Auld Jag Posted May 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2017 Now that the season is finished was getting into the top 6 worth it? Imo yes.The last few results and performances were very poor and to me that was the only downside.Being in the top 6 meant we had no relegation worries and more revenue because of higher league position and bigger gates.As long as we don't start next season the way we finished this one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted May 22, 2017 Report Share Posted May 22, 2017 Now that the season is finished was getting into the top 6 worth it? Imo yes.The last few results and performances were very poor and to me that was the only downside.Being in the top 6 meant we had no relegation worries and more revenue because of higher league position and bigger gates.As long as we don't start next season the way we finished this one. We are stuck with this system, which I hate. While it exists, top six is bound to be seen as a landmark. The financial gain will only be worth it if it is spent enhancing the squad for next season. We'll have to wait and see. Nice not to have to look over our shoulder in a relegation battle, I agree. It is nonsense though, isn't it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eljaggo Posted May 22, 2017 Report Share Posted May 22, 2017 Hopefully, when the extra funds from the top six finish are used to improve the squad over the summer, we won't have to endure the poor start to the season like that suffered this past season. That put us on the back foot for a large part of the season, and the notable achievement of a top 6 finish after that experience may have caused players (and management) to switch off post split. The stronger prospect of a top six finish next year may set the higher ambition of a European place in 2018/9. I don't believe that Archie will want to stand still, and simply aim for a 6th place finish next year, and with the new training ground likely to be an attraction to prospective new players, the Board should set the bar a bit higher for next year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auld Jag Posted May 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted May 22, 2017 Agree BB it is nonsense.I have compared us to Andy Murray, he worked very hard to get to world number 1 and not done much since.We got to 6th and didn't do anything after that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 22, 2017 Report Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) Hopefully, when the extra funds from the top six finish are used to improve the squad over the summer, we won't have to endure the poor start to the season like that suffered this past season. That put us on the back foot for a large part of the season, and the notable achievement of a top 6 finish after that experience may have caused players (and management) to switch off post split. The stronger prospect of a top six finish next year may set the higher ambition of a European place in 2018/9. I don't believe that Archie will want to stand still, and simply aim for a 6th place finish next year, and with the new training ground likely to be an attraction to prospective new players, the Board should set the bar a bit higher for next year. From what I can see we got £110K more than County in 7th place and £220K more than 9th place (where we finished the season before). Since the split we've had three home games with attendances that add up to about double our norm. Even if OF games cost us more to host we've had full or near full hospitality. Factor in the craziness of the split gave us an extra home game and, poor result as it was, we got a share of a healthy gate at Pittodrie. All in all we've done relatively well this season. Another bonus this time round is already having key players signed up which has got to help. Edited May 22, 2017 by lady-isobel-barnett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 ^^ Yeah and the fact we got beat in all three post-split games mean no win bonuses to hand out some more money for the club there. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allyo Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 Definitely worth it. A landmark for the club and a great achievement. Poor recent performances maybe shouldn't be excused, but equally they shouldn't diminish the season's success. And I still fail to see what is so bad about the split Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 And I still fail to see what is so bad about the split A system that throws up ridiculous anomalies. One that only exists so as the ugly sisters play each other 4 times and are effectively the only two teams that are guaranteed to have the same amount of home and away matches. Not that I'm in favour of any split but at least a league of 14 would make more sense. Each team would play each other home and away (26 fixtures) followed by 12 games post split, which means the same amount of fixtures (38). 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgow Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 A system that throws up ridiculous anomalies. One that only exists so as the ugly sisters play each other 4 times and are effectively the only two teams that are guaranteed to have the same amount of home and away matches. Think you are correct in sense they are guaranteed 2 home & 2 away against each other. However, fairly sure that both have had 3 away against other teams. That in a nutshell is why this particular version of a split is flawed. Also, the cut off at 33 games can easily mean (as it did for Thistle last season), narrowly missing out to a team you had an extra away fixture against. The "excitement" of having the top half play each other across the last 5 weeks (and same with bottom half) can be fairly well constructed in a full set of fixtures with a reasonable degree of accuracy at start of season (4 if not 5 of top half were all but certainties). All that would need is a sensibly sized league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) Any league structure in which all teams don't play each other home and away an equal number of times is inherently flawed. If the split has to exist then l-i-b's version is much better but it's still not right. Seventh finishing with more points than sixth? Utter nonsense. Anyone can come up with schemes to avoid 'meaningless' end of season fixtures (I seem to remember TJR coming up with some amusing ideas a while ago) but it is conjuring and every trick is a further step away from integrity of the league. Edited May 23, 2017 by BowenBoys 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allyo Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 I can accept the argument about uneven home and away fixtures. It is flawed but I don't see it as a big deal. I don't see it as hugely different from home advantage in cup competitions, but would rather see a chance element introduced rather than it being fixed by committee, which is always open to criticism. But I think that what you gain, more competitive games at the end of season with teams directly facing their challengers, and a mid-table pre-split battle between teams who might otherwise have little to play for, far outweighs the negative. And for the life of me I just can't understand the big deal about 7th having more points than 6th. The team that wins the second division has more points than the team that finishes eighth in the premier league. It doesn't mean they should be ranked above them. Is it just because it looks funny that everyone gets upset? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 23, 2017 Report Share Posted May 23, 2017 (edited) Allyo, Why do you think the split in a 12 team league exists? The whole idea of a league is that over the length of a season it produces an accurate order of merit. How can that be possible if you play other clubs twice away and once at home or vice versa? How can it be accurate when some clubs play 20 home games and 18 away games or vice versa? The answer of course to the first question is it exists to ensure the ugly sisters play each other four times, twice at Parkhead and twice at Ibrox and to **** with the other ten clubs. Edited May 23, 2017 by lady-isobel-barnett 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allyo Posted May 24, 2017 Report Share Posted May 24, 2017 Without the split we'd have 44 games which is too many. So if 12 is the optimal number then it needs a workaround. Obviously that raises the question of whether 12 is the optimal number, but I'm not convinced that a bigger league is the answer. I agree that it is skewed towards organising around the other two Glasgow clubs and I do object to that, which is why I'd introduce an element of chance to remove any bias. But I can understand the league (the member clubs) wanting four meetings since I'm sure it makes a big difference to tv revenue. I'm not defending every element of it. I just think there are benefits, often making it an exciting league (though rarely at the top), with the quirks being fairly insignificant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.