Lambies Lost Doo Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 Some junior teams do want to enter the senior leagues, some don't. The English pyramid contains plenty of teams who refuse promotion to the next level up for the same sort of reasons. I really do think you would struggle to find any Junior teams who want to "step up" to Division 3. Spartans etc would like to but they are classed as senior in the East of Scotland league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 (edited) Reconstruction is a bit of a misnomer in many ways because what we're being asked to buy into when it comes to matchday is not that different from what we have now. The upside of the proposals is that there would be one governing body for the league. Perhaps that might bring change somewhere down the road, change that many of us hope for but don't seem to be getting - larger leagues. The cynic is me says the 12-12-18 set-up is a device that will end up cutting the bottom third of the game loose. That's what some fans here and elsewhere are calling for - as if this will miraculously improve the standard of what remains and grow the sponsorship income to the 12-12. Alarm call: most of the teams - with one exception although it doesn't know what it is - have never seen 'football in crisis' headlines. They get along, they make ends meet, sometimes they pull off a cup shocker. That's it. The problem teams are in the 12-12 - Motherwell, Dundee, Hearts, Dunfermline, Thistle, Livingston, Airdrie. All mismanaged since the 'trickle down' of the SPL started in 1998. One of them has been in administration twice. If we're going to talk about kicking teams to the kerb, start with the deadwood. That would be the criterion for Scottish football given that it's so fixated on money and community is secondary, wouldn't it? The bald men fighting over a comb leagues - and sadly, the fans are conniving with it. Sad to think that six months ago clubs like ours had the SFA and the SPL by the balls. Edited January 11, 2013 by McKennan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 I really do think you would struggle to find any Junior teams who want to "step up" to Division 3. Spartans etc would like to but they are classed as senior in the East of Scotland league. So, by implication 'stepping up' is a good thing? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 (edited) Most clubs in Div 2 and Div 3 get home attendances of 3 figures with the exception of Rangers and Ayr Utd. Even Cowdenbeath and Dumbarton in our league struggle to get 4 figure crowds. I'm not saying these teams should fold. The should continue but in a setup and format which suits them and others. I was crazy that David Will of Brechin City was so high up in UEFA or FIFA. These clubs are there for their fans but they don't actually contribute a lot ot improving Scottish football or bringing through youth and improving technique in the current state and the dedication the players must have to work, play part-time and travel all over the place is not efficient use of resources. Junior teams are happy in their own setup they would not want to join a pyramid. Why would Pollok want to go and play Peterhead? They are better off with Arthurlie and Kilwinning. That's probably a generalisation, which may not be true of all Junior set ups. Carnoustie or Tayport may well fancy getting involved in senior football. Unless every Junior club is against every "progressing" to the seniors then I feel an avenue should remain open. Also when the phrase introducing a pyramid system is used I think most are really meaning opening the door to any club that has earned the right to and wishes to compete in the bottom senior league. How can any current SFL club complain about one up one down to & fro the SPL when it's a member of an organisation that doesn't permit any relegation from its bottom league. I agree tho' that the likes of Pollok wouldn't wish to travel to Peterhead but is that any dafter than Elgin City travelling to Stranraer? Perhaps if the lower tier of senior football was regionalised then perhaps the bigger Junior clubs may have a rethink. Anyway the point I'm making is if they're good enough and ever want to then they shouldn't be blocked. Edited January 11, 2013 by lady-isobel-barnett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambies Lost Doo Posted January 11, 2013 Report Share Posted January 11, 2013 So, by implication 'stepping up' is a good thing? No. Hence the quotation mark thingymabobs. I think the Junior setup is far better than Div 3 (excludng the Rangers factor) and 2 in lower leagues. Works well. Local clubs. Guys playing football. Big rivalries all within close travelling distance. One thing I would do though with Juniors is take away their voting power in the SFA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 In view of many fans' reported "reservations", I am beginning to wonder whether 2 divisions of 22 teams might be the best answer. Take the present 42 teams, add in a couple of keen newcomers (perhaps Spartans and Gala Fairydean?), and - hey presto! - two divisions of 22. Play each other team once at home and once away = 42 games. Avoid any potential risk of "meaningless" games by having really generous promotion and relegation arrangements. Any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) In view of many fans' reported "reservations", I am beginning to wonder whether 2 divisions of 22 teams might be the best answer. Take the present 42 teams, add in a couple of keen newcomers (perhaps Spartans and Gala Fairydean?), and - hey presto! - two divisions of 22. Play each other team once at home and once away = 42 games. Avoid any potential risk of "meaningless" games by having really generous promotion and relegation arrangements. Any thoughts? Tied in with a maximum ticket price, more equitable redistribution of TV monies and a governing body looking after all of Scottish football it may well be the way to go. Some rationalisation of the cup competitions could also introduce some extra excitement. Edited January 12, 2013 by scotty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chicofan Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 (edited) I hope this all goes through as planned for the simple reason to piss off our ugly Govan neighbours. Fat Sally is turning into a bleating bellend of a man Its no fair blah blah blah They have taken over from the other ugly neighbours from the east end as "the persecuted" Lets see how long these "loyal" fans can stick it Oh and Good luck to Berwick today hope you take points off them....again Edited January 12, 2013 by Chicofan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eff Tee Ohh Eff Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 I remember reading an article a few years ago that suggested that junior clubs (in the West region at least) were pretty much split 50/50 on their support of a national pyramid system. It hinted that the main reason for clubs being against a move towards this structure was the junior Blazerati's fear of losing office/status/influence etc. Sound familiar? If some junior clubs do not want to join a new national, regionalised set up then that is their right however this should not deny the more progressive clubs the opportunity to progress through a pyramid league structure. With the changing demographics in Scotland we now have largish centres of population (East Kilbride, Glenrothes, Irvine, Bathgate, Musselburgh etc) as well as rural areas (Speyside, Cromarty, Sutherland, Skye, Lewis, Orkney, Shetland) which have seen re-population in recent years, without senior football teams to call their own. By a process of natural selection the 'deadwood' teams that some of you refer to would be replaced in the top leagues by some of the more ambitious clubs currently plying there trade in Scotland's various leagues (amateur, junior, semi-pro) thus ensuring that much of the freshness and competition we all crave can be created from the bottom up and not just from shaking the top of the tree every few years. Scottish football's blinkered, self-serving establishment tried for years to keep Highland League clubs out of the senior set up, privately citing distance and accessibility as factors (but in reality they were just trying to preserve their own status). Can imagine the Scottish football landscape today without ICT and Ross County? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted January 12, 2013 Report Share Posted January 12, 2013 The pyramid system has to be put in place as it is a structure that clearly works - lots of other countries have it. But do you seriously think it will bring the spark back to scottish football? Will I turn up to a game that I wouldnt of before, knowing East Stirling might be replaced by Arthurlie Juniors this year? It needs to happen but this isn't the game changer. 1. Get the spl.sfl merged. 2. Fairer wealth distribution. 3. Sort the leagues. 4. Pyramid System 5. Youth initiative system that works (eg all teams field two under 21's in starting 11) Do that, in that order. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgow Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 I caught a bit of Radio Scotland yesterday before 3pm. Derek Ferguson was making reference to an on air interview that Jackie had clearlly just given but I didn't hear it. He mentioned that "Jackie made a lot of sense" and I get the impression that it wasn't too favourable to the Middle 8 split. However, did anyone else hear what Jackie actually said? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 (edited) I caught a bit of Radio Scotland yesterday before 3pm. Derek Ferguson was making reference to an on air interview that Jackie had clearlly just given but I didn't hear it. He mentioned that "Jackie made a lot of sense" and I get the impression that it wasn't too favourable to the Middle 8 split. However, did anyone else hear what Jackie actually said? Sorry, didn't hear that but was listening to the radio later on. I'm getting the impression that the SFL will probably run with this reconstruction model simply to see the SPL/SFL merge. I think there'll be enough SFL chairmen thinking along the lines that once the SPL is out the equation then they'll be able to revamp the leagues again a few seasons later. I won't guess David Beattie's voting intentions but let's say just that SFL clubs of our size have more to gain with the SPL's demise than lower league clubs. Two things that concern me most are, firstly if this means to an end approach is not adopted will it strengthen the SPL's hand and put the SPL's demise on the back burner? Secondly can Scottish football afford the time to go with this daft 8-8-8 system. Put another way will this be a further nail in the coffin? I'm usually all in favour of chairmen consulting their fans over issues like this. If the chairmen heed their fans they'll certainly reject the proposed structure. That tho' could mean the one chance of getting rid of the SPL is gone (when sevco return to the top flight fairer distribution etc will be far harder to bring about). Don't know what the answer will or even should be. Edited January 13, 2013 by lady-isobel-barnett Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fawlty Towers Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 I caught a bit of Radio Scotland yesterday before 3pm. Derek Ferguson was making reference to an on air interview that Jackie had clearlly just given but I didn't hear it. He mentioned that "Jackie made a lot of sense" and I get the impression that it wasn't too favourable to the Middle 8 split. However, did anyone else hear what Jackie actually said? He said (to the best of my recollection) that he was happy that there would be change in regard to one ruling body & a fairer share of money but not happy with 12-12-18 proposal. He would prefer a larger top league and to make up the number of games would have League Cup games over 2 legs. His main concern seemed to be the points being reset to zero for the middle 8 teams as a team at the bottom of the top 12 knowing early on they will be in the middle 8 could rest players so that they would be fresh for the 14 game season whilst a team in the second 12 could be fighting all the way to the last match to get in to the middle 8 and could be disadvantaged with injuries, etc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 13, 2013 Report Share Posted January 13, 2013 His main concern seemed to be the points being reset to zero for the middle 8 teams as a team at the bottom of the top 12 knowing early on they will be in the middle 8 could rest players so that they would be fresh for the 14 game season whilst a team in the second 12 could be fighting all the way to the last match to get in to the middle 8 and could be disadvantaged with injuries, etc. I know being a ten team league at present it isn't exactly the same but if 22 games was the cut off point this season Airdrie's win at Dunfermline yesterday would've been for nothing. Their next two games would be academic. Likewise Morton's next two games would be of no importance to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Interesting to note that BBC Scotland is now reporting that Rangers would like to see a 14-14-14 set-up. Many of us have been struggling with different arithmetical formulae over recent months in an attempt to satisfy multiple demands from both supporters and clubs. What is abundantly clear is that the current 12-12-18 proposition, with artificial multi-splits and zero-setting of points, is just not workable - and simply not what the punters are looking for! Maybe it is indeed time to go back to the straightforward 14-14-14 arrangement, two-up two-down, plus play-offs for a potential third up/down place, once each home and away, and then a simple 7-7 split with 12 more home-and-away games = a guaranteed 34 league games for everybody. Beyond that, we can also look at more attractive arrangements for the various Cup competitions. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Interesting to note that BBC Scotland is now reporting that Rangers would like to see a 14-14-14 set-up. Many of us have been struggling with different arithmetical formulae over recent months in an attempt to satisfy multiple demands from both supporters and clubs. What is abundantly clear is that the current 12-12-18 proposition, with artificial multi-splits and zero-setting of points, is just not workable - and simply not what the punters are looking for! Maybe it is indeed time to go back to the straightforward 14-14-14 arrangement, two-up two-down, plus play-offs for a potential third up/down place, once each home and away, and then a simple 7-7 split with 12 more home-and-away games = a guaranteed 34 league games for everybody. Beyond that, we can also look at more attractive arrangements for the various Cup competitions. Makes a lot of sense to me... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Interesting to note that BBC Scotland is now reporting that Rangers would like to see a 14-14-14 set-up. Many of us have been struggling with different arithmetical formulae over recent months in an attempt to satisfy multiple demands from both supporters and clubs. What is abundantly clear is that the current 12-12-18 proposition, with artificial multi-splits and zero-setting of points, is just not workable - and simply not what the punters are looking for! Maybe it is indeed time to go back to the straightforward 14-14-14 arrangement, two-up two-down, plus play-offs for a potential third up/down place, once each home and away, and then a simple 7-7 split with 12 more home-and-away games = a guaranteed 34 league games for everybody. Beyond that, we can also look at more attractive arrangements for the various Cup competitions. Would that not be a guaranteed 38 games? Certainly given a straight choice above would surely be preferable to what's on offer. I don't see why, provided there's some sort of pyramid structure in place, the bottom league couldn't be extended to 18 clubs and just play each other twice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaggy Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Interesting to note that BBC Scotland is now reporting that Rangers would like to see a 14-14-14 set-up. Many of us have been struggling with different arithmetical formulae over recent months in an attempt to satisfy multiple demands from both supporters and clubs. What is abundantly clear is that the current 12-12-18 proposition, with artificial multi-splits and zero-setting of points, is just not workable - and simply not what the punters are looking for! Maybe it is indeed time to go back to the straightforward 14-14-14 arrangement, two-up two-down, plus play-offs for a potential third up/down place, once each home and away, and then a simple 7-7 split with 12 more home-and-away games = a guaranteed 34 league games for everybody. Beyond that, we can also look at more attractive arrangements for the various Cup competitions. this seems the most obvious & simple solution. The first bit of common sense I think I've ever heard from Charles Green Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Junior Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Right thats it , games over, im agreeing with Charles Green here (although this smells of Traynor and his "plans" he announced in the Daily Ranger last year). The conspirator in me thinks that this has been fed out via Green by Longmuir so that he can appear to be in cahoots with the SPL/SFL while secretly getting someone who is getting piles of media attantion anyway to peddle the line that everyone actually wants (and get Green some good publicity). If they are moving the financial payments for the equivalent of the first division to be closer to the bottom of the SPL then there really is no blocker to going to 14 teams. Even if they want to continue their split and likely go 6/8 it is a structure that can be mirrored throughout all 3 divisions so there is no confusion for any club in any league. My preferance is still 14 with 39 games and some sort of financial adjustment to cover for lack of home games against bigger clubs in the final round of games , maybe even something that each club keeps 80% of the gate fee from its own fans going to away games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Incognito Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Would that not be a guaranteed 38 games? Certainly given a straight choice above would surely be preferable to what's on offer. I don't see why, provided there's some sort of pyramid structure in place, the bottom league couldn't be extended to 18 clubs and just play each other twice. I made it 38 games too. I thought it might have just been my dodgy maths! Either way, 14-14-14 would mean plenty of games - even more if they included play-offs - and it does everything good the 12-12-18 is supposed to except without the complicated splits. It sounds like a reasonable idea to me - I just can't believe Charles Green thought of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Yes! Forum readers are quite right! It is indeed 38 games - plenty enough for everybody! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buchanio Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I'm all for 14-14-14, sounds like the best option all round, well at least its understandable to the standard punter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Does the 14-14-14 still have the problem of a split around the time when most teams will have postponed games to rearrange ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buchanio Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 it appears to have a more traditional split with the teams playing each other for European, promotion or relegation places. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeanieD Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 Seems strange that the 14-14-14 has found favour at The Rangers 2012 Club - one of their whines about the 12-12-18 was that their "triumph" in winning this year's 3rd (lowest) division would be rendered meaningless and that they would be playing for nothing for the rest of the season. If 14-14-14 comes along then The Rangers 2012 club would still be in the lowest tier of Scottish Football next season regardless of winning the current lowest division this season. I suspect they are just muddying the water and putting forward options that will merely delay any final decision - or at least sow some seeds of doubt in the minds of some of the other clubs. 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.