twinny Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 50/50 gates will never come back, and to be fair why should they? at the end of the day, whatever may be the reasons for it, the OF generate the crowds to fill their own stadiums why should they give 50% of that over to clubs who can't contribute a significant crowd level. Also, the problem with that thinking is it still concieves of a scottish football that is dependant upon the subsidy of the old firm. Thats not a healthy model IMO I agree that 50/50 on gate receipts isn't right, but I do think that as you need two teams to play a game of football and a number of teams to make a league that there should be a middle ground. This would encourage away fans to travel, which is something that needs to be done. I'd suggest maybe 80/20 split in favour of the home team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 50/50 gates will never come back, and to be fair why should they? Rangers / Celtic might get 50,000+ for their game, but only if the opposition is there. It takes 2 teams to create the reason for attending, so the gate should be shared 50/50. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottymagoo Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) Sorry Davie but I think that's nonsense. Why should Rangers and Celtic invest huge sums of money themselves in building a stadium large enough to hold 50,000 people and then see teams turn up with 1000 fans take half the cash? I disagree with gate shares completely in any ratio. I think the number of people who don't attend away games because they don't want to give money to the other clubs is probably very small and if everyone has similar attendances then you're just shuffling the same amount of money around in a different way. The best way for Thistle to improve revenue through gate receipts is to get more bums in seats at Firhill. Edited October 25, 2012 by scottymagoo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uberteeb Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 If we are offering incentives to anyone to attend our games it needs to be home supporters who can attend 18+ times per season. There is no point in offering incentives for a few hundred away fans coming twice per season. Firstly, it will annoy home fans. Secondly, it will not make any difference. A quid or two extra on your ticket price is not the real reason people don’t go to away games, it is a convenient excuse for fans of teams doing badly who have no reason to travel, I used this excuse for avoiding Dens a couple of times myself in meaningless games. It wasn’t that I can’t afford £2, it was that I couldn’t be bothered and when you travel by train and make a day/night of it £2 is absolutely buttons. The parent/child issue at Falkirk is a valid one but there is not a single childless adult who is not going on Saturday because they cannot afford the extra quid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Fair points, and like I said, only a moot point. So what about capping prices on the cheapest seats: ie saying that you must make X number of seats available to home and away fans for a maximum £20, £17, £14 and £12, but cheaper is fine. The rationale being that a successful club on, say, a promotion / European chase will get bigger crowds so more £20 / £17s coming in than shite clubs, but fans are guaranteed a maximum amount they'll need to pay to get in at away grounds. aye that sounds fair enough. basiclly any solution can't be undertaken by one club alone. the way i see it, we have a 3 year window to change scottish football into an environment that can better nurture the ambitions of non old firm clubs. Clubs need to be talking to each other, but seems that the momentum that was built up in the rangers debacle has fallen off and there is the real danger that they get back up to the SPL with everything is as it was... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I agree that 50/50 on gate receipts isn't right, but I do think that as you need two teams to play a game of football and a number of teams to make a league that there should be a middle ground. This would encourage away fans to travel, which is something that needs to be done. I'd suggest maybe 80/20 split in favour of the home team. yeah i can see the rationale in that but i think scottys point about it just meaning the same amount circulating around the same amount of clubs is probably true, if one takes the OF out of the equation.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blackpool Jags Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 aye that sounds fair enough. basiclly any solution can't be undertaken by one club alone. the way i see it, we have a 3 year window to change scottish football into an environment that can better nurture the ambitions of non old firm clubs. Clubs need to be talking to each other, but seems that the momentum that was built up in the rangers debacle has fallen off and there is the real danger that they get back up to the SPL with everything is as it was... All true in my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twinny Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 yeah i can see the rationale in that but i think scottys point about it just meaning the same amount circulating around the same amount of clubs is probably true, if one takes the OF out of the equation.. Perhaps, but even when Rangers were in the SPL, wouldn't they be much more likely to sell out a home tie with Aberdeen than with say Hamilton Accies (at least in the 80s and 90s). This would be nothing to do with away support but the attraction of the tie to the home support. Would Aberdeen not be due anything as a more attractive team to the Rangers fans. As Davie says, if it was just the Rangers players on their own you wouldn't get 50,000 turning up. I believe in this principle and to me it doesn't matter if at first division level all it meant was shuffling the same cash about the same clubs. In fact, it could help with cashflow when clubs get a month with mainly away matches. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lin1876 Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I think a big problem this season is the divide between the big clubs and the small clubs, especially when there aren't really any in between. On the one hand, you have us, Morton, Dunfermline and Falkirk, who can and will take around 400-1000 to away games depending on where it is. On the other hand, you have Hamilton, Dumbarton, Aidrie, Cowdenbeath and Livingston who won't take more than 300 to an away game unless it's an exceptional occasion. With so many small clubs, the fact our average league attendance this season has been around 2700 is a mighty achievement when we've still to face Morton and Dunfermline at home. Is our system perfect? Absolutely not. The free entry for under-16s is a nice headline, but it's unnecessary and open to abuse. I think that lowering the entry price for adults to £15 and charging kids under-12 £1 would be good in itself, and still a million miles better for families than any other club of our size. I'm no economist, but perhaps we should try an experiment where the prices are changed to £15 for adults, £11 for concessions (16-18, students, OAPs), £7 for 12-16 year olds, and £1 for under 12s. Again, not perfect, but something different... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lady-isobel-barnett Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I think a big problem this season is the divide between the big clubs and the small clubs, especially when there aren't really any in between. On the one hand, you have us, Morton, Dunfermline and Falkirk, who can and will take around 400-1000 to away games depending on where it is. On the other hand, you have Hamilton, Dumbarton, Aidrie, Cowdenbeath and Livingston who won't take more than 300 to an away game unless it's an exceptional occasion. With so many small clubs, the fact our average league attendance this season has been around 2700 is a mighty achievement when we've still to face Morton and Dunfermline at home. We've lost Ross Co, Q o S, Ayr & Dundee and gained Pars, Cowden, Dumbarton & Airdrie. Pars I'm sure will bring more than Dundee did last season, County no loss whatsoever and Queens crowd had dropped away substantially. Think on balance away crowds should be marginally better this season. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagscast Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 I wrote this a while ago: http://jagscast.blogspot.co.uk/2012/02/wir-sind-eine-weithin-bekannte-glasgow.html?m=1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Thats what immediately came to mind for me as well. However, if they were to offer that price for away supporters that were season ticket holders of their respective teams, and that kinda deal was accross the board for all div 1 clubs then that would add an incentive for people to buy season tickets AND go to more away games... Not a bad idea, that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 50/50 gates will never come back, and to be fair why should they? at the end of the day, whatever may be the reasons for it, the OF generate the crowds to fill their own stadiums why should they give 50% of that over to clubs who can't contribute a significant crowd level. Also, the problem with that thinking is it still concieves of a scottish football that is dependant upon the subsidy of the old firm. Thats not a healthy model IMO Err, because they need other teams to play against? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) Err, because they need other teams to play against? I go to Firhill to see Thistle. I don't go to see Cowdenbeath, Airdrie, Morton. I go to see Thistle. Everyone gets the same number of home and away fixtures, it's up to them to generate crowd's, not the opponents. That's why 50/50 gates should never return. Edited October 25, 2012 by G SUS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crazy davie Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Sorry Davie but I think that's nonsense. Why should Rangers and Celtic invest huge sums of money themselves in building a stadium large enough to hold 50,000 people and then see teams turn up with 1000 fans take half the cash? Cos they'll get 50% of every game while they away team gets 50% of just one game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted October 25, 2012 Members Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 That's why 50/50 gates should never return. 50% share of the gate money from the away gate could be easily enforced these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 50% share of the gate money from the away gate could be easily enforced these days. It could be. There is no doubt of that. Why is there suddenly such a clamour for giving up money generated at Firhill? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gianlucatoni Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 To answer the OP it's because 100,000 neanderthals from all over (including Ireland) who travel to watch the filth of both hues simply have no fekkin taste. Like sheep they are following the bigotry and all the crap associated with the filth cos their da's and uncles and their granda's and genetic mutant family trees have always supported them and their miniature stunted brains are incapable of breaking the cycle. We may be the minority but I'd rather be in amongst real football fans than a bunch of complete and utter phannies. As for the pricing debate you could make it free - as they did at Hampden on Saturday for the Scotland v Spain women's game - and still no-one will turn up - for the record the wimmin got 4k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottymagoo Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 50/50 share of the away gate favours the bigger clubs with bigger travelling supports and would hinder Thistle if we get promoted to the SPL where we'd be the wee team. As far as I'm concerned 50/50 split on all gate receipts isn't fair. Yes it takes two teams to make a game of football but it only takes one of them to invest in the larger facilities and generating a large fanbase. Since both are unlikely anyway, far better to concentrate on the situation as it is at the moment and get more money by getting more people into Firhill. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 (edited) To answer the OP it's because 100,000 neanderthals from all over (including Ireland) who travel to watch the filth of both hues simply have no fekkin taste. Like sheep they are following the bigotry and all the crap associated with the filth cos their da's and uncles and their granda's and genetic mutant family trees have always supported them and their miniature stunted brains are incapable of breaking the cycle. We may be the minority but I'd rather be in amongst real football fans than a bunch of complete and utter phannies. Think my fam have been thistle fans for 3-4 generations after they came over from ireland, and im sure that most thistle fans today are fans by virtue of the fact of coming from a thistle family. I love the paradoxes that arise out of a predicament like ours. Like im sure many of have the typical pride that comes with being a died in the wool football supporter, and from that standpoint there is no greater crime than chucking ones team to follow another team. Yet at the same time, we desire that our fanbase grows, which can only come about through others violating that sacred ethic of being a football fan. That said what circulates as sacred ethics change all the time, for instance the notion of being a fan entailing a monogamous notion of a devotion to one singular team is fairly recent. Thistle probably at their heyday in terms of crowd figures benifited from being many peoples 'wee team' before travelling support became part and parcel of being a fan, thus establishing that monogamous sentiment. In the present monogamous context, a big part of our identity is about articulating a dismissive attitude towards the OF. I think that will probably be a significant barrier in our attempts to become a bigger team by alienating potential new supporters that come from old firm backgrounds, but its a situation that there is probably no way out of. Because if we started to soften our stance wed probably lose as many fans as we gain through the dilution of our identity. And thats not even considering the structural factors in scottish football that added to that says we are ******!! However, we should take comfort from the fact that even if one excludes the OF from the crowd figures that per capita scottish teams still pull in more crowds than most countries. As for the stats about the scotland spain game. sad but not surprising and arguably gives us more proof as to the backwardness of scottish society than anything that can be said about us having the OF would communicate. Edited October 25, 2012 by mrD Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Not a bad idea, that. glad you noticed that. an effing brilliant idea if i dont say so myself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Perhaps, but even when Rangers were in the SPL, wouldn't they be much more likely to sell out a home tie with Aberdeen than with say Hamilton Accies (at least in the 80s and 90s). This would be nothing to do with away support but the attraction of the tie to the home support. Would Aberdeen not be due anything as a more attractive team to the Rangers fans. As Davie says, if it was just the Rangers players on their own you wouldn't get 50,000 turning up. I believe in this principle and to me it doesn't matter if at first division level all it meant was shuffling the same cash about the same clubs. In fact, it could help with cashflow when clubs get a month with mainly away matches. the cashflow point is a really good point i have to say. What do they do in England re dividing up gate receipts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G SUS Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 the cashflow point is a really good point i have to say. What do they do in England re dividing up gate receipts? Same as in Scotland. Home team keeps gate receipts. Which is the way it should remain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Same as in Scotland. Home team keeps gate receipts. Which is the way it should remain. As i thought. So whats pretty much driving the 50/50 split in scottish football chat is predicated upon there being a dominant OF to perpetually subsidise the less succesfull teams. That to me seems to suggest that its almost impossible for scottish football fans to concieve of a situation without a dominant duopoly. Sad really Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrD Posted October 26, 2012 Report Share Posted October 26, 2012 I wrote this a while ago: http://jagscast.blog...lasgow.html?m=1 i just read that and i think there are some points on this that would add greatly to this discussion. Could you please paste it though as i think that would more likely prompt a response. Ive got some things to say about it but i think i should shut up for a while and let some other peeps say stuff on this thread. 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.