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

[kingjoey]

11 minutes ago, Ric said:

 

I am sure Descartes said something about that.

Rene Descartes was a drunken fart, “I drink therefore I am”.

[Ric]

11 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Regarding a "push" for a European spot. When was the last time the team in 7th at the split had a genuinely decent chance of getting into Europe with five games to go?

This is a bit of "if your auntie had baws" answer, but it is possible, just that there is no way to specifically say for sure as those games were never played.

However, last year we were on 40pts, after 33 games, the European spot at the time was held by Aberdeen who were 9 points ahead. Clearly they could be caught, I obviously can't say they would have been caught.

[Ric]

4 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

I don't see the positive outcome we'd get if we removed the split.

We'd lose good fixtures at the end of the season that add to the excitement. We'd lose an easy model for a 38-game season. We'd lose semi-interesting games as clubs scramble for the last top six place in the spring.

What exactly would we gain?

All in my OP.

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Ric said:

All in my OP.

Fair enough. I just don't agree with you that there's a problem.

Artificial competition is good for sport. Our league needs as much competition as possible. It's why we have play-offs for the lower leagues that allow the fourth-best side to go up. Loads of countries do stuff like this because sport needs competition. It's not meant to be completely fair.

As long as you cling on to that notion, you'll always be unhappy.

 

[Ric]

1 minute ago, VincentGuerin said:

Fair enough. I just don't agree with you that there's a problem.

I'd expect you are in the majority. As I said, I don't think anyone feels the points I raise are incorrect, just that some don't consider them much of a problem.

1 minute ago, VincentGuerin said:

Artificial competition is good for sport. Our league needs as much competition as possible. It's why we have play-offs for the lower leagues that allow the fourth-best side to go up. Loads of countries do stuff like this because sport needs competition. It's not meant to be completely fair.

And here is where I disagree with you. Not that we need competition, but with the suggestion that the split is somehow necessary for that competition to exist. In fact, when you mention 4th placed teams possibly being promoted (ie: via the Championship) that's not supporting the split, that's a different argument to this one.

Ultimately I'm not some idealist, there will always be inequities in sport. Christ, we have a league with both the OF in it, of course it's uneven! I don't believe that is a reason not to look into improving things though.

[VincentGuerin]

10 minutes ago, Ric said:

I'd expect you are in the majority. As I said, I don't think anyone feels the points I raise are incorrect, just that some don't consider them much of a problem.

And here is where I disagree with you. Not that we need competition, but with the suggestion that the split is somehow necessary for that competition to exist. In fact, when you mention 4th placed teams possibly being promoted (ie: via the Championship) that's not supporting the split, that's a different argument to this one.

Ultimately I'm not some idealist, there will always be inequities in sport. Christ, we have a league with both the OF in it, of course it's uneven! I don't believe that is a reason not to look into improving things though.

The split does provide competition. It produces 'big' ish games when the teams from 5-8 in the league are scrambling to get into the top 6. For example, this season everyone from 4th-10th could conceivably be in the top or bottom 6. That'll mean a lot of games with something riding on them in the next month or so.

You could argue that this season's push for Europe would be exciting regardless, given how congested the table is. However, it's not like this every year. Even if it were only two clubs in any doubt about top 6/bottom 6, then that adds meaning to games in spring that would have little otherwise.

It's very obvious that this adds to the number of meaningful games in the league in a normal season. Otherwise who would really care about a game between the team in 6th and the team in 8th in late February? But now for those clubs that game could result in a good cash boost, a bit of added prestige, and an outside shot at Europe. It adds jeopardy to the fixture that would be lacking.

Then there's the obvious point that post-split run-in fixtures are massively improved by knowing the sides competing for titles/Europe/safety will have to play their direct rivals in the last few weeks. I don't see how anyone could object to that.

For instance, we might have St Johnstone v Dundee on the last day this season. A last day with Celtic v St Johnstone and Dundee v Rangers wouldn't be too thrilling for the relegation battle or for the title race.

Edited February 7, 2022 by VincentGuerin

[flyingscot]

I actually think the current format in the Premiership is probably the best balance we can get. I'm not sold on the 18 team league for our size of country. I think the division below would probably be an abyss for full time teams. I could possibly see the merit in the 14 team and 6 / 8 split where there are 2 automatic relegation spots and the Championship clubs playoff doesn't involve the premiership clubs. I could also see some sense in the Championship going to 12 clubs.

I don't mind the split. The fact clubs and fans talk about being 'top 6' as a target shows it sort of works. I also like the fact that the bottom 6 play each other and it's 6 pointers almost every week, particularly if 3 or 4 clubs are close to 11th and 12th. 

I think if the English Premiership introduced a split, some of the same journalists you hear moan about how silly it is, would rush to tell you it's the best thing ever. 

Probably my preference for any changes is for L2 relegation to be the same as the other divisions - 1 automatic, 1 playoff, if the Lowland League also changes to be a little bit more open to relegation. 

[sergie's no1 fan]

51 minutes ago, AsimButtHitsASix said:

Regarding a "push" for a European spot. When was the last time the team in 7th at the split had a genuinely decent chance of getting into Europe with five games to go?

Not that I want to remind myself of this but StMirren (our best team in 30 years) last season. We were on the same level of points with the greatest StJohnstone team ever but they beat us with better GD (2 goals ). 

StJohnstone then leap frogged Livi into 5th place which earned a European spot. Pretty sure it did anyway. Like 99% sure. 

[TheScarf]

17 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

 

For instance, we might have St Johnstone v Dundee on the last day this season. A last day with Celtic v St Johnstone and Dundee v Rangers wouldn't be too thrilling for the relegation battle or for the title race.

This happens in 95% of all other football leagues in the world.  Why does the Scottish Premiership have to be different?  Why does the final day relegation battle have to be between the bottom two for it to be exciting?

IMO you're implying that final day relegation battles (the classic final day of 2004-2005 in the PL when about 5 sides were bottom of the league at one point that day) aren't exciting as all teams playing in the fixtures aren't in danger of going down.

Not every game has to mean something.  Dead rubbers are allowed in football.  Even then, there's still prize money at stake, so is there even dead rubbers in football anyway?

[velo army]

As @HibeeJibee and @TheScarf have pointed out, the split has nothing at all to do with competition, but about providing 4 OF games and ensuring that there's not 44 league games played. 

I think any kind of reconstruction would be deckchair rearrangement. I also suspect that larger leagues would be more boring and that those advocating those had no experience watching scottish football when we had larger leagues. My old fella was recently telling me that while the 1971 title winning/promotion season was obviously nice (and the next season wasn't bad either!!) there were so many games that were boringly predictable wins against rubbish. I'd appreciate the contributions of other aulder posters on this.

Ultimately the only meaningful act to increase competitiveness is a reallignment of financial distribution and voting structure. 

In short I appreciate the efforts of the OP, and it's a good post and topic, but I like it enough as it is, not because I think it's amazing, but because I'm unconvinced any reconstruction would be worth the bother.

[VincentGuerin]

2 minutes ago, TheScarf said:

This happens in 95% of all other football leagues in the world.  Why does the Scottish Premiership have to be different?  Why does the final day relegation battle have to be between the bottom two for it to be exciting?

IMO you're implying that final day relegation battles (the classic final day of 2004-2005 in the PL when about 5 sides were bottom of the league at one point that day) aren't exciting as all teams playing in the fixtures aren't in danger of going down.

Not every game has to mean something.  Dead rubbers are allowed in football.  Even then, there's still prize money at stake, so is there even dead rubbers in football anyway?

It does happen a lot. And it's boring.

And I'm not implying what you say in your second paragraph.

I'm saying that fixtures late in the season between teams in direct competition with each other are exciting and I think it's a good idea to have them.

If you disagree, you disagree. Dead rubbers will always happen, but I don't think you'll find many people who, if given the choice, would rather have more of them.

[Hibee_Hibernian]

An 18 team league would be awful and would almost certainly see pretty much every team getting smaller crowds unless there was a stupidly large amount of teams getting relegated. The only possible change that wouldn’t make the league worse would be 14 teams with an 8/6 split and more relegation - maybe something like 2 down automatically and a third via playoffs. 

[tree house tam]

11 minutes ago, sergie's no1 fan said:

Not that I want to remind myself of this but StMirren (our best team in 30 years) last season. We were on the same level of points with the greatest StJohnstone team ever but they beat us with better GD (2 goals ). 

StJohnstone then leap frogged Livi into 5th place which earned a European spot. Pretty sure it did anyway. Like 99% sure. 

M8 we won the showpiece trophy to get into Europe.

Along with another one just because we could.

The split works and only folk not involved in the top 6 moan about it.

[Ric]

11 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

The split does provide competition. It produces 'big' ish games when the teams from 5-8 in the league are scrambling to get into the top 6. For example, this season everyone from 4th-10th could conceivably be in the top or bottom 6. That'll mean a lot of games with something riding on them in the next month or so.

You could argue that this season's push for Europe would be exciting regardless, given how congested the table is. However, it's not like this every year. Even if it were only two clubs in any doubt about top 6/bottom 6, then that adds meaning to games in spring that would have little otherwise.

It's very obvious that this adds to the number of meaningful games in the league in a normal season. Otherwise who would really care about a game between the team in 6th and the team in 8th in late February? But now for those clubs that game could result in a good cash boost, a bit of added prestige, and an outside shot at Europe. It adds jeopardy to the fixture that would be lacking.

Then there's the obvious point that post-split run-in fixtures are massively improved by knowing the sides competing for titles/Europe/safety will have to play their direct rivals in the last few weeks. I don't see how anyone could object to that.

For instance, we might have St Johnstone v Dundee on the last day this season. A last day with Celtic v St Johnstone and Dundee v Rangers wouldn't be too thrilling for the relegation battle or for the title race.

You have put forward the positives you see.

Now that's fair enough, there is no onus upon you to negate the claims I make, but for me it feels like you are attributing a lot to the split that has noting to do with the actual split itself as my OP expands on.

I will take issue with the idea that, "A last day with Celtic v St Johnstone and Dundee v Rangers wouldn't be too thrilling for the relegation battle or for the title race." is not correct at all, what's more the police are likely to ensure that the league doesn't finish with an OF game purely because we all know a large number of fans can't control themselves. It's also pretty insulting to St Johnstone and Dundee, but seeing as it is St Johnstone and Dundee, then I'm fine with it!

One thing to note is you say this year it's close, but last year it was very close (decided by a two goal difference) and the team in 7th was 9 points behind with 15 to play for. How many times does it need to happen before it become an issue? Depends on whether you think it's an issue or not I suppose.

[craigkillie]

This happens in 95% of all other football leagues in the world.  Why does the Scottish Premiership have to be different?  Why does the final day relegation battle have to be between the bottom two for it to be exciting?
IMO you're implying that final day relegation battles (the classic final day of 2004-2005 in the PL when about 5 sides were bottom of the league at one point that day) aren't exciting as all teams playing in the fixtures aren't in danger of going down.
Not every game has to mean something.  Dead rubbers are allowed in football.  Even then, there's still prize money at stake, so is there even dead rubbers in football anyway?

Scottish football isn't really "different". We were one of the first leagues to introduce a split, but something in the region of 20 leagues in Europe have splits now. Because it's a good idea and leads to more direct competition between teams fighting for the same thing.

[Ric]

5 minutes ago, sergie's no1 fan said:

Not that I want to remind myself of this but StMirren (our best team in 30 years) last season. We were on the same level of points with the greatest StJohnstone team ever but they beat us with better GD (2 goals ). 

StJohnstone then leap frogged Livi into 5th place which earned a European spot. Pretty sure it did anyway. Like 99% sure. 

Wasn't their Euro spot come from their cup success? Either way, Aberdeen in 4th were 9 points ahead with 15 to play for.

 

 

[LiviLion]

7 minutes ago, sergie's no1 fan said:

Not that I want to remind myself of this but StMirren (our best team in 30 years) last season. We were on the same level of points with the greatest StJohnstone team ever but they beat us with better GD (2 goals ). 

StJohnstone then leap frogged Livi into 5th place which earned a European spot. Pretty sure it did anyway. Like 99% sure. 

 

Just now, Ric said:

Wasn't their Euro spot come from their cup success? Either way, Aberdeen in 4th were 9 points ahead with 15 to play for.

5th place guaranteed them Europe in some form, winning the cup meant they got Europa League instead of the Conference League. If they finished 5th and lost the cup they'd have been in the latter.

Tbf I think even if they finished 6th they would have been given the European spot because our facilities or lack of a youth setup weren't up to scratch for Europe (or something along those lines).

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Ric said:

You have put forward the positives you see.

Now that's fair enough, there is no onus upon you to negate the claims I make, but for me it feels like you are attributing a lot to the split that has noting to do with the actual split itself as my OP expands on.

I will take issue with the idea that, "A last day with Celtic v St Johnstone and Dundee v Rangers wouldn't be too thrilling for the relegation battle or for the title race." is not correct at all, what's more the police are likely to ensure that the league doesn't finish with an OF game purely because we all know a large number of fans can't control themselves. It's also pretty insulting to St Johnstone and Dundee, but seeing as it is St Johnstone and Dundee, then I'm fine with it!

One thing to note is you say this year it's close, but last year it was very close (decided by a two goal difference) and the team in 7th was 9 points behind with 15 to play for. How many times does it need to happen before it become an issue? Depends on whether you think it's an issue or not I suppose.

It's not insulting to Dundee and St Johnstone. They are literally the two worst teams in the league and it would make for a very dull end to the season for them to play the best two teams when they all needed to win.

Your final paragraph is where we get to the point, I think. Your team missed out and you're upset. That's fair enough, but you haven't made any convincing arguments for the league being improved by the split's removal.

As for your final question. It's not an 'issue'. St Mirren knew they had 33 games to get into the top 6 and they failed. Case closed. The consequence of that is that they couldn't qualify for Europe.

[Ric]

Just now, VincentGuerin said:

Your team missed out and you're upset. That's fair enough, but you haven't made any convincing arguments for the league being improved by the split's removal.

How wonderfully, and confidently, incorrect.

Well done.

 

[sergie's no1 fan]

7 minutes ago, tree house tam said:

M8 we won the showpiece trophy to get into Europe.

Along with another one just because we could.

The split works and only folk not involved in the top 6 moan about it.

Oh I know I know but to us mear mortals 5th place would have given us European football, had we not bottled it. 

5 minutes ago, Ric said:

Wasn't their Euro spot come from their cup success? Either way, Aberdeen in 4th were 9 points ahead with 15 to play for.

 

 

 

2 minutes ago, LiviLion said:

 

5th place guaranteed them Europe in some form, winning the cup meant they got Europa League instead of the Conference League. If they finished 5th and lost the cup they'd have been in the latter.

Tbf I think even if they finished 6th they would have been given the European spot because our facilities or lack of a youth setup weren't up to scratch for Europe (or something along those lines).

Aye that's how I remembered it. Makes our bottle job look even worse.