Jump to content

West Ender

What if they shut down the season?

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, ClydebankJag said:

There’s a difference between automatic promotion and a playoff. Being top of their league doesn’t guarantee promotion, even in normal circumstances. Don’t let the facts get in the way of your conspiracy theory though.

Is the parallel not ourselves being guaranteed relegation 

There were no playoffs in any of the divisions, not a conspiracy theory but surely you want to reward success in these extraordinary times .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, allyo said:

Possibly, but affected clubs will see through it.

You could take the same logic and flip it around. In a 14-14-14 structure Dundee United would not be promoted, as they'd still be playing in the third league up from the bottom.

Or another way to look at it. Let's say a 20-12-10 structure was proposed. Thistle and QOS are allocated to play in the second tier, with all of last season's League 1 clubs. Would you not view that as relegation?

For me relegation happens when a full season is played.  2 points behind with a game in hand and 27 points to play for but going down because of it was expulsion

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, allyo said:

Possibly, but affected clubs will see through it.

You could take the same logic and flip it around. In a 14-14-14 structure Dundee United would not be promoted, as they'd still be playing in the third league up from the bottom.

Or another way to look at it. Let's say a 20-12-10 structure was proposed. Thistle and QOS are allocated to play in the second tier, with all of last season's League 1 clubs. Would you not view that as relegation?

Sorry, I’m not buying this bottom up logic. It is not the same.  Any league system is tiered from top down and viewed accordingly. 

Lets at least stick to realistic comparisons if we are going to discuss it. You don’t need to shoehorn us into a ridiculous format to get an unfair scenario for us. The current state of play is unfair on us, and as I’ve pointed out we have all more or less accepted that this will happen unless an option that is on the table is taken up. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Jagtastic said:

Sorry, I’m not buying this bottom up logic. It is not the same.  Any league system is tiered from top down and viewed accordingly. 

Lets at least stick to realistic comparisons if we are going to discuss it. You don’t need to shoehorn us into a ridiculous format to get an unfair scenario for us. The current state of play is unfair on us, and as I’ve pointed out we have all more or less accepted that this will happen unless an option that is on the table is taken up. 

Sorry, but I don't buy this. You can't just count it down from the top. If you could then DD's suggestion of everyone in one (top) league would work for everyone.

The status of a league is defined by the positions it represnts in the overall structure. Even if we go to 14-10-10-10 the status of every league is diminished and so is the potential prize money. In the Championship for example, instead of competing for places 13-22 you're competing for 15-24. Which is a modest change, but diminished.

In the case we are discussing, Clyde, they go from a league where they are competing for places 23-34 to one where they are competing for 29-42. That is a significant drop in status and prize money and frankly, at that level, Clyde are far more concerned about how many leagues are below them than how many are above them.

We can disagree on this, no problem. And I respect your view while disagreeing with it. But in reality it is the clubs that have to be convinced, and I believe that clubs affected as Clyde would be will see it the way that I am outlining. They will therefore not support it and that's ultimately what matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, allyo said:

Sorry, but I don't buy this. You can't just count it down from the top. If you could then DD's suggestion of everyone in one (top) league would work for everyone.

The status of a league is defined by the positions it represnts in the overall structure. Even if we go to 14-10-10-10 the status of every league is diminished and so is the potential prize money. In the Championship for example, instead of competing for places 13-22 you're competing for 15-24. Which is a modest change, but diminished.

In the case we are discussing, Clyde, they go from a league where they are competing for places 23-34 to one where they are competing for 29-42. That is a significant drop in status and prize money and frankly, at that level, Clyde are far more concerned about how many leagues are below them than how many are above them.

We can disagree on this, no problem. And I respect your view while disagreeing with it. But in reality it is the clubs that have to be convinced, and I believe that clubs affected as Clyde would be will see it the way that I am outlining. They will therefore not support it and that's ultimately what matters.

I'm not sure whether this will go through or not, probably the latter. As with our situation though, it is unlikely to be the clubs perceived to be negatively affected that cast the decisive votes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Jagtastic said:

I'm not sure whether this will go through or not, probably the latter. As with our situation though, it is unlikely to be the clubs perceived to be negatively affected that cast the decisive votes.

I suppose it depends how many there are. The "genius" of the first vote was that it loaded all the burden on to a very small number of clubs.

Fairness and democratic self interest are in direct conflict here, unfortunately.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

One league of 44 ... play each other once and reverse the fixtures for the next season. What could be fairer than that

Quite like that idea, gives the traditionally smaller club's some good pay days and sorts out what would be the hierarchy of Scottish football (as it would be now), relegation for the bottom two into lowland or Highland leagues and promotions for the winners from each of those leagues.  It could be determined what the year 3 structure looks like from the outset and everyone then knows what they're playing for.

 

It's never going to happen but I'd love to see it, also the bonus if a visit to every ground in the country for the die hard travelling fans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can see next season being 14-10-10-10 for “fairness” and “sporting integrity” as an interim measure but with the play-off and relegations set up to change it to say 14-14-16 for the following season. 

Would prefer a 16 team top flight but don’t see that happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JeanieD said:

Kelty have a point but so do Clyde in their respective announcements,  both are made with an element of self -interest,  as well as a nod to relative  fairness given the unusual circumstances.

Clyde say no club should be in a worse financial or sporting position because of Covid-19, yet voted to relegate Thistle, Stranraer and possibly Hearts. These 2 things do not add up.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Auld Jag said:

Clyde say no club should be in a worse financial or sporting position because of Covid-19, yet voted to relegate Thistle, Stranraer and possibly Hearts. These 2 things do not add up.

No one has actually voted to relegate Thistle. They voted to end the season with Thistle in bottom place in the league. There are now discussions which may or may not result in Thistle being relegated (and the default is that we will be) but until we know the outcome I think we are jumping ahead. 

Edited by allyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually got myself thinking. I reckon 13-10-10-10 is the obvious temporary solution, for the following reasons...

It allows the automatic promotion positions to be honoured while removing relegation

It only admits one non league team (via a playoff) which was the maximum ever intended 

It virtually maintains the status of each of the lower leagues in terms of their position within the overall structure

It is easier to revert to 12-10-10-10. The premier league would only be required to relegate 2 clubs, not three

It's only real disadvantage is the odd number of teams in the top league, which only means that each team would have to go 2 to 4 weekends without a game. But given the way that games are shifted around these days for TV,  weather, other competitions, glamour friendlies etc, that hardly seems a big deal.

Unconventional, but not unworkable

Edited by allyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, allyo said:

Is 13-10-10-10 a complete non starter, and if so why?

Would that not mean one team in the Premier League not playing every week?

sorry you’ve just answered your question 

Edited by jlsarmy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Would that not mean one team in the Premier League not playing every week?

sorry you’ve just answered your question 

Not that big a deal, compared to all the other issues. I don't think

Edited by allyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Someone might complain about an extra club getting a divvy of the payout. What about 13-10-10-9

edit, with some of the revenue from the extra SPL gate money going to the league 2 teams who have 2 home  games less

Edited by Dick Dastardly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Or the spare premier team could play the spare league 2 team each week in a friendly. Nice wee earner for some. :happy2:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, allyo said:

No one has actually voted to relegate Thistle. They voted to end the season with Thistle in bottom place in the league. There are now discussions which may or may not result in Thistle being relegated (and the default is that we will be) but until we know the outcome I think we are jumping ahead. 

So are you saying that clubs didn’t actually know what they were voting for ? That the SPFL just decided after the vote to promote/relegate/not relegate clubs ?

If relegation wasn’t part of the vote, I am pretty sure Thistle would have voted for the resolution as well.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

So are you saying that clubs didn’t actually know what they were voting for ? That the SPFL just decided after the vote to promote/relegate/not relegate clubs ?

If relegation wasn’t part of the vote, I am pretty sure Thistle would have voted for the resolution as well.

 

I'm saying that it wasn't yet decided. It still isn't. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, allyo said:

I'm saying that it wasn't yet decided. It still isn't. 

I think it is decided and that unless there is reconstruction of the leagues, Stranraer and ourselves will be relegated. I am also pretty sure that this was known when the vote was made.

The reconstruction may come as a saviour for us, but as things stand we will be a League One club next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, allyo said:

I'm saying that it wasn't yet decided. It still isn't. 

It isn’t decided yet, but I think that is really a separate issue from the original vote. There was only a proposal to look at restructuring - that wasn’t a foregone conclusion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Dick Dastardly said:

I think it is decided and that unless there is reconstruction of the leagues, Stranraer and ourselves will be relegated. I am also pretty sure that this was known when the vote was made.

The reconstruction may come as a saviour for us, but as things stand we will be a League One club next year.

That's as I see it. Otherwise why were we even thinking of a law suit if there was nothing decided?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Auld Jag said:

Clyde say no club should be in a worse financial or sporting position because of Covid-19, yet voted to relegate Thistle, Stranraer and possibly Hearts. These 2 things do not add up.

Indeed @Auld Jag. That’s Cumbernauld logic at its finest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×