Jump to content

People's opinions of the split (..and possible reconstruction?)


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, VincentGuerin said:

Daft thing to say, but also a daft thing to be even remotely bothered by.

Who cares?

Certainly not me.

You said you thought they had a good relationship. I disagreed and explained why.

Frankly I couldnt give two hoots about us having a "good relationship" with your club or not, and I am not even vaguely bothered about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

Certainly not me.

You said you thought they had a good relationship. I disagreed and explained why.

Frankly I couldnt give two hoots about us having a "good relationship" with your club or not, and I am not even vaguely bothered about it.

I think that's a misunderstanding of what was said.

The issue it that we're more likely to get a system that is to our liking if the clubs work together.

Some people won't like that. Superfan points for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

I think that's a misunderstanding of what was said.

The issue it that we're more likely to get a system that is to our liking if the clubs work together.

Some people won't like that. Superfan points for you.

We will only get a system that is to our liking if the voting system was changed.

At present that isnt likely, even if the clubs you mentioned get together and all sing kumbaya together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/02/2022 at 15:31, Kyle Reese said:

is there any way to get a poll bolted on to this?

 

 

I could add one if you wanted.

What are you wanting to ask, because despite it's faults the split is still more popular than not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Leith Green said:

We will only get a system that is to our liking if the voting system was changed.

At present that isnt likely, even if the clubs you mentioned get together and all sing kumbaya together.

Needlessly silly, imo.

The point is quite obvious.

I suppose we could frame it the opposite way. Do you think Hearts, Hibs, and Aberdeen are likely to succeed in getting change by avoiding cooperating and collaborating?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

I'd imagine Hearts, Hibs, and Aberdeen would all like greater financial parity with the Old Firm and a more competitive league. Do you disagree with that?

 

Are you asking me to agree with your imagined scenario?

I am away out to look for a missing cat (true). I will ask him if I find him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Needlessly silly, imo.

The point is quite obvious.

I suppose we could frame it the opposite way. Do you think Hearts, Hibs, and Aberdeen are likely to succeed in getting change by avoiding cooperating and collaborating?

They used to shoot collaborators 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've not read the whole thread so sorry if I repeat anything.

I don't mind the split, it probably does add a bit more of a competitive edge trying to get into the top 6 (outside the OF who are in their own 2 team league).

There are some other options though. Do people know how the Belgian league works? They go into a championship playoff at the end where the teams points are halved. I don't know how popular that is though.

My own random opinion is a 16 team league but with a direct 2 leg tie with the team beside you after the 30 games so it would be a 32 game season. So team in 1st plays 2nd, 3rd v 4th, 5th v 6th etc. This almost 90% of the time will satisfy Sky's OF quota and could lead to an exciting way to end the season for the title, European places, relegation playoffs and relegation itself if the places are close. This wouldn't happen though because fans (OF fans) can't behave.

A similar point but it baffles me that with 6 games to go and you literally get to decide the fixture list then in what other sporting competition would you not make the last game a title decider if you could? In Scotland we have to decide the last OF fixture on it not being decisive because of the trouble it would cause. It is a huge opportunity on a sporting level to make such a game but we can't do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Ric said:

I could add one if you wanted.

What are you wanting to ask, because despite it's faults the split is still more popular than not.

I didn't realise that had been established. That would have been one of the poll questions, certainly. Also number of teams, and other structural options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, VincentGuerin said:

I'd imagine Hearts, Hibs, and Aberdeen would all like greater financial parity with the Old Firm and a more competitive league. Do you disagree with that?

 

But they probably would be less keen on greater financial parity with the likes of Motherwell and St Mirren

Aberdeen's notorious lack or enthusiasm for voting reform may have been because they thought being bullied by a couple of giants isn't much worse than being bullied by an army of dwarves.

Edited by topcat(The most tip top)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not a fan of the split. I accept that places me in the minority. I appreciate a lot of people won't know anything else also. 

The reasons why are pretty much all covered earlier in the thread so I'll not repeat them. 

That said, it'll probably no be my concern come the summer :)

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

But they probably would be less keen on greater financial parity with the likes of Motherwell and St Mirren

Aberdeen's notorious lack or enthusiasm for voting reform may have been because they thought being bullied by a couple of giants isn't much better than being bullied by an army of dwarves.

The gap being a chasm between second and third, and pretty negligible between fifth and six, is a part of the reason our league is so non-competitive at the top end. Bunching all the non-OF clubs closer together in terms of quality only widens the more meaningful gap at the top. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Aberdeen's notorious lack or enthusiasm for voting reform may have been because they thought being bullied by a couple of giants isn't much worse than being bullied by an army of dwarves.

Perhaps, but a bit shortsighted as it's unlikely many of the other clubs such as Hibs, Hearts etc would vote differently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

But they probably would be less keen on greater financial parity with the likes of Motherwell and St Mirren

Aberdeen's notorious lack or enthusiasm for voting reform may have been because they thought being bullied by a couple of giants isn't much worse than being bullied by an army of dwarves.

I don't dispute that at all.

But Hearts, Aberdeen, and Hibs would probably really like to shove them around.

Not saying it's right, but we've basically got all the non-OF clubs essentially just fighting for themselves. It's stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

But they probably would be less keen on greater financial parity with the likes of Motherwell and St Mirren

Aberdeen's notorious lack or enthusiasm for voting reform may have been because they thought being bullied by a couple of giants isn't much worse than being bullied by an army of dwarves.

Gatesharing is an example.

If split 50/50 then Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibs tread water monetarily... and whilst gap behind OF narrows somewhat, gap ahead of provincial clubs narrows too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, VincentGuerin said:

I don't dispute that at all.

But Hearts, Aberdeen, and Hibs would probably really like to shove them around.

Not saying it's right, but we've basically got all the non-OF clubs essentially just fighting for themselves. It's stupid.

I had thought there was some collaboration between the clubs already?

https://www.cityam.com/scottish-premiership-clubs-hibs-hearts-aberdeen-dundee-and-dundee-united-task-deloitte-with-finding-ways-to-increase-league-revenues/

I wouldn't mind a playoff for say the top 4. I don't think Celtic or Rangers will ever vote for that mind you. Whether the likes of St Mirren or Motherwell might go for it, well why not? There's no guarantee that Hibs, Hearts or Aberdeen take advantage of it. Well run sides like the two I mentioned may fancy their chances of getting into it and performing well.

Regardless I think it would largely leave things as is. If its over two legs with a single leg final I think you can quite comfortably say that barring anything wild happening its a Celtic/Rangers final more often than not.

Also just from a societal point of view I can think of few events more wild and toxic than a Hampden playoff game between the two of them to decide the league. That shouldn't really be a factor, but I think the Government/Police may want to have their say on such a thing.

Ultimately football is a game and the rules of our league are of our choosing. If things feel stale then I'd hope clubs were up for experimenting with different formats every now and then. The split is relatively new, why not try this out. That it's happening in Germany is encouraging, lends an air of 'if they're doing it lets copy them' to the minds of the chairmen I'd imagine. 

Edited by Chefki Kuqi
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...