jagsman411971 Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 (edited) 14-14-14 will not happen, unless there is only 1 team relegated from the SPL, with the possibility of 1 more via a playoff. The top 12 at the moment would be happier with 12-12-18 because the chance of relegation from the top division is almost non-existant. ps.... anything coming out of the Govan based ugly sister should be taken with a massive pinch of salt. They spent years ignoring anything the lower league clubs had to say, so now that the boot is on the other foot, f**k them. They dont deserve to be listened to. Edited January 14, 2013 by jagsman411971 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P-R Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 (edited) Considering the "Old" Firm have always been quick to talk about the possibility of playing their football outwith Scotland and have little long interest in the system here I don't see why they should drive/dicate to anyone else the setup that they want. Edited January 14, 2013 by P-R Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 14, 2013 Report Share Posted January 14, 2013 I supported 3 leagues of 14 (with 2 up and 2 down) on previous threads ages ago. 12-12-18 is a pathetic joke. Green's statements are irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Incognito Posted January 15, 2013 Report Share Posted January 15, 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. That's the thing that confused me about Charlie Green's hissy fit last week: whatever league structure is adopted next season, be it 12-12-18, 14-14-14, or the status quo, then Rangers will still be two promotions away from reaching the top flight (assuming they win the 3rd division this season, of course). 14-14-14 sounds good to me - I think a play-off between 3rd bottom and 3rd top a la Germany would be good - but it is highly doubtful it will be adopted. Two extra clubs in the top flight means there will be two extra clubs expecting a cut of the TV money, thus there will be that little bit less to go around the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted January 15, 2013 Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 That's the thing that confused me about Charlie Green's hissy fit last week: Playing to the gallery, that's all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 15, 2013 Report Share Posted January 15, 2013 (edited) ^^ Guy is spot on. If a reconstruction of 3 leagues of 14 takes place in 2013/14, "New" Rangers (assuming they win promotion next season) would be in the second tier. Edited January 15, 2013 by kni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 16, 2013 Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 I am with kni. That is the only reason Rangers are suggesting that structure. However, because they want it, shouldn't be a reason for rejecting it,should it ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 16, 2013 Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 (edited) 14-14-14 could be worse financially for Rangers. If 12-12-18 is implemented next season, Rangers would play the current 3rd division clubs again. They would also be playing 8 clubs (places 3 to 10) from the second division. However, if 14-14-14 was implemented next season, Rangers would still be in the bottom tier - playing the same clubs plus 4 from the old second division. It would help us get promoted too. Edited January 16, 2013 by kni Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lambies Lost Doo Posted January 16, 2013 Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 The 16 - 10 - 16 was attractive to me as I thought it would allow the Top 16 teams to support the bottom 16 by loaning out players. Remove the reserve league and have the teams playing in the bottom league with players loaned out there to develop in competitive games. Then have an U21 league with overage players to keep their fitness up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 16, 2013 Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 Simple logic suggests that league reconstruction cannot happen until season 2014/2015, in order for everyone to know what they are playing for. PLEASE, let's go for 14/14/14 with 2-up/2-down, plus the possibility of a play-off for a third up/down pairing. One game home and away against each other team (= 26 games) + top-7/bottom-7 split with a further one game home and away against the rest of the split group (= 12 games), giving a total of 38 games, and something to play for right to the end of the season! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 16, 2013 Report Share Posted January 16, 2013 The 16 - 10 - 16 was attractive to me as I thought it would allow the Top 16 teams to support the bottom 16 by loaning out players. Remove the reserve league and have the teams playing in the bottom league with players loaned out there to develop in competitive games. Then have an U21 league with overage players to keep their fitness up. Interesting thoughts but the 10 club second division could be compromised if the top clubs "paired" with the bottom league clubs for loans. I remain convinced that the leagues should be the same or a similar size. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Playing to the gallery, that's all. Green probably wants to get out with his dosh before they get back to the top league (as it would then still take them a few years from then to be able to really complete with Celtic) and needs to keep Rangers constantly in the headlines to make sure that meanwhile the punters keep turning up and buying stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Green probably wants to get out with his dosh before they get back to the top league (as it would then still take them a few years from then to be able to really complete with Celtic) and needs to keep Rangers constantly in the headlines to make sure that meanwhile the punters keep turning up and buying stuff. Green would make more dosh if goes if/when Rangers are back in the SPL. Ibrox and Murray Park were bought for a pittance. It should be easy for Rangers to raise or borrow cash to fund new signings. In fact, they could be stronger than Celtic very quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shuggie Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Simple logic suggests that league reconstruction cannot happen until season 2014/2015, in order for everyone to know what they are playing for. PLEASE, let's go for 14/14/14 with 2-up/2-down, plus the possibility of a play-off for a third up/down pairing. One game home and away against each other team (= 26 games) + top-7/bottom-7 split with a further one game home and away against the rest of the split group (= 12 games), giving a total of 38 games, and something to play for right to the end of the season! This + a motivating share of money for the bottom 7 of each of the 3 divisions to get them to bust a gut to finish as high as possible in the 8th to last final positions for the season (I do not know if the current money split does enough on its own to drive teams to these ends and thereby engage supporters during the second half of the season?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 Simple logic suggests that league reconstruction cannot happen until season 2014/2015, in order for everyone to know what they are playing for. PLEASE, let's go for 14/14/14 with 2-up/2-down, plus the possibility of a play-off for a third up/down pairing. One game home and away against each other team (= 26 games) + top-7/bottom-7 split with a further one game home and away against the rest of the split group (= 12 games), giving a total of 38 games, and something to play for right to the end of the season! I'd agree with this to an extent, except making the split top 6/bottom 8. My main issue with the 7 split is a team has a "bye" week. How do you determine who gets the last bye week? Teams can be dragged back into relegation battles/propel forward to challenge for Europe and have a weekend where "match fixing" could occur. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted January 17, 2013 Report Share Posted January 17, 2013 I'd agree with this to an extent, except making the split top 6/bottom 8. My main issue with the 7 split is a team has a "bye" week. How do you determine who gets the last bye week? Teams can be dragged back into relegation battles/propel forward to challenge for Europe and have a weekend where "match fixing" could occur. The fixtures are drawn at the split - you could fix it so that the teams sitting in 7th and 8th are free that week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 The fixtures are drawn at the split - you could fix it so that the teams sitting in 7th and 8th are free that week. I still don't like this split. The league could be tight and a good/poor run of form could propel 7th/8th higher/lower in the league meaning the last weekend could still have consequences for the team missing out. Is there any league in the world that operates a split where there are "bye weeks" for teams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ember Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 It really is quite simple; 14-14-14, playing each other 3 times giving 39 games. After the first 26 games the top 7 get 7 home games and 6 away, the bottom 7 get 6 home games and 7 away. Playoffs as present between all 3 leagues. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stillresigned Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 I don't agree with making changes halfway through the season, it reeks of being made up on the back of a fag packet and Scottish football as we see it today is a result of this half baked approach over a number of years. If re-consruction to be done its in the best interests of all concerned that its thought through abd has widespread support. Whilst the current proposals are better than nothing and have an element of financial re-distribution; they fail to convince me of the unsuitability of the 14-14-14 concept, Nor do they seriously address the(in my view) the idea of summer footballl . Which to me is an obviously no brainer, particularly on mornings like this, where the prospects of sitting around freezing ones bollocks off is hardly appetising.. In spite of all the soundbites coming from those keepers of the flame down Govan way, or perhaps their apologists in the media, I for one will not be taken in by their sudden conversion to the merits of re-structuring. Nor do those who run Scottish football appear to me to be reknowned for their perspicacity, Thus, I feel any proposal should be subject to a credible consultation period and most certainly not rushed through in order to please corporate sponsors or anyone else for that matter. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 18, 2013 Report Share Posted January 18, 2013 how about with 14-14-14, play each other 3 times and to avoid unfairness in income from home games that the revenue from the 3rd game is shared between the 2 teams? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 19, 2013 Report Share Posted January 19, 2013 Brilliant suggestion from Lenziejag! Let's go for it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag2 Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I wonder whether anyone at the SFL has had a good think about Lenziejag's reconstruction plan? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I proposed 3 leagues of 14 on 12th November. I've always hated splits and each team should play the others 3 times. Splitting the money from the 3rd game is a complex issue. Some clubs, i.e. those with small support, would benefit disproportionately. The clubs with bigger home supports, i.e. us, would suffer. The smaller clubs already benefit from our large away support. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 I proposed 3 leagues of 14 on 12th November. I've always hated splits and each team should play the others 3 times. Splitting the money from the 3rd game is a complex issue. Some clubs, i.e. those with small support, would benefit disproportionately. The clubs with bigger home supports, i.e. us, would suffer. The smaller clubs already benefit from our large away support. We'd be in the SPL, this wouldn't be the case. I think that playing an odd number of matches against each team is far worse than the split to be honest. However if the 14 team 39 match system was implemented I would be very happy with the income from the third game being split. It takes more than just the big teams to make up a league, otherwise why don't Rangers and Celtic play each other 38 times a season? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted January 22, 2013 Report Share Posted January 22, 2013 Kni,I wasn't suggesting that 14-14-14 was my idea.I was trying to suggest a possible solution to some SPL teams complaining that they would lose out if they didn't get their extra OF income. I don't think that it matters so much in the other divisions, but it would have the added advantage of encouraging travelling support. 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.