Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

Just now, JTS98 said:

Ok. And how is that point made by referring to seasons played to a finish as normal?

It's quite a bizarre thing.

Basically the point of that Hibs.net post is

"How come in exceptional circumstances Hearts want something unusual to happen when in normal circumstances they never asked for something unusual to happen?'

Even by the standards of a football forum it is brain-dead nonsense.

Ann Budges statement is Brain dead nonsense..

 

5725d86ac46188bd038b45a1.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
3 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

If you're saying other seasons are irrelevant, then you're tacitly admitting that reconstruction isn't there to fix any structural problems with the league competition in general, it's just a temporary quick fix to stop Hearts getting relegated, on the grounds that you think the way this season panned out is unfair. Changing something permanently for a temporary problem is surely not right.

So why fix something that isn't broken? Surely voiding the season is the correct temporary fix, since it keeps the competition intact while actually being the temporary quick fix to the one-off problem with the season. It does have it's own issues of course, since you're nuking 3/4 of a season over a relative handful of unplayed games, and it comes with problems related to competition winnings and European places.

And of course, once you agree that both options are bad options, then you can throw in the third bad option (call the season as-is and relegate/promote as applicable) and argue over which of the three bad options is the least-bad bad option. And that argument has already taken place and the answer is that option 3 won out. So it goes.

 

I know. That's stuff that's been gone over to death.

My point is that referring to normal and seasons and saying 'Hoe come they never asked for reconstruction then?' is stupid.

And it is.

It misses the entire point of the whole discussion. It's baffling that anybody could find it relevant, far more worrying consider it 'nail on head'.

Edited by JTS98
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

Ok. And how is that point made by referring to seasons played to a finish as normal?

Because there is no normal.

And the Hibs.net point, which I've not fully read only what you've posted here, is a pretty valid point. If Budge had said a single word about league reconstruction before now, then maybe she'd have a leg to stand on, what's more she was an advocate of reducing the league structure not increasing it. So forgive me if I see through her crocodile tears.

Trust me, after experiencing years of petty bullshit from some Hearts fans, if St Mirren were in the bottom spot now there wouldn't be a single hint of contrition or support. It would all be about "rightful justice for 86" and all that bullshit.

The whole "it's going to cost us £3m" is just grist to the mill of those who think Budge has been an utter dick about this whole thing.

Edited by Ric
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
2 minutes ago, Ric said:

Because there is no normal.

And the Hibs.net point, which I've not fully read only what you've posted here, is a pretty valid point. If Budge had said a single word about league reconstruction before now, then maybe she'd have a leg to stand on,

Oh my.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 season only: 1 Division of 44 Clubs - 43 league matches with 1-14 forming Premiership, 15-28 forming Championship, 29-42 forming League 1 and 43 & 44 relegated to HK/LL.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
1 minute ago, sjc said:

1 season only: 1 Division of 44 Clubs - 43 league matches with 1-14 forming Premiership, 15-28 forming Championship, 29-42 forming League 1 and 43 & 44 relegated to HK/LL.

 

Ha!

I think we should do that every five years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

Oh my.

Go on...

..are you accepting that Budge has said nothing about reconstruction until now?

..are you accepting that Budge actively suggested reducing the number of professional teams, not increasing them?

Oh, you are? Well at least we agree on something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, JTS98 said:

I know. That's stuff that's been gone over to death.

My point is that referring to normal and seasons and saying 'Hoe come they never asked for reconstruction then?' is stupid.

And it is.

It's not stupid, in that there is a case to be made for league reconstruction as a better competition for Scottish football in general. Plenty of people support it. This was even a good opportunity to enact it, if there was support, since it could be combined with a fix to the perceived unfairness of prematurely calling the season.

However, Ann Budge hasn't ever been a proponent of reconstructing the league until it helps her team dodge the upcoming relegation, so it comes across as a little opportunist and hypocritical. That didn't help gain reconstruction any more support than it already had, especially when she herself thought it should just be a temporary thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sjc said:

1 season only: 1 Division of 44 Clubs - 43 league matches with 1-14 forming Premiership, 15-28 forming Championship, 29-42 forming League 1 and 43 & 44 relegated to HK/LL.

 

Would the Celtic-Rangers game be played at a neutral ground?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, SJP79 said:

Why could'nt these games be done at a later date ?

How far in advance of the season do you think it's reasonable to hold a playoff series that determines, not only what league 3 clubs are in and all the budget/squad implications for them, but also has ramifications for league structure of 5 leagues underneath that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
7 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

It's not stupid, in that there is a case to be made for league reconstruction as a better competition for Scottish football in general. Plenty of people support it. This was even a good opportunity to enact it, if there was support, since it could be combined with a fix to the perceived unfairness of prematurely calling the season.

However, Ann Budge hasn't ever been a proponent of reconstructing the league until it helps her team dodge the upcoming relegation, so it comes across as a little opportunist and hypocritical. That didn't help gain reconstruction any more support than it already had, especially when she herself thought it should just be a temporary thing.

It's not hypocritical at all.

I think she's been quite clear that she thinks that because of the unusual circumstances nobody should be relegated.

She literally opened her most recent statement by saying it.

"As you can imagine, I am bitterly disappointed, although sadly not surprised, that there is insufficient support from Premiership clubs to expand the top league of Scottish Football to avoid unfairly penalising any club as a consequence of the Covid-19 pandemic.

Now, you might agree or disagree with that, but I don't think it's a ludicrous starting point in a debate.

Asking why she has never made that point in a normal season played to its full conclusion is stupid.

Edited by JTS98
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hypocritical at all. I think she's been quite clear that she thinks that because of the unusual circumstances nobody should be relegated.

Now, you might agree or disagree with that, but I don't think it's a ludicrous starting point in a debate.

Asking why she has never made that point in a normal season played to its full conclusion is stupid.

 

 

I think the point is that once the preferreable options of playing to a finish, temporary reconstruction, or “null and void” were off the table she was willing to throw her lot in with the advocates of permanent reconstructionists as plan D. Inadvertently becoming the figurehead of a plan that wasn’t hers and was of dubious benefit to Hearts

 

Whether this is classed as despicable hypocrisy, an admirable readiness to compromise or just dull pragmatic realism tells you more about the observer doing the classification than about Budge

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
1 minute ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

 


I think the point is that once the preferreable options of playing to a finish, temporary reconstruction, or “null and void” were off the table she was willing to throw her lot in with the advocates of permanent reconstructionists as plan D. Inadvertently becoming the figurehead of a plan that wasn’t hers and was of dubious benefit to Hearts

Whether this is classed as rank hypocrisy, an admirable readiness to compromise or just dull pragmatism realism tells you more about the observer doing the classification than about Budge
 

 

I've repeatedly said that Budge has played this wrong.

That doesn't mean some of the arguments used against her aren't abject nonsense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, JTS98 said:

It's not hypocritical at all.

Really ?

I think you should quit right now.

Any credibility you may have had until now has just been pissed out the window with those five words..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, JTS98 said:

I've repeatedly said that Budge has played this wrong.

Now that is something we can both agree on. She must have realised, if she is such the successful business woman, that consensus was needed to get her club out of the hole she's put them into.

Trying to put forward a temporary reconstruction that only benefits Hearts, bleating about how much cash it's going to cost and effectively making the "we're too big to go down" has only set everyone's teeth on edge.

"You catch more flies with honey than you do vinegar."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest JTS98
2 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

Really ?

I think you should quit right now.

Any credibility you may have had until now has just been pissed out the window with those five words..

I'm devastated you feel that way.

Not sure I can recover from that.

You said something aggressive to someone you disagree with, so you must be right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...