Our Competitive League

[Monkey Tennis]

11 hours ago, invergowrie arab said:

Almost word for word 

 

 

It really is precisely the same 'logic'.

Now obviously, what Thatcher did was many times worse and more morally despicable because it had such profound effects on people and the actual courses of their lives.

However, I'd contend that Jinky's outlook, although clearly less serious and significant is actually more extreme. 

That's because it's not actually the raison d'etre of all of us to compete with Elon Musk in his Space Race.  There are other, greater components to life which give it value.  However, it really is the point of, say, Motherwell's existence to compete with the teams they share a league with at football, using resources that cost money.

Jinky wants that to be impossible.  The comparisons with Thatcher are therefore a bit unfair.

On her.

[Jinky67]

2 hours ago, Monkey Tennis said:

It really is precisely the same 'logic'.

Now obviously, what Thatcher did was many times worse and more morally despicable because it had such profound effects on people and the actual courses of their lives.

However, I'd contend that Jinky's outlook, although clearly less serious and significant is actually more extreme. 

That's because it's not actually the raison d'etre of all of us to compete with Elon Musk in his Space Race.  There are other, greater components to life which give it value.  However, it really is the point of, say, Motherwell's existence to compete with the teams they share a league with at football, using resources that cost money.

Jinky wants that to be impossible.  The comparisons with Thatcher are therefore a bit unfair.

On her.

[Derry Alli]

Jinky the Tory, huh?

Merry Christmas.

[effeffsee_the2nd]

On 24/12/2022 at 11:04, pozbaird said:

As others have said, been multiple threads about this, and nothing is ever going to change. The root issue is that in a very small country, we have two disproportionally large clubs. In every major football league you care to mention, they too naturally have their big clubs, middling clubs, wee clubs, and yo-yo clubs. That’s pretty much a given. However, in most other decent standard leagues, unlike us, there are more than two clubs who could win the league, or at least be genuinely sniffing it…. Barcelona & Real Madrid at least have Atletico to think about. Italy has multiple big, well matched clubs. England has at least a big four, if not more when Newcastle truly unlock the baw-bees hidden down the back of their Saudi sofa. Netherlands has Ajax, PSV Eindhoven, Feyenoord. Portugal has Benfica, Sporting Lisbon, Porto. I’m not saying all other leagues see different winners each year, or the title is shared every five years, whatever, but at least there are more than two big clubs who garner support, and media attention, and money. The dynamic changes when two becomes at least three.

Germany and France are weird ones these days. No matter, even with their weirdness, someone list me another ‘major’ or well regarded European league where no-one, outwith the same two clubs, has won their top flight in what is approaching 30 years. Show me another European league where two clubs have supporters buses actively running to their middens from every, and I mean every, corner of the country in multiple towns that have their own professional clubs.

I could also ask to be shown a European league where two clubs have a rivalry based on religion, and an unhealthy dose of bigotry, with a media who have their noses so far up their arses that even Noel Fitzpatrick the Super Vet couldn’t operate on them.

There is no solution. Other than them fcuking off to some sort of European Super League Division 2. Not holding my breath.

Every league has it's big clubs, the number differs from country to country

Every big club draws support from all across their country and beyond ,not just their own local hinterland

plenty other countries have misfit clubs that are disproportionately bigger than the rest

other nations have teams that win the league year in year out without much meaningful competition

In other countries, players of smaller clubs often aspire to getting signed by the big teams

We don't generally consume foreign media here, only english.  Back when levandowski was at Dortmund, he was openly quoted in the media that he "couldn't wait to sign the pre contract with bayern in January" whilst he was still a Dortmund player and would be for the res of that season

[effeffsee_the2nd]

As I've said before, it's going to take a bosman on steroids piece of legislation to make any difference. 

You'd have to have tightly regulated transfers, spending and maximum number of contracted players per club to make any difference. otherwise no matter what you do you are always going to get in the situation where them with the most money usually win. no business is ever going to agree to a cut in revenue. they may agree to strict player regulations if they can still make big profits

Clubs regulated to 25 contracted players in total including any youth players on professional contracts. if they want to bring someone in then they have to let someone go

no more talent hoarding.  big clubs have shit tonnes of young players (who are no close to the first team than you or I) tied up on contracts with decent wages. most of them would already be playing first team football elsewhere if they weren't. for big clubs buying these lads is just investment for future transfers. 

but from a entertainment point of view we've got to get to a situation where the best players are all playing not sitting in the stands 

[Monkey Tennis]

42 minutes ago, effeffsee_the2nd said:

As I've said before, it's going to take a bosman on steroids piece of legislation to make any difference. 

You'd have to have tightly regulated transfers, spending and maximum number of contracted players per club to make any difference. otherwise no matter what you do you are always going to get in the situation where them with the most money usually win. no business is ever going to agree to a cut in revenue. they may agree to strict player regulations if they can still make big profits

Clubs regulated to 25 contracted players in total including any youth players on professional contracts. if they want to bring someone in then they have to let someone go

no more talent hoarding.  big clubs have shit tonnes of young players (who are no close to the first team than you or I) tied up on contracts with decent wages. most of them would already be playing first team football elsewhere if they weren't. for big clubs buying these lads is just investment for future transfers. 

but from a entertainment point of view we've got to get to a situation where the best players are all playing not sitting in the stands 

This is a better post than the first one.

Yes, regulation along such lines is definitely required.

 

The suggestion that our situation is just the same as exists elsewhere is, however, wildly flawed.  

Our version is extreme in terms of its longevity and in terms of the scale of disparity in resources.

[hk blues]

On 24/12/2022 at 15:44, Monkey Tennis said:

That's not simplistic at all.  It's how it should be seen.

The idea of a league competition between lots of sides is illusory.  The idea that it's genuinely competitive to line teams up against each other in the same division of the league with such vastly different resources, is indeed illusory.

Honestly, it would be less unfair to balance the wealth, yet make some clubs play with ten men.

You clearly get something you've not identified, from battles between the OF.  I don't and I think buying into it fuels the problem.

By your interpretation of what is competitive then I doubt any league anywhere in the professional game is competitive.

As for your comment about getting something I've not identified from the OF battles, if you're referring to me not responding to your previous post then give me a break - I'm living on a completely different time zone and in addition I don’t live on this site - that little inconvenience Christmas gets in the way at times.

Anyhow, to answer your question in one simple sentence - there are no Scottish games I seek out where I am on TV (excluding my own team) other than the OF ones. If that swims against the tide here than so be it.

[hk blues]

On 24/12/2022 at 17:19, Grangemouth Bairn said:

It’s not an argument - it’s a fact. For over 100 years we’ve had a duopoly, for the last 10 years or so, we’ve had a monopoly and that’s how it’ll likely continue for a while.

When one team has such a big financial advantage it’s difficult to end a monopoly. Look at Scotland, France and Germany for examples of this. In the last 11 seasons, 3 teams have won 28 from 33 league titles. You don’t break dominance like that overnight.

You're misinterpreting my meaning of Duopoly v Monopoly argument.  I'm not saying their existence is arguable - it's absolutely not - but it's arguable which is better.  Sure, if you take a snapshot you can justify either but over time it's much less clear.

[Kapowzer]

So let's ask the OF fans who have got involved this discussion so far @Jinky67@AJF because your responses may mimic what can be expected from the supporters of the more successful clubs in every nation and what any proponents of change will face: (answer each from 0 = absolutely not to 10 = big time)

1./ Are you genuinely content with the present duopoly as it stands.

2./ Would you welcome stronger competition domestically that means you may lose a few more per season and win less silverwear (Less Tina Turner and Depeche Mode)

3./ Willing to have a sporting handicap placed on you (points deduction, starting a game -2 goals, squad cap, you go back to three subs, rest of league stays at 5 or something else)

4./ Willing to diminish/redistribute any of your current income (both reported £90m ish), also indicate how much

and no score but:

5./ What would would you be willing to accept and would you suggest any solution

Maybe some OF may support this but they'd want it that extended to Juventus, RB Leipzig and Lyon too, so they weren't further from competing in the CL.

[Monkey Tennis]

6 hours ago, hk blues said:

By your interpretation of what is competitive then I doubt any league anywhere in the professional game is competitive.

As for your comment about getting something I've not identified from the OF battles, if you're referring to me not responding to your previous post then give me a break - I'm living on a completely different time zone and in addition I don’t live on this site - that little inconvenience Christmas gets in the way at times.

Anyhow, to answer your question in one simple sentence - there are no Scottish games I seek out where I am on TV (excluding my own team) other than the OF ones. If that swims against the tide here than so be it.

What are you on about?

I've not had a go at you for not responding to anything.  I don't "live on" here these days either.

The point is that many domestic games remain much more competitive than ours, although the trend is definitely in the direction you imply.

You're kind of doing the OF fan thing of making out that because I'm dissatisfied with what we've got, I must be striving towards some utopia of absolute equality.  I'm not.  I recognise that big clubs from big cities are always likely to dominate.  I am, however, lamenting just how grotesque the imbalance here has become.

Your last bit is telling.  Whilst you're obviously entitled to swim against any tide you wish, it reflects the difference, and why you prefer the destructive duopoly.  You obviously feel you have some sort of stake in the contrived, divisive, pantomime rivalry, with its real world costs for our country.  I don't, and I think it's regrettable when apparent diddy club fans, do.

[AJF]

3 hours ago, Kapowzer said:

So let's ask the OF fans who have got involved this discussion so far @Jinky67@AJF because your responses may mimic what can be expected from the supporters of the more successful clubs in every nation and what any proponents of change will face: (answer each from 0 = absolutely not to 10 = big time)

1./ Are you genuinely content with the present duopoly as it stands.

2./ Would you welcome stronger competition domestically that means you may lose a few more per season and win less silverwear (Less Tina Turner and Depeche Mode)

3./ Willing to have a sporting handicap placed on you (points deduction, starting a game -2 goals, squad cap, you go back to three subs, rest of league stays at 5 or something else)

4./ Willing to diminish/redistribute any of your current income (both reported £90m ish), also indicate how much

and no score but:

5./ What would would you be willing to accept and would you suggest any solution

Maybe some OF may support this but they'd want it that extended to Juventus, RB Leipzig and Lyon too, so they weren't further from competing in the CL.

Interesting questions. Here goes:

1. 5/10

2. 6/10

3. 0/10

4. 5/10

5. I think to summarise my answers, I’d say I would be willing to see change in Scottish Football, but I accept given the team I support, the appetite for it is significantly less than supporters of other teams.

In terms of question 4 of finance sharing, I would be supportive of equal or weighted (towards clubs finishing lower in the table) sharing of TV, sponsorship and prize money. European income/prize money I think the majority should be retained by the club involved because, as shown this season, neither club can even hold their own without investing that money into the squad. And yes, I absolutely appreciate this is what other Scottish sides face when competing with Rangers/Celtic. That is not to say some of it can’t be distributed though.

I am also unsure if season ticket/gate receipts will even be something that can be shared, in a legal sense I mean, and I doubt either club would willingly accept this and it would need to be enforced if it were to ever happen.

I outlined some things before I think I’d be able to accept, such as a stricter cap on homegrown players in match day squads, prize/sponsorship and TV money sharing and wage caps.

This is of course hypothetical and I won’t try and kid on to people that I don’t enjoy winning the majority of matches we play, I think that is just natural. But, I do think that having increased competition would bring more buzz back to the game I love which has slightly worn off for me.

With that being said (and I appreciate this is not on the same level as others), but I felt that I enjoyed our recent league win more than any other I can remember, and maybe that was to do with it being at the end of such a barren spell. That has a lot to do with the circumstances and events of 2012 though so it may not be indicative of things going forward.

It’ll never be a level playing field though, I think it’s too late for that to ever happen.

[Dons_1988]

4 minutes ago, AJF said:

 

With that being said (and I appreciate this is not on the same level as others), but I felt that I enjoyed our recent league win more than any other I can remember, and maybe that was to do with it being at the end of such a barren spell. That has a lot to do with the circumstances and events of 2012 though so it may not be indicative of things going forward.

Interesting, sounds like you’re saying not winning it every year/going through a sustained period of having to actually work to limb through the leagues and win it made it more valuable. 

Almost like winning it 9 times in a row or only ever going a year or two without it is a bit meaningless. 

[Monkey Tennis]

4 hours ago, AJF said:

Interesting questions. Here goes:

1. 5/10

2. 6/10

3. 0/10

4. 5/10

5. I think to summarise my answers, I’d say I would be willing to see change in Scottish Football, but I accept given the team I support, the appetite for it is significantly less than supporters of other teams.

In terms of question 4 of finance sharing, I would be supportive of equal or weighted (towards clubs finishing lower in the table) sharing of TV, sponsorship and prize money. European income/prize money I think the majority should be retained by the club involved because, as shown this season, neither club can even hold their own without investing that money into the squad. And yes, I absolutely appreciate this is what other Scottish sides face when competing with Rangers/Celtic. That is not to say some of it can’t be distributed though.

I am also unsure if season ticket/gate receipts will even be something that can be shared, in a legal sense I mean, and I doubt either club would willingly accept this and it would need to be enforced if it were to ever happen.

I outlined some things before I think I’d be able to accept, such as a stricter cap on homegrown players in match day squads, prize/sponsorship and TV money sharing and wage caps.

This is of course hypothetical and I won’t try and kid on to people that I don’t enjoy winning the majority of matches we play, I think that is just natural. But, I do think that having increased competition would bring more buzz back to the game I love which has slightly worn off for me.

With that being said (and I appreciate this is not on the same level as others), but I felt that I enjoyed our recent league win more than any other I can remember, and maybe that was to do with it being at the end of such a barren spell. That has a lot to do with the circumstances and events of 2012 though so it may not be indicative of things going forward.

It’ll never be a level playing field though, I think it’s too late for that to ever happen.

I know I'm not being asked, but my response to Question 3, would also be very low.

Question 4 needs a response that's a much, much higher number though. 

Again, I don't think anyone is really pressing for a completely "level playing field".  There's never been such a thing.  That doesn't make what we've got, remotely acceptable though.

Edited December 26, 2022 by Monkey Tennis

[Sergeant Wilson]

41 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

What are you on about?

I've not had a go at you for not responding to anything.  I don't "live on" here these days either.

The point is that many domestic games remain much more competitive than ours, although the trend is definitely in the direction you imply.

You're kind of doing the OF fan thing of making out that because I'm dissatisfied with what we've got, I must be striving towards some utopia of absolute equality.  I'm not.  I recognise that big clubs from big cities are always likely to dominate.  I am, however, lamenting just how grotesque the imbalance here has become.

Your last bit is telling.  Whilst you're obviously entitled to swim against any tide you wish, it reflects the difference, and why you prefer the destructive duopoly.  You obviously feel you have some sort of stake in the contrived, divisive, pantomime rivalry, with its real world costs for our country.  I don't, and I think it's regrettable when apparent diddy club fans, do.

It's not the dominance as such. As you say every country has big clubs  It's how our two achieved it and continue to function.

[Dons_1988]

Points handicaps etc don’t make any sense to me. 

Surely you’re better to tackle the source of the problem than artificially tackle the symptom. 

I don’t think anyone wants to win the league by 3 points if the OF have been docked 10, do they? You’d rather just actually be the best team. 

Edited December 26, 2022 by Dons_1988

[hk blues]

1 hour ago, Monkey Tennis said:

What are you on about?

I've not had a go at you for not responding to anything.  I don't "live on" here these days either.

The point is that many domestic games remain much more competitive than ours, although the trend is definitely in the direction you imply.

You're kind of doing the OF fan thing of making out that because I'm dissatisfied with what we've got, I must be striving towards some utopia of absolute equality.  I'm not.  I recognise that big clubs from big cities are always likely to dominate.  I am, however, lamenting just how grotesque the imbalance here has become.

Your last bit is telling.  Whilst you're obviously entitled to swim against any tide you wish, it reflects the difference, and why you prefer the destructive duopoly.  You obviously feel you have some sort of stake in the contrived, divisive, pantomime rivalry, with its real world costs for our country.  I don't, and I think it's regrettable when apparent diddy club fans, do.

For the avoidance of doubt, I have absolutely no skin in the game whatsoever. 

You are taking my one and only opinion, that a duopoly is preferable to a monopoly,  and interpreting way more into that than there is. 

If you're hanging your hat on my comment that the OF game is superior to any other in the Scottish game in terms of TV viewing then you've either not watched much Scottish football on TV or are allowing your bias against them to cloud your judgement. Or both. To underline my point here - folk can, and do,  detest the Champions League or even World Cup due to everything they represent that's wrong in our game yet at the same time appreciate that they produce some of the best games we'll see.

Let me finish my input on this thread by saying that the OF are NOT good for our game - I've no idea how things would look without them though. But, if we have to tolerate them then I'd prefer they be competitive with each other.

 

Edited December 26, 2022 by hk blues

[AJF]

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

Interesting, sounds like you’re saying not winning it every year/going through a sustained period of having to actually work to limb through the leagues and win it made it more valuable. 

Almost like winning it 9 times in a row or only ever going a year or two without it is a bit meaningless. 

It definitely did. Like I said though, I think that was a lot to do with many fans seeing it as the end goal of our “journey” being achieved so I’m not sure a second sustained spell of no success until our next league win would be viewed the same. But yeah, in general I realise that fewer wins make them more meaningful when the next one comes around.

[VincentGuerin]

The heart of the issue is finance. If the financial disparity is not going to be changed, then the competition has to move away from being a pure meritocracy and include play-offs etc.

The only solutions that would ever work are solutions that would strike us all as weird and prompt folk to claim the whole world was laughing at us.

I've seen a few people suggesting numbers of home-grown/Scottish players in the squad on a matchday. We've already sort of seen this. Forcing clubs to have homegrown players in the squad simply stops players being sent out on loan and leads to them rotting on the bench for clubs who have no intention of playing them, but need them to tick a box. It will not make our league competitive.

Similarly, having a requirement for X number of Scottish players would simply drive up the domestic value of Scottish players and lead to more of the good ones being at the OF than we have now. And since the OF's financial advantage means they already have vastly superior foreign players it would not in any way make for a competitive division.

There is no solution to this that won't strike people as a bit mad.

Edited December 26, 2022 by VincentGuerin

[Kapowzer]

2 hours ago, AJF said:

In terms of question 4 of finance sharing, I would be supportive of equal or weighted (towards clubs finishing lower in the table) sharing of TV, sponsorship and prize money. European income/prize money I think the majority should be retained by the club involved because, as shown this season, neither club can even hold their own without investing that money into the squad. And yes, I absolutely appreciate this is what other Scottish sides face when competing with Rangers/Celtic. That is not to say some of it can’t be distributed though.

What's telling is this response. We're happy to share the part of the domestic stuff which lets be honest pales with UEFA. Win a game in the CL and you're on roughly what you got for 2nd place in a 38 game season. What's UEFA's solution? Oh yeah, throw solidarity payments to the other 9 teams of about £400k each while the OF make 75x that.

It was covered earlier that the issue these days is the first team to win our league outwith the OF would receive a financial package that would put them out of touch of the others (well playoff/Russia/coefficients allowing). So potentially you just move the same problem from Glasgow to Edinburgh or Aberdeen.

TV execs know its gets the audiences, advertisers consequently want the exposure and FIFA/UEFA know the value of that. The fact that a company like Gazprom stumped up and UEFA took their money says it all. Both organisations moved from facilitating competitions to commercialising them US style. The current Netflix documentary on FIFA and how João Havelange's election changed a fixtures and rules organisation into a behemoth able to make wild conditions to hosts and sponsors.

Any decision to level the playing field needs to be taken globally (FIFA) or at the very least continentally (UEFA), but with the former just wanting to keep its head below the parapet for a while and the former still tiptoeing around the 12 super league clubs not wanting to upset them it won't happen anytime soon. It was telling that despite being the most populous nation, no German teams were involved due to the half plus one rule which their clubs ownership. PSG was a surprise however.

However any solution needs a strong leader with integrity to steer it through, both qualities missing in Nyon and Zurich and I think universally at the top of the game, too many have the hungry hippo approach to anything, content to sell their £700m purchase for 8x that 15 years later. A line in the sand moment would face significant objections and lobbying from teams with huge war chests.

It really is a root and stem shake up that's required. Many ideas voiced in this thread already would be good starting points. But let's face it there's no groundswell of support for it and therefore none of us will see any improvement in our lifetimes. Too many vested interests and no desire to upset the apple cart. Not being cynical just pragmatic as how I see human nature and our politics corrupted by money time and time again.

Manchester United's revenue is $800 million (https://www.888sport.com/blog/football/richest-football-clubs-in-world) no league title for 10 years and 2 cups I think. But a substantial bit of that revenue will be coming from Fergie's achievements in the 90's and 00's. That consistent winning got exposure, extra fans domestically and internationally and corporates eager to align. Liverpool's recent resurgence will see payback in 10-15 years time. Now at home, in our game, 3x 9 in a row's, Celtic winning 13 domestic trophies on the bounce, that will payoff domestically and internationally in the years ahead with kids who could have went local or either way as it often is in this country and passive foreign fans eager to align with glory.

So we continue showing up every year hoping to get a cup run but primarily facilitating the two horse race or find some other sport that is more of a contest.

[Willie adie]

On 24/12/2022 at 14:43, ahemps said:

I also wonder what the fallout would have been. The money from Europe that distorts most league would potentially have dried up which would (you would think) close the gap to some degree. 

If the super league teams all got together and decided to install salary caps so that their clubs actually make profits rather than losing money then would this influence the rest of football that was left behind? Their salary cap would be something ridiculous like £500m a season so it wouldn't have been under any threat from any other league.

The super league is always inching closer with every change made to appease the big clubs that in my opinion it would have been quicker to just have let it happen. The new format to the CL is going to look like a league so these teams will feel like they are already in such a super league. The 2 extra places to the highest ranked leagues to get more teams in it so the likes of Arsenal going forward will barely miss a season of CL football. I also believe that within 10yrs the CL games will be on weekends and then it will accelerate the process.

A European super league will happen the only difference being uefa will want it to be under Thier asupices rather than a break away