Post-Split

[wellgirl]

9 minutes ago, Stuwell2 said:

And we will be again, life of following the ‘Well. 

Im almost at my limit tbh. Not sure my nerves can stand much more -that's not me saying I won't support the team btw

[Kmcalpin]

Not quite sure why we're suggesting playing Slattery in an advanced role. It didn't work on Saturday although he put in a huge effort. He's a box to box player. 

[texanwellfan]

43 minutes ago, wellgirl said:

I agree that Wilson has been poor. Maybe the hype around him got to him. I wouldn't start him. I also do think Watt is a useful player even if he's not scoring 

I thought it looked more like a few pudding suppers got to him!! I may be a bit harsh, maybe he buffed up but it looked to me like he put on a few pounds. Either way I think he can be a good player for us next season. He has some good foot skills and just needs coaching and encouragement on wing back play. 

[thewelllfan]

1 hour ago, Kmcalpin said:

Not quite sure why we're suggesting playing Slattery in an advanced role. It didn't work on Saturday although he put in a huge effort. He's a box to box player. 

It gives him a bit more freedom to get on the ball with that midfield i mentioned there all very much interchangable within games and should help us get more of the ball. It does lack a bit of pysichality tho

[star sail]

12 hours ago, weeyin said:

I doubt Dundee will score 6 more points than us to overhaul us and County.

There's no form team in the bottom 6 right now, but if you look at the last 6 games:

Hearts 7 points

Motherwell 8 points

Killie 4 points

Dundee 7 points

St Johnstone 8 points

I still think 42 will do it, but our mentality should be to overhaul Hearts.

This is interesting. I am sure that most of us would be thinking that other teams in the bottom six had gained momentum in recent weeks whilst our form has dropped off a cliff. The reality is, we are the in form team (relatively) along with StJ going into the split.

Everything points to us being fine. Form, current league position, the cut throat nature of the last 5 games.

Motherwell's season imploded in Perth. Those games leave a feeling that it has been a very unsatisfactory season. This will be the chance to go some way towards fixing that. I think we will win that first game.

[FirParkCornerExile]

16 hours ago, mfc said:

I think with the amount of games left and the other teams doing damage to each other we should just be about ok but it would be nice if we beat st johnstone to settle any nerves.the concerning thing is we have went through the motions in the last 3 games and maybe the players are already on holiday mode.i agree with what weeyin just said above,catching hearts should be our goal rather than looking over our shoulder,the extra prize money would come in handy for the obvious rebuild that's coming in the summer.

Last season StJ needed to beat us at Fir Park to stave off relegation they did.

StJ needed to beat us in January to relight their season , they did. 

StJ needed to beat us in the Cup , they did. 

 

I have zero confidence this god awful Motherwell squad will beat them in this very important game.  

[mfc]

5 minutes ago, FirParkCornerExile said:

Last season StJ needed to beat us at Fir Park to stave off relegation they did.

StJ needed to beat us in January to relight their season , they did. 

StJ needed to beat us in the Cup , they did. 

 

I have zero confidence this god awful Motherwell squad will beat them in this very important game.  

I've got no confidence either,there fighting for there lives while we're absolutely terrible and going through the motions.i fully expect us to play into there hands and most likely lose this game.

[Ya Bezzer!]

As it stands we have a 4 point advantage, or more, over all 4 teams below us.

Even if we lost every match in the bottom 6, Kilmarnock and Ross County would need 4 points at least (goal difference is too close to really mean much right now so I'm not even taking that into consideration), Dundee would need 5 and St Johnstone would need 10.

In the last 5 matches those clubs have taken the following

Kilmarnock - 4 pts

Dundee - 7 pts

Ross County - 3 pts

St Johnstone - 5 pts.

So the worst possible scenario of us getting 0 points and using the others recent forms as an indicator, we still stay up.

Even getting 1 draw makes it unlikely we finish lower than 9th.

No team in the Bottom 6 has more than 1 win in their last 5 matches apart from Dundee.  

The chances of three teams leaping over us seems very unlikely.

[Spiderpig]

14 minutes ago, Ya Bezzer! said:

As it stands we have a 4 point advantage, or more, over all 4 teams below us.

Even if we lost every match in the bottom 6, Kilmarnock and Ross County would need 4 points at least (goal difference is too close to really mean much right now so I'm not even taking that into consideration), Dundee would need 5 and St Johnstone would need 10.

In the last 5 matches those clubs have taken the following

Kilmarnock - 4 pts

Dundee - 7 pts

Ross County - 3 pts

St Johnstone - 5 pts.

So the worst possible scenario of us getting 0 points and using the others recent forms as an indicator, we still stay up.

Even getting 1 draw makes it unlikely we finish lower than 9th.

No team in the Bottom 6 has more than 1 win in their last 5 matches apart from Dundee.  

The chances of three teams leaping over us seems very unlikely.

I agree, the chances of us finishing lower than 10th are very slim, but you do realise your  positivity will never catch on dont you.

[Ya Bezzer!]

24 minutes ago, Spiderpig said:

I agree, the chances of us finishing lower than 10th are very slim, but you do realise your  positivity will never catch on dont you.

Well I am entertaining the possibility that we lose all 5 games so it's a weird kind of positivity. 🤣

[El Grew]

It’s time splitting the league in half at this stage of the season was scrapped. It’s utter nonsense, and in my opinion achieves nothing and always ends up with some clubs having an imbalance in their home and away fixtures.

In my view, a 12-team league doesn’t work. When it first came in, clubs played each other 4 times leading to a 44 game season. It became obvious this wasn’t tenable and that a compromise was needed. Enter the split, which reduced the season to 38 games.

While fiddling with the size of the league is undesirable and a pain, something needs to be done. As I understand it there a few options under consideration, including:

Option 1: Reduce league to 10 clubs, playing each other 4 times - a 36 game season. Tried and failed as relegation dropped 1 / 2 clubs out at the end of the season - attrition rate of 10%/25% undesirable.

Option 2: Increase league to 14 clubs, playing each other 4 times - 42 game season. As bad as the original 12-club league with 44 game season and clubs won’t accept it.

Option 3: Increase league to 16 clubs, playing each other 2 times - 30 game season.

Personally, I favour Option 3 which I think has a number of good points which I won’t go into here but what do others think?

[dennyc]

20 minutes ago, El Grew said:

It’s time splitting the league in half at this stage of the season was scrapped. It’s utter nonsense, and in my opinion achieves nothing and always ends up with some clubs having an imbalance in their home and away fixtures.

In my view, a 12-team league doesn’t work. When it first came in, clubs played each other 4 times leading to a 44 game season. It became obvious this wasn’t tenable and that a compromise was needed. Enter the split, which reduced the season to 38 games.

While fiddling with the size of the league is undesirable and a pain, something needs to be done. As I understand it there a few options under consideration, including:

Option 1: Reduce league to 10 clubs, playing each other 4 times - a 36 game season. Tried and failed as relegation dropped 1 / 2 clubs out at the end of the season - attrition rate of 10%/25% undesirable.

Option 2: Increase league to 14 clubs, playing each other 4 times - 42 game season. As bad as the original 12-club league with 44 game season and clubs won’t accept it.

Option 3: Increase league to 16 clubs, playing each other 2 times - 30 game season.

Personally, I favour Option 3 which I think has a number of good points which I won’t go into here but what do others think?

Option 2 with a 6/8 split after two rounds of fixtures followed by a further two rounds. Ends up 36 games for top section/ 40 for the bottom group. No unfairness possibly affecting Title or Relegation and retains the split as something to target. Then enough games second half for both sections to change around a bit throughout the remainder of the season.

Of course Clubs would vote that down as the bottom group lose an OF home game and potentially a couple of others against Clubs with a large travelling support. Partially offset though by an extra home fixture over the season.

Or alternatively back to 18 teams playing each other twice with no split. Again no chance given the loss of home fixtures against the big boys. And Sky demand as many OF clashes as can be squeezed in. Money takes precedence.

 

[grumpy]

43 minutes ago, El Grew said:

It’s time splitting the league in half at this stage of the season was scrapped. It’s utter nonsense, and in my opinion achieves nothing and always ends up with some clubs having an imbalance in their home and away fixtures.

In my view, a 12-team league doesn’t work. When it first came in, clubs played each other 4 times leading to a 44 game season. It became obvious this wasn’t tenable and that a compromise was needed. Enter the split, which reduced the season to 38 games.

While fiddling with the size of the league is undesirable and a pain, something needs to be done. As I understand it there a few options under consideration, including:

Option 1: Reduce league to 10 clubs, playing each other 4 times - a 36 game season. Tried and failed as relegation dropped 1 / 2 clubs out at the end of the season - attrition rate of 10%/25% undesirable.

Option 2: Increase league to 14 clubs, playing each other 4 times - 42 game season. As bad as the original 12-club league with 44 game season and clubs won’t accept it.

Option 3: Increase league to 16 clubs, playing each other 2 times - 30 game season.

Personally, I favour Option 3 which I think has a number of good points which I won’t go into here but what do others think?

A 14 team league playing each other 4 times is a 52 game season, not 42. A 14 team league would probably mean a split after two rounds (26 games) followed by two more rounds against the teams in your half of the league (12 games) meaning 38 games total. The problem with that, well one problem, is that there are 7 teams in each half so for every round of fixtures there is a team without a fixture. Option 3 only has two bigot fests a season so there is no way that is being voted in.

Personally, I would go for an 18 team league, 34 games, but that won't happen as per option 3. Whilst the league is organised to suit the arse cheeks, nothing will ever improve the product.

*Edit* Sorry, didn't consider a 6/8 split. (Still $hite though)

[wellsince75]

In terms of balance of league set up. for me the split works better than what we've seen in the past. 

A larger league  of say 14, 16 would simply mean more teams with nothing to play for. 

It would mean several clubs come to final third of a season with SFA to play for.  

We'd still have 2 clubs  fight for league.  2-3  other chasing Europe. 1-2 clubs fighting relegation.   The rest would be a non event. 

As poor as Scottish football is, I personally think the current league set up is the best it's ever been. It's more the product on the park that's regressing. 

[Spit_It_Out]

They are 100 percent needing to scrap this play off nonsense for the team that finishes 11th rewarding a team for being utterly pish with another chance to stay in the league nope not for me.

Straight  two up and two up.

[wellgirl]

7 minutes ago, Spit_It_Out said:

They are 100 percent needing to scrap this play off nonsense for the team that finishes 11th rewarding a team for being utterly pish with another chance to stay in the league nope not for me.

Straight up two up and two up.

I agree. I hate the play off and it's completely unfair to the teams in the championship. Absolutely agree. Two up two down 

[wunderwell]

At this stage of the season I feel it's best if we can send some inspectors to Falkirk to see what's wrong with their stadium just to give us some comfort.

[El Grew]

2 hours ago, grumpy said:

A 14 team league playing each other 4 times is a 52 game season, not 42. A 14 team league would probably mean a split after two rounds (26 games) followed by two more rounds against the teams in your half of the league (12 games) meaning 38 games total. The problem with that, well one problem, is that there are 7 teams in each half so for every round of fixtures there is a team without a fixture. Option 3 only has two bigot fests a season so there is no way that is being voted in.

Personally, I would go for an 18 team league, 34 games, but that won't happen as per option 3. Whilst the league is organised to suit the arse cheeks, nothing will ever improve the product.

*Edit* Sorry, didn't consider a 6/8 split. (Still $hite though)

Grumpy I’d like to say the 42 was a typo but it was my arithmetic to blame. 😉

[El Grew]

2 hours ago, wellsince75 said:

A larger league  of say 14, 16 would simply mean more teams with nothing to play for. 

Wellsince75, I appreciate your point but consider this: In the 18-club league, clubs only had to play 4 games against the OF and then with only 2 points for a win the maximum number of points each club could lose to them was 8.

Now even if a club misses out on the top 6, the maximum number points they can lose to the OF is 18; and if they do make the top 6 it’s 24.

Now I whilst I appreciate that no matter the size of league the OF will still dominate it but if clubs only had to play each of the OF twice in a season it would mean the maximum number of points each could lose would be 12 points. I apologise for taking the long way round to explain that the league is loaded towards the OF before a ball is kicked.

Also, although as you say there were ‘meaningless’ games at the fag-end of a season, this gave clubs the chance to introduce younger players to first team football without under pressure.

[Kmcalpin]

56 minutes ago, wunderwell said:

At this stage of the season I feel it's best if we can send some inspectors to Falkirk to see what's wrong with their stadium just to give us some comfort.

They have already complained to the SPFL regarding the use of artificial pitches. They don't want to have to rip theirs up and lay a grass one. 

Deja vu!

[FirParkCornerExile]

3 hours ago, wellsince75 said:

In terms of balance of league set up. for me the split works better than what we've seen in the past. 

A larger league  of say 14, 16 would simply mean more teams with nothing to play for. 

It would mean several clubs come to final third of a season with SFA to play for.  

We'd still have 2 clubs  fight for league.  2-3  other chasing Europe. 1-2 clubs fighting relegation.   The rest would be a non event. 

As poor as Scottish football is, I personally think the current league set up is the best it's ever been. It's more the product on the park that's regressing. 

Agreed and no one can point to any league reconstruction inn the last 50 years that delivered what was promised. With 5 games to go the only teams with nothing to play for are Rangers & St Mirren , why would we change that.  

The league should be looking at innovation , imaginative thinking about the current set up not adding more teams to add fuck all but a change of strip you are looking at.

[wellsince75]

1 hour ago, El Grew said:

Wellsince75, I appreciate your point but consider this: In the 18-club league, clubs only had to play 4 games against the OF and then with only 2 points for a win the maximum number of points each club could lose to them was 8.

Now even if a club misses out on the top 6, the maximum number points they can lose to the OF is 18; and if they do make the top 6 it’s 24.

Now I whilst I appreciate that no matter the size of league the OF will still dominate it but if clubs only had to play each of the OF twice in a season it would mean the maximum number of points each could lose would be 12 points. I apologise for taking the long way round to explain that the league is loaded towards the OF before a ball is kicked.

Also, although as you say there were ‘meaningless’ games at the fag-end of a season, this gave clubs the chance to introduce younger players to first team football without under pressure.

I hear you @El Grew and can see where you're coming from. 

The idea of playing teams twice certainly appeals - my biggest concern is there would be many meaningless games for many teams , yes we could play youngsters but I suspect fan numbers would reduce further.

All if's buts and maybe's - good to debate different ideas. 

[grizzlyg]

2 hours ago, wellgirl said:

I agree. I hate the play off and it's completely unfair to the teams in the championship. Absolutely agree. Two up two down 

Should be 11th in spfl v 4th in championship and 2nd v 3rd in championship.  2 semi final ties then a final,  it is so in favour of the spfl club

Ps. May 2015.......I love the play off set up!! 🤣🤣

[Spiderpig]

3 hours ago, Spit_It_Out said:

They are 100 percent needing to scrap this play off nonsense for the team that finishes 11th rewarding a team for being utterly pish with another chance to stay in the league nope not for me.

Straight  two up and two up.

All that's needed with the playoffs is to copy the English set up, so a simple 2 relegated from the premiership, Championship, L1 and L2.

The Championship, L1 and L2 winners promoted with the next 4 in each of those 3 leagues playing for the other promotion place.

The 2 down from league 2 would be replaced by the Lowland and Highland league winners

[The African]

9 hours ago, Ya Bezzer! said:

As it stands we have a 4 point advantage, or more, over all 4 teams below us.

Even if we lost every match in the bottom 6, Kilmarnock and Ross County would need 4 points at least (goal difference is too close to really mean much right now so I'm not even taking that into consideration), Dundee would need 5 and St Johnstone would need 10.

In the last 5 matches those clubs have taken the following

Kilmarnock - 4 pts

Dundee - 7 pts

Ross County - 3 pts

St Johnstone - 5 pts.

So the worst possible scenario of us getting 0 points and using the others recent forms as an indicator, we still stay up.

Even getting 1 draw makes it unlikely we finish lower than 9th.

No team in the Bottom 6 has more than 1 win in their last 5 matches apart from Dundee.  

The chances of three teams leaping over us seems very unlikely.

One factor which may have been missed when looking at the arithmetic possibilities here is that, should we somehow contrive to lose all five of our post split fixtures, then every other team in the lower half gets an automatic three point boost to their position. As such, our current situation is not as secure as we would hope. It would probably also be the case that, with goal difference being remarkably tight between all the teams involved, five defeats will not help us if we are level on points with anyone else at the end of the season.

 

The solution is still in our hands thankfully. Pick up points wherever we can, as early as we can, and we will be safe for another year.