SuperCC Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Hadnt given it much thought at the time but pre xmas I cancelled my ESPN subscription as most of the games they had been broadcasting were so shite I had stopped watching it as a channel. Still have a sky subscription due to the wider range of games available and some of the other sports they broadcast but as soon as the on-demand tv gets to the level whereby I can just pay for a single event then the sky subscription will be gone as well - if not sooner!! At the moment the only football I watch is Match of the Day on a Saturday night!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I can't remember a time when the fans of Scottish football were so united in their stance. Fans from Motherwell, Hibs, Hearts, Celtic, Rangers and ICT that I have seen on forums are against it. But we know fuck all, we're just the paying customer That's been the most obvious thing through this - usually when things of this type crop up, there's one or two groups who feel stronger than others etc (usually the Old Firm fans want one thing, and the rest want another). But you're right - one look on Pie & Bovril, the BBC forum bit and all other Scottish football messages board; one listen to the football phone ins - it's all the same. The vast, vast majority are dead against this and I wouldn't be surprised if that is being noticed by some clubs. We started with Dundee United against it, then Inverness Caley, then Hearts and Kilmarnock joined the resistance, now it's on the radio that a fifth club is destined to vote against it. It's quickly shaping up to be the six members of the steering group left voting for this debacle, and it disappoints me no end that "our club" will be one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaag Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Fill yer boots Not that it'll make much difference Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 How funny would it be if they took cognicence of this and voted against it Here's a suggestion - get back to the drawing board. Take 'Long Term Vision', 'Pricing', 'Entertainment', 'Youth Development', 'Proper TV Coverage / Promotion', 'Distribution of Wealth' as a couple of bullet points to start with and START AGAIN!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dinnae-punt-it Posted January 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Fill yer boots Not that it'll make much difference Signed! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East_Stand_Al Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 How funny would it be if they took cognicence of this and voted against it Here's a suggestion - get back to the drawing board. Take 'Long Term Vision', 'Pricing', 'Entertainment', 'Youth Development', 'Proper TV Coverage / Promotion', 'Distribution of Wealth' as a couple of bullet points to start with and START AGAIN!!!! But then its reported that the last meeting lasted a massive 3 hours so that agenda would have to be cut back so I've taken off a couple of points which leaves and agenda looking something like this. What do the OF want ? Let's agree to that and have lunch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperCC Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 But then its reported that the last meeting lasted a massive 3 hours so that agenda would have to be cut back so I've taken off a couple of points which leaves and agenda looking something like this. What do the OF want ? Let's agree to that and have lunch. Thats a bit harsh! Surely this would have been on the agenda: What dregs will the OF allow the peasants/hanger ons? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Kerse Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Signed! Me too 1104 already. I have never known so many regular attenders being a baw-hair to packing it in, all over Scotland. The 10 team will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Game over up here. Scottish punters taking in a few quality games in the Premiership a season might become a culture we have to get used to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mfc 58 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Could somebody more competant with computers start our own poll, then maybe the club will know exactly how we feel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic2904 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Dont see the point in a bigger league! After 3/4 of the season there will be meaningless games and why would people bother to see teams trying some new players or youngsters and obviously the TV wouldnt bother either! It wouldnt work! I totaly agree with the proposal if you want to bring Scottish Football ahead. Money rules the world and people need to accept it, wehter we like it or not! I certainly prob wouldnt renew a seasonticket for a 18 team league to see 2 teams playing some terrible football, because you can be 100% sure that even in a 16 or 18 team league, teams will play not to lose and talent wont improve. Once certain teams have a decent amount of points the pressure is out and peope wont pay at the gate.... Games wont be on TV and here we go! We need to have competition, excitemnt all year around, thats already lacking at times with 12 teams. But again: This is my own view! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Dont see the point in a bigger league! After 3/4 of the season there will be meaningless games and why would people bother to see teams trying some new players or youngsters and obviously the TV wouldnt bother either! It wouldnt work! I totaly agree with the proposal if you want to bring Scottish Football ahead. Money rules the world and people need to accept it, wehter we like it or not! I certainly prob wouldnt renew a seasonticket for a 18 team league to see 2 teams playing some terrible football, because you can be 100% sure that even in a 16 or 18 team league, teams will play not to lose and talent wont improve. Once certain teams have a decent amount of points the pressure is out and peope wont pay at the gate.... Games wont be on TV and here we go! We need to have competition, excitemnt all year around, thats already lacking at times with 12 teams. But again: This is my own view! I get what you're saying - but I genuinely think that this is different this time round. I don'y have to accept anything (that's not a dig at your point just a statement on where i think we are) Too many negatives are colliding at the one time. In the past many have accepted and shuffled along I sense a sea change This is a genuine clifftop Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I totaly agree with the proposal if you want to bring Scottish Football ahead. Money rules the world and people need to accept it, wehter we like it or not!People don't need to accept it - that's the point. The game relies on the paying customer. If it doesn't deliver to an acceptable standard, then no more customers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 We need to have competition, excitemnt all year around, thats already lacking at times with 12 teams. And how does a 10 team league guarantee competition and excitement all year round exactly!? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonesy Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Are you saying that at the 3/4 point of the season that the Premiership, Bundesliga, La Liga etc. don't have 'meaningless games'? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 And how does a 10 team league guarantee competition and excitement all year round exactly!? The answer to that isn't a guess Jay - as we've been there before. It's dire, negative, fear filled, stalemate, park the bus SHIIITE! Agreed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mic2904 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Are you saying that at the 3/4 point of the season that the Premiership, Bundesliga, La Liga etc. don't have 'meaningless games'? Ok, do get all your points - you dont have to accept it, obviously. As for the point above: Of course they have, but I would like to think all these leagues are in a different position, esp the Bundesliga with all their finincial restrictions and anual check up of the finances. The EPL has plenty of derby games and La Liga You can argue in England that there a plenty of derby games etc, so there will be less "meaningless" games and more games to play for. The Bundesliga has no problems with supporters so nothing to worry. About La Liga I am not sure, I am not too deep into La Liga. I mean its obviously crap with the ugly sisters, they are too far ahead. Apart from: We dont want a 2 10 Tier SPL, what does the ordinary supporter in Scotland want? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welldaft Mk1 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I know not the solution, but if expanding to a 16 or 18 team league loses the club £1m in revenue I would put my hoose on the people on here moaning about a 10 team league moaning about the pish being served up on the park. Because we are playing 14th v 16th in April in front of crowds of 3000 but with an even poorer 1st 11 because we cannot afford decent playing squad. The majority on here are deluding themselves if they think crowds will increase just becuase we only play Raith 2 times a season. I am not saying a 10 team league is the answer, but an expanded league of 16 or 18 most certainly is not. Where I do agree is that the revenue split is skewed so much in favour of the top 2. That should be discussed and a more equitable split proposed as the gap from 2nd to 3rd is laughable. I would be all for sticking with 12 team league and introducing play offs for the drop and Europe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I would be all for sticking with 12 team league and introducing play offs for the drop and Europe.We do have play-offs for the drop and Europe. It's called the SPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 The answer to that isn't a guess Jay - as we've been there before. It's dire, negative, fear filled, stalemate, park the bus SHIIITE! Agreed? Indeed. Are we now destined for a rotation system where every ten years we switch from 12 teams to 10 teams then back again and so on and so on...!? I've got to concur with the comments about the complete lack of imagination. As I said earlier, that's what worries me the most. It's now been officially recognised that Scottish football needs change. Switching to an even more mundane and mind-numblingly shite 10 team league is just a complete and utter waste of an opportunity, and the creativity on show is absolutely laughable. Tell you what though, when me and Panda started talking about taking up following Blantyre Vics if this abortion of a league setup comes in, I thought we'd be the black sheep amongst those chucking the SPL who just go to the pub instead. But there are a lot more folk than I'd expect talking about following their junior sides instead of professional football if this comes in. The junior teams must be praying for a 10 team SPL! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
star sail Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 The answer to that isn't a guess Jay - as we've been there before. It's dire, negative, fear filled, stalemate, park the bus SHIIITE! Agreed? I agree with what you say but your description describes the Accies v Well game at the weekend and with a 16 team league we may see the very same shite (minus the fear part for those in mid table). 10 is definetly not the answer but 12,16,18 is not the answer either. We desperately need to start again and starting again means tackling the problem of the Old Firm monopoly. Anything else is just rearranging the furniture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Me Bungo Pony Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 i'm very suprised people feel so strongly about this. is playing 9 teams 4 times so different from playing 6 teams 3 times plus 5 teams 4 times? it's two less games and instead of playing accies and midden you play one more game against the teams who finish in the other half of the league from you. It all depends who you are playing. Chairmen, like St Johnstone's, who are apparently all for this 10/10 farce have convinced themselves that they will always be in SPL1 playing 4 home games against the OF. For them, this makes "financial sense". However, having looked at the list of teams who would make up SPL2 if it was instigated today printed in the Sun, how much "financial sense" does it make when those 4 OF home games are replaced by Cowdenbeath and QotS? Where is the sense in arguing a 16 team league would mean slicing the financial cake too thin when the proposal is to create a "20" team SPL1 and 2 ? It only makes sense if the SPL2 clubs are given a tiny slice of the financial action with the bulk being retained by the SPL1 teams. As no-one outside the OF can guarentee SPL1 status, financially disastrous relegation becomes an ever present fear .... or even a never ending nightmare for all those who fail to get promoted. Turkeys voting for Xmas has been used a lot to describe teams like 'Well backing this plan and it is bang on the "money" (pardon my French ). I don't buy the financial necessity for this. If the TV money were split evenly amongst a 16 team league, instead of the OF pocketing over 40% of it between them as happens now, the non-OF teams would not lose a penny. At the moment, non-OF teams get about 6% of the TV revenue; splitting the money evenly in a 16 team league would leave them with 6.25%. Of course, the OF would scream bloody murder about it and block it at every turn, but it would at least put the real reasons for this 10/10 nonsense out in the open. That is, ensuring the OF get even more money and sod everybody else . As for the supposed loss of games .... just another red herring in the campaign to muddy the waters and convince people "there is only one way". As I have said before on other threads, by replacing the current CIS/League Cup with a new (Top Flight only) competition comprising 4 seeded groups of 4 playing each other twice leading to a QF-SF-Final scenario easily makes up for this. It's not the only way of making it work. The much maligned Championship play-offs proposal would make up for "lost games" while also ensuring TV interest and (most likely) 4 OF games a season. As I said, "lost games" is a red herring. As for the argument a 10 team SPL1 would lead to more competition ..... b*llocks. We know it doesn't because we all saw it in action before and it was as dull as dishwater. The points made in other posts mirror my own in this respect so I wont re-iterate them now. Thay are all spot on. I could go on but, in short, I'm not a fan of the 10/10 proposal ... in case anyone was in any doubt . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 'Flow Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 No reply from Leeann as yet and maybe she would feel that it was not appropriate to reply at the moment on a fans forum however if Leeann/Flow or anyone else from the club were to read the boards over these last few days it must surely be of major concern to them the strength of feeling against a 10 team league. Obviously discussions such as this are taken so far above my level I have no input and as such, as a club employee, I am not too sure it would be appropriate for me to comment on it from a personal point of view. One thing though, purely from an interest point of view and this is 100% purely hypothetical. Neil Doncaster stated tonight that a move to a trimmed 10-team league would generate more money from TV Broadcasters. Now, if that money was used to reduce the cost of admission to games (i.e. the German model), would that change this debate any? Just out of interest... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I know not the solution, but if expanding to a 16 or 18 team league loses the club £1m in revenue I would put my hoose on the people on here moaning about a 10 team league moaning about the pish being served up on the park. Because we are playing 14th v 16th in April in front of crowds of 3000 but with an even poorer 1st 11 because we cannot afford decent playing squad. I have been moaning about a 10 team league and I can say without any doubt that I wouldn't be moaning about "the pish being served up on the park" if clubs lost £1,000,000. Some of the most exciting football matches I've ever seen have been lower league, junior or even amateur level. Folk need to get their head around the idea that two teams having a lesser standard of player doesn't automatically mean the game is going to be less entertaining. The majority on here are deluding themselves if they think crowds will increase just becuase we only play Raith 2 times a season. I don't think home attendances would significantly increase in an expanded league. Like any football league, attendances change depending on form, time of year etc. However, I believe away attendances would increase a bit because "away days" would only be coming once a year. Ultimately though, I don't think anyone is arguing that attendances would increase in an expanded league (if they are, then I apologise but I've not read that). The point is though that attendances will undoubtedly decrease with this 10 team league goes ahead. I am not saying a 10 team league is the answer, but an expanded league of 16 or 18 most certainly is not. Why? Where I do agree is that the revenue split is skewed so much in favour of the top 2. That should be discussed and a more equitable split proposed as the gap from 2nd to 3rd is laughable. It can be proposed but it would be accepted. The 11 to 1 vote means that the Old Firm will never vote to share more of the money in the league. It will never change so that's a complete non-starter. I would be all for sticking with 12 team league and introducing play offs for the drop and Europe. I would rather stick with a 12 team league than the 10 team proposal, but what do you mean by play offs for the drop and Europe? Hearts have been outstanding this year. If they finish 3rd by some distance, would they then have to play in a playoff to get into Europe in your proposal?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albie Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 Anyone know what the stadium criteria requirements for SPL 1 & 2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Welldaft Mk1 Posted January 5, 2011 Report Share Posted January 5, 2011 I understand all this negativity in that the fans viewpoints are not being taken on board it would seem. But I do not comprehend a fair number on here who are stating they will chuck supporting Motherwell if this is voted through. Why give up a lifetime of support for a league restructuring. I would support Motherwell if they were in a league of 2, 4, 6, 10, 12, 14, 16, 18, 75 etc etc. I am a little despondent now for a whole host of reasons, but I still plan on buying a season ticket for the forseeable future. The only reason I would not is if I could no longer afford one. I hope people calm down over time and keep following the boys in Claret & Amber. We can ill afford to lose 1 fan let alone several 000. By the same token we can ill afford to lose the revenue an expanded league of 16 or 18 would deliver. 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.