read'n'yell Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Ok so seen as it has came up (yet again) I thought it would be interesting to see what people's views are on the decision in terms of a poll rather than discussion. Would you vote yes or no? Considering the change would have better distribution of wealth, more chance of teams getting into the top flight, a large league in lower division to test impact of 2 games a season, merging of the governing bodies, change of 11-1 majority voting structure, pyramid system etc etc. I would definitely vote yes. Especially with Thistle being in the category that gains most financial benefit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggyman Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Any system that takes teams back to zero points midway through the season is lunacy in the extreme 7 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Undecided. Still more questions than answers Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BowenBoys Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Any system that takes teams back to zero points midway through the season is lunacy in the extreme I agree. Promotion/relegation decided over 14 games making it a lottery. Taking it a stage further to the ludicrous inclusion of Celtic Colts. Imaging a league of 8 teams in which one team is not allowed to be promoted anyway. Total nonsense. When this proposal was first discussed on BBC Radio 5, it was explained thus 'In order to get away from 4 leagues, there will be 3 leagues which split into 4 halfway through the season'. How do we get rid of these idiots and get our game back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 It's a crackpot scheme but if it pulls the shutters down on SPL then anything might be better than the status quo. If it can be changed after a season or two, maybe three at the most, then it can't be any worse than what we suffer just now. My fear would be that the nutters proposing this require the 12-12-18 to be in place for a lengthy period before it can be scrapped. So purely as a means to an end I'd be for it but if it's given a protracted sell by I'd be against it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peagreenboy Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 So purely as a means to an end I'd be for it but if it's given a protracted sell by I'd be against it. Well, the SPL has been around for sixteen years now, and the last major change was in the seventies? Scottish football is not known for its swift decision-making. I think whatever is decided upon for us, the lowly ignorant fans, will be in place for a while. Unfortunately. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albert's Ghost Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I can't bring myself to vote. It's better than the status quo, whether or not I'm wearing red 'n yella glasses, but it's still bollox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bunny Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 {Scene: boardroom with SPL men in dark suits and black masks} It's like this, the fans demand change, how can we put them off? Easy! Think up something really crazy and totally useless ... Better slip one half-decent point into it ... OK, as a sop, then we present the new set up as being the bees knees. The fans argue amongst themselves about it, then they argue with us but we just stonewall them. By the time they realise it's a con they'll have lost the will to live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
allyo Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I don't mind it actually. I think if they rewarded points at the start of the middle league, say six, four or two for finishing first, second and third (something similar at bottom of the premier), it would make the first part of the season valuable while giving everyone a chance in the second part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 (edited) Total pish, whats the point in the start of the season You could start in Top division of 12 be bottom at split, Enter the 2nd tier of 8 on zero points against teams that are used to winning end up bottom 2 Start season 2 in the bottom tier The say the SPL is built on fear of relegation and is anti football due to this, wait till you can be relegated twice in a year. Then you start to work your way up Top of the bottom tier no split full season Top of the 2nd tier at split in second season Start top tier in the 3rd season 1 season to end up from starting as a potential European side to playing the likes of Clyde but takes you a minimum of 2 years to get back, so you end up signing guys on a 2 year deal in the premiership and the are getting paid premiership wages in the depths of Scotland the next season against really small crowds....... and this will help the financial structure and enjoyment of the game how?? Edited March 13, 2013 by Norgethistle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Just give us back the old two down, two up system. And make the leagues larger. Plain and simples. Get back to having limits on foreign imports Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Wragg Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 If this nonsense is carried then I think the moment its implemented is the moment I make the decision to abandon football spectating for good, and I dont think I'll be alone in making that move. The sooner we get rid of the knobheads running our game the better, theres only one solution , back to 2 leagues , of evenly numbered teams playing each other twice in the league, 2 up /2 down , reduce the number of clubs in the senior game , I mean 370 at a 1st div game last Sat, c'mon , get real , the game is dying a death as it is and it will only die quicker under this amazingly stupid scheme . A protest is required to rid the game of the the Numpties at the top !!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H Wragg Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 I'd be happy with the existing set up with a play off between Premier and First. Completely against the 8-8-8 split and OF colt teams. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norgethistle Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 If this nonsense is carried then I think the moment its implemented is the moment I make the decision to abandon football spectating for good, and I dont think I'll be alone in making that move. The sooner we get rid of the knobheads running our game the better, theres only one solution , back to 2 leagues , of evenly numbered teams playing each other twice in the league, 2 up /2 down , reduce the number of clubs in the senior game , I mean 370 at a 1st div game last Sat, c'mon , get real , the game is dying a death as it is and it will only die quicker under this amazingly stupid scheme . A protest is required to rid the game of the the Numpties at the top !!! The games dying because it boring and not worth the money for the entertainment (Us not included this season) Bigger leagues means more chance to experiment and have a go, field youngsters and bring through your own talent, all adds to the entertainment on the park, plus less boredom playing the same team up to 8 times a season (4 league, 1 League cup, 1 scottish cup, 1 scottish cup replay 1 ramsdens cup), if your only going to parkhead or ibrox once in a season your as well treating it as a cup game and having a shot, instead of parking the bus for the chance of a point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted March 13, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 Bigger leagues end up with meaningless games. What is known just now is fans are not willing to travel to meaningless games. I don't think the "quality" of football has a lot to do with it. People say that by the split there will be certain teams without anything to play for, but think with 18 in a league, by half way, most teams will have nothing to play for. With 4 euro slots and 2 down, that leaves 12 teams - 6 of which will probably be secure from relegation and too far off euro by not long after christmas. As said, the imporant thing is sorting distribution of wealth, changing 11 - 1 voting and merging governing bodies. If we vote yes then this will happen. We can easily change the league set up in 5 years time if it doesnt work. We might end up liking it ! If fans honestly wouldn't turn up to a game because of this league structure then I really don't understand their mentality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted March 13, 2013 Report Share Posted March 13, 2013 The only reason I would be for it is that a much fairer income distribution has been set, see my chart from one of the recent league reconstruction threads: I don't think the system will work but I don't think it would be overly damaging to adopt it for a few seasons and figure out why it doesn't work and learn from that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Wragg Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 Bigger leagues end up with meaningless games. What is known just now is fans are not willing to travel to meaningless games. I don't think the "quality" of football has a lot to do with it. People say that by the split there will be certain teams without anything to play for, but think with 18 in a league, by half way, most teams will have nothing to play for. With 4 euro slots and 2 down, that leaves 12 teams - 6 of which will probably be secure from relegation and too far off euro by not long after christmas. As said, the imporant thing is sorting distribution of wealth, changing 11 - 1 voting and merging governing bodies. If we vote yes then this will happen. We can easily change the league set up in 5 years time if it doesnt work. We might end up liking it ! If fans honestly wouldn't turn up to a game because of this league structure then I really don't understand their mentality. Fans aren't turning up to games now , so whats different ? Even we aren't getting the crowds we deserve and when this hairbrained scheme kicks in there will be even fewer turning up, it has been tried before in Europe, and failed , why should it work here ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watson Towers Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 You do get the feeling that the powers that be are trying to come up with a bit of a bollox so that we end up voting it down - and the boring, boring, boring status quo keeps on rockin' all over the world. That said, I voted for "yip": 12-12 to 8-8-8 could be interesting. This allows the possibility of significant change between the top two leagues each year. That, to me, has been the worst thing about the present set-up. Maybe even more significant, though, is the proposed change towards a decent voting system: the present 11-1 is obscene; and if nothing else that has got to go before Sevco get back to the top flight. Throw in a much fairer distribution of the cash, and surely this has to be worth a whirl? Are folk on here really saying they would rather stick with 1-up & 1-down; with silly money all going to the top, and the evil of an 11-1 voting system on future changes? Yeh 12-12 to 8-8-8 is pretty off the wall, but come in - we need some radical solutions to the shitey state the game is currently in. p.s. please do get back to me and call me a fud if, this time next year we are promoted... but then manage to finish 9th... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted March 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 You do get the feeling that the powers that be are trying to come up with a bit of a bollox so that we end up voting it down - and the boring, boring, boring status quo keeps on rockin' all over the world. That said, I voted for "yip": 12-12 to 8-8-8 could be interesting. This allows the possibility of significant change between the top two leagues each year. That, to me, has been the worst thing about the present set-up. Maybe even more significant, though, is the proposed change towards a decent voting system: the present 11-1 is obscene; and if nothing else that has got to go before Sevco get back to the top flight. Throw in a much fairer distribution of the cash, and surely this has to be worth a whirl? Are folk on here really saying they would rather stick with 1-up & 1-down; with silly money all going to the top, and the evil of an 11-1 voting system on future changes? Yeh 12-12 to 8-8-8 is pretty off the wall, but come in - we need some radical solutions to the shitey state the game is currently in. p.s. please do get back to me and call me a fud if, this time next year we are promoted... but then manage to finish 9th... Completely agree. Getting the "background" stuff sorted out is a priority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thistle_1876 Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 I don't see why we can't have the same top flight set up with the revamped distribution of wealth and just add a play off place between 11th in the SPL and 2nd in the First Division, i don't understand why its this ludacris 8-8-8 system or nothing! I am in no way a major supporter of the current set up in terms of position and a split but its a hell of a lot fairer than than the new set up, if it happened this season then Ross County could be facing relegation where as now they are serious contenders for finishing second! Don't even want to get started on the Colt's idea, why can't they just add 2 fresh teams from outside the set up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 I think this vote misses the point and the only one I can see for league reconstruction. That two teams have won the same competition for more than twenty years. This is the cycle that must be broken. Ideas like colts just strenghthens their dominance For me its not about splits and stuff like that but allowing for a top league were every team could have a possible chance to win the league. That is the only way to bring fans back. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted March 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 I think this vote misses the point and the only one I can see for league reconstruction. That two teams have won the same competition for more than twenty years. This is the cycle that must be broken. Ideas like colts just strenghthens their dominance For me its not about splits and stuff like that but allowing for a top league were every team could have a possible chance to win the league. That is the only way to bring fans back. That is just completely unrealistic. Every league in the world has top teams that are dominant. Look at Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea in England. Barcelona and Madrid in Spain. Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund in Germany, PSG and Lyon in France. Benfica, Porto and Braga in Portugal. Finland - Helsinki runs it. See the trend? No league configuration will stop this. What is important is to still be able to make life interesting for the rest. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 That is just completely unrealistic. Every league in the world has top teams that are dominant. Look at Man Utd, Man City, Chelsea in England. Barcelona and Madrid in Spain. Bayern Munich and Borussia Dortmund in Germany, PSG and Lyon in France. Benfica, Porto and Braga in Portugal. Finland - Helsinki runs it. See the trend? No league configuration will stop this. What is important is to still be able to make life interesting for the rest. In the past 10 years the Bundesliga has been won by five teams (Bayern Munich, Werder Bremen, Stuttgart, Wolfsburg and Dortmund). In the past 10 years the Premier League has been won by four teams (United, City, Chelsea and Arsenal). In the past 10 years La Liga has been won by three teams (Valencia, Real and Barcelona) In the past 27 years the Scottish Premier League/Division has been won by two teams. At the end of the day this doesn't mean much to be honest. But a larger league would see the advantage the top teams have in Scotland reduced. Teams currently hoping for 3rd at best will have four fewer games against old firm opposition and several games against the likes of us, Morton, Livingston and Dunfermline to pick up points. The Old Firm would still dominate in such a set-up, but it would be slightly closer run. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
read'n'yell Posted March 14, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 The difference (and I should of pointed out in my post) is that even Wolfsberg get 40 odd thousand fans through their gates every week. This gives them the finance to challenge the likes of Bayern Munich - the gap isn't all that huge. But when our third best supported team (hearts) gets an average crowd of 13,000 - it is nothing compared to the old firm. I don't see how having more teams will reduce this. Surely the bottom clubs will have more chance picking some points of Dundee Utd, Hibs, Motherwell than they do against the old firm? The only way teams will challenge the Old Firm is by taking points of them as they don't lose enough points to others. So playing them four times probably helps, much like is had benefited Morton so far playing us three times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duck snort Posted March 14, 2013 Report Share Posted March 14, 2013 (edited) Celtic and Rangers will always dominate, sadly, but having a larger league should make it closer. With 8 games a season against them under the current set up teams are likely to raise their game 2 or 3 times at most so aren't taking many points off them. If they can do the same when there are only 4 games the Old Firm are going to drop more points. Having said that, you would also need 1 or 2 teams to be consistent in their other games. Celtic have dropped a lot of points this season but teams 2 to 11 have all been beating each other with no-one performing consistently, so no-one's put pressure on Celtic. It's not impossible to challenge dominant teams. Take Holland as an example. Ajax and PSV have dominated for years but Twente and AZ have both managed to win titles in the last 4 years, in an 18 team league. Edited March 14, 2013 by Duck snort 1 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.