Monkey Tennis Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I dont believe you can compare anything that happens anywhere else in Europe with what may happen in Scotland. Why's that then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 17, 2013 Share Posted February 17, 2013 I dont believe you can compare anything that happens anywhere else in Europe with what may happen in Scotland. Why not? 3 leagues used 12-12 > 8-8-8 for, combined, 25 seasons. Each averaged between 1-up-1-down and 2-up-2-down, and while there were some 0-up-0-downs in Switzerland there were also some 3-up-3-downs I don't see the problem in using this as an indicator of what may happen here. It's a better indicator than some 'gut feeling' that all this is a stitch-up to reduce or eliminate promotion-n-relegation (which, if true, wouldn't last anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Except you dont get automatically promoted if you end up in the top four, you go into a play off with the bottom four from the SPL with the distinct possibility that you may not get promoted at all. Jesus, not just stupid, but thick as well. But you shouldn't look at it as a play off. It's a continuation of the league system. Closed minds get nowhere,try looking at it positively rather than dishing out insults Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 But you shouldn't look at it as a play off. It's a continuation of the league system. Closed minds get nowhere,try looking at it positively rather than dishing out insults It can't be a 'continuation' by definition. What happened before ends. Something else (right or wrong) starts afresh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Killie have put a Q&A about the reconstruction on our website. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relichtie Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Who would have more right to call themselves champions if for instance 1 team wins the 12 and another the 8?. Can see this leading to more disputes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Who would have more right to call themselves champions if for instance 1 team wins the 12 and another the 8?. Can see this leading to more disputes. Well, they'll each have won different things. I'm not sure where the dispute arises to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 But you shouldn't look at it as a play off. It's a continuation of the league system. Closed minds get nowhere,try looking at it positively rather than dishing out insults It's not a continuation you stupid b*****d, everything gets wiped and they start again only this time they have to get past four clubs from a league above them to get any chance of promotion. I've looked at it from all angles and I still cant see the positive aspect. Closed minds get a lot further then empty heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted February 18, 2013 Share Posted February 18, 2013 Well, they'll each have won different things. I'm not sure where the dispute arises to be honest. So, who goes into the record books as the First Division Champions the one that wins the 12, or the one that gets promoted from the 8? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Killie have put a Q&A about the reconstruction on our website. Overall, that makes many good points, although the bit on 14 includes several mistakes or oddities (e.g. - it wouldn't require more than 40 matchdays; it's not correct to say no-one else in Europe accomodates 40 matchdays, Belgium does and Turkey accomodated 44 last season; the argument about many clubs being out of the European race after 26 games is actually milder than 12-12 where the corresponding figures if 22). It's also disappointing that no automatic relegation is proposed into the 'pyramid' (document illustrates 2 play-offs only). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
relichtie Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Well, they'll each have won different things. I'm not sure where the dispute arises to be honest.I'm sure whoever wins a 12 team league will claim that its more meaningful than an 8. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 I'm sure whoever wins a 12 team league will claim that its more meaningful than an 8. But those who win the 12 get absolutely nothing. You could finish bottom of the top 12th or 4th in Division one and still win the middle 8. It's ridiculous to wipe out hard earned points for teams after half a season. Why would a team like Dundee field anything other than boys for the first half of this season? They would have known they would finish low down the table, then they could have spent their budget in January in an effort to stay in SPL. Not fair on teams pushing for the top 8 that missout or teams in Division one that push for top 4. The full system is flaud, it is only to protect 4 Old Firm games and to hell with the rest. Everything else is designed to show they are putting in change but still protecting the prized asset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The biggest bit of proof that it's only to keep Old Firm games is when Doncaster said 12-12-18 was 'The only option' then when SFl started talking about wanting 10-10 at the bottom he was indifferent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The biggest bit of proof that it's only to keep Old Firm games is when Doncaster said 12-12-18 was 'The only option' then when SFl started talking about wanting 10-10 at the bottom he was indifferent. The SPL can't win, it would appear. Had they said "It has to be 18" or "It has to be 10-10" then they'd have been slaughtered for trying to tell the smaller clubs what to do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SpoonTon Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Overall, that makes many good points, although the bit on 14 includes several mistakes or oddities (e.g. - it wouldn't require more than 40 matchdays; it's not correct to say no-one else in Europe accomodates 40 matchdays, Belgium does and Turkey accomodated 44 last season; the argument about many clubs being out of the European race after 26 games is actually milder than 12-12 where the corresponding figures if 22). It's also disappointing that no automatic relegation is proposed into the 'pyramid' (document illustrates 2 play-offs only). Is actually the plan though? I mean, I thought there was no proposal set in stone yet. So, like the league size of 18, it's merely the SPL's suggestion? Although from what the chairman of the Highland league said, he expects a play-off. Either way it's at least a starting point. The thing I don't quite get is the meaningless games in a league of 16 bit. In a (I assume) standard league of 16 SPL season you'd have the OF taking the top 2 places, then a number of clubs who would all be competing for the next position. If you had 2 relegation places and a play-off, then you could actually create a battle against relegation. It's a step-up from the status quo. The financial arguments against are sound IMO, but not the increased meaningless games bit - I think that's just naive. We've had a few meaningless seasons in a league of 10. Which means I do get the splitting into 8-8-8, which I've actually been a fan of for a while. But, at the same time, from a footballing point of view 16-16 is preferable. People like the inherent fairness of a single league season, playing all the same teams home and away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rod Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The Kilmarnock thing gives the financial distribution figures as well. http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/214554-financial-distribution-model-for-scottish-league-reconstruction-revealed/ 2nd place in the SPL (Motherwell ) to lose the most money. The distribution seems not too bad actually. I don't like the stupid names they have given these leagues though. Premiership, Championship and National League? Naw thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 The SPL can't win, it would appear. Had they said "It has to be 18" or "It has to be 10-10" then they'd have been slaughtered for trying to tell the smaller clubs what to do. The SPL certainly can win you know how? By modeling a plan Scottish football fans want i.e a bigger top flight as well as fair income distribution and democratic voting rights. Less money in the short term sure but it's delivering what fans want and gives Scotland a chance for a better future as a footballing nation. Sounds like a win to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 gap between bottom of SPL & top of championship is still a bit steep top of championship to bottom is a bit steep aswell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 It's not a continuation you stupid b*****d, everything gets wiped and they start again only this time they have to get past four clubs from a league above them to get any chance of promotion. I've looked at it from all angles and I still cant see the positive aspect. Closed minds get a lot further then empty heads. Well as you can't see any positives it clearly must be a non starter. Sorry to have troubled you with an alternative view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted February 19, 2013 Share Posted February 19, 2013 Well as you can't see any positives it clearly must be a non starter. Sorry to have troubled you with an alternative view. I'm sorry but as poorly as the gentleman put it (Using *** is never the answer) I have to agree with his point I don't see any positives at all in this league structure. The wealth distribution yes but the actual league plan needs to be changed and the wealth distribution migrated to a new structure. Also a voting structure across all 42 member clubs needs to be introduced for league reconstruction as it effects everyone. I think a 70% pass rate would be democratic enough, scrap the 11-1! Majority of fans want 16 team top league, Doncaster and Co should be spending their time working on a plan that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.