Ric

Maybe you should ask Sky as ultimately they will be the ones that decide the matter.

Not necessarily. I've got used to Hearts fans whining like children about 1986 so I think I'm more immune to that. The club though has seemed to be working on the premise that they are too important for bad stuff to happen to them even. It's touching on a Rangers delusion.

I don't think many clubs have come out of this well, but Hearts have effectively sounded like a spoilt child. Imo, of course.

Hearts fans complaining about the conduct of other teams is, I believe, "a minter".

I'm sure that's just someone "at it", as (a) UEFA wouldn't allow it, and (b) the English don't want them.

It's just embarrassing, isn't it?

I have to apologise here, I was using the blanket term of juniors when it's clearly not the right one. Does it all just come under the banner of amateur?

I'm going to be entirely honest I don't know. I used to watch the occasional pollok game but that was years ago.

How widespread is that opinion in the junior leagues. Many seem content to be within that structure and I appreciate why. What I would say is if Budge and Grey are looking into reconstruction it would be a dereliction of duty to only focus on the top or top two divisions.

I've always felt there should be a pathway to progress up the leagues, no matter what level you are playing at. I understand that, for some clubs, it's just not viable due to costs, and perhaps regionalisation even as high up as League 1 might help with that. It's ridiculous (in my mind at least) that it's only now just a thing that teams can gain entry into League 2 via promotion rather than being voted in.

Could i just say I would like to see how it plays out. I'm not putting it forward for serious consideration. That said, a league without Morton is always a good league!

Would it though? As it is, the top 10 teams in the league are not involved in relegation or playoffs, in an 18 team league that extends to 12 teams. (if you had 2 automatic, 4 above them playing off to avoid the other 2 positions).

I'd love to see how well an 18 team league (if given time to settle) would work. You'd need to give it 6 or 7 years though and you just know that won't happen. btw, I'd be pushing for 4 teams down, with perhaps 2 automatic and maybe a 4 team playoff for the other 2 spots, if it was 18. Which, as a St Mirren fan sounds like one of the least self preservationist things I could say! If we do go to 14, I would be sorely disappointed if it stayed at 1+playoff.

I'm sure you'd settle for a 6 month reconstruction at this point! My, rather laboured, analogy was that reconstruction is that rather attractive friend you have your eye on but they are drunk and it would be a bad thing to take advantage of them at this time because you know come the light of day they won't really be that into you.

I was just hoping for a better response than... "kafflics" I maybe set the bar too high.

Here's the thing, I think most do too. The problem for me is at this point it is that it seems a forced issue, which probably means a 2 season 14 team league then back to 12 (or maybe even 10) and I have the feeling that once clubs like Hearts are out of the bottom 6 they'll somehow feel different on the matter.

I still don't understand why Rangers fans are annoyed. They weren't going to move up a place, they weren't going to go down a place. They have shown no interest in bettering the positions of the other teams. So... why?

The "formality"? Not sure what you are getting at.

Sadly it does seem like she has whined her way into getting something out of this. I've listened to Grey a couple of times and he at least sounds objective.

As for whom? No idea, presumably an independent body that has "no dog in the fight". As for the second part, that is exactly the point I'm making, it's a massive conflict of interest. If, for example, they found it was not financially viable, they are not going to treat that evidence with the same weight they would something that showed it to be a benefit.

Why are they putting Grey and Budge in charge of a reconstruction taskforce? Surely that's a massive conflict of interest.

If a typo gives you enjoyment then I'm more than happy to brighten your day up, but it was a genuine question, maybe you could give me (and I believe the phrase of the day is..) "brief enlightenment". It's good to see you are in no way bitter about being corrected earlier.

Right, so, you'll forgive me for asking this, but I'm still not sure exactly what either Rangers or their fanbase is annoyed about. I'm going to be honest here, living in Govan, I'm not short of blue noses to ask, but of the 5 I've encountered recently every one has said "the league's done, there are far more important things to worry about, just call Celtic as winners and move on".

I mean sure, but don't you ever just want Scottish football not to start a fight in an empty room.

You are a very bad loser. It's not a good trait. I've given evidential proof that my point is correct. Whether you accept that is immaterial. As for the rest? Allow me to paraphrase Samuel Johnson by saying "Insult is the last refuge of the scoundrel".