chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 What about that principle you've devised?Please do explain it. I didn't devise anything, it's already established fact. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I didn't devise anything, it's already established fact. So just to help us out, as we're clearly the thick ones here. How does: (attacking dutch trams and police+covering up child abuse+restricted view seats for away fans)singing about terroristsracism = brings a lot more to the table ? I think if you do the maths, you'll find the ugly sisters owe Scotland a f**k ton more than we owe them. Feel free to use use your fingers for counting rather than typing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I didn't devise anything, it's already established fact. Not good enough. What do you mean by "bring more to the table"? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I think if you do the maths, you'll find the ugly sisters owe Scotland a f**k ton more than we owe them. Feel free to use use your fingers for counting rather than typing. You can't do the maths yourself, and you mock me for using fingers for counting? Guess you don't do irony, eh. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Forgive my ignorance chaps, I've not been on this thread for a bit ( and it's a pain to look back through ).The telly news has just reported the Ashley/badge story but hasn't it been that way for feckin ages ... what is it I'm missing ? I've just read the BBC report It seems to be from the same school of thought that saw the "Record" describe the idea of Ashley's loan being secured against Ibrox as "legalised theft" and would mean that Bank Of Scotland have stolen my flat. He doesn't own the badges and won't if Rangers honour their debts. The new bit of this "news" is that Rangers are "Investigating" following "Social Media Reports" Which either means that they take rumours in P&B more seriously than me or that the "good guys" in charge felt we needed another media report about the problems caused by the "bad guys" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Not good enough.What do you mean by "bring more to the table"? More revenue, silly. Why don't you define the costs of staging a match? They only ideas you've come up with so far can all be categorised as vague and without substance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
williemillersmoustache Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 You can't do the maths yourself, and you mock me for using fingers for counting? Guess you don't do irony, eh. I think we'd all feel better if you apologised for each and every one of your posts. That one at the top there just seems insufficient. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I think we'd all feel better if you apologised for each and every one of your posts. That one at the top there just seems insufficient. Still can't do the maths. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 More revenue, silly. Why don't you define the costs of staging a match? They only ideas you've come up with so far can all be categorised as vague and without substance. It's a term already used by Scottish Football authorities when determining revenue split for cup games. I don't see any massive fall-outs over it and would therefore guess that it works fine in practise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 More revenue, silly. Why don't you define the costs of staging a match? They only ideas you've come up with so far can all be categorised as vague and without substance. I am vague on the costs of staging a match, but it's not an insurmountable hurdle when cup tie gates are divided, so I fail to see why that would be more troublesome in the League. So in your view, the fact that a club has more fans means they should be able to make much much more money, even though these big clubs are utterly dependent on the others in order to stage matches and create the meaningful contexts that are our competitions. Go the whole hog - allow the big teams to field fourteen players. That would help recognise the revenue they bring. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I am vague on the costs of staging a match, but it's not an insurmountable hurdle when cup tie gates are divided, so I fail to see why that would be more troublesome in the League. So in your view, the fact that a club has more fans means they should be able to make much much more money, even though these big clubs are utterly dependent on the others in order to stage matches and create the meaningful contexts that are our competitions. Go the whole hog - allow the big teams to field fourteen players. That would help recognise the revenue they bring. FFS, Now you are just being stupid. It would be a 3 goal start in every match, as well as additional players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 I am vague on the costs of staging a match, but it's not an insurmountable hurdle when cup tie gates are divided, so I fail to see why that would be more troublesome in the League. So in your view, the fact that a club has more fans means they should be able to make much much more money, even though these big clubs are utterly dependent on the others in order to stage matches and create the meaningful contexts that are our competitions.Go the whole hog - allow the big teams to field fourteen players. That would help recognise the revenue they bring. If you're splitting revenue 50 / 50 then the big teams still get much more money, so you're not really providing a solution to anything. But yeah, more fans = more money. That's pretty much how society works. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted April 10, 2015 Author Share Posted April 10, 2015 But yeah, more fans = more money. That's pretty much how society works. Sevco... More fans = More cnuts. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Sevco... More fans = More cnuts. They are, but you still want them to finance your club. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 If you're splitting revenue 50 / 50 then the big teams still get much more money, so you're not really providing a solution to anything. But yeah, more fans = more money. That's pretty much how society works. Not a solution, but an improvement based on fairness. Thanks for the sociological lesson though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted April 10, 2015 Author Share Posted April 10, 2015 They are, but you still want them to finance your club. No I don't. I want them to fcuk off. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 They are, but you still want them to finance your club. I doubt if he does to be honest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chimneyman Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Not a solution, but an improvement based on fairness.Thanks for the sociological lesson though. It's not based on fairness, it's based on some arbitrary nonsense you dreamt up on your lunch break. I've got no idea why you want your team to be more reliant on the old firm, and to profit from their sectarianism. Thought the idea was for wee teams to be self-sufficient. It's weird logic. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 Even the language you use reflects a really warped perspective. When organised professional football took off in this country and for about its first century, people paid money to watch football matches between two teams at the venues that were staging them, in much the same way they might pay to visit a theatre, or later on, a cinema. Nobody saw this as being about offering "financial help" to a club, "subsidising" them, or "funding" a rival. It was payment on the understanding that without two teams, no spectacle took place and that the contract involved paying to watch a contest, even if that person paying had a partisan interest in the outcome. Obviously, this enabled the bigger clubs from bigger cities to earn significantly more through gates as they got to play in front of big crowds much more frequently than smaller clubs. Now sadly, plenty of people see this as you - and indeed most OF fans - do and wish for difference in stature to be as exaggerated as possible, so that their team wins more often. That's why it changed. Don't however pretend that a view that says otherwise is wacky or unfair. It's not. It's entirely sensible and was the prevailing one until football started veering hideously off the rails. Good point but the fact is that the change to home teams keeping all the gate money was seen as a good idea at the time and not just by the OF. Prior to that the home team was massively disadvantaged by having to pay out all of their expenses off half the gate money. So an away match was much more lucrative. It's not the gate money that disadvantaged the smaller clubs it was the unfair share of prize money once sponsorship and TV money came in. In the SPL it was loaded so that the top two got the majority of the cash. The added honey pot of the Champions League cash exacerbated the financial difference between the OF and the rest. Unfortunately with all the cash coming into the game in Scotland going one way the game as a contest deteriorated and the OF deteriorated with it. With little or no competition they were poorly prepared when they came to competitive matches in Europe. They trot out the same excuse everytime about there being no competition at home, then when they get some they go and buy up their best players. I am not denying them the right to buy good players but please dont then moan about a lack of competition when you actively weaken your opponents. From having two clubs qualifying straight through our Champions now have to negotiate three qualifying rounds. Gone are the days of two clubs in the CL group stages and it is extremely doubtful if we will ever see them back. In my opinion the blame for that can be laid fairly and squarely on the inequality and lack of competitiveness at the top of Scottish Football. Please dont suggest sharing the gates as a way to remedy this as it plainly isn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted April 10, 2015 Share Posted April 10, 2015 It's not based on fairness, it's based on some arbitrary nonsense you dreamt up on your lunch break. I've got no idea why you want your team to be more reliant on the old firm, and to profit from their sectarianism. Thought the idea was for wee teams to be self-sufficient. It's weird logic. I've not just thought this up. Those that devised league competitions beat me to it by about 130 years. I don't wish to be reliant on the OF at all. We've existed very well for most of the last half century without a receiving a penny off the back of them. Benefiting financially from the matches we participate in and that people wish to see, is to be entirely self-sufficient. The weird logic my friend, belongs to you. 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.