League Reconstruction 20/21 season

[RandomGuy.]

12 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Okay. So you are not arguing the sporting merit or fairness of relegation, or no play-offs after 30 games. What you are saying is some clubs would suffer financially if they had to play games. So to avoid that, a handful of other clubs like Falkirk, Partick and Hearts just had to be absolutely clobbered financially? You must see how that is at least open to challenge?

The over riding priority should be that as many clubs as possible make it through a potential 9 months without matchday income.

There is absolutely no way that forcing the play offs to happen helps that. If you include Kelty/Brora, then you're arguing it's better to force 15 teams to suffer heavy financial losses than 3.

Edited June 19, 2020 by RandomGuy.

[Ric]

Allow me to present, in picture form, successful businesswoman Ann Budge and her current legal position:

 

[ribzanelli]

10 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Okay. So you are not arguing the sporting merit or fairness of relegation, or no play-offs after 30 games. What you are saying is some clubs would suffer financially if they had to play games. So to avoid that, a handful of other clubs like Falkirk, Partick and Hearts just had to be absolutely clobbered financially? You must see how that is at least open to challenge?

Why are you making it sound like Hearts, Partick and Stranraer (no idea why you’ve included Falkirk in the ‘financially clobbered’ group!) are being sent a big fat relegation invoice? They are not being financially clobbered, they are facing less income in the future (in part compensated for with a parachute payment) but have plenty of opportunity to adjust their outgoings accordingly. If Hearts aren’t in a position to do so then they have much bigger problems.

[Pet Jeden]

21 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Well considering Championship sides still cant afford to start testing and training, and the top flight starts in about 6 weeks, try and figure out why the play offs arent being held.

Because everything has been sacrificed on the altar of SKY's August contract and Celtic's Euro participation. And a handful of clubs have been lined up to take the financial hit

[Jacksgranda]

13 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Yes, Kelty's case is also complicated by the fact that Bonnyrigg were just behind them with a game in hand. But it still doesn't change the fact that it was not for the SPFL to unilaterally deny the contractual right of the HL/LL league play off  winners the chance of a crack at Brechin for entry to L2. Except, of course, that Brechin had a vote on the SPFL board. 

Not fishy at all...

Play offs weren't possible, as has been explained ad nauseam.

Edited June 19, 2020 by Jacksgranda

[arabdelic]

3 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Because everything has been sacrificed on the altar of SKY's August contract and Celtic's Euro participation. And a handful of clubs have been lined up to take the financial hit

 

But given reconstruction isn't happening and all clubs agreed to end the season what is your solution? 

[Staggie52]

1 hour ago, Pet Jeden said:

The point is - they were at least playing the play offs. (Cheltenham btw, not Exeter).

There's a desperation on P&B to scream loudly that playing some or all of the outstanding fixtures before starting the next season is now, and was in early April, "utterly impossible". Which is utterly untrue. But it's the crutch that holds up the self-interest clubs in denial and allows them to block out their consciences.  Not Hibs btw, who are in that camp for fan giggles and because Ron doesn't understanding that soccer customers don't switch their preferred franchises.

You’re repeating yourself after avoiding my last reply to you. Please explain how, when football was banned under the emergency legislation in lat March, and the announcement about the ban being lifted was only made yesterday, how it would have been possible to play football in the intervening period. As before, please be brief.

[RandomGuy.]

4 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Because everything has been sacrificed on the altar of SKY's August contract and Celtic's Euro participation. And a handful of clubs have been lined up to take the financial hit

No, the clubs voted to save themselves money.

Its costing each EFL club "£200k-£300k" to play their play off games. You're arguing that forcing 10+ clubs, including the likes of Arbroath and Brechin to pay that over a month is better than handing 3 clubs losses that theyll suffer over 12 months. Are you genuinely claiming that's "better for everyone"?

You're not even arguing against relegating sides either you fucking moron, so the 3 clubs would still be taking that hit.

[Bazil85]

On 17/06/2020 at 15:34, wastecoatwilly said:

I disagree, the merit is not just for Celtic plus you seem to underestimate our game,it's doesn't matter if it was St Mirren's colt team playing in league 2 they are not St Mirren players.
Would it make a difference if it was St Mirren colts playing in league 2? For me they only become Celtic players when they make the first team.
There is two parts here and the first part is more important than the second, the first part is to produce better and more talent for club level the players that make the grade at Celtic will probably move abroad or down south plus some will stay at Celtic,the second part is national level,the players that don't make the grade will create a trickle down effect.
The trickle down effect should make sure we don't lose as many players to the game.

You keep mentioning Europe for me this is where you are underestimating our game as a league we are sitting 14th out of 55 nations across Europe if you think that isn't good enough then you're wrong.You have got to accept the position we are in, we will never be as good as the big 5 countries but we are at least a top 20 country which makes us better than average. the nations league puts us in the 3rd tier or better it's decent but would be better if we can make the 2nd tier.

Self interest is killing our game and I include my club in that, you mentioned project brave the problem is the self interest gets in the way of anything long term.
Clubs never fully support each other in anything, small country small mentality attitude, look after yourself inward thinking will never change.
The bigger picture for clubs doesn't exist,the needs from bottom to top top to bottom for clubs are totally different.
  

I just don't see a single shred of evidence that a team of 18-21 years old playing at L2 level in Scotland are going to produce several players vastly superior to what Celtic currently have. That's the only way there would be a benefit to the Scottish national team. Your point on them being different players isn't really true. If these players do become the required quality (or at least profitable sales), they are/ will be contracted to Celtic or Rangers and they get the benefit. It's not like they're buying them from a L2 team for their value & that progresses a Scottish team. It also would make no difference to me if it was St Mirren. I am fundamentally against turning lower leagues into development exercises to progress bigger teams (which is all this is)

The trickle down effect is a red herring and I have shown why. Let's take three players that were released by St Mirren and went onto be very important to us, both as players and in two instances, financially. Jack Baird, Lewis Morgan & Kenny McLean. If colts had existed, by your own argument there is every chance these players could have developed quicker. If that's the case, would they all still have been released and made their way to St Mirren? I think the chances are overwhelmingly no. The second point here is the colts will still need a team to field. If it was thought these players were slightly below the required level, the colts is almost a last chance saloon type of thing. Again it adds fuel to we might not of got these players. That will be reflected in many teams the country over.

The trickle down effect only benefits Celtic & Rangers because it would likely create more young players not quite good enough for them but that could be sold for value, someone starring at L2 isn't automatically going to play for a Celtic but could be worth a five or six figure bid from a lower end SP team or lower English leagues (players that may have previously been free?). This hampers other clubs that unfortunately do need to look at released Celtic & Rangers players because of the financial strength of these two teams. Trickle down is ABSOLUTELY NOT a benefit for any other team. I get the argument that this might have made them slightly better players but it's hardly going to have an impact on the SP overall which no one can deny is at a shockingly low level of quality & obviously that wont help Scotland's national team. 

Regarding Europe, there is an argument for run before you can walk but from where Scottish football has been, the players we've developed and the level of teams we've had in the past, 14th is absolutely not good enough. That means there are 13 better leagues with 1,000s of better players in them representing multiple countries. We need Scottish players generally to be wanted & playing for clubs the level of the top five leagues, like the majority of the top 20 teams in Europe. (There is no chance we are a top 20 team in Europe right now, no idea where you're getting that from. Although we should be). We are not going to get regularly to international tournaments with around 75% of our team playing in the 14th best league in Europe. 

Self-interest is killing the game and it comes from the ridiculous 11-1 voting structure that has suffocated our game for decades. When this is all said and done it should be put down to a 60% majority for almost all the high level decisions (clubs keeping their own gate money can stay higher). The vote this week does show there isn't even close to that appetite for Colts though which is good, it is the single biggest self-interest proposal put forward in recent Scottish football history.

Like I say, glad it's done and hopefully it never returns.  

 

 

[Aim Here]

Pet Jeden fighting for the lost cause of a season completion, long after even Hearts voted against it and in the middle of a court case where it's not even on the table.

Like a  lone Japanese soldier on a jungle island still fighting World War 2 in the 1960s.

 

Edited June 19, 2020 by Aim Here

[jaybeee]

50 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Arbroath potentially had 16 games still to play.

And if you're on about just playing the play-offs, then Hearts would have to be relegated, so I doubt you're arguing for just the play offs being played.

Well spotted Random.  

[EdinburghPar1975]

8 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Okay. So you are not arguing the sporting merit or fairness of relegation, or no play-offs after 30 games. What you are saying is some clubs would suffer financially if they had to play games. So to avoid that, a handful of other clubs like Falkirk, Partick and Hearts just had to be absolutely clobbered financially? You must see how that is at least open to challenge?

And that's before you get into the propriety of how the board advised the clubs and how the vote was carried out. 

Sorry for the long post...

No, i'm not arguing the sporting merit after 30 games as the clubs voted on ending the season, therefore relegation, promotion and champions would be declared (unless the whole season was voided which would have cost the SPFL and clubs more). As loathed as I am to keep going back to Donald Findlay the other night, some teams win and others lose from the situation - it's not fair, but it's far from being 'unjust'.

I have sympathy for Partick given they were a point behind with a game in hand but purely on positions at the time the leagues were called Hearts and Stranraer were, in my mind, at least far enough from the others that it was an 'easier' decision, again not maybe fair but....

I 've already said I feel for any play off team denied the opportunity to potentially be promoted (and also Falkirk given they were only a point behind Raith) but at the same time the three teams in a relegation play off spot were breathing a sigh of relief.

It's not fair, but it's also not like there were only 8 games played of the season, there were 30 games passed when a decision had to be made and it was voted on by the members and the decision made - that's why I think it's not open to any more challenge.

It's already been shown on this thread that Ann Budge had claimed that Hearts would do what was voted on by their peers and also shown that your own fans would have no issue if St Mirren had been in your shoes, 'karma' I think was the word used. There is no way that Hearts would be anywhere near their currant 'crusade' for justice if they were 11th, you'd have wanted this closed asap and before you ask, no - I don't think St Mirren would've went down the road that you guys are.

I get the anger and annoyance of Hearts fans at what's happened but maybe Hearts fans should be looking closer to home as to why they were 12th after 30 games and in this position rather that lashing out at all the other member clubs and SPFL  who voted on what's best in their eyes?

Surely you can see why other teams fans have an issue with the approach Hearts are taking?

 

[Pet Jeden]

9 minutes ago, Alan Stubbs said:

Apart from a few nutters, everyone up here seems to recognise that all of the outstanding fixtures can't be played. Likewise, in England's League 1 and 2 which isn't playing the 10 remaining league games. Their approach would also have seen Hearts relegated.

What the prospect of playing 'some' of the outstanding fixtures has to do with Hearts, I have no idea. Much like bringing up Covid deaths and getting that wrong, I'm guessing it was just an opportunity to bring some staunchness into your general campaign of greeting.

Don't think my covid point was wrong as it turned out. Someone - who certainly knew their stuff - helpfully posted that the appropriate UK deaths number for comparison is 51K. So, Scotland's comparable £4.2k number is still worse  per head of pop. (7.7% of UK's) . Just not as bad as I had thought. 

[Guest JTS98]

44 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

It is a given, based on the fact that they have literally done so and the fact that they have already provisionally scheduled next season's tournaments.

 

No. It's a given that we nominate clubs. Not that we actually send them.

It's a leap of faith for now to say that these competitions will 1) take place 2) take place in a format that includes our clubs. Nobody knows that yet.

[craigkillie]

The format has literally been announced and includes our clubs.

[jaybeee]

49 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

This is what I was saying - I would have still been unhappy, but a lot less unhappy if there had even been an attempt to play those games. I just can't see the logic and consistency to the decisions. They look like they were guided by Doncater (SKY 2020 and my bonus?) Celtic (clear the decks for 2020-21 CL start) and all aided and abetted by a fortuitous majority of board member clubs who would do quite well thank-you-very-much out of calling the leagues.

And had Hearts been two positions higher ............... there would have been no argument.  I believe AB lauded; by Pete Jeden and associates are doing irreparable damage to the reputation of Heart of Midlothian, rather sad in my opinion.

[welshbairn]

16 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Don't think my covid point was wrong as it turned out. Someone - who certainly knew their stuff - helpfully posted that the appropriate UK deaths number for comparison is 51K. So, Scotland's comparable £4.2k number is still worse  per head of pop. (7.7% of UK's) . Just not as bad as I had thought. 

I won't annoy everyone going into it on this thread but that's a very selective use of statistics, on any measure I've seen England, and the UK, has a higher covid related death toll than Scotland. And Scotland's population is 8.2% of the UK btw. Here's a wee summary for those interested.

https://theferret.scot/scotland-covid-19-excess-deaths-rate/

Edited June 19, 2020 by welshbairn

[DA Baracus]

BIG BAD BRECHIN RUN SCOTTISH FOOTBALL AND HAVE UNLIMITED POWER AND WHAT THEY SAY GOES AND VOTES DON'T MATTER BECAUSE THEY COULD OVERTURN IT ANYWAY YET DESPITE THIS MASSIVE POWER THEY CHOOSE TO FINISH BOTTOM AND NOT VOTE THEMSELVES QUADRUPLE WINNERS

[renton]

10 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Don't think my covid point was wrong as it turned out. Someone - who certainly knew their stuff - helpfully posted that the appropriate UK deaths number for comparison is 51K. So, Scotland's comparable £4.2k number is still worse  per head of pop. (7.7% of UK's) . Just not as bad as I had thought. 

Actually no. The two comparable figures you can take are either the daily figures, or the excess mortality. The other figures, from NRS and ONS are far more dependent on the individual reporting of the case. The other two have far less wiggle room for interpretation: either you take thd daily subset of people who definitely died because of Covid, or literally everyone who died over the period and in both instances, Scottish mortality rates are far lower than England.

Obviously there are many factors that make that so, and not all are to do with Governmwnt policy.

[Guest Flash]

21 minutes ago, EdinburghPar1975 said:

I have sympathy for Partick given they were a point behind with a game in hand but purely on positions at the time the leagues were called Hearts and Stranraer were, in my mind, at least far enough from the others that it was an 'easier' decision, again not maybe fair but....

Two points behind.