League Reconstruction 20/21 season

[bennett]

42 minutes ago, SJP79 said:

The Old Firm must be losing money at a horrendous rate, if Aberdeen are dropping a million pound a month then what are the old firm ?

Probably why they are desperate for the champions league money,  hearts and others must pay the price. 

 

[djchapsticks]

20 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I really don't think you did.

Your response makes no sense.

Carry on.

He might have missed the thread of the discussion somewhat but it's easy to do as you are all over the shop. Your earlier posturing though that if Hearts are relegated after 30 games, we should be also be penalised alongside Hearts for being bottom after 30 games LAST SEASON is brilliantly batshit. 

[Green Day]

1 hour ago, Mr. X said:

The views are far too entrenched in this thread no one seems likely to change their opinion. 

 In the yellow corner you have the supporters of the spineless teams who believe its fair to relegate a team that has 24 points to play for.  It just so happens it also makes life more easy for their team.  A few know that a weak Hearts team is normally a temporary blip, so  'let's get them down while they are weak', seems to be part of the thinking from some of the snake clubs.  'Reconstruction is just to suit Hearts' they squeal. 

In the Maroon corner  you have other supporters that can plainly see Hearts are getting very unfairly treated.  Everything should be done to ensure no team carries a disproportionately large burden because of Covid 29 shutdown.  Reconstruction is just to suit Hearts because Hearts are the only team that are getting shafted in the top league.  No other team in the Premiership is being voted out by their rivals, at a cost  of 3 million and possibly more. 

I can understand teams looking after number 1, and that is exactly why the vote should not have taken place.  

This post, like every other post in this thread will not change any opinons. Budge will present her temporary fix and the spineless ones will once again  prefer the f**k Hearts option to any kind of fair play. Hearts will then get a solidarity payment just enough to save this from going through the courts. 

We'll be back soon enough, and hopefully some of you smaller teams will still be around for us play. 

Why are there only two choices? And why do those choices need to revolve around Hearts?

Every club votes in a way that they feel least damages their club and - I would hope - allows us to move forward into a new season at some point.

I am afraid that I cant really put Hibs into one of your categories because - as has been stated many times - we voted for an option which (unlike every other club in the Premiership) will negatively change our league placing and cost us six figures in prize money, never mind the differential in attendance money that we will lose next season due to missing out on derbies.

We could stamp our feet, mewl away about unfairness, brief behind the scenes, threaten to take the league to court - but that didnt happen.

Any club trotting out the line that "there must be no losers" should piss off back to running a Primary 1 egg and spoon race and not professional football.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Green Day

[Dunning1874]

Didn't think any P&B fanbase would manage to be more tragic than Falkirk in the midst of this, but credit to the Hearts fans on this thread for managing to be that pathetic.

[Guest JTS98]

2 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

He might have missed the thread of the discussion somewhat but it's easy to do as you are all over the shop. Your earlier posturing though that if Hearts are relegated after 30 games, we should be also be penalised alongside Hearts for being bottom after 30 games LAST SEASON is brilliantly batshit. 

I clearly was not saying St Mirren should be relegated because of last season.

Can't say I'm surprised that the nuance seems to have passed you by.

My point was that if one argues that Hearts 'deserve' to be relegated for being shite for 30 games, then surely one must hold the same view about St Mirren last season?

I am completely unsurprised that you (and others) missed that. The idea is obviously ridiculous, and I was using that to point out that relegating Hearts under these circumstances is just that. Ridiculous.

[RandomGuy.]

3 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Didn't think any P&B fanbase would manage to be more tragic than Falkirk in the midst of this, but credit to the Hearts fans on this thread for managing to be that pathetic.

Their inability to consistently miss the point that this season has a 0% chance of being played to a finish, so will need ended now after 30 games, is incredible.

Squealing about how unfair it is as if every other club just decided after 30 games to pack up and leave instead of a global fucking pandemic forcing the shutdown.

Edited May 17, 2020 by RandomGuy.

[Green Day]

Just in case anyone needs to see the money side of things - 

Ladbrokes Premiership
1st - 13.40% - £3,350,000*
2nd - 9.60% - £2,400,000*
3rd - 8.25% - £2,062,500*
4th - 7.25% - £1,812,500*
5th - 6.75% - £1,687,500*
6th - 6.25% - £1,562,500*
7th - 5.75% - £1,437,500*
8th - 5.50% - £1,375,000*
9th - 5.25% - £1,312,500*
10th -5.00% - £1,250,000*
11th - 4.75% - £1,187,500*
12th - 4.50% - £1,125,000*
** *** *** *
Ladbrokes Championship
1st - 2.25% - £562,500*
2nd - 1.90% - £475,000*
3rd - 1.60% - £400,000*
4th - 1.30% - £325,000*
5th - 1.00% - £250,000*
6th - 0.90% - £225,000*
7th - 0.85% - £212,500*
8th - 0.80% - £200,000*
9th - 0.75% - £187,500*
10th - 0.70% - £175,000*
** *** *** *
Ladbrokes League 1** *
1st - 0.50% - £125,000*
2nd - 0.43% - £107,500*
3rd - 0.35% - £87,500*
4th - 0.34% - £85,000*
5th - 0.33% - £82,500*
6th - 0.32% - £80,000*
7th - 0.31% - £77,500*
8th - 0.30% - £75,000*
9th - 0.29% - £72,500*
10th - 0.28% - £70,000*
** *** *** *
Ladbrokes League 2****
1st - 0.27% - £67,500*
2nd - 0.26% - £65,000*
3rd - 0.25% - £62,500*
4th - 0.24% - £60,000*
5th - 0.23% - £57,500*
6th - 0.22% - £55,000*
7th - 0.21% - £52,500*
8th - 0.20% - £50,000*
9th - 0.19% - £47,500*
10th - 0.18% - £45,000
 

[Aim Here]

5 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I clearly was not saying St Mirren should be relegated because of last season.

Can't say I'm surprised that the nuance seems to have passed you by.

My point was that if one argues that Hearts 'deserve' to be relegated for being shite for 30 games, then surely one must hold the same view about St Mirren last season?

I am completely unsurprised that you (and others) missed that. The idea is obviously ridiculous, and I was using that to point out that relegating Hearts under these circumstances is just that. Ridiculous.

Had last season been called off after 30 games through some massive force majeure event like a war or a pandemic, then yes, St Mirren would have been relegated as the least-worst option. However, it was possible to play out the entire season as normal because a Big Bad Thing didn't happen last year.

Unfortunately for you, The Big Bad Thing happened this year and it wasn't possible to play out the season. So it goes. Life isn't 100% fair, sometimes.

 

Edited May 17, 2020 by Aim Here

[djchapsticks]

6 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

 

My point was that if one argues that Hearts 'deserve' to be relegated for being shite for 30 games, then surely one must hold the same view about St Mirren last season?

 

That you cannot correlate the differences between the circumstances of 2019 and 2020 is as I say, brilliantly batshit. 

Edited May 17, 2020 by djchapsticks

[Jacksgranda]

1 hour ago, Mr. X said:

The views are far too entrenched in this thread no one seems likely to change their opinion. 

 In the yellow corner you have the supporters of the spineless teams who believe its fair to relegate a team that has 24 points to play for.  It just so happens it also makes life more easy for their team.  A few know that a weak Hearts team is normally a temporary blip, so  'let's get them down while they are weak', seems to be part of the thinking from some of the snake clubs.  'Reconstruction is just to suit Hearts' they squeal. 

In the Maroon corner  you have other supporters that can plainly see Hearts are getting very unfairly treated.  Everything should be done to ensure no team carries a disproportionately large burden because of Covid 29 shutdown.  Reconstruction is just to suit Hearts because Hearts are the only team that are getting shafted in the top league.  No other team in the Premiership is being voted out by their rivals, at a cost  of 3 million and possibly more. 

I can understand teams looking after number 1, and that is exactly why the vote should not have taken place.  

This post, like every other post in this thread will not change any opinons. Budge will present her temporary fix and the spineless ones will once again  prefer the f**k Hearts option to any kind of fair play. Hearts will then get a solidarity payment just enough to save this from going through the courts. 

We'll be back soon enough, and hopefully some of you smaller teams will still be around for us play. 

 

 

F***, is this going to last 10 years?

[Zing.]

Spineless teams 

Snake clubs

Pure serenity down Gorgie way. 

[djchapsticks]

2 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

Had last season been called off after 30 games through some massive force majeure event like a war or a pandemic, then yes, St Mirren would have been relegated as the least-worst option. However, it was possible to play out the entire season as normal because a Big Bad Thing didn't happen last year.

Unfortunately for you, The Big Bad Thing happened this year and it wasn't possible to play out the season. So it goes. Life isn't 100% fair, sometimes.

 

Correct. We'd have gone down. We'd have been peeved off at the circumstances and likely appealed but ultimately fans would have had to have accepted it as we were the worst side in the league at that point. 

[Guest JTS98]

1 minute ago, djchapsticks said:

 

That you cannot correlate the differences between the circumstances 2019 and 2020 is as I say, brilliantly batshit. 

Again. I think you are completely missing the point of what I've said.

I have constantly made the point that relegating Hearts is not 'fair'.

Now, when it comes to ethical decisions, one must be consistent. You either believe that relegating a team based on 30 games of what is supposed to be a 38-game season is fair or unfair. If it's unfair in one season, then it's unfair in another.

It's a simple case of the categorical imperative.

The fact that there is a difference in circumstance this year as compared to last year is not Hearts' fault. Therefore, it does not ethically stand to punish Hearts for 30 games of bad performance. That's not how the league works, it's not the understanding upon which the league was started, it's not the understanding upon which the games were played.

I'm not saying Hearts will or won't be relegated. Simply that there is no ethical case for doing so. And there isn't.

'Get doon', 'meltdown', blah blah,

[Coventry Saint]

I'd very strongly argue that altering the entire league structure just to suit one 'big' club is the spineless option. 

Standing up to those entitled Gorgie bullies is the far braver course of action and I'm glad so many clubs have found the resolve to do so.

[djchapsticks]

3 minutes ago, Zing. said:

Spineless teams 

Snake clubs

Pure serenity down Gorgie way. 

Excuse me, don't you DARE suggest anything other than total inner Zen and being at complete peace with the circumstances. 

 

[Jacksgranda]

10 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I clearly was not saying St Mirren should be relegated because of last season.

Can't say I'm surprised that the nuance seems to have passed you by.

My point was that if one argues that Hearts 'deserve' to be relegated for being shite for 30 games, then surely one must hold the same view about St Mirren last season?

I am completely unsurprised that you (and others) missed that. The idea is obviously ridiculous, and I was using that to point out that relegating Hearts under these circumstances is just that. Ridiculous.

Yes it is.

10 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

I clearly was not saying St Mirren should be relegated because of last season.

Can't say I'm surprised that the nuance seems to have passed you by.

My point was that if one argues that Hearts 'deserve' to be relegated for being shite for 30 games, then surely one must hold the same view about St Mirren last season?

I am completely unsurprised that you (and others) missed that. The idea is obviously ridiculous, and I was using that to point out that relegating Hearts under these circumstances is just that. Ridiculous.

No it isn't

[DA Baracus]

10 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Their inability to consistently miss the point that this season has a 0% chance of being played to a finish, so will need ended now after 30 games, is incredible.

Squealing about how unfair it is as if every other club just decided after 30 games to pack up and leave instead of a global fucking pandemic forcing the shutdown.

Nonsense. The season was called randomly one afternoon in March. It was totally arbitrary.

[Ric]

1 minute ago, JTS98 said:

Simply that there is no ethical case for doing so. And there isn't.

[Coventry Saint]

12 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

 

Now, when it comes to ethical decisions, one must be consistent. You either believe that relegating a team based on 30 games of what is supposed to be a 38-game season is fair or unfair. If it's unfair in one season, then it's unfair in another.

It's a simple case of the categorical imperative.

The issue is, though, that catastrophic global events have turned it into a 30 game season and there's nothing that can reasonably be done to change that. You've got to forget what you were promised because events have occurred that have changed things.

And, as it's consistency you're after, then, as has been pointed out ad infinitum on here, there is historical precedent for seasons being called early and relegation being applied.

Edited May 17, 2020 by Coventry Saint

[Guest JTS98]

2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Nonsense. The season was called randomly one afternoon in March. It was totally arbitrary.

Well, since arbitrary can mean something being done on the basis of random choice, then yes the thirty game tally is an arbitrary number to call the season on.

There's no reason it should be considered a justifiable number of games to call a title winner, European places, or relegation on.

No reason whatsoever. Regardless of whether any more games can be played.