mebude
1 - Nathan Patterson

 

Edited by craigkillie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, strichener said:

I don't seek your respect as you haven't a scooby about this matter.  This is one of those times where the phrase "stop digging" is really the most appropriate course of action.  Removing your hands from this particular shovel will at least allow you to clutch other straws.  

The Companies Act is criminal law, how many times did the Opinion mention this Act?  Hearts cannot raise a civil case on a criminal matter and therefore once again your post is ill-informed nonsense. 

I look forward to Ann lodging a formal complaint on this matter with Police Scotland .  Any investigation being carried out before Christmas, never mind the start of the season would be remarkable.

 

Erm. 13 times. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I'm just going to limit it to appearances for the Celtic or Rangers first teams, since I assumed that's what you meant. Several of the players have gone on to play for other teams. I've also excluded the overage players for obvious reasons, but have included non-Scottish U20/21 players in italics.

I genuinely thought you were listing the number of minutes they'd played for the first team.

Not a lot of difference in most cases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bohemian said:

Liar... you called me a racist on that thread and ran away. So again show me where I called Leo Varadkar a refugee or said anything remotely racist..  

You are a liar😉

From memory, I said that there had been some borderline racist assumptions shown in the thread. There was Cru Bag (?) who was implying that Varadkar wasn't Irish (despite having an Irish mother and being born and raised in Ireland) and there was yourself, who assumed immigrants were all refugees. tbf to you, your  motives might well be fine and it's just that you have a problem with your English.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Erm. 13 times. 

 

Sorry , forgot who I was dealing with here.  I will revise the question.

 

How many times does the opinion mention using the Companies Act as the basis of litigation?

I remember reading the Opinion shortly after PTFC released the information.  Most of the comments were in relation to their being no statutory obligation to vote against a resolution and then basing an argument on the procedural failings in accepting a vote against the resolution.  The remainder was around the lack of provision of information such as - not including in the briefing notes that the SG were obliged to review the situation every 21 days. 

Really strong (not) arguments that a) rely on previous case law and b) assume that the shareholders in the SPFL are imbiciles. 

Be interesting to see which path "successful businesswoman" Ann would take on this.

Edited by strichener
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, strichener said:

Sorry , forgot who I was dealing with here.  I will revise the question.

 

How many times does the opinion mention using the Companies Act as the basis of litigation?

I remember reading the Opinion shortly after PTFC released the information.  Most of the comments were in relation to their being no statutory obligation to vote against a resolution and then basing an argument on the procedural failings in accepting a vote against the resolution.  The remainder was around the lack of provision of information such as - not including in the briefing notes that the SG were obliged to review the situation every 21 days. 

Really strong (not) arguments that a) rely on previous case law and b) assume that the shareholders in the SPFL are imbiciles. 

Be interesting to see which path "successful businesswoman" Ann would take on this.

Yay!! Our very own Queen's Counsel on P&B.

Can we just get doon and close the thread now?

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...