PLAY OFFS

[Skyline Drifter]

I don't actually have any problem with the playoff format. I don't think it's unreasonable. I tend to agree with Flash that the necessary midweek date should have been used within the opening tie, not the semi final, although it actually helps our organisation that it isn't probably. This year is a step forward on last year as we do at least have one extra weekend involved.

[Scottishyeltz]

MT is right, a middle league side shouldn't have a playoff possibility, even the attendances at Palmerston prove that this does not entice neutrals

[MrDust]

Would be better for the QF winner if there was a week between QF and SF.

As it is, the QF winner could be playing extra time with a game 3 days later. Meanwhile the other team in the SF won't be playing.

There is no need for a week between QF legs because both teams will have the same recovery time whenever the second leg is played plus the first leg can't go to extra time.

I understand that the team finishing second should have an advantage, but surely it is a big enough advantage to play 2 games less without also having the benefit of playing a tired QF winner.

That would give the Championship team a better chance.......cant have that.....!!

Its the old Takeshi's Castle as far as finishing 3rd and 4th.....got past the difficult two rounds then bang.....you get killed at the end

Call me cynical, but the 3 days between games in the final legs also should help the SPL team

After all that, I think I will have a cheeky wee bet on Queens at 16/1

[Rjc-1988]

The arguments that have arisen about the Play Off gate receipts once again highlight how difficult it is to run Scottish Football.

I assume that when the play off schedule was voted in the member clubs had to agree with the outline rules of engagement. One of the rules presumably related to gate receipts for the Play Offs.

Having agreed the format we have Hibs doing their own thing last year by not charging Season ticket holders for the home leg of the final. While it was a nice touch in the context of their own season ticket holders - the fact is that it was outwith the spirit of the Play Off agreement. Hibs' decision put the SFL in a difficult position - invoke a fine and then face the press backlash of imposing a fine on a club who "was only trying to do the right thing by their own fans".

The fact is that they should have taken action at that point. We now have Rangers, who let's face it have broken every rule in terms of "how to run a football club" now deciding that they will deprive Scottish football of cash that was PRE-AGREED at the time the play offs were incepted. The trouble is that certain memeber clubs think that they can do what they like and the SFL are invariably too weak to administer the rules that the CLUBS THEMSELVES created.

I am interested to see how this plays out because there is little point in agreeing a framework and then letting clubs re-write the rule book when it suits their own agenda.

[SUPERSOUTH]

Queens announce ticket prices same as league prices £16 adult £9 concession quite right too. By time policing and all other overheads are met and sfl get their 50% share there wont be much left in the pot. Season ticket holderd get 18 games for the price of 16 at palmerdton already.

[HibeeJibee]

Hibs and Motherwell now following Rangers suit and with Hearts support?

Of course Hibs Hearts & 'Well were recently unsuccessful in trying to cut the contribution to 25%.

http://www.scotsman.com/sport/football/spfl-lower-divisions/hibs-could-join-spfl-play-off-cash-revolt-1-3758705

EDIT: It surprises me slightly that SPFL aren't using the get-out of "for 1 game only" or "in the Final only", which accommodates any Hibs 'precedent'.

[Sloop John B]

It seems like Queens are being made to look bad for actually following at the rules and preparing accordingly at the start of the season. Hopefully the SPFL put the three teams back in their box but I very much doubt that will be the case seeing as there already is a precedent set.

[Rjc-1988]

The clubs THEMSELVES made the rules in relation to Play Offs - the SFL need to stand up and be counted on this point.

If these clubs decide to let season ticket holders in for free then they should be made to make good the shortfall.

Alternatively they need to change the rules BUT that would take consensus approval not just 3/4 clubs doing what suits their own agenda.

Seems clubs havent learned anything over the years - the main reason that Scottish football is in its current mess is because individual teams decided to pursue their own selfish agenda rather than what was for the great good.

These teams sicken me - hibs break the rule last year and the other clubs will no doubt now claim that a LEGAL PRECEDENT has been set.

Th e point is that guys like Neil Doncaster are powerless to do their job if the significant member clubs make their position untenable by flagrantly waiving two fingers and then hiding behind a precedent.

[The Grass Is Greener.]

The clubs THEMSELVES made the rules in relation to Play Offs - the SFL need to stand up and be counted on this point.

If these clubs decide to let season ticket holders in for free then they should be made to make good the shortfall.

Alternatively they need to change the rules BUT that would take consensus approval not just 3/4 clubs doing what suits their own agenda.

Seems clubs havent learned anything over the years - the main reason that Scottish football is in its current mess is because individual teams decided to pursue their own selfish agenda rather than what was for the great good.

These teams sicken me - hibs break the rule last year and the other clubs will no doubt now claim that a LEGAL PRECEDENT has been set.

Th e point is that guys like Neil Doncaster are powerless to do their job if the significant member clubs make their position untenable by flagrantly waiving two fingers and then hiding behind a precedent.

Did we break the rules last year? If we did why wasn't there anything done about it? - The answer to this should be good.

[Hawk]

The arguments that have arisen about the Play Off gate receipts once again highlight how difficult it is to run Scottish Football.

I assume that when the play off schedule was voted in the member clubs had to agree with the outline rules of engagement. One of the rules presumably related to gate receipts for the Play Offs.

Having agreed the format we have Hibs doing their own thing last year by not charging Season ticket holders for the home leg of the final. While it was a nice touch in the context of their own season ticket holders - the fact is that it was outwith the spirit of the Play Off agreement. Hibs' decision put the SFL in a difficult position - invoke a fine and then face the press backlash of imposing a fine on a club who "was only trying to do the right thing by their own fans".

The fact is that they should have taken action at that point. We now have Rangers, who let's face it have broken every rule in terms of "how to run a football club" now deciding that they will deprive Scottish football of cash that was PRE-AGREED at the time the play offs were incepted. The trouble is that certain memeber clubs think that they can do what they like and the SFL are invariably too weak to administer the rules that the CLUBS THEMSELVES created.

I am interested to see how this plays out because there is little point in agreeing a framework and then letting clubs re-write the rule book when it suits their own agenda.

Good post.

I wonder how some clubs will feel now and we were one of them, that having voted to keepThe Rangers alive, The Rangers are now planning to do these clubs out of money?

[MrDust]

Play-offs are intrinsically 'unfair' really, but this version is perhaps less so, than other ones.

Which other ones ?

Yourselves and 3rd have the hardest task of being successful, whereas leagues below have the level playing field.

I'd fancy Queens to beat Motherwell now, not so after 4 games in a short period

[Elixir]

I have absolutely no idea why we are getting involved.

[Monkey Tennis]

Which other ones ?

Yourselves and 3rd have the hardest task of being successful, whereas leagues below have the level playing field.

I'd fancy Queens to beat Motherwell now, not so after 4 games in a short period

That's precisely my point.

The other ones confer no real advantage to the team finishing second, over the one coming fourth. That seems intrinsically unfair after a 36 game season.

This one however, does at least reward the higher finishers to some extent.

[Rjc-1988]

Did we break the rules last year? If we did why wasn't there anything done about it? - The answer to this should be good.

Yes hibs did break the rules - for their own two fold agenda:-

- to maximise the home support for a vital fixture

- to appease a home support that could only take so much punishment in one season

The rules , which Hibs agreed to , were that admission to Play Offs would not be free. Some of the smaller clubs really need any handout they can get and as I keep saying that was Hibs and all ember clubs signed up to.

The reason why nothing was done about it was that those administering the rules are effectively employees of the member clubs and when anything difficult comes long they invariably "look the other way" .

That is why we now have this ridiculous situation where Motherwell and Rangers are jumping on the bandwagon and the SFL have set a precedent.

Despite being a QOS season ticket holder i hope Queens dont feel obliged to follow suit as clubs like us need to balance our books in a prudent manner and to achieve that without running up debt all income is gratefully received.

[MrDust]

That's precisely my point. The other ones confer no real advantage to the team finishing second, over the one coming fourth. That seems intrinsically unfair after a 36 game season. This one however, does at least reward the higher finishers to some extent.

Ever so slightly it can be looked that way in the championship, so the higher you finish, you then take the same precedent as the other leagues but the SPL team doesnt.....hmmmmm

It very much favours the SPL team of only having 2 games to play, which doesnt happen in the leagues below, in effect it rewards failure

[topcat(The most tip top)]

Ever so slightly it can be looked that way in the championship, so the higher you finish, you then take the same precedent as the other leagues but the SPL team doesnt.....hmmmmm

It very much favours the SPL team of only having 2 games to play, which doesnt happen in the leagues below, in effect it rewards failure

Given that the kind of clubs who finish 2nd to 4th in the championship in one season will generally be the same kind of clubs that finish 11th in the Premiership in other seasons is this not one of those things that will even out over time.

It's only been going two years and Hibs have already had both ends of the stick.

[Monkey Tennis]

Ever so slightly it can be looked that way in the championship, so the higher you finish, you then take the same precedent as the other leagues but the SPL team doesnt.....hmmmmm

It very much favours the SPL team of only having 2 games to play, which doesnt happen in the leagues below, in effect it rewards failure

There's no doubt that it favours the top flight club, which is why it was agreed to, after many years of the shop being as closed as possible.

It's not ideal, but it's as good as we were going to get and as I said, there are at least things in place to make it hard for the side finishing effectively in mid-table, things that don't exist in the other divisions.

[No8.]

Good post.I wonder how some clubs will feel now and we were one of them, that having voted to keepThe Rangers alive, The Rangers are now planning to do these clubs out of money?

The other clubs will be getting a share of £500,000 from the coverage of the play offs due largely to Rangers.

The other clubs will share 50% of the gate money at Ibrox which will still be more than what any other club would generate.

Aye...You are welcome.

[No8.]

Yes hibs did break the rules - for their own two fold agenda:-

- to maximise the home support for a vital fixture

- to appease a home support that could only take so much punishment in one season

The rules , which Hibs agreed to , were that admission to Play Offs would not be free. Some of the smaller clubs really need any handout they can get and as I keep saying that was Hibs and all ember clubs signed up to.

The reason why nothing was done about it was that those administering the rules are effectively employees of the member clubs and when anything difficult comes long they invariably "look the other way" .

That is why we now have this ridiculous situation where Motherwell and Rangers are jumping on the bandwagon and the SFL have set a precedent.

Despite being a QOS season ticket holder i hope Queens dont feel obliged to follow suit as clubs like us need to balance our books in a prudent manner and to achieve that without running up

debt all income is gratefully received.

You would think a QoS season ticket holder would know the SFL no longer exists. I wouldnt have mentioned it but you have posted it more than once.

[Rjc-1988]

Ok fair point but I think you know what i meant!

Fact is that Rangers and others are breaking the rules for their own agenda - given where your club has been recently you would think that they might just have learned a few lessons ...........obviously not.

The irony of this free entry offer is that of all the teams in theplay off Rangers are the least able to afford the gesture but they are still acting as though "money is no object".