Can we ever imagine a Scotland without the Old Firm?

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, Merkland Red said:

I'm not making excuses. That's why he voted the way he did.

Whether he was correct to do so is another matter. I wasn't to become the 'second force' though.

I don't think he ever believed they'd be the second force, just that they might as well make hay while the sun shines and plan for the future.

Hearts would probably have done the same if circumstances were reversed. But they weren't, and we didn't, so we aren't irredeemably evil, unlike the OF's best mates, Aberdeen.

Edited April 8, 2022 by VincentGuerin

[Dons_1988]

Just now, Merkland Red said:

I'm not making excuses. That's why he voted the way he did.

Whether he was correct to do so is another matter. I wasn't to become the 'second force' though.

They’re not really reading properly. 

Nobody saying it was the right decision (it definitely wasn’t) or that self interest wasn’t at the heart of it (of course it was).

But this notion of being motivated by cornering the ‘2nd force’ mantle and gaining some long term advantage over the Edinburgh clubs is just silly. 

[VincentGuerin]

3 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

They’re not really reading properly. 

Nobody saying it was the right decision (it definitely wasn’t) or that self interest wasn’t at the heart of it (of course it was).

But this notion of being motivated by cornering the ‘2nd force’ mantle and gaining some long term advantage over the Edinburgh clubs is just silly. 

Silly / Obvious

[AB1872]

10 minutes ago, Hoose Rice said:

Good for them, first title.   You sat slagging off other teams in Europe while neglecting the fact that part timers from where?  Luxembourg pumped you.  

I actually addressed that earlier in thread

And Lincoln Red Imps beating Celtic away

 

[AJF]

7 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

They’re not really reading properly. 

Nobody saying it was the right decision (it definitely wasn’t) or that self interest wasn’t at the heart of it (of course it was).

But this notion of being motivated by cornering the ‘2nd force’ mantle and gaining some long term advantage over the Edinburgh clubs is just silly. 

What was the self interest to gain from voting that way? I’m not arguing that you believe it was the right way to vote, I’m just trying to understand what the self interest would’ve been if not to further their own interests in the absence of Rangers and a diminished Hearts/Hibs?

It also seems that voting simply to spite clubs due to the setanta deal explanation previously given wouldn’t really sit with voting in their self interest.

Edited April 8, 2022 by AJF

[Dons_1988]

4 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

Silly / Obvious

This all would have required Milne to have had a modicum of ambition. 

[VincentGuerin]

4 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

This all would have required Milne to have had a modicum of ambition. 

I don't disagree that he was a bit of a tool, but it is quite funny to see this line of arguing.

He didn't do it for the really obvious reason, he did it because of this thing that happened a decade previously and affected everybody, even though it didn't enter anyone else's thinking.

I mean, it's a bit flimsy, no?

[DukDukGoose]

2 minutes ago, AJF said:

What was the self interest to gain from voting that way? I’m not arguing that you believe it was the right way to vote, I’m just trying to understand what the self interest would’ve been if not to further their own interests in the absence of Rangers and a diminished Hearts/Hibs?

It also seems that voting simply to spite clubs due to the setanta deal explanation previously given wouldn’t really sit with voting in their self interest.

It wasn't to spite the clubs. He didn't want to get in to another Setanta situation.

Again, we're not saying he was correct to do so but that's why he did it.

[Dons_1988]

3 minutes ago, VincentGuerin said:

I don't disagree that he was a bit of a tool, but it is quite funny to see this line of arguing.

He didn't do it for the really obvious reason, he did it because of this thing that happened a decade previously and affected everybody, even though it didn't enter anyone else's thinking.

I mean, it's a bit flimsy, no?

I don’t see it as ‘really obvious’ at all. The perceived wisdom was that the status quo would return in a few years after rangers scooshed all the lower leagues. 

I think it’s far more likely that Milne saw the status quo as less risky and was happy to have a smaller piece of a bigger old firm pie. He probably felt that a 9-3 voting system and thus increasing the probability of radical change was more likely to cause a setanta-esque disaster rather than take Scottish football to a competitive utopia. 

[craigkillie]

The 2nd force stuff falls down a bit when you realise that they did (permanently) redistribute the prize money to make the top 2, and particularly 2nd place, earn a lower percentage than they used to.

It went from 32% of SPL prize money to the top 2 clubs (17% and 15%) down to 23% of SPFL money (13.4% and 9.6%). The gap between 2nd and 3rd was 15% to 9.5% and changed to 9.6% to 8.25%.

[bennett]

1 hour ago, Merkland Red said:

 

Milne and the OF didn't want to go with Setanta as the numbers didn't add up. Other teams pushed ahead and voted for it. Setanta went bust. Sky swooped in the save the day with a low ball offer. 

 

Are you sure?

 

"Nine SPL clubs voted to accept Setanta’s offer at a Hampden board meeting last month, with only Rangers and Celtic voting against and Dundee United abstaining"

 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/soccer/arid-10090385.html

 

[scottsdad]

Anyone saying that Scotland cannot cope with 42 senior teams is just wrong. Go back 100 years and we had 56 senior teams in three divisions. Scotland has always had a healthy number of teams. 

The "problem" as some see it is when comparing Scotland to other countries, in particular the old firm comparing themselves to English clubs. Looking enviously at the riches of others is the root cause of all this talk of splitting away. And there are people at other clubs who buy into this - Anne Budge was on a documentary saying that there wasn't enough money in Scottish football to support 42 teams. 

Again, this is incorrect. There is enough so long as clubs act sustainably in financial terms. 

Problems come when clubs aim for the big time and saddle themselves with debt to try to achieve the success on the pitch. The early 2000s in Scottish football was a case in point here. So many teams overspent, got into trouble. And it is still happening. The ego of the arse cheeks is such that they cannot accept that, today, they cannot compete in Europe. Not without breaking their own clubs or having a sugar daddy. 

So if they go, fine. They won't be missed. Then maybe we can get back to enjoying the sport of football without the toxicity that these clubs bring. 

[gannonball]

1 hour ago, Hoose Rice said:

We took years to recover, Hearts almost went bust.  We still voted for the 10-2 vote to be changed. 

You're just making excuses mate.  Hibs got relegated and hearts were erm cabbaged rangers down the pan, Aberdeen second.  That's why you voted against changing the rule.  Now it's goosed for good. 

I think Milne knew he was wanting out soon enough too. If it was a long term looking owner he may see the long term benefits but he fancied the cash coming in short term for a more attractive sale.

[AJF]

34 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

Are you sure?

 

"Nine SPL clubs voted to accept Setanta’s offer at a Hampden board meeting last month, with only Rangers and Celtic voting against and Dundee United abstaining"

 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/soccer/arid-10090385.html

 

Hmmm  

[Dons_1988]

39 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

Are you sure?

 

"Nine SPL clubs voted to accept Setanta’s offer at a Hampden board meeting last month, with only Rangers and Celtic voting against and Dundee United abstaining"

 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/soccer/arid-10090385.html

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/c/celtic/8154830.stm

"Last year's decision to reject the Sky bid and opt for Setanta - arrived at against the strong opposition of Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen - has proved to be the disastrous misjudgement we indicated it might be, with Setanta now in administration.

[DukDukGoose]

43 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

Are you sure?

 

"Nine SPL clubs voted to accept Setanta’s offer at a Hampden board meeting last month, with only Rangers and Celtic voting against and Dundee United abstaining"

 

https://www.irishexaminer.com/sport/soccer/arid-10090385.html

 

Yes.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1200278/Celtic-chairman-rage-SPL-endorses-cut-price-65m-TV-deal.html

[AJF]

So there were two votes, one for the initial setanta deal which Aberdeen voted in favour of, and then the vote for extending the agreement, which they voted against?

I have no recollection of this at all

[Monkey Tennis]

7 hours ago, Uncle Psychosis said:

I'd love them to piss off but unless they go out of business they'll still be in Scotland, still hoovering up the media coverage and dominating the commercial landscape. If you think we get treated as a tin pot league now wait until the perceived "big boys" aren't even a part of it. 

Kids in Inverness and Fife will still stoat about in Rangers* tops and the two sisters will still dominate the football coverage. The difference is that they'll be talking about whether they should have had a penalty vs Burnley rather than vs St Johnstone.

Yes, but I'd still take that, over what we have currently In terms of their stranglehold on trophies.

I also wonder if the appeal for kids in Inverness and Fife will be the same, for a side as likely to lose each week, as win.

[Monkey Tennis]

6 hours ago, ol1vercloff said:

I think the Old Firm are like insurance.  We'd love to not have to bother with it, but without it, we could suffer financially.

Maybe we could keep the old firm and the money they bring, but remove their supporters?  They really are knuckle dragging savages, and proud of it.  I thought the characters in Rab C Nesbitt were just fictional.  Unfortunately most of them live in West Lothian, which doesn't say much for the area 

Here's a bit of a tangent question - can you feel a real connection to a club that is 40-50 miles away from where you were born, raised and live?  A connection to a club because they are used to success doesn't count.

Outline how clubs would suffer financially please.

In your answer, you'll obviously wish to recognise that in football, relative wealth is far more significant than absolute wealth.  After all, money is not an end in itself.

[coprolite]

2 hours ago, gannonball said:

So are you seriously suggesting that he was looking back on a dodgy deal from 10 years ago and that the proper diddies can’t be trusted to vote through stuff? I’m sorry but he clearly had an eye on the extra cash from things staying much the same.

It was only 3-4 years since they'd collapsed though. 

Not mutually exclusive from wanting some extra cash