GordonS

388 pages, and about 350 of them say the same thing.

The letter to the victim's solicitor isn't a statement, it was private correspondence, the only statement I was talking about was the line given to the BBC.

Just read about this and came here to see if it had been shared. I've heard worse from football clubs, but definitely not in Scotland and I can't think of anything worse in Britain, ever. The closest I can think of is some of the cowardice shown by Sheffield Wednesday when their stadium contributed significantly to 96 deaths. But Rangers' statement goes beyond that as it goes on the offensive with remarks about "cheap and nasty attacks". Rangers fans should be utterly ashamed of their club, and they should tell them so. In a long line of batshit crazy statements, this is the first that crosses from hilarious to obscene. They're hiding from a clear and obvious moral responsibility. The least important bit of this is that it ends the debate on whether Rangers are the same club or not. I've enjoyed teasing Rangers fans about it, but I've always felt that it's the same club - it's a team with the same name playing at the same stadium with the same colours, legally they have the same goodwill, and most importantly, it's the same fans. I think that matters more than a piece of paper in Companies House. But you don't get to claim the trophies of the past while dodging responsibility for the sins committed. The discussion is over. Rangers have said that they are not Rangers any more. But as I say, that's the least important part of this scandal. And before anyone starts with the "innocent until proven guitly" crap, there have been several separate allegations made against this guy at two different clubs. It would be a helluva coincidence for them all to have spontaneously made it up. How about we respect the victims and not regard them with suspicion just because it involves ra bears, eh? Edited to add - just remembered Crewe Alexandria. They were worse. But that's the territory Rangers are now in.

There should be a rule on this thread that you get 10 posts for every match you actually attend - and every tenth post has to have something to do with the sport that's played on the pitch. Because it feels like the debate here is dominated by a small number of evangelists who are more interested in structures and in feeling superior than they are in football, and all other voices are denigrated and driven away. It's Arthurlie 0 Hurlford 1 in case anyone's interested. Hurlford number 8 got booked for a pretty extravagant dive. Lovely evening to be at a game.

He's wrong, and I answered you.

42 member clubs playing in four divisions, running the league cup and development leagues. Yeah, totally different... The rest is just plumbing. Or are you one of these people who think English football started in 1992? I honestly think you're just arguing for the sake of it, and I'm not getting dragged into nonsense.

By going back to exactly the same thing that had been formed in 1890.

I'm not sure if you're being serious? Assuming you are, the SPFL is exactly the same as the SFL was before the top clubs left to form the SPL in the late 90s. Sentiment for the old SFL is part of what led to the clubs coming together again to form the SPFL. Also, if you manage to find one organisation that has fallen by the way side, it doesn't negate the fact that sentiment is a huge part of football. I can't believe any football fan would even try to argue with that.

Eh, because the clubs who would be added to both east and west are all Juniors right now, so it's making use of the existing "blazers" instead of asking the EoS to find new "blazers". It's completely normal in many countries that when they're building a pyramid, they bolt-on the existing organisations to the overall structure. You seem to want to take a top-down approach. If you actually wanted to entice the rest of the Juniors into the pyramid, you would want to keep the SJFA relevant too. Instead you just call anyone you disagree with dinosaurs and blazers.

Someone has to run those leagues, so why not the organisation that has done so for 132 years? Football is all about sentiment, if clubs and fans want to retain the SJFA it can still have a future inside the pyramid, but it couldn't be at the same tier across the country. The Scottish Cup places for winning those leagues would obviously have to go. As for the Junior Cup, I would love to see that as an all-in competition for everyone below tier 4. If that can't be achieved then clubs in the senior set-up could retain their SJFA membership to play in it. It would be a bit weird but if it's what people want, why not. That's not axiomatic. There's no reason at all that the SJFA couldn't be the organisers of leagues, just as the EoS is talking about being the organisers of a WoS league. It feels like you just want to dance on the SJFA's grave.

I'm sceptical about the pyramid and it's never appealed to me, but even I see it this way too. The risks of staying are now greater than the risks of going. There was a window to join Tier 5, which we didn't take, and I was happy about that. But now a whole load of clubs are leaving the ER and if we don't go we'll be left in an increasingly irrelevant, fossilised league while others grow and improve. We'll then be faced with a choice of joining at Tier 8 or becoming obsolete. For better or worse it's time to go. As I imagine you know, that's not how the line works - it's at 56.4513 degrees north - see page 226 of the SPFL rules: https://spfl.co.uk/docs/067_324__rulesofthespflasat19_january_2018_1518083042.pdf Oban is just a couple of miles south of this, so makes it into the Lowland League territory. If they moved up to where Oban airport is they'd be in Highland League country. Why? Why couldn't the SJFA run tiers 6 and 7 in the north, tiers 7-9 in the west and tiers 8-10 in the east? Just because it's not neat and tidy?

I'll have a footer with the graph. I'm alright with Excel but shite at design. You make a good point about finances. I'm not going to argue with Dons' fans about the board, but how many teams finished above Aberdeen while spending money they didn't have? McInnes' teams have struggled more than some others against the Old Firm and have come up short a couple of times in cup ties that they ought to have won. But for 5 years nobody has been better at winning games against the rest of the league.

Funny, I did exactly the same thing and for the same reason, then came on here to see what was being said lately. I made a graph with Aberdeen's points-per-game going back to 1970, giving 3 points for a win - see below. I used points-per-game to iron out the differences between the lengths of seasons. There's no doubt that the past four years have been the best for Aberdeen since the early 90s, and consistently the best since Fergie left. When this season ends it'll be the best five years. It's a different game now and comparisons with that period wouldn't be fair. - put it this way, the last time Aberdeen broke 1.75 points per game, the Scottish League was ranked 10th in Europe and Aberdeen were ranked just above Stuttgart, Gothenburg and Arsenal. The last time Aberdeen hit 2 points per game, which they did last season, was in 1985, when they were ranked 13th in Europe and Dundee Utd were 8th. The relative weakness of Rangers doesn't explain how Aberdeen have gathered these points, because they've struggled to beat Rangers anyway! Excuses can be made about Hearts and Hibs, but Hibs have barely troubled to top end of the league in the past 25 years and Hearts have only done so sporadically. The past four years for Aberdeen haven't just been the best for them in the past 25 years, they've been the best for ANY team outside the Old Firm since the mid 80s. And even if they lose on Sunday, they'll have 1.84 points-per-game for this season, making it 5 consecutive seasons better than any season since 1993, and they'll have done it despite losing several key players last summer. Take a bow, Mr McInnes.

One of the teams has a higher average attendance this year than four teams in the Scottish Premiership, so I don't know what point you think you're making. There will be thousands fewer than there would have been if they're charged a reasonable price. For non-league clubs to literally price supporters out of a huge game is a fcking disgrace. On that, surely to God, we can all agree.

That's why I thought the Juniors would never join the seniors - the lower SPFL clubs have what suits them, and the Juniors have what suits them. Each to their own. But the lure of money drew some, the concept of progression drew others, and the sudden relative improvement in the LL has tipped the balance.

Because people are holding up English non-league clubs and systems as an example for us, when they really, really aren't.

Yup, as I pointed out to the fella: http://nonleague.pitchero.com/features/big-shake-non-league-football-confirmed/

Actually I'd argue our equivalent is Livi/Dundee Utd v Partick Thistle/Ross County. I don't think fans of either club in the play-off final want it at Wenbley anyway, nor can I see why the fact it's at a ground with 90,000 seats is reason to charge ludicrous prices.

That's all well thought out and I agree with the broad benchmarking, but it's moot as the English are further regionalising. Tier 7 is going up from 3 to 4 leagues, Tier 8 from 6 to 7, and tiers below are increasing too, specifically to reduce travel time. Clubs were declining to step up from Tier 9 after achieving promotion places because of the increased costs. http://nonleague.pitchero.com/features/big-shake-non-league-football-confirmed/

This is only slightly relevant, but I thought it would interest some. The CHEAPEST ticket for the National League play-off final on Saturday is £39 for an adult and £19.50 for under 16s, with at least £1 on top for print-at-home. Is that the kind of "progress" and "ambition" the zealots here are after? https://wembley.ee.co.uk/tickets/national-league-promotion-final-3/

Because there are many more part-time clubs that don't want nationwide travel than do. That there are 20 clubs whose players and fans are happy with it is all lovely. It doesn't make them better, or right. It's just not, and all your greetin' about it doesn't change that. Dunno about you, but I think "time immemorial" goes back further than 5 years. That's when one of the largest airlines in the world sponsored it. You know, the one with an annual revenue of $25 billion. Is that a credible enough sponsor for you? The fact you didn't know that suggests you really don't know enough about Junior football to have opinions worth taking seriously. FWIW they've also had Barr Construction (who built half the stands in Scotland), Scottish Citylink and obviously the long-lasting sponsorship from OVD Rum. But I'm sure you knew that, what with being so knowledgable about the Junior Cup. I was also at Stranraer v Albion Rovers in the league a few months ago, and there were 5 or 6 away fans in a crowd of 281. Linlithgow Rose will get that many for a wee cup game tomorrow against lower league opposition. Can you give examples of countries in which an entire division (other than the top tier) with an average attendance under 500 regularly involves up to 6-7 hour round trips? If it's very straightforward then there must be plenty.

I was at Peterhead v Dumbarton in the cup recently. The crowd was 691 - little more than Pollok average - and there can't have been more than a dozen Dumbarton fans. Well done to those that travelled, of course. I know it's a cup tie, so it's different, but it's clear that not many Dumbarton fans fancied the journey.

Eh, no. There are about 250 senior and junior clubs in Scotland, and well over half of them are semi pro in regional leagues. The individual experiences of fans don't matter? Aye, ok pal. With that attitude you should work for UEFA. And you really need to read more carefully. I said I don't usually bother going IF it's more than an hour AND it's a ground I've been to before. Which means I go to more away games than most football fans. But feel free to keep telling me why what I enjoy is wrong.

There's no club whose fans all want the same thing. I don't socialise much with other Rose fans so I've no feel for the wider views, so I'll take the word of others for what that might be.

You're not telling me anything I don't know. But football has gone through a lot of changes in the past 25 years and mostly they've made it worse, so you'll have to excuse me if this clamour for "progress" doesn't have me skipping and clapping. BTW, it's not arrogant to assume that a club that's been in the Scottish Cup for ten years and in that time has lost once to a HFL team and has never lost to a LL team, usually winning with plenty to spare, and who has been in five Junior Cup finals in recent years, might someday make it to L2. It's just knowing about football at that level and watching loads of it.