PaleGreySky Posted December 22, 2010 Report Share Posted December 22, 2010 how many guys watch both football and cricket? Very few I'd guess. Cricket is the second most played sport in Scotland after football. It's more popular than rugby for participation. I play every saturday throughout the summer, and I know a lot of other who do as well who go to watch various football teams when the cricket season is out. Fans of clubs from Dumbarton to the old firm. Summer football would hit cricket pretty hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted December 23, 2010 Report Share Posted December 23, 2010 David Beattie on reform Haven't heard too many folk in favour. To be fair that's a selective quote as David is also advocating Summer football. I'd maybe be more interested in Friday night football if I knew what those opportunities were. I'd have thought selling hospitality and season tickets would actually be harder. This quote from David's a beezer, given the 'put up, shut up and give us £100,000 by May or else' statement from a few weeks ago: "So we have to look at what the fans are saying - they are our customers after all." Nice to see his backing for summer football. I'd like to hear a lot more from the club on the McLeish/SPL proposals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mull Jag Posted December 25, 2010 Report Share Posted December 25, 2010 Been bored at work all week so thought i would sort the SPl out 3 Leagues of 14 teams based on Geography (West, North, Central/east) thes guys play each other home and Away 26 games Benefits- Smaller clubs as they play derby games and get a visit from the bigger clubs e.g Killie V Ayr Peterhead V Aberdeen Drawbacks- No regular OF Games for 28 teams Top 3 in each League at the end of the Rounds Progress to a Play off League- Playing once (venue determined by record in the 3 leagues) 8 games Winner- Wins the League European Spots based on final postions Benefits- an extra OF Match for Sky, Top teams get to play each other in a competitive match with meaning The other 33 Clubs play for the league/challenge club in a knock out basis Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fearchar Posted December 25, 2010 Report Share Posted December 25, 2010 (edited) After a two-year trial, a large majority of the stakeholders in shinty voted to move to a summer season. If anything, that game has grown since. Because I've watched friendly matches (football - people swinging chib sticks at each other isn't really very friendly) in balmy conditions in summer, and endured some of the worst that Scotland's climate can throw at spectators in winter, I'd vote for a season from March to November without any hesitation. If we're going to have to endure sitting down all the time, then it seems reasonable to me to move to warmer weather: sitting down in freezing weather is only suitable for masochists. It also seems very likely that the poor standard of football, dominated by taller players, head tennis and kich-and-rush could well be consigned to the dustbin of history along with the worst of our weather, if we move to take advantage of our climate instead of fighting against it. Sorry: I thought it should have been "kick-and-rush", but, of course, it should have been "keech-and-rush". Edited December 26, 2010 by Fearchar Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie Of The Month Posted December 26, 2010 Report Share Posted December 26, 2010 See if we were to move to a summer league how would it work in the transitional season? I doubt clubs could afford to not play from May until the following March so do we have a shorter season the year before, say from July/August until January and then start in March? I like the idea a lot, I just don't understand how it would work to start with. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Mull Jag Posted December 26, 2010 Report Share Posted December 26, 2010 See if we were to move to a summer league how would it work in the transitional season? I doubt clubs could afford to not play from May until the following March so do we have a shorter season the year before, say from July/August until January and then start in March? I like the idea a lot, I just don't understand how it would work to start with. You just draw a line in the sand and go for it from there, if we move to summer football it will be a july to nov then a break then Feb to May rather than a march to oct season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggybunnet Posted January 3, 2011 Report Share Posted January 3, 2011 from BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9334707.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie Of The Month Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 A reporter from STV has on their twitter that 2 leagues of 10 has been agreed in principle at the SPL meeting today and will be voted through on 17th January. http://twitter.com/STV_Andy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 A reporter from STV has on their twitter that 2 leagues of 10 has been agreed in principle at the SPL meeting today and will be voted through on 17th January. http://twitter.com/STV_Andy I was wonderin how that's gona work. Will there still be promotion from SFL 1 wi 3 dropping out of SPL 1 into SPL 2 (unlikely)? Will 2 teams now automatically drop out of SFL 1? Will the SPL leagues be determined by positions or by invitation/ground criteria? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillresigned Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Yet again, the average supporter will have no real influence on any of these changes. One might have thought that at a time when attendances are dwindling everywhere, someone might have had the bright idea of asking the paying customers what they actually want. Speaking personally, the thought of going to a game and freezing my boll*cks off holds no great appeal any more. As for a ten team league, heres me foolish enough to think this is an absurdly retrograde step. Hey, but what do I know! Edited January 4, 2011 by stillresigned Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-R Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Story on the BBC now as well "Not financially viable" for 16-18 team league. Guess the clubs are happy to accept the TV money and let the crowds dwindle away to nothing like they're currrently doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Firhillista Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 So that's it confirmed then - the folk who actually go to football grounds are no longer the 'customers', that role is now exclusively reserved for television companies and, presumably by extension, the folk who sit in pubs with their backs to the tv football on the large 3-D screens. Has it ever occurred to the chairmen that maybe in the future no-one will want to watch any team other than Man.U., Chelsea, Arsenal, Barcelona, Real Madrid and their ilk? Maybe we'll all end up paying for a t.v. subscription to a World League where we all 'support' (i.e. buy stuff from) one of the real Top Ten? And all the wee kids will run around in the replica kit of their favourite team from somewhere a long way away where they speak a different language and you never actually get to see a live game. Dear God, I think I've seen the future and it doesn't look good. How about we tell the t.v. companies to go stuff themselves, accept that most of our clubs have to go part-time and get back to the point where you actually have to go to a football ground to see a game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckstone Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Can someone enlighten me as to how the SPL can vote through 2 leagues of 10 when half the proposed teams aren't even in the SPL ? Or is the vote on the 17th for both the SPL and the SFL ? I can't believe I was naive enough to hope that this review could actually improve things !!! I used to have a season ticket but got terminally bored by watching us play Falkirk, Dundee, etc at least 4 times each season (used to go to most away games too). I think there are loads of people who, like me, would be back like a shot if the league was expanded. Instead, I'll continue to do something else on Saturdays. If the handful of games I've seen this season are anything to go by, I'm not missing much. Still gutted though ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted January 4, 2011 Members Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 If Partick Thistle vote for this, I'll seriously consider chuck following senior football. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 If Partick Thistle vote for this, I'll seriously consider chuck following senior football. Totally agree with you Will, The fresh thing about watching games over here is you only play teams twice, its great all the wee clubs have a go away from home and it makes for an exciting league (well less boring). You even have the rangers player Bougerra saying he wants to leave as its too repetitive here. If this goes ahead scottish football will be dead as we know it in 5 years Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) I heard a radio commentator, discussing this, say the problem is the Old Firm. SKY really only want the Old Firm and they don't want the number of OF games halved. So any discussions start from this basis and everyone's hands are tied. Until there's real competion against Sky Sports TV or the OF leave Scotland this is never going to change. Edited January 5, 2011 by Mr Bunny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 If Partick Thistle vote for this, I'll seriously consider chuck following senior football. Maybe worth re-reading this I'm of similar opinion as Willjag on this. My immediate reaction would probably be not renewing my season ticket and likely attending only a handful of games. I repeat once again, what the **** is our only supporters association doing about this? Has the idea of canvassing its membership even occurred to the Trust? We already know that (thru Supporters Direct) nearly 90% are against a 10 team SPL 1 and over 70% in favour of enlarged leagues. We really need to confirm that our fans are broadly in line with Supporters Direct. So while I'd probably no longer support the Jags to the same degree as I do just now I've still a certain sympathy with David Beattie. He can only vote for what he thinks is best for the Club. But the Club is the fans and his judgement is severely hampered by not knowing what the majority of the support want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel J. Botch Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 I heard Doncaster on the radio earlier and even though the presenters and Yorkston (the balloon from Dunf) were telling him the paying punter was not interested in this move, he blanked them all telling them it was the only way forward. Sounded a bit like Giddeon Osborne and his VAT argument as the ONLY thing to do. I'm not really interested in going to a league format that has already been tried, tested and scrapped. There is talk of a few dates for a boycott of games in protest to this. It seems games on the tv in front of empty stands is the preferred option for Mr Doncaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) Maybe worth re-reading this I'm of similar opinion as Willjag on this. My immediate reaction would probably be not renewing my season ticket and likely attending only a handful of games. I repeat once again, what the **** is our only supporters association doing about this? Has the idea of canvassing its membership even occurred to the Trust? We already know that (thru Supporters Direct) nearly 90% are against a 10 team SPL 1 and over 70% in favour of enlarged leagues. We really need to confirm that our fans are broadly in line with Supporters Direct. So while I'd probably no longer support the Jags to the same degree as I do just now I've still a certain sympathy with David Beattie. He can only vote for what he thinks is best for the Club. But the Club is the fans and his judgement is severely hampered by not knowing what the majority of the support want. No-one's voting for a 10-team leauge cosy it's a good size for a league. They're voting for it because they believe it's the only size league capable of generating any money for member clubs. Without anything else changing they're probably right. Of course they've chosen to ignore the real point which is that the "business" is Scottish Football (and not each club) and each club is merely a business unit. If they start from there, they'll see that the strong business units have to support the weak business units, as happens in real business. Edited January 4, 2011 by crazy davie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 Of course they've chosen to ignore the real point which is that the "business" is Scottish Football (and not each club) and each club is merely a business unit. If they start from there, they'll see that the strong business units have to support the weak business units, as happens in real business. Agree. I can't think of any successful commercial business that can build a sustainable model completely ignoring the wishes of the end user. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MerryHell Posted January 4, 2011 Report Share Posted January 4, 2011 While I can see the point that the old firm are the main selling point, with regards to TV rights - what would actually change if we were to adopt a 14, 16 or 18 team top tier? As I'm sure has been metioned previously, they would be able to make sure the number of games in a season does not significantly change and Sky pretty much just show whatever side of the OF are playing away anyway. Who are these people who want to see 4 OF games a season? There are plenty of derbys around the world that are played twice - surely this makes them more appealing? If we increased the size of the league and brought the number of OF games down to two, maybe we would also see an increased interest in the Cups, in terms of spectators and TV rights. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lanarkjag Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 For what it's worth and will probably achieve hee-haw, a copy of the e-mail I've sent to the SPL. Probably go straight in the trash! Dear SPL I would like to put forward an opinion on the planned reformation of the SPL into two leagues of 10 teams that is allegedly going to be voted through by clubs in January. If this reformation goes ahead it will categorically destroy Scottish Football. Interest from fans in Scotland is waning fast, especially from lower end SPL clubs and SFL Division 1. Attendances are dropping rapidly and many will never regain that support unless something radical (not two leagues of 10) is implemented. Playing 4 fixtures against the same club each Season is probably the biggest cause of apathy. Our competitions are predictable, uninteresting, inflexible and pander to the Old Firm. Two divisions of ten is a retrograde step that will take us back to the late 80's and early 90's - a situation that was decided at the time wasn't working. Do you realise that a club in the 1st Division could potentially play another team 8 times in one season? Fans are sick and tired of this format - it is killing the game. Fans are sick and tired of seeing the same teams week in week out. A larger SPL 16-18 teams with 3 up 3 down would generate new interest amongst the Fan Base in Scottish Football outwith the Old Firm. Even something completely radical such as regional divisions with end of season playoffs might even be attractive. A turnover of 1 team a season in the SPL has caused the game to stagnate badly not just in the SPL but in SFL 1. Unfortunately I feel that the fans have had no input into this and we are pandering to the Old Firm and chairmen who are too scared to let their valued home games against Rangers and Celtic go. Fans will continue to dwindle as long as teams play each other 4 times a season. One word. Boredom. We need interest and excitement. Yours optimistically Aaron Barnes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberteeb Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 This whole thing is ridiculous, fans are the ones who fund the clubs, fans overwhelmingly don’t want this so the clubs insist on doing it. Where is the logic in that? No new money is going to be generated; it just stops more of the money being shared around. It’s not as if these new proposals are going to allow the ambassadors of the wonderful Scottish game to conquer Europe. I can’t actually be bothered writing anymore about it, there’s a million and one more reasons why this is pants. Yawn yawn yawn. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 the latest I've heard is that four SPL clubs (Hearts, Dundee Utd, Killie & ICT) are NOT in favour of the proposed change(s). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Blutarsky Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 (edited) It is just possible that FIFA excom members took their cue from their SPL counterparts antics a few years back, with their hollow pledges for England's bid. When the SPL get their 11-1 majority, we're all left guessing which one of the four actually did vote against the proposals. We shouldn't forget, they have form on this. Edited January 5, 2011 by John Blutarsky 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.