TvTotherwell Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 SPL bosses have held secret talks about the nightmare scenario of sending Celtic to Fir Park for a THIRD time this season as the title race goes down to the wire Click Whats the hell is the big deal, Ok th park aint great by any stretch of the imagination but c'mon, these guys get paid thousands, surely they can play on a cut up park, we all did it when we were young! I think this is getting blowen way outa proportion ! ! ! ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirkySuperSub Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Well that's their excuse ready now if they fail to win the league and we take points off them at FP... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWilson (Anchorman) Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Yet another reason not to buy newspapers. Full of shite and written by arseholes. (apart fae Mr Devlin of course! ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Stall Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Did last season work out fair to everyone? If not celtic dont have a leg to stand on. If it was fair, then surely the fixtures should just be the same, but swap hibs for hearts? Anyway, its all academic. Because there is definatley no guarantees who is going to be in the top 6 this year. Celtic outrage though is always funny. Lets hope the Motherwell - Celtic game can be Helicopter Sunday part 2! My final point, top 6 games occur in April and May. It is warmer than 5 degrees in those months hence the grass grows. Pitch arguaments by then will be over and done with........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Well Up For It! Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Do they not proof-read articles at the Daily Record at all? The amount of poor english, grammatical errors and clearly cut n' pasted sentences that didn't make sense is shocking. Anyways................. Come on now eddie - we all know the great unwashed can't read and write! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malky79 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 All the more reason to make sure we get into top 6 and annoy the fuckers! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green_Triangle Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Good. Fuck them. I'd love it if our pitch cost them the league. Love it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrshirewell Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Alternatively Mr Gold could admit the split is a shambles and do away with it. Only in Scottish Football could we come up with a system that causes chaos and brings no benefit. 18 team league, 3 down 2 up. 1 playof place between 3rd-6th in the first div. Same as England and it works. Sorted Take the year off Henry McLeish!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 While I have no time for Rangers I'd love to see Celtic lose the league at FP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gav212 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Aw boo fucking hoo, your getting paid £40k a week to do a job most of us would love to do (Albeit not for Celtic) get on with it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yir Elder Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Someone in the media is shit-stirring, cos if we make the top six we'd be due to go to Parkhead and have Rangers at Fir Park. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fatcalf Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Agreed. Problem seems to be at their end though Yir, trying to make sure both sides of the bigot divide get equal home and away matches. Can't see how our games should be changed though, surely we would have been in their initial group of teams expected to be in the top 6? Hearts are the surprise package so they should be switched if anyone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 It's just another good example as to why the split is the most useless idea in the history of the SPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 It's just another good example as to why the split is the most useless idea in the history of the SPL. honestly? i think the split is about the only good thing the spl has ever done. the fixture imbalance is the only problem with it but the benefits it brings outweigh that imo. it's there to provide the right amount of fixtures, add a bit of mid table excitement and provide dramatic end of season games all of which it does. an 18 team league is the daftest idea ever. there isn't enough depth in scottish football to have that many top flight teams plus the ones pushing for promotion. there are probably 4 or 5 clubs in the first who could be decent spl clubs but they should earn it through winning their league. an 18 team league would weaken scottish football by reducing the income of clubs meaning more good spl players heading down south for decent wages. the effects of an 18 team league would be less big games, less tv money for top division clubs and hunners of meaningless games. clubs would have 17 instead of 19 home fixtures which would mean less revenue. would it be possible to be bottom in december and challenging for europe in march in an 18 team league? no chance.you'd end up teams being well out of relegation and europe by xmas and having absolutely fuck all to play for 5 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 honestly? i think the split is about the only good thing the spl has ever done. the fixture imbalance is the only problem with it but the benefits it brings outweigh that imo. it's there to provide the right amount of fixtures, add a bit of mid table excitement and provide dramatic end of season games all of which it does.You could have a 10 or 12 team league and play each other 3 times. However, when that was touted the clubs complained that meant having to play certain teams away from home twice in a season. Then they decided to have to split which causes exactly the same argument. If a team in 7th position is close enough to a Euro place, why shouldn't they be allowed to chase it down in the last third of the season? That's just stupid. Likewise, our early attempts to do anything of note in the top 6 were laughable. There was no chance of a Euro place, and the team were so disinterested we struggled to even win a game. That wasn't very exciting, either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrshirewell Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 honestly? i think the split is about the only good thing the spl has ever done. the fixture imbalance is the only problem with it but the benefits it brings outweigh that imo. it's there to provide the right amount of fixtures, add a bit of mid table excitement and provide dramatic end of season games all of which it does. an 18 team league is the daftest idea ever. there isn't enough depth in scottish football to have that many top flight teams plus the ones pushing for promotion. there are probably 4 or 5 clubs in the first who could be decent spl clubs but they should earn it through winning their league. an 18 team league would weaken scottish football by reducing the income of clubs meaning more good spl players heading down south for decent wages. the effects of an 18 team league would be less big games, less tv money for top division clubs and hunners of meaningless games. clubs would have 17 instead of 19 home fixtures which would mean less revenue. would it be possible to be bottom in december and challenging for europe in march in an 18 team league? no chance.you'd end up teams being well out of relegation and europe by xmas and having absolutely fuck all to play for 5 months. The game is about more than revenue . Some people have been fooled into thinking that success can be measured on the merits of acheiving a top six place and a few extra grand. Success comes from trophies. Nothing else. One of the biggest barriers to football development is the fact that we only allow passage between the top two divisions for one team per year. This stifles development at a lower level and has caused many good clubs to struggle to survive. The protectionist mentality of the SPL is a disgrace. I think we may be the only league in Europe with a 1 up 1 down system. Being bottom in November and in a European place by March has nothing to do with the split. I would still call a match against Aberdeen for a place in the top six meaningless but if that's what floats yer boat. I'm a traditionalist old fart so I'm probably wrong Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 You could have a 10 or 12 team league and play each other 3 times. However, when that was touted the clubs complained that meant having to play certain teams away from home twice in a season. Then they decided to have to split which causes exactly the same argument. If a team in 7th position is close enough to a Euro place, why shouldn't they be allowed to chase it down in the last third of the season? That's just stupid. Likewise, our early attempts to do anything of note in the top 6 were laughable. There was no chance of a Euro place, and the team were so disinterested we struggled to even win a game. That wasn't very exciting, either. i'd say that the small imbalance in the split is managable, it's definitely a fault but the circumstances probably don't exist in scottish football for a perfect system. and as far as our two trips to the top six under big tel are concerned i recall both occasions as being good experiences. the first year we we're delighted just to achieve it with the squad we had and having lost faddy and pearo. we got pumped off the h**s and dunfermline and the united game was pish but the last games were excellent - a hard fought one each draw with celtic and probably the most entertaining defeat ever against hearts and a cracking day out. the second time round was even better. good performance and day out at tynecastle, loads of laughs and the jambos were beeling cause we owned them that season. a disapointing but entertaining draw against hibs and the small matter of skippy sunday. the downside was we got pumped at ibrox as usual but at least it was sunny! as i said it's not perfect but it delivers 38 games and adds drama, i haven't seen any better ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milo Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 1 up and 1 down from the SPL to 1st Division is bollocks in my opinion. It should be a 16 team SPL with some sort of play off system in place for teams finishing 2nd/3rd bottom and 2nd/3rd top. If we went down it could take us years to get back up (like Dumfermline), and despite having a reasonably successful season, it would count for nothing. The "diddy 10" would probably vote against this though as it would mean less games against the big two. Although with the dwindling travelling supports they are now bringing, maybe it's time for a re-think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 The game is about more than revenue . Some people have been fooled into thinking that success can be measured on the merits of acheiving a top six place and a few extra grand. Success comes from trophies. Nothing else.One of the biggest barriers to football development is the fact that we only allow passage between the top two divisions for one team per year. This stifles development at a lower level and has caused many good clubs to struggle to survive. The protectionist mentality of the SPL is a disgrace. I think we may be the only league in Europe with a 1 up 1 down system. Being bottom in November and in a European place by March has nothing to do with the split. I would still call a match against Aberdeen for a place in the top six meaningless but if that's what floats yer boat. I'm a traditionalist old fart so I'm probably wrong success comes from winning trophies? so you wouldn't consider last season even finishing third under mclean as succesful seasons. being bottom in december and then going for europe has to do with the level of parity in the league, a 20 team league would have whipping boys and it wouldn't be possible for a team to make up so much ground. as for a top six match against aberdeen, it definitely floated my boat ten months ago. i'd argue that scotland has different circumstances from pretty much every other major european league. with two teams soaking up most of the fans, our small population and the premiership on our doorstep (and on the bbc, sky, itv and setanta) which weakens our posistion further. if you were to split the little money we have across more teams it would probably mean from our point of view no porters, hughes or klimpls and it would make it harder to hold onto decent young players. how lessening the quality of teams is good for the national game i can't quite fathom. accies and st mirren have shown that well run teams can get into the spl and survive and i don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that the first has st johnstone, dundee, partick and dundee fighting it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lobey_Dosser Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 10 team SPL, 2 up, 2 down. That would give us two decent leagues. We would obviously have the problem of clubs playing each other 4 times but there is not enough quality for a 16 team league. 10 team league would offer the most excitement. Given the nature of how the SPL is governed however, no club is going to shoot itself on the foot by reducing the size of the league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ankles Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 Good. Fuck them. I'd love it if our pitch cost them the league. Love it. Feckin right ,especially if the ball hit a divet and rolled by Artur into the net with three minutes to go on a last day decider Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deaddogman Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 A 12 team top league ,2nd and 3rd leagues of 12 the remaining six teams form a conference type league north and south with the highland and juniors/seniors teams in the top leagues play each other three times then split the leagues. top eight in league one play for Europe places, bottom four form a mini league with the top four in league two and play for top league positions ,bottom eight join up with league three with the top eight getting league two positions . The conference winners play off against each other with the winner replacing the bottom team in league three. simple Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 The thing is about all this it isn't just the SPL that don't want to change. The SFL don't want it, not all of the Non League Pro sides want it and the Juniors certainly don't want to leave their comfort zone Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Malky79 Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 I spent a much time as the next person thinking about what would be the best set re number of teams in respective divisions and games etc but come to the conclusion that whilst some would clearly be better than others that is all pretty pointless whilst the financial imbalance persists within the game and the fact we have so many different bodies running it all. All gate money should be split 50/50 between teams after costs and all TV money should be equally split at start of season between the teams. The OF would still have the ability to generate extra revenue compared to wee teams but the gulf would be slashed and we might get a league where teams outside of OF if well run could realisticaly challenge for prizes on a regular basis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motherwell Football Club Posted February 27, 2009 Report Share Posted February 27, 2009 14 team SPL, 10 team SPL 2 Gives only one extra game per season for the top division and scraps the Split. Spl basically the 1st division but with 2 teams moving up/down. Malky's post about the money split is a good Idea. Unfortunately it will never happen. 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.