League Reconstruction 20/21 season

[naegoodinthedark]

Personally I think we should just do away with any notion of leagues, champions etc and just concentrate on everyone having a really lovely time.

[invergowrie arab]

1 hour ago, TheLad said:

Scottish football reconstruction.
Scotland is too small for 42 or 44 senior professional clubs, most of them tin pot shit hole clubs

Start from scratch.

Invite applications from all over the country for 32 top clubs - 2 leagues of 16.

Pick the best run clubs, with best infrastructure, facilities, finance. To f%%k with the rest.

Under this 32, regional tiers in 3 areas. North, West, East. If you're going to greet about too much travel within that, your club is too flimsy to be involved. Bye.

Have as many tiers as you want under each of the region but your champion will play off against the other 2 regions and bottom of the 32 forma place with the big boys.

To hell with tradition. Who gives a toss about Montrose V Brechin or Forfar V Annan. (You can replace these with equally other shit clubs)

There's about 200 senior professional clubs you absolute moron.

I know some people don't like VT but when you see it done badly you can appreciate the craftsmanship 

Edited April 28, 2020 by invergowrie arab

[Ric]

55 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

As @topcat(The most tip top) said, the temporary reconstruction avoids that penalty whilst not denying clubs like your own the promotion they deserve.

Let's have a look at the positions Hearts have been in since their return: 6, 6, 5, 3. During that time not a peep about league reconstruction, in fact quite the opposite with Budge stating that the number of clubs in Scotland as a whole is too many. They have a large squad, they have a large stadium and gate revenues, they have all the benefits that a large club in Scotland brings.

So you will forgive me for taking anything that somehow temporarily resolves their situation while fucking over every other club that may reside in the relegation places in proceeding years when the league is "returned to normal" with an extremely large dose of salt.

Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.

[Dons_1988]

Just now, Ric said:

Let's have a look at the positions Hearts have been in since their return: 6, 6, 5, 3. During that time not a peep about league reconstruction, in fact quite the opposite with Budge stating that the number of clubs in Scotland as a whole is too many. They have a large squad, they have a large stadium and gate revenues, they have all the benefits that a large club in Scotland brings.

So you will forgive me for taking anything that somehow temporarily resolves their situation while fucking over every other club that may reside in the relegation places in proceeding years when the league is "returned to normal" with an extremely large dose of salt.

Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.

Not enough bold, not enough guarantees. Did not register.

[Ric]

Just now, Dons_1988 said:

Not enough bold, not enough guarantees. Did not register.

Jesus f**k man, grow up.

[Arthur Orton]

1 hour ago, TheLad said:

Scottish football reconstruction.
Scotland is too small for 42 or 44 senior professional clubs, most of them tin pot shit hole clubs

Start from scratch.

Invite applications from all over the country for 32 top clubs - 2 leagues of 16.

Pick the best run clubs, with best infrastructure, facilities, finance. To f%%k with the rest.

Under this 32, regional tiers in 3 areas. North, West, East. If you're going to greet about too much travel within that, your club is too flimsy to be involved. Bye.

Have as many tiers as you want under each of the region but your champion will play off against the other 2 regions and bottom of the 32 forma place with the big boys.

To hell with tradition. Who gives a toss about Montrose V Brechin or Forfar V Annan. (You can replace these with equally other shit clubs)

Doesn't understand football and shouldn't be allowed to attend a game again.

Dreams of an OF x 42 games scenario.

[Dons_1988]

Just now, Ric said:

Jesus f**k man, grow up.

You have a significant chip on your shoulder about Hearts here.

You think your own views are the only ones who have all of Scottish footballs interests at heart. You support this with bluster and grand statements such as 'Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.'

It might sound good in your head but it doesn't really mean anything. The same with 'I guarantee this wouldn't happen if it was St Mirren'. It's all semi-articulate bollocks.

[RandomGuy.]

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

You have a significant chip on your shoulder about Hearts here.

You think your own views are the only ones who have all of Scottish footballs interests at heart. You support this with bluster and grand statements such as 'Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.'

It might sound good in your head but it doesn't really mean anything. The same with 'I guarantee this wouldn't happen if it was St Mirren'. It's all semi-articulate bollocks.

Hes not wrong, only a few select clubs would get reconstruction talks forced in to try and save them, and that's all this is.

It's the other clubs at the bottom who suffer when relegation spots are multiplied after Hearts have saved themselves (with the caveat Hearts have been the worst too flight side for 18 months, so theres every chance they could still end up relegated next season regardless).

[Dons_1988]

2 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Hes not wrong, only a few select clubs would get reconstruction talks forced in to try and save them, and that's all this is.

It's the other clubs at the bottom who suffer when relegation spots are multiplied after Hearts have saved themselves (with the caveat Hearts have been the worst too flight side for 18 months, so theres every chance they could still end up relegated next season regardless).

I don't accept that. We've never been in this situation before. St Mirren would be fighting this as Hearts are right now and I think they'd get plenty of sympathy. I've already acknowledged that there is increased support for it because it's Hearts, I don't think that means other clubs would be ignored.

And to your final point, it is clear that the motivation for league reconstruction talks is preventing relegation for a handful of clubs while giving promotion to some others. That is not the basis to be starting any conversation on long term reconstruction, and why I believe it is doomed to fail. 

'League reconstruction' is like Brexit, there's a huge variety of options, a broad diversity in support for different options and significant stumbling blocks in the way of every option. The result is deadlock.

I agree that what you say on additional relegation spots will probably prevent temporary reconstruction as well.

So, we're fucked basically.

[Ric]

26 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

You have a significant chip on your shoulder about Hearts here.

Wrong. You would know this if you even took a second to read any of my comments on here. It's clear you haven't.

26 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

You think your own views are the only ones who have all of Scottish footballs interests at heart. You support this with bluster and grand statements such as 'Anyone supporting a temporary fix is not supporting Scottish football as a whole and to claim otherwise is some of the most mealy mouthed bullshit I've heard on this board.'

Once again another massive jump into assumption. So once again a massive "swing and a miss, champ" as a well known box-office poster would put it.

It is absolutely not a grand statement to suggest that those using this situation to benefit their club when all previous statements have made no reference to the subject (and in Budge's case, the opposite) is the de-facto definition of mealy mouthed.

26 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

It might sound good in your head but it doesn't really mean anything. The same with 'I guarantee this wouldn't happen if it was St Mirren'. It's all semi-articulate bollocks.

Going by your comments it seems you have scant experience of what it's like for a team to yo-yo between leagues, and honestly whether you believe it or not I'm glad you have enjoyed your team being successful. With that in mind it comes as no surprise you are happy to just gloss over that a temporary reconstruction poses issues for more clubs in the top division than it provides benefits.

Maybe you could stop taking umbrage at my comments, I have already stated my arguments are "playing the ball rather than the man" yet your tone continues to be one where you think I am solely out to insult you.

 

Edit: ...to be fair, I probably shouldn't have quoted you, instead quoted the person you quoted, as that may have come across as taking the opportunity to disagree with you.

Edited April 28, 2020 by Ric

[Mr Heliums]

14 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

It might sound good in your head but it doesn't really mean anything. The same with 'I guarantee this wouldn't happen if it was St Mirren'. It's all semi-articulate bollocks.

It's not bollocks, though, is it? Even those who seek to justify re-construction start with the reasonable premise that it's harsh on Hearts, but eventually bring out a variation of the line that Hearts are too big to go down.

Edited April 28, 2020 by Mr Heliums

[RandomGuy.]

13 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I don't accept that. We've never been in this situation before. St Mirren would be fighting this as Hearts are right now and I think they'd get plenty of sympathy. I've already acknowledged that there is increased support for it because it's Hearts, I don't think that means other clubs would be ignored.

And to your final point, it is clear that the motivation for league reconstruction talks is preventing relegation for a handful of clubs while giving promotion to some others. That is not the basis to be starting any conversation on long term reconstruction, and why I believe it is doomed to fail. 

'League reconstruction' is like Brexit, there's a huge variety of options, a broad diversity in support for different options and significant stumbling blocks in the way of every option. The result is deadlock.

I agree that what you say on additional relegation spots will probably prevent temporary reconstruction as well.

So, we're fucked basically.

The decision is simple.

You either punish the side who finished bottom of the league this year, or you punish clubs who finish 3rd bottom next season.

Is it fairer to relegate Hearts this year, or have a one off season where three clubs are horses out the top flight in a situation that wont be repeated?

I'll tell you the simple fact that out of the four clubs who face relegation in the circumstances, its highly likely Hearts will be the ones who can financially cope with relegation the best.

[Dons_1988]

4 minutes ago, Ric said:

Wrong. You would know this if you even took a second to read any of my comments on here. It's clear you haven't.

I'm going by the posts I've read, playing 'the post not the man' as you say. Why on earth would I go and seek out your previous posts. You've made a fair few assumptions about me that if you went back and read my posts over the years would be debunked. If you go back and do that then I'll do you the same courtesy. Maybe.

6 minutes ago, Ric said:

Once again another massive jump into assumption. So once again a massive "swing and a miss, champ" as a well known box-office poster would put it.

You have taken personal umbrage at everything I have said, and it's clear from the moment you had a little tantrum because I used bold in a post. It is absolutely not a grand statement to suggest that those using this situation to benefit their club when all previous statements have made no reference to the subject (and in Budge's case, the opposite) is the de-factp definition of mealy mouthed.

Said box-office poster is the absolute model of 'semi-articulate bollocks'. Full of bluster and an articulate ability to discredit someone he's arguing with, without actually making a point. I only took personal umbrage at your patronising wee pat on the head yesterday. Your bold font was funny because you made a statement about absolutely no justification, again with nothing to support it...just bold font.

Have I suggested Hearts aren't indulging in self interest here? Of course they are. You yourself yesterday said that you have no interest in saving Hearts but you want a bigger league so I'm willing to accept these talks, even if they're just to save Hearts. So...self interest, clearly. The truth is Aberdeen have very little skin in this game other than any future split of the pie, and I can tell you I have very much enjoyed Hearts demise this season and was very much looking forward to their relegation.

The game has changed and I absolutely can see a justification for not imposing relegation on them. Or Partick and Stranraer for that matter.

12 minutes ago, Ric said:

Going by your comments it seems you have scant experience of what it's like for a team to yo-yo between leagues, and honestly whether you believe it or not I'm glad you have enjoyed your team being successful. With that in mind it comes as no surprise you are happy to just gloss over that a temporary reconstruction poses issues for more clubs in the top division than it does provide benefits.

Maybe you could stop taking umbrage at my comments, I have already stated my arguments are "playing the ball rather than the man" yet your tone continues to be one where you think I am solely out to insult you.

Scant? Try never 

I'm not glossing over anything, I understand bottom 6 clubs concerns, and they are within their rights to reject this. Any expansion to the league, temporary or permanent requires the 11-1 vote so if those concerns are insurmountable then...they can say no. It is you stamping your feet that temporary reconstruction is this inherent evil. Temporary reconstruction for this season doesn't necessarily mean an immediate return to the status quo after either by the way.

You can take every time I challenge you as me getting personally offended but that's really not the case.

[Dons_1988]

4 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

The decision is simple.

You either punish the side who finished bottom of the league this year, or you punish clubs who finish 3rd bottom next season.

Is it fairer to relegate Hearts this year, or have a one off season where three clubs are horses out the top flight in a situation that wont be repeated?

I'll tell you the simple fact that out of the four clubs who face relegation in the circumstances, its highly likely Hearts will be the ones who can financially cope with relegation the best.

The problem is Hearts didn't 'finish bottom', and the team next season would 'finish 3rd bottom'. If (huge if) the clubs agreed to the temporary fix, and that happened, then absolutely the team finishing 3rd bottom going down would be more fair.

There is no black and white answer here.

[RandomGuy.]

13 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I don't accept that. We've never been in this situation before. St Mirren would be fighting this as Hearts are right now and I think they'd get plenty of sympathy. I've already acknowledged that there is increased support for it because it's Hearts, I don't think that means other clubs would be ignored.

And to your final point, it is clear that the motivation for league reconstruction talks is preventing relegation for a handful of clubs while giving promotion to some others. That is not the basis to be starting any conversation on long term reconstruction, and why I believe it is doomed to fail. 

'League reconstruction' is like Brexit, there's a huge variety of options, a broad diversity in support for different options and significant stumbling blocks in the way of every option. The result is deadlock.

I agree that what you say on additional relegation spots will probably prevent temporary reconstruction as well.

So, we're fucked basically.

The decision is simple.

You either punish the side who finished bottom of the league this year, or you punish clubs who finish 3rd bottom next season.

Is it fairer to relegate Hearts this year, or have a one off season where three clubs are horses out the top flight in a situation that wont be repeated?

I'll tell you the simple fact that out of the four clubs who face relegation in the circumstances, its highly likely Hearts will be the ones who can financially cope with relegation the best.

[Ric]

  

10 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

I'm going by the posts I've read, playing 'the post not the man' as you say. Why on earth would I go and seek out your previous posts. You've made a fair few assumptions about me that if you went back and read my posts over the years would be debunked. If you go back and do that then I'll do you the same courtesy. Maybe.

 

I don't think I've made a single assumption about you, none of this has been about you, it's been about the position you have taken on this. Why on Earth should you seek out my comments? Presumably because they are about this very topic and refute the claims you have made.

Now, let's get past the personal, let's deal with the meat of the issue.

9 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

The game has changed and I absolutely can see a justification for not imposing relegation on them. Or Partick and Stranraer for that matter.

On this we actually agree. However, could you tell me how a temporary reconstruction (say.. a season or two) benefits these club more than a permanent one.

Temporary simply kicks the can down the road, leaving these clubs equally unsure what will happen once the league structure "returns to normal". This is where your "I'm supporting all clubs here" argument falls down.

9 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

Temporary reconstruction for this season doesn't necessarily mean an immediate return to the status quo after either by the way.

So go on then, what does it mean? Clearly if you use the term temporary it cannot be in place for anything longer than a season or two, and certainly Budge's comments would hint at that. So can you confirm if you see temporary in the same way as Budge?

 

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by Ric

[RandomGuy.]

30 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

The problem is Hearts didn't 'finish bottom', and the team next season would 'finish 3rd bottom'. If (huge if) the clubs agreed to the temporary fix, and that happened, then absolutely the team finishing 3rd bottom going down would be more fair.

There is no black and white answer here.

Theres no answer when you're arguing a completely different point.

Budgets entire premise is one year of expanded top flight then back to 12, shes been clear on that. No idea why you've suddenly decided differently. 

[Grangemouth Bairn]

38 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Is it fairer to relegate Hearts this year, or have a one off season where three clubs are horses out the top flight in a situation that wont be repeated.

Neigh chance of that happening mate.

[topcat(The most tip top)]

 

47 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

You either punish the side who finished bottom of the league this year, or you punish clubs who finish 3rd bottom  next season.

Or to put it another way

Punishing a club that is deemed likely to have have finished 12th or punishing a club that actually does finish 12th.

 

Edited April 28, 2020 by topcat(The most tip top)

[topcat(The most tip top)]

4 minutes ago, Grangemouth Bairn said:

Neigh chance of that happening mate.

Are you saying it Whinney Happen