Scottish Football Reconstruction (Mod Note #55)

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

I'm not worming out of anything. I've been calling ye Sevco for a long time now, its not a derogatory term. I've asked several times for an explanation of how it is derogatory/offensive but I havent gotten one other than the "we dont like it", surprise surprise!

As for going off topic, are you for real??! I'm offtopic because ye keeping beating the drum about me calling ye Sevco. Try shutting the fúck up about it and see how that goes!

Oh yeah, sorry - i forgot i needed your approval to voice my opinion around here.

I clearly gave my opinions relating to the changes needed in Scottish football twice in this thread. You saw fit to rant and rave about thread derailings instead.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

Oh yeah, sorry - i forgot i needed your approval to voice my opinion around here.

I clearly gave my opinions relating to the changes needed in Scottish football twice in this thread. You saw fit to rant and rave about thread derailings instead.

I never said that, I just asked you to stay on topic or take your rant elsewhere, which you and your family couldnt do for several posts. Ye kept at it and at it, now you come out with this tripe.

SantryRed

Dempsey wrote: »

I never said that, I just asked you to stay on topic or take your rant elsewhere, which you and your family couldnt do for several posts. Ye kept at it and at it, now you come out with this tripe.

You're not a mod. He'll do what he wants.

FREE SPEECH FOR EIREBEAR!!!

GavRedKing

Unless this gets back on topic fairly sharpish I'm going to close it up.

TheBuilder

Dempsey wrote: »

I never said that, I just asked you to stay on topic or take your rant elsewhere, which you and your family couldnt do for several posts. Ye kept at it and at it, now you come out with this tripe.

You are actually stupid aren't you? We never went off topic, we clearly gave our thoughts on league reconstruction that you choose to ignore and cry on about us wanting to be called by our proper name.

Madam

Jelle1880 wrote: »

But it goes further than that, do you remember the referee strike ?

Yes I do, what has that to do with the topic though?

Badabing

I would favour a 16 team SPL it will just need and take everybody to go in to a meeting with open minds. I was surprised that the SPL agreed a 5 year deal with SKY/ESPN if reconstruction of the League is on the cards soon.

Eirebear

Madam wrote: »

Yes I do, what has that to do with the topic though?

You asked why people wanted rid of Regan and Doncaster.
His handling of every major situation in the last few years has been abysmal.

Badabing wrote: »

I would favour a 16 team SPL it will just need and take everybody to go in to a meeting with open minds. I was surprised that the SPL agreed a 5 year deal with SKY/ESPN if reconstruction of the League is on the cards soon.

That's because they're idiots.

Coillte_Bhoy

GavRedKing wrote: »

Unless this gets back on topic fairly sharpish I'm going to close it up.

why bother? Unfortunately the same nonsense will pop up in either the celtic or rangers thread.

Broxi_Bear_Eire

the realpigiron wrote: »

Why don't you engage your brain and contribute to the thread in a positive fashion yourself. Getting hung up on what some people are calling the club formerly known as Rangers is hardly contributing to the discussion.

That is exactly the sort of childish behaviour I am talking about.

_blank_

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

That is exactly the sort of childish behaviour I am talking about.

Stop pointing it out! You are the one derailing the thread, not the Celtic fans who'd never do anything bad to anyone, no not them.

bobmalooka

Des wrote: »

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

That is exactly the sort of childish behaviour I am talking about.

Stop pointing it out! You are the one derailing the thread, not the Celtic fans who'd never do anything bad to anyone, no not them.

The funny thing is as much as the rangers and Celtic threads go off topic and people wind each other up nobody is as off topic and openly insulting as you in this thread so far,I don't recall you ever posting in a thread about Scottish football with anything other than a pop at either set of fans with a nicely tarred brush.

the realpigiron

Broxi_Bear_Eire wrote: »

That is exactly the sort of childish behaviour I am talking about.

What's wrong with ya, can't take a joke?

Madam

Eirebear wrote: »

You asked why people wanted rid of Regan and Doncaster.
His handling of every major situation in the last few years has been abysmal.QUOTE]

Oh, I see:) I can't really recall any other 'major' decisions they had to make(outwith the Rangers debacle). Besides to my mind the refereeing in Scotland needs a massive overhaul(no I don't care which team they support;))but standards are really low and the sooner they bring in at least goal line electronic refereeing the better.

premierstone

bobmalooka wrote: »

The funny thing is as much as the rangers and Celtic threads go off topic and people wind each other up nobody is as off topic and openly insulting as you in this thread so far,I don't recall you ever posting in a thread about Scottish football with anything other than a pop at either set of fans with a nicely tarred brush.

Super Des apparently has no interest in Scotish Football, but he can't resist posting on every single thread relating to it, bit of a closet fan methinks.

Jelle1880

Madam wrote: »

Eirebear wrote: »

You asked why people wanted rid of Regan and Doncaster.
His handling of every major situation in the last few years has been abysmal.QUOTE]

Oh, I see:) I can't really recall any other 'major' decisions they had to make(outwith the Rangers debacle). Besides to my mind the refereeing in Scotland needs a massive overhaul(no I don't care which team they support;))but standards are really low and the sooner they bring in at least goal line electronic refereeing the better.

It was nothing to do with the standard of referees, but when the Scottish ones went on strike they tried to bring in refs from other countries.

Including Israel, and they never told them the reason why they wanted to use them.

Dempsey

TheBuilder wrote: »

You are actually stupid aren't you? We never went off topic, we clearly gave our thoughts on league reconstruction that you choose to ignore and cry on about us wanting to be called by our proper name.

What do ya call posts like this then? The thread is littered with these from you trio. Think before you type, eh? Also, resorting to childish insults didnt work for Eirebear, its not going to work for you.

Anyways, I think the biggest deal breaker will be the voting rights and the ratios involved to pass a resolution after the leagues are streamlined. Whether something needed to be voted on in future is in the best interest of the game long term or not, the bigger clubs wont like the idea of the smaller clubs being able to influence them out of potentially millions of sterling. There is a lack of trust there and how you smooth that out without creating loopholes and problems will be the acid test.

RoryMac

Jelle1880 wrote: »

It was nothing to do with the standard of referees, but when the Scottish ones went on strike they tried to bring in refs from other countries.

Including Israel, and they never told them the reason why they wanted to use them.

Are you saying the standard of refereeing in Scotland is ok? There have been some shocking decisions over the years involving all sides, the lack of consistency is woeful IMO.

I've no interest in teams refs support nor do I believe they show bias for or against teams but if refs were made full time I think we'd see an increase in standards.

RoryMac

Dempsey wrote: »

Anyways, I think the biggest deal breaker will be the voting rights and the ratios involved to pass a resolution after the leagues are streamlined. Whether something needed to be voted on in future is in the best interest of the game long term or not, the bigger clubs wont like the idea of the smaller clubs being able to influence them out of potentially millions of sterling. There is a lack of trust there and how you smooth that out without creating loopholes and problems will be the acid test.

That lack of trust will be heightened if the SPL/SFA try to push this through too quickly which will be seen in some quarters as an attempt to speed up Rangers return to the top flight.

Jelle1880

RoryMac wrote: »

Are you saying the standard of refereeing in Scotland is ok?

No.

RoryMac

Jelle1880 wrote: »

No.

At least we agree on something

Coillte_Bhoy

premierstone wrote: »

Super Des apparently has no interest in Scotish Football, but he can't resist posting on every single thread relating to it, bit of a closet fan methinks.

......

Dempsey

Just popped into my head, why hasnt the winter break been introduced? We've already moved the season forward, if we have to move it a little more to accommodate it I'd be all for it. The positives far outweigh the negatives with that one

Badabing

Dempsey wrote: »

Just popped into my head, why hasnt the winter break been introduced? We've already moved the season forward, if we have to move it a little more to accommodate it I'd be all for it. The positives far outweigh the negatives with that one

Winter break is back in this season Jan 2nd -19th.

Dempsey

http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11095/8026785/

Plans to restructure the Scottish leagues are not designed to restore Rangers to the top division, according to the Scottish Football Association's president.

Mr.Integrity speaks! :rolleyes:

Dempsey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20013658

Scottish Premier League clubs will next week consider a proposal to change the league's voting structure.

Why wouldnt all the other SPL clubs use the opportunity to change the voting structure so they can change the wealth distribution & league setup etc. Celtic probably wont be voting for the change because they are not happy about the behaviour of the SPL10 in the past but this change and many other really needs to happen if Scottish Football wants to progress quicker.

Dempsey

Dempsey wrote: »

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20013658

Scottish Premier League clubs will next week consider a proposal to change the league's voting structure.

Why wouldnt all the other SPL clubs use the opportunity to change the voting structure so they can change the wealth distribution & league setup etc. Celtic probably wont be voting for the change because they are not happy about the behaviour of the SPL10 in the past but this change and many other really needs to happen if Scottish Football wants to progress quicker.

According to something on Radio Scotland, there are rumours that 3 clubs will vote against the change. But Scottish radio often engages in the media equivalent of pub talk, so this could be nonsense.

Jelle1880

Hearts have received a registration embargo until Dec. 23rd.

Sure showed them...

RoryMac

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Hearts have received a registration embargo until Dec. 23rd.

Sure showed them...

Farcical alright!

Dempsey

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Hearts have received a registration embargo until Dec. 23rd.

Sure showed them...

fairly useless punishment but they were looking to sign rudi skacel, again, on a free transfer i think. slight inconvience is all they've given hearts.

At least there is a formal process in place rather than the 'we'll cross that bridge when we come to it' approach that was there.

Dempsey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20309606

Scotland's major clubs are pursuing plans for a new 16-team top tier but will not be swallowed up by the Scottish Football League.

Need to ignore what the broadcasters want, fans come first.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20302632

Old Firm second sides would play in three-tier system - SFL

Cant see that getting enough support tbh

BhoscaCapall

Jelle1880 wrote: »

Hearts have received a registration embargo until Dec. 23rd.

Sure showed them...

The only way it could be more of a joke is if they then postponed it for their convenience :rolleyes:

Eirebear

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

The only way it could be more of a joke is if they then postponed it for their convenience :rolleyes:

Or if it was an illegal punishment in the first place you mean?

As an aside, I read recently that a member of the Dufc board was on the panel that made this decision, a couple of days later they snatch Rudi Skacel out from under Hearts noses.
Says a lot about Scottish Football right now.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

Or if it was an illegal punishment in the first place you mean?

As an aside, I read recently that a member of the Dufc board was on the panel that made this decision, a couple of days later they snatch Rudi Skacel out from under Hearts noses.
Says a lot about Scottish Football right now.

Hearts admitted to breach of rules and were punished accordingly. Imagine if they werent punished properly and were signing players whilst unable to pay players and had tax bills due! That would have been a farce!

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

Hearts admitted to breach of rules and were punished accordingly. Imagine if they werent punished properly and were signing players whilst unable to pay players and had tax bills due! That would have been a farce!

All I'm saying is the system leaves people open to suspicion.
Don't let that get in the way if a snide dig though.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

All I'm saying is the system leaves people open to suspicion.
Don't let that get in the way if a snide dig though.

What snide dig?

Dempsey

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20329684

The 30 Scottish Football League clubs have unanimously voted to propose a new three-tier league structure of 16, 10 and 16 teams for season 2014-15.

The SPL presently has 12 clubs, with their governing body progressing its own plan for a 16-team top flight, although there is also an option of two top leagues of 12.

SPL sources have suggested there is no prospect of the SFL plan receiving the support of the 11 clubs required for such change to be accepted by the present top flight.

The SFL plan proposes the introduction of promotion and relegation play-offs involving the top flight.

Teams finishing 15th and 16th would be automatically relegated, being replaced with the Championship title winners and runners-up.

Sides finishing 13th and 14th in the Premier Division would enter play-offs with those finishing third and fourth in the Championship.

There would be automatic relegation for the sides finishing ninth and 10th in the Championship, with a promotion play-off taking place with the side in third, fourth and fifth in the First Division.

The First Division champions and runners-up would be automatically promoted.

I think a 16 team SPL is a must (SFL & SPL agree in principle on this at least), the SFL are in the best position to judge the make up of the lower divisions so surely the SPL will concede to that part. I'm happy with the proposed relegation & playoff setup, badly needed in Scottish Football.

This still dances around the issue of voting rights, which body is absorbed into which and distribution of tv/sponsors money. Hopefully egos are put aside and the best format (from a fans perspective) gets selected.

RoryMac

I like the look of 3 leagues with 16 in the top division, also like the Play Off's and the bottom 2 being relegated.

What is their thinking behind having only 10 in the Championship(2nd division) with 16 in the 3rd division? It would certainly make the Championship division pretty exciting with the possibility of half the teams being promoted or relegated in any given season.

Dempsey

So Celtic use their AGM to tell everyone about UEFA's regional league idea and give the nothing stays the same ideology and Charles Green believes that Rangers can join the EPL when/if they can sort themselves out whilst continually backing himself further into the corner about ever joining the SPL. He even claimed that Manchester United were open to the idea only for United to shoot that idea clean out of the sky! Time to have a chat with Walter Smith at least!

Eirebear

Eirebear wrote: »

As an aside, I read recently that a member of the Dufc board was on the panel that made this decision, a couple of days later they snatch Rudi Skacel out from under Hearts noses.

That's half true. Someone from the Arabs' board was on the panel, and they subsequently signed Skacel. But the reality was that we weren't going to be able to pay Skacel anyway.

What a guy, though.

Dempsey

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/spl-plan-to-ditch-toxic-structure.19448547

Tomorrow a number of SPL clubs are to meet with Neil Doncaster, the SPL chief executive, to hear the plan. One aim is to counter last week's Scottish Football League proposal of a 16-10-16 model by inviting up to 12 clubs to resign from the SFL and join what is currently the SPL.

The new SPL strategy would create a 24-club elite, involving two top divisions of 12, but under a new corporate banner, with the "SPL" brand being binned.

"This is not an 'SPL1 & 2'," said an SPL source last night. "The plan is that it would be radical, it would wipe the slate clean. We've had many proposals in recent years, but we hope this might be the one."

The new leagues would involve two top tiers of 12 clubs. A split would come after 22 games, following which the bottom-four clubs and the top four from the second tier would play a further 14 games home and away to determine which four clubs secured top-flight status.

The SPL have looked to various leagues across Europe, and for the 24 clubs it would mean a 36-game league season.

The source added: "Someone referred to it as 'three leagues of eight', as you'd have this battle raging from February onwards in what is effectively an enlarged play-offs system for four spots in the top flight. It is being strongly presented."

What ever happened to listening to the fans...? That plan sounds ridiculous and an excuse to shoehorn in a smaller top division.

Eirebear

Dempsey wrote: »

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/football/spl-plan-to-ditch-toxic-structure.19448547



What ever happened to listening to the fans...? That plan sounds ridiculous and an excuse to shoehorn in a smaller top division.

I think it'll rumble on for a long time.
I don't know Celtic's official opinion on it but i saw Lennon in the paper the other day saying he wanted a 10 team top division.

Dempsey

Eirebear wrote: »

I think it'll rumble on for a long time.
I don't know Celtic's official opinion on it but i saw Lennon in the paper the other day saying he wanted a 10 team top division.

"A 16-team league? I'm not sure it's going to work,"

"You're always looking for the variety but, having spoken to the SPL a year ago, these things come up every one or two years; restructuring, promoting the game a bit more and making it better"

"It's a proposal from the SFL, I've not really had a chance to digest it all yet."

The headlines seem to differ from what he was actually saying imo. He was highlighting the fact that a year ago the SPL was saying a 10 team SPL was the only real option and now that has changed and that has happened over the last few years.

Its disappointing though that he is leaning towards whatever is best for Celtic's bottom line over what is best for Scottish Football. A stronger, more stable league is what is best for Celtic in the long run.

BhoscaCapall

I don't really know much about the proposals, but the cynic in me (and the fact the authorities basically announced it as their intention) sees any attempt at increasing the size of the top division as another desperate attempt to get the new Rangers back into the SPL asap.

Other than them, the only sides I can see it benefiting are the weaker Div 1 teams who might not gain a promotion to the top tier as it stands. For everyone else, money wise they are swapping 2 home sell outs against Celtic for 2 games against Cowdenbeath. I don't really see what's in it for those sides.

Even for Celtic, a 20/16 team league would be easier than what we currently have, as instead of having 4 or 5 tricky grounds to go to twice, we halve that in exchange for playing even weaker teams.

Maybe someone can explain the counter argument.

Dempsey

a 16 team spl was on the table long before rangers entered administration even. the majority of fans across scotland want it. the problem was the broacaster stipulation of 4 old firm games a season, thats now dead.

no split/fixture issues
reduce dependency on old firm income
more teams relegated/promoted
playoff system
voting/financial restructuring so that the old cant dictate everything in scottish football and unfair financial advantages that currently exist.

whether rangers jump a promotion or not is irrelevant. the right changes need to happen

BhoscaCapall

I think I'm one of the only people who thinks the split is a good thing. Always ensures for good fixtures toward the end of the season for every team involved, less importance placed on 'random' fixtures e.g. one team getting a really easy run in.

I don't see how letting a few more crap teams in the league will help. Look at the EPL, half of the clubs there are just making up the numbers, and if they didn't get pumped full of money they wouldn't even be able to pretend to compete.

Dempsey

one team always gets an unfair set of fixtures. uneven set of home and away fixtutes in a season. the split is influenced by the current state of the league table. the team in 7th can end up with more points than the team in 6th.

the fixtures should be decided before a ball is kicked imo. the split regularly gets questions about integrity and fairness and scottish football can do without it

BhoscaCapall

Dempsey wrote: »

one team always gets an unfair set of fixtures. uneven set of home and away fixtutes in a season.

An away game against a team in 10-12th is easier than a home one against 1st-3rd.

the split is influenced by the current state of the league table. the team in 7th can end up with more points than the team in 6th.

And logic would suggest they should, since a team in 7th plays 5 games against weaker opposition than a team in 6th does.

The only downside to the split that I can see is that it's a bit problematic for fans to arrange for games, but it's not exactly a big country.

Dempsey

BhoscaCapall wrote: »

An away game against a team in 10-12th is easier than a home one against 1st-3rd.


And logic would suggest they should, since a team in 7th plays 5 games against weaker opposition than a team in 6th does.

The only downside to the split that I can see is that it's a bit problematic for fans to arrange for games, but it's not exactly a big country.

the odd home and away numbers is caused in the split. eg. celtic plays one team 3 times away from home one season and plays them 3 times away the next time they are in the split together. its absolutely ridiculous

that logic doesnt make sense for a league though. what other league does a split like the spl?

there are a host of things wrong with the split, the sooner its buried, the better imo

BhoscaCapall

Dempsey wrote: »

the odd home and away numbers is caused in the split. eg. celtic plays one team 3 times away from home one season and plays them 3 times away the next time they are in the split together.

No team plays another team 6 times...

what other league does a split like the spl?

I don't know, why does it matter? The south american leagues use a points average of the past 3 seasons, doesn't mean we should copy them.

there are a host of things wrong with the split, the sooner its buried, the better imo

You haven't told us any yet, you've just said you don't like it. I'm actually interested in why people are against it.