Scottish Football Reconstruction

[HibeeJibee]

The points gap back then wasn't as high as it is now.

It was also 2pts for a win.

Also, 1948 was the second season back after the 2nd World War, you have to deduct the seasons between 1939 and 1946.

Rangers won the Western League (and national play-off) in 1939, the Southern Leagues 1940-45 which included most big clubs, and 'A' Division Southern League (which was nationwide) in 1946.

Interestingly, you completely left out the seasons between 1948 and 1965 in which Aberdeen, Hibs (3 times), Hearts (Twice) Dundee, and Kilmarnock all won titles.

Having demonstrated a half-century of OF title monopolosing.

[No8.]

Rangers will be promoted from the 4th tier to the 3rd tier. So will everyone else in SFL3.

No they wont. There will be no promotion and they will be exactly where they are right now...The Bottom Tier.

As for Rovers Lad point about fan boycotts...Why? It is in the rules that no team should be denied promotion due to league reconstruction. I thought the outcry in the summer was all about sporting integrity?

[craigkillie]

No they wont. There will be no promotion and they will be exactly where they are right now...The Bottom Tier.

Rangers are currently in the 4th tier of Scottish football. Under this reconstruction proposal, you would be in the 3rd tier of Scottish football next season. That is a fact. As such, the rule quoted earlier in the thread is not being breached.

The fact you are still in the bottom tier is irrelevant. If the SFL decided to invite 10 new teams and create a 4th Division, then the current 3rd Division would no longer be the bottom tier. Would that mean that Stirling Albion had been promoted?

The point I was making earlier was that this reconstruction would be legally acceptable under the current SFL rules. Do I think it is morally correct? No. Clubs should not be told halfway through the season that the goalposts have changed. If this system is to go ahead, it should be started in the 2014/15 season, with the promotion and relegation rules clearly set in advance of next season.

[Mushroom]

I've a feeling the blazers might be right here. Not many of the crticisms I've read on here or elsewhere strike me as particularly valid.

I don't know about that.

• Dead rubbers before the split when it becomes obvious a team will inhabit the middle eight.
• Dead rubbers after the split in the outer groups if you're away from the titles or relegation.
• The likelihood that teams from 2nd tier will struggle in middle eight over 14 games, which could mean even less movement that there is now.

Definitely problems there.

[EdTheDuck]

I don't know about that.

• Dead rubbers before the split when it becomes obvious a team will inhabit the middle eight.
• Dead rubbers after the split in the outer groups if you're away from the titles or relegation.
• The likelihood that teams from 2nd tier will struggle in middle eight over 14 games, which could mean even less movement that there is now.

Definitely problems there.

Quite so, which is why HJ among others, myself included, think that (a) taking forward all points in Top & Bottom 8 and (b) taking forward no points in middle 8 creates as many problems as they would solve and do not deal with existing problems.

The system offers a great opportunity to revitalise our game and they're currently missing a trick or two to make the most of the opportunity

[Mushroom]

Quite so, which is why HJ among others, myself included, think that (a) taking forward all points in Top & Bottom 8 and (b) taking forward no points in middle 8 creates as many problems as they would solve and do not deal with existing problems.

The system offers a great opportunity to revitalise our game and they're currently missing a trick or two to make the most of the opportunity

I know in Belgium they have a system where they take half the points forward in playoffs, but that strikes me as being slightly unfair.

[HibeeJibee]

Halving points in the Top 8, or carrying-over only points among the Top 8's pre-split games against each other (14), is just an exercise in narrowing the gaps - to make the 2nd half of the season more exciting... I regard it as fairly dispensable.

Halving points in the Bottom 8 is similar - but drawing teams closer to the relegation scramble could be necessary, if this 'Bottom 8 trophy' doesn't excite fans.

Middle 8 is different - it's unsporting to start everyone on 0 regardless of pre-split placing, and it'll create meaningless games pre-split.

[Rod]

I quite like the idea of the 12-12-18 IF (and only if) they reset the points in all 3 leagues after the split.

Imagine if Celtic have a few injuries or are still in Europe and their form struggles a bit, another team could mount a real challenge. Chances are Celtic would still go on to win the league but it could lead to a more competitive title race. It may also help crowd numbers if you go into the last few games with a chance of the title.

The same may also make the bottom 8 exciting too.

[HibeeJibee]

Resetting all splits to 0 won't happen, and would in any case be box-of-frogs madness.

Huge swathes of pre-split would be rendered meaningless as clubs became confirmed top 8, bottom 8, etc.

[EdTheDuck]

I quite like the idea of the 12-12-18 IF (and only if) they reset the points in all 3 leagues after the split.

Imagine if Celtic have a few injuries or are still in Europe and their form struggles a bit, another team could mount a real challenge. Chances are Celtic would still go on to win the league but it could lead to a more competitive title race. It may also help crowd numbers if you go into the last few games with a chance of the title.

The same may also make the bottom 8 exciting too.

Nah, not under the 12/12-8/8/8 system; if they had a proper Apertura/Clausura set up then I'd be all for starting from scrtach but this system is effectively a continuation of the same tournament, not a new one, which is why I think the wiping of points completely in the middle 8 isn't right and wouldn;t be right in Top or Bottom 8 either.

It would certainly make the last 3 months interesting

[Mushroom]

Halving points in the Top 8, or carrying-over only points among the Top 8's pre-split games against each other (14), is just an exercise in narrowing the gaps - to make the 2nd half of the season more exciting... I regard it as fairly dispensable.

Halving points in the Bottom 8 is similar - but drawing teams closer to the relegation scramble could be necessary, if this 'Bottom 8 trophy' doesn't excite fans.

Middle 8 is different - it's unsporting to start everyone on 0 regardless of pre-split placing, and it'll create meaningless games pre-split.

In the middle 8 I'd set the points of 11th in the top tier equal to 2nd in the 2nd tier and adjust everyones points totals based on those numbers, or something along those lines if someone who's better at maths than myself can suggest better way.

Also that suggestion I made earlier about having leagues of 14, playing each other 3 times, with the third round of fixtures' venues rewarding the top 7 with an extra home game? Nobody's picked out any issues with that. Does this mean there's actually nothing wrong with it? The only logistical thing I can think of would be having to have everyone up to 26 fixtures together, but you could put in a cup weekend with league fixtures taking priority if there's a need to catch up.

[HibeeJibee]

In the middle 8 I'd set the points of 11th in the top tier equal to 2nd in the 2nd tier and adjust everyones points totals based on those numbers, or something along those lines if someone who's better at maths than myself can suggest better way.

There's that, although it's a bit untidy.

You can give bonus points based on position, e.g. 9th + 1st start on 6pts ... 10th + 2nd start on 3pts... 11th + 3rd start on 1pt... 12th + 4th start on 0pts.

Or you can carry-over points gained in pre-split matches between clubs (i.e. 6 matches).

[Mushroom]

There's that, although it's a bit untidy.

You can give bonus points based on position, e.g. 9th + 1st start on 6pts ... 10th + 2nd start on 3pts... 11th + 3rd start on 1pt... 12th + 4th start on 0pts.

Or you can carry-over points gained in pre-split matches between clubs (i.e. 6 matches).

I think the middle one would work better actually.

[EdTheDuck]

If the clubs took forward just the points gained in their games against each other the middle 8 would currently look like this;

St Mirren 13 pts

Partick 12 pts

Morton 12 pts

Dundee 7 pts

County 6 pts ( 5 games)

Hearts 5 pts (5 games)

Livvy 5 pts

D'line 4 pts

Isnae gunna happen eh

[Monkey Tennis]

I don't know about that.

• Dead rubbers before the split when it becomes obvious a team will inhabit the middle eight.
• Dead rubbers after the split in the outer groups if you're away from the titles or relegation.
• The likelihood that teams from 2nd tier will struggle in middle eight over 14 games, which could mean even less movement that there is now.

Definitely problems there.

I think the likelihood of dead rubbers must surely be less than is currently the case, given that more clubs will be involved in movement.

This idea that we'll end up with the middle 8 re-arranging themselves into the top 4 and bottom 4 we started with, is one I just don't get. Obviously, it's possible it'll fall that way sometimes, but I don't see it as particularly likely. Remember that under a different model of financial distribution, the advantages enjoyed by those from the top flight should be lessened. Allan Preston was forcibly arguing your case the other night, but I don't see it as a problem.

If the new model doesn't lead directly to a greater degree of movement than we currently have between the top two divisions, I'll be absolutely astonished.

[HibeeJibee]

R.e. "no-one might go down"... what was Austrian/Swiss experience here?

[Mushroom]

I think the likelihood of dead rubbers must surely be less than is currently the case, given that more clubs will be involved in movement.

This idea that we'll end up with the middle 8 re-arranging themselves into the top 4 and bottom 4 we started with, is one I just don't get. Obviously, it's possible it'll fall that way sometimes, but I don't see it as particularly likely. Remember that under a different model of financial distribution, the advantages enjoyed by those from the top flight should be lessened. Allan Preston was forcibly arguing your case the other night, but I don't see it as a problem.

If the new model doesn't lead directly to a greater degree of movement than we currently have between the top two divivions, I'll be absolutely astonished.

Yeah but with the playoff cut off so high in a fairly small league - teams which are clearly going to be in the middle eight will have nothing to play for knowing their points will be reset, unless they don't reset them of course.

It's a concern given that the middle 8 will be made from teams who have been competing at two different levels for the first half of the season. Could be counteracted by form and the fairer distribution, I suppose the only way we'll know is to see what happens.

And of course when a team is in their eight but away from the business end - I hear there will be a trophy of some kind for the bottom 8 winner which is something I suppose (but I get the feeling that will be held in the same regard 7th in the SPL is now) and then there's 8th place in the top 8, I suspect they'll have even less to play for, for a longer period of time than they would be out of it now.

With the split happening so early I'm still not terribly keen.

[TheLip69]

Having demonstrated a half-century of OF title monopolosing.

Yes, the half century before most of us were born, which included a Worldwide Depression and Two World Wars. Why not the 50 years following that when the Scottish league was at it's most competitive, of course that doesn't fit in with your scenario.

[Monkey Tennis]

Yeah but with the playoff cut off so high in a fairly small league - teams which are clearly going to be in the middle eight will have nothing to play for knowing their points will be reset, unless they don't reset them of course.

It's a concern given that the middle 8 will be made from teams who have been competing at two different levels for the first half of the season. Could be counteracted by form and the fairer distribution, I suppose the only way we'll know is to see what happens.

And of course when a team is in their eight but away from the business end - I hear there will be a trophy of some kind for the bottom 8 winner which is something I suppose (but I get the feeling that will be held in the same regard 7th in the SPL is now) and then there's 8th place in the top 8, I suspect they'll have even less to play for, for a longer period of time than they would be out of it now.

With the split happening so early I'm still not terribly keen.

I'll concede again that it's imperfect. I think though that the relatively short nature of both parts of the season should mean that it won't be that clear, that early, for that many clubs, where they'll wind up. This system certainly won't eradicate meaningless games - you even get them in tiny leagues like Champions League groups or groups at International finals tournaments. I don't honestly think it'll lead to many more of them though - indeed, I think we'll end up with fewer.

[TheLip69]

I'll concede again that it's imperfect. I think though that the relatively short nature of both parts of the season should mean that it won't be that clear for that many clubs, where they'll wind up. This system certainly won't eradicate meaningless games - you even get them in tiny leagues like Champions League groups or groups at International finals tournaments. I don't honestly think it'll lead to many more of them though - indeed, I think we'll end up with fewer.

The only way you'll end up with fewer "meaningless games" is if you wipe the points altogether and just have a massive free-for-all in the last 14 games.

If you have a group of 8 with some having 10 or 12 points more than others then it negates the competition and some teams will fall out of the competitition after a couple of games.

How can you possibly judge what the points gap should be between a team who finished bottom of the SPL winning only 2 games out of their 22, with the team finishing top of SPL2 losing only 2 games out of their 22?

Currently Dundee have 12 pts in the SPL while Morton have 39 in the First Division how would that split work? Are Dundees point worth more because they've played bigger teams?

The whole thing is a bag of shit and no matter how it's calculated it isn't going to please everyone, far less anyone.