Pie Of The Month Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 It seems whoever is coming up with the ideas has lost the plot http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/8653062.stm 14 teams playing each other twice before splitting into a top 6 and bottom 8 who play each other twice. So the problem of playing each other 4 times a season isn't solved and 2 sections play a different amount of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Fourteen teams playing 26 games then an eight-six split. That'll make an interesting league table come May. Only in the SPL. The trouble with sitting on two stools is that the sitter invariably ends up on their arsssssh. Fail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paddy Thistle Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Just more bollocks from the out of touch SPL, everyone's complaint is playing each other 4 times is boring. So how does this change it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red Yell Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 It'd be crazy to expect anything other than a totally insane proposition from the SPL. I mean, playing each team once after the split leads to the possibility of bottom half teams overtaking top half teams on points with no effect, but twice? Wouldn't be surprised if the top team of the bottom 8 gets more points than, say, the 3rd placed team in the top 6 and demands a European place or something. Or do we still have that for 3rd place, our football is going down the sh*tter so fast I never can tell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 If I were the chairman of a current SPL club, would I vote for a system that would reduce the guaranteed games played against the OF from 6 per season to 4 per season and increase the chances of relegation from 10-1 to 6-1? Scotland's biggest problem is the number of senior league teams. We have 42 with a population of 5 million. That's roughly equivalent to England having 420 teams, or London having 63. If the cake is too small, it doesn't matter which way you slice it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 This proposal is pretty ridiculous. The current SPL managers (at least Rangers, Motherwell and somebody else) have been moaning that the split is a farce, so the SPL see a way of 'fixing' that by making it even more of a farce with this 8-6 split. I honestly can't see how anybody sees this as a sensible way forward, whoever came up with this is mad. If you take the problems that there seem to be at the moment - the split (which I like but most seem to disagree with), playing each other 4 times and then add the fact that come half way through the season the team in 7th will have nothing to play for (even if they're not too far off of 4th place), both halves(ish) of the league will play different amounts of games and the entire world will laugh at the ridiculous set-up. Theres been a million threads on tons of football forums that have come up with ideas, there is no need for us to repeat any of them now, but in my opinion every single one has been better than this one! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 (edited) The thing is of course is that these aren't football proposals, they're money propsals. Edited April 30, 2010 by crazy davie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 The Doncaster fellow will have sounded out the individual clubs and realise this format proposed is probably the only one that'll get carried. Wouldn't be surprised if they've had a vote already pro or con the status quo and the pros have carried the day. That's the easy part, getting a sensible system is probably nigh on impossible given some of the eejits involved in running SPL clubs. All you can say positively about this proposed set up is it's better than what they've got now. The fact that even at 14 clubs they won't have a straight two up two down points to compromise based on self preservation. No surprise . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberteeb Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 I think they would have struggled to come up with a worse idea to be honest, the fact that someone who works for the SPL decided to release these proposals really makes you wonder about who is in charge of the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 Imagine that if by the time of the split there was one or two teams so far behind that relegation clearly beckoned. That would make the bottom 8's remaining matches a wonderfully exciting event, wouldn't it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven H Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 How did we get into a situation where 2 Clubs can work together to veto ANY proposal? That is plain stupid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 John Lambie Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 (edited) Bloody crazy, a team could miss out on a relegation battle/european place so early on in the season because of the stupid split. No other major league in the world has a split, why? Because it's unfair & stupid! 14 is pants too, how many relegation spots, still 1? Needs to be 16 teams, no stupid split. If that doesn't work then we've tried it, change it to something else & see if that works. I didn't think there could be anything worse than what we have just now, but they seem to have found it! Edited April 30, 2010 by 1 John Lambie Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lionel J. Botch Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 it might be crazy, but if it increases our chances of playing in the top league - I'll take it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted April 30, 2010 Report Share Posted April 30, 2010 it might be crazy, but if it increases our chances of playing in the top league - I'll take it. Agreed, if that was the only (and quickest) option for change, I'd happily grab it too and hope we are in top 2 (or possibly top 3 if there's a bottom v 3rd playoff for the 14th spot) next season. But have to agree with majority of others here - it's the daftest idea possible they could have come up with, and shows how out of touch those who run the game and make such decisions, are. Until we have an 18 team top league and league cup (with initial regional mini-leagues), the game in Scotland will continue to decline. (League restructuring also has to be backed up by (many glaringinly obvious) findings of McLeish report including in terms of investment in football (and sport generally) for kids from a young age and the provision of decent standard facilities.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1 John Lambie Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 it might be crazy, but if it increases our chances of playing in the top league - I'll take it. But on our budget, it won't. Not unless we have a really good season & punch above our weight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigesige00 Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 Why 14 teams? Why not 16? The top flights of Norway and Greece are 16 teams. 16 teams/30 games is the best structure. And the SFL must be expanded to 48 teams (3 divisions, 30games a year) and relegation must be introduced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
afghan Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 It seems that the main barrier to any sort of meaningful change is the fact that everyone wants a go at playing the OF as often as possible. John Boyle (the Motherwell chairman) said recently that an OF visit is worth about 125000 pounds. It's hard to see the anyone in the SPL voting to lose that kind of income, even if it were for the greater good of the game in Scotland. I really wish they would naff off to England and let a sensible restructuring happen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sigesige00 Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 It seems that the main barrier to any sort of meaningful change is the fact that everyone wants a go at playing the OF as often as possible. If that is the case, the SFA should force a reform even against the will of the SPL clubs. And the same applies to the SFL -- relegation should be introduced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 If that is the case, the SFA should force a reform even against the will of the SPL clubs. And the same applies to the SFL -- relegation should be introduced. Unfortunately, the SPL consider themselves to be independent of the SFA. They can basically vote to do whatever they want. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted May 1, 2010 Report Share Posted May 1, 2010 Unfortunately, the SPL consider themselves to be independent of the SFA. They can basically vote to do whatever they want. Much as I despise the SPL when you see how the SFA is run it's rather hard to blame them. This proposal is really flawed but hope it goes through if only as a stepping stone to something far better. 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.