Gordon EF Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 (edited) 5 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: ive already said, the top two tiers are practically all full time, so no need to regionalise. Ive also just said that im not copying England. There are , as far as i am aware, no developed countries with just one national tier, so clearly, you are just being facetious. Yes, but every argument you make can be applied to the Championship as it is right now. So why aren;t you in favour of it? Well why do you keep referencing England and the number of national tiers compared to Scotland then? Of course I'm being facetious. But I'm trying to prove a point. Every single argument you've made in favour of regionalising tiers 3/4 could apply equally to tiers 2/3/4. So what specific reason do you have for deciding where the line is. What is it about regionlalisation that would be advantageous for Airdrie, East Fife and Montrose but would be detrimental to QoS, Partick Thistle and Arbroath? Edited March 10, 2020 by Gordon EF 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: There are , as far as i am aware, no developed countries with just one national tier, so clearly, you are just being facetious. Germany, a country that you could say have been pretty successful over the years, only brought in a nationwide division in the 60s. Since then that have increased the number of teams playing nationally by creating more national divisions. Germany is significantly larger than Scotland. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, Cyclizine said: The clubs are playing quite happily in a national setup at the moment. Edinburgh City and Cove Rangers weren't clamouring for regionalisation after promotion. Again, we are a small country with a few geographical outliers who are coping just fine. Just because you've merged League 1 and 2 into and split them quasi-geographically (which doesn't really help with travel anyway, given the population distribution in Scotland) doesn't mean that you've made it easier for clubs to be promoted. The number remains the same. I'd also argue from a sponsorship point of view, there is more to be gained from national divisions in terms of exposure. "Scottish National League Division 2" has more inherent prestige than the "Scottish Provincial League Division 1 Northeast": even if they're both notionally at Tier 3 in your spreadsheet. FFs. A club in tier 3 HAVING ONE GOOD SEASON WILL BE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP. it cant possibly get in their in one year if there are 4 tiers and that club is in the 4th. I didnt claim it made promotion easier, i said, perfectly accurately, that it makes you one tier nearer the top, a simple fact at least 3 people on this thread seem to be struggling with/in denial of/ not accepting. (One has now accepted it) Awful lot of folk putting words in my mouth, but then failing to screen shot the evidence of me saying these things. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 8 minutes ago, Cyclizine said: Germany, a country that you could say have been pretty successful over the years, only brought in a nationwide division in the 60s. Since then that have increased the number of teams playing nationally by creating more national divisions. Germany is significantly larger than Scotland. Interesting. But this is 2020, Germany has more than one national tier, so its not really relevant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 10 minutes ago, Gordon EF said: Yes, but every argument you make can be applied to the Championship as it is right now. So why aren;t you in favour of it? Well why do you keep referencing England and the number of national tiers compared to Scotland then? Of course I'm being facetious. But I'm trying to prove a point. Every single argument you've made in favour of regionalising tiers 3/4 could apply equally to tiers 2/3/4. So what specific reason do you have for deciding where the line is. What is it about regionlalisation that would be advantageous for Airdrie, East Fife and Montrose but would be detrimental to QoS, Partick Thistle and Arbroath? Try reading. Ive JUST SAID< FULL TIME TEAMS. RE England, i referenced it once, perhaps twice. You are extremely prone to exaggeration, that is at least 4 or 5 times youve done it now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: FFs. A club in tier 3 HAVING ONE GOOD SEASON WILL BE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP. it cant possibly get in their in one year if there are 4 tiers and that club is in the 4th. I didnt claim it made promotion easier, i said, perfectly accurately, that it makes you one tier nearer the top, a simple fact at least 3 people on this thread seem to be struggling with/in denial of/ not accepting. (One has now accepted it) Awful lot of folk putting words in my mouth, but then failing to screen shot the evidence of me saying these things. Nobody's is denying it puts you one tier closer to the top. What we're saying is why would clubs give a f**k about that? What you're gaining is a slightly increased chance of skipping a level, the downside of that is that you're far more likely to end up idling around in the middle of a league not actually with much chance of getting promoted or being relegated. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Doonhamer1969 said: FFs. A club in tier 3 HAVING ONE GOOD SEASON WILL BE IN THE CHAMPIONSHIP. it cant possibly get in their in one year if there are 4 tiers and that club is in the 4th. I didnt claim it made promotion easier, i said, perfectly accurately, that it makes you one tier nearer the top, a simple fact at least 3 people on this thread seem to be struggling with/in denial of/ not accepting. (One has now accepted it) Awful lot of folk putting words in my mouth, but then failing to screen shot the evidence of me saying these things. No need to shout, sweetcheeks. I don't deny that merging leagues and putting them in parallel will move them up the pyramid. But by that argument, we should just run all clubs in local divisions and then have a title playoff à la Germany pre-1962ish. However, the point stands that if you have the same number of promotion places and double the clubs, you've reduced the promotion opportunities available. I still do not see the benefit to merging the current league 1 and 2 clubs. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 Just now, Doonhamer1969 said: Try reading. Ive JUST SAID< FULL TIME TEAMS. RE England, i referenced it once, perhaps twice. You are extremely prone to exaggeration, that is at least 4 or 5 times youve done it now. And you're extremely prone to not understanding questions. I know you keep saying full time. I want to know why the obvious advantages of decresed travel, more local derbies and being closer to the top do not apply to full time teams. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Gordon EF said: Nobody's is denying it puts you one tier closer to the top. What we're saying is why would clubs give a f**k about that? What you're gaining is a slightly increased chance of skipping a level, the downside of that is that you're far more likely to end up idling around in the middle of a league not actually with much chance of getting promoted or being relegated. Possibly true, but not certain. REPEAT. ONE good season away from the Championship. Not possible in Tier 4. Dangle the carrot and see what they say. If you dont, and you are convinced they wouldnt go for it, what inside info do you have from those 20 clubs that they are against this ? Hence why i said it could appear that you are claiming to be spokesperson for 20 clubs. C'mon spill the proverbial beans ? Statement from Albion Rovers against regionalisation ? Never seen one, doesnt exist as fa as i am aware. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: Interesting. But this is 2020, Germany has more than one national tier, so its not really relevant. So why use England as your example then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 Just now, Doonhamer1969 said: Possibly true, but not certain. REPEAT. ONE good season away from the Championship. Not possible in Tier 4. Dangle the carrot and see what they say. If you dont, and you are convinced they wouldnt go for it, what inside info do you have from those 20 clubs that they are against this ? Hence why i said it could appear that you are claiming to be spokesperson for 20 clubs. C'mon spill the proverbial beans ? Statement from Albion Rovers against regionalisation ? Never seen one, doesnt exist as fa as i am aware. Because as you seem to be missing the point here: just because it is one level below the Championship does not mean it will be perceived as such. Clubs derive media attention (and hence money) from playing nationally. To me, playing in a national division, even one that is at a lower step on the pyramid is more prestigious than playing in a regional league. I speak as a Ross County fan who has seen us come from the Highland League, voted into the SFL and ascend up the divisions. Improving and developing our facilities along the way. The small divisions are competitive generally to the end. Clubs pretty much always have something to play for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 8 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: Possibly true, but not certain. REPEAT. ONE good season away from the Championship. Not possible in Tier 4. Dangle the carrot and see what they say. If you dont, and you are convinced they wouldnt go for it, what inside info do you have from those 20 clubs that they are against this ? Hence why i said it could appear that you are claiming to be spokesperson for 20 clubs. C'mon spill the proverbial beans ? Statement from Albion Rovers against regionalisation ? Never seen one, doesnt exist as fa as i am aware. Oh for f**k sake. I'm just giving my opinion, the same as everyone else. I have no idea what individual clubs think about league strcuture. What you're saying isn't exactly a novel idea though. Clubs will generally be aware of the concept. Given that tiers 3 and 4 being national is the status quo, I'd have thought that if the arguments you're putting forward had any traction with clubs, we'd hear some of them proposing or coming out in favour of it. I haven't heard one single club say anything of the sort. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 14 minutes ago, Gordon EF said: And you're extremely prone to not understanding questions. I know you keep saying full time. I want to know why the obvious advantages of decresed travel, more local derbies and being closer to the top do not apply to full time teams. They do apply. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 4 minutes ago, Cyclizine said: Because as you seem to be missing the point here: just because it is one level below the Championship does not mean it will be perceived as such. Clubs derive media attention (and hence money) from playing nationally. To me, playing in a national division, even one that is at a lower step on the pyramid is more prestigious than playing in a regional league. I speak as a Ross County fan who has seen us come from the Highland League, voted into the SFL and ascend up the divisions. Improving and developing our facilities along the way. The small divisions are competitive generally to the end. Clubs pretty much always have something to play for. So call them National League One South and National League One North...problem solved 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gordon EF Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 Just now, Doonhamer1969 said: They do apply. OK, so what competing factors are there that make a national tier 2 favourable? And why do you think the factors in favour of nationalisation win out at tier 2 but not tier 3 or 4? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, Gordon EF said: Oh for f**k sake. I'm just giving my opinion, the same as everyone else. I have no idea what individual clubs think about league strcuture. What you're saying isn't exactly a novel idea though. Clubs will generally be aware of the concept. Given that tiers 3 and 4 being national is the status quo, I'd have thought that if the arguments you're putting forward had any traction with clubs, we'd hear some of them proposing or coming out in favour of it. I haven't heard one single club say anything of the sort. Lets put the boot on the other foot. Where do you draw the line for regionalisation ? Tier 5 ? Tier 6 ? Tier 9 ? Highland and Lowland merged etc etc ? What arguments for regionalisation dont apply to Albion Rivers that do apply to Inverurie ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, Gordon EF said: OK, so what competing factors are there that make a national tier 2 favourable? And why do you think the factors in favour of nationalisation win out at tier 2 but not tier 3 or 4? Fair point. It's just circumstances, the number of SPFL teams we have now etc. As i said, i personally think 4 national tiers is too much. Just a personal opinion. We had 2, then 3, then 4. I think most folk, from what i have seen, dont like the 4 times per year arrangement. Ive seen plenty of people saying that. If we go back to 3 national tiers, still 40 odd clubs, then there would be no need for regionalisation. Ive already stated if clubs dont want it, fine. But has anybody actually asked them ? Proposed it ? They cant answer no to a question they havent been asked. Point still applies though, what are your criteria for when regionalisation does start ? At what point ? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclizine Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 7 minutes ago, Doonhamer1969 said: So call them National League One South and National League One North...problem solved Err... no. That's my point, I'd much rather just play in the National League One. Notwithstanding the tautology of calling regional divisions the "National League" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Cyclizine said: Err... no. That's my point, I'd much rather just play in the National League One. Notwithstanding the tautology of calling regional divisions the "National League" I'll get a row from Gordon EF for referencing England, but , ahem...National League South ? Merely means its a national league split into 2 geographically...which means its not a national league ....perhaps it should be National Conference South . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doonhamer1969 Posted March 10, 2020 Share Posted March 10, 2020 Still under SPFL, so still national leagues as far as i am concerned. 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.