All change for no change
The Scottish football media has apparently become suddenly convinced that the SPL’s proposed 12-12-18 league reconstruction plan is going to happen, and very possibly as soon as next year. Today’s papers are full of analysis of the story, but as usual it’s pretty shallow stuff which appears to miss all the main implications in favour of a simplistic “is it confusing for the fans and where would it leave Rangers?” dual angle.
So with the usual apologies to the football-hating politics fans, let’s have a wee delve.
————————————————————————————————
1. Is it really THAT confusing?
No. The proposed new system isn’t fundamentally any more convoluted than what we have in the top division now. It’s still a single split, it’s just that it now affects two divisions rather than one. No team can end a season more than one division higher or lower than the one they started in.
.
2. Will it do anything about the four-times-a-year “problem”?
Yes. It could make it even worse.
As we’ve previously noted, the vociferous complaints of some fans about the boredom of playing the same opponents four or more times in a single year are largely a red herring. Firstly the objection doesn’t apply to the 90% of supporters who don’t travel to away games, and secondly we’re not convinced that Hibs fans (to pick a random example) really, when they think about it, want to give up two games against Hearts and two games against Celtic every year in favour of four games against, with all due respect, Partick Thistle and Morton.
The new arrangement, however, may see the greatest ever amount of top-division stagnation. To see why, look at how badly Dundee are struggling in the SPL this season. Now, to be fair to them that’s at least partly because they were thrown in to the top flight with about a week’s notice, having already cut their cloth to win SFL1 rather than compete in the SPL. But it does also illustrate a significant gulf in class between the upper two divisions.
The main effect of the 12-12-18 plan is that it ends automatic relegation altogether. The middle league after the 8-8-8 mid-season split will comprise the bottom four clubs from the SPL and the top four from the new second division (we’ll keep calling the divisions by their current names purely for the purposes of this article, so that’s the present SFL1). It’s entirely possible – even likely – that the four SPL clubs could take the top four slots, meaning that the next season’s SPL will start with exactly the same 12 clubs the previous season did, possibly for many seasons in a row.
.
3. Will there still be a footballing fiscal cliff?
Yes. In fact, the new proposals seriously raise the stakes at the midway point of the season. In a competitive top division like the one we’re currently enjoying, Dundee Utd and Hearts in 8th and 9th are both just six points adrift of Hibs in 4th, and both have a game in hand over the Easter Road club. Just a single goal divides the Tannadice and Tynecastle teams. (Their goal differences are -1 and -2 respectively.)
Yet in the new system United and Hearts would be separated overnight, into two very different worlds. One would be safe beside the Hibees in the top division with the chance to challenge for Europe, and the other would be cast into a mini-league with a 50% chance of relegation. That’s pretty harsh with five months of the season to go, and much more punitive than the current split.
.
4. What about the money?
Part of the reason for the gulf between the two top divisions is that Scottish football’s TV revenue is concentrated overwhelmingly in the SPL. Everyone involved in the present reconstruction talks is dutifully insisting that one of the aims of reorganisation is to ensure a more even distribution of Scottish football’s money-pot.
But does anyone seriously see Sky and ESPN being interested in Mini-League 2 after the halfway point of the season? If they’re not, then the number of clubs seen on TV after Christmas is likely to be cut by a third under the new plan. And it’s hard to see why the top eight would be keen to share a pot of money that won’t have gotten any bigger than it is now, because what possible reason do Sky have to pay more?
The broadcaster’s best-case-scenario is that they get pretty much the same product they’ve got now. But in reality it could be much worse. If we take a snapshot of current standings, the middle division post-split would comprise Hearts, St Mirren, Ross County, Dundee, Dunfermline, Morton, Partick Thistle and Raith Rovers. It’s not an attractive TV proposition even on face value, but take a closer look.
That scenario is a catastrophic nightmare for Sky, because it opens up the chilling possibility of a pair of eight-team leagues which are not only bereft of Old Firm games, but also feature no Edinburgh derbies, no Dundee derbies and no Highland derbies.
The second half of the season would be an absolute wasteland for the broadcaster, with Celtic probably well on top in the SPL and nothing more enthralling to offer subscribers than Motherwell and Inverness Caley Thistle scrapping for the right to go out to Dynamo Potato in the first round of the Europa League.
Viewing figures would plummet, and with them Sky’s motivation to pump in any extra money. Even if and when I Can’t Believe It’s Not Rangers eventually manage to claw their way into the top league, that just gets everyone back to where they were in 2011, and that was nobody’s idea of the promised land.
.
5. Oh yeah – what are the ramifications for The Rangers?
Perhaps surprisingly, the reconstruction doesn’t directly provide an accelerated route back to the top division for Charles Green’s youngsters, technically backing up SFL chief David Longmuir’s assertion in the Herald today that “Neither proposal would ‘fast-track’ Rangers”. If, as is suggested, the reorganisation is in place for next season, Rangers would have to start in the bottom 18-club division. (Assuming they win SFL3 this year, they’ll have effectively finished in 33rd place, well out of the top 24.)
That would mean they couldn’t theoretically be back in the SPL before season 2015/16 (via promotion to the new middle division at the end of 2013/14, achieving a top-four spot by the halfway point and then finishing in the top four of the middle split division in 2014/15), which is the same as under the current set-up. (Win SFL3 this year, SFL2 in 2013/14 and SFL1 in 2014/15.)
The advantage of the new arrangement for the Ibrox club, though, is that under the present system they’d have to win SFL1 in 2014/15 to get back into the SPL. This way they only have to make it to one of FOUR promotion slots from the middle league.
.
6. And if The Rangers are the winners, who are the losers?
That scenario could be bad news for some current SFL1 and SFL2 teams, many of whom could miss out on lucrative fixtures against Ally McCoist’s dynamic, thrusting newco. It’s especially concerning for current SFL1 clubs, for two reasons.
Firstly, they won’t get any of the benefit of The Rangers spending an extra season in the bottom division, and secondly they’ll feel the loss more keenly, as many of them have decent-sized grounds which would have seen thousands of fans turn up for the matches. (Whereas the income boost for some of the tinier SFL3 sides has been limited by the size of their stadia.)
To illustrate this point, let’s compare, say, SFL3 Annan Athletic (stadium capacity 2,007) with SFL1 Livingston (stadium capacity 10,122). Annan have had two home league fixtures against The Rangers this season, but would get a bonus one under the reconstruction plan, for a total of four.
The likes of Livingston (whose typical SFL1 home crowd is in the region of 1500), meanwhile, could have expected to get two bumper home gates in – probably – season 2014/15, but might end up with just one if they find themselves in Mini-League 3 after Christmas 2014 and the Ibrox men are in Mini-League 2.
The same fate could befall the rest of SFL1 and, on current standings, Queen Of The South and Alloa Athletic from SFL2. Most SFL1 club have stadium capacities in the 10,000 region – losing just one full house would therefore be a serious financial blow, and one unlikely to be compensated for by an increased share of TV revenue. (As that would require something in the area of £250,000.)
————————————————————————————————
So the net effects of the reconstruction can be summed up thusly:
(i) Good news for The Rangers, who get a much easier (if not necessarily faster) route back to the top flight without having to win the competitive SFL1.
(ii) Current SPL clubs will lose two league fixtures a season. The plan calls for League Cup reorganisation to make up the shortfall, but nobody goes to the League Cup as it is, and we’re not sure making the early stages of the unloved tournament even more drawn-out is the answer to that.
(iii) Bad news for several SFL1 clubs, but a small boost for the current SFL3. (Most of today’s SFL2 comes out neutral for games against the Ibrox side.)
(iv) A real danger that the top league will become more static and stagnant than ever, with no automatic relegation and no incentive for the top division to share TV money with lower leagues.
(v) At best, a neutral effect on Sky/ESPN – they might get Old Firm games back sooner, but at a long-term ongoing cost in terms of other derbies. So there’ll be no increase in the amount of that TV money.
(vi) Good news in the shape of the formation of a single governing body, ending the current ridiculous three-way bureaucracy, but of course we don’t need to reorganise the leagues to do that.
We have to admit, readers, it seems a lot of trouble to go to to expedite the return of The Rangers to the top division while changing nothing else. But as we saw last year, there are few lengths the Scottish football authorities won’t go to to achieve that end. At least this time, we suppose, they’re being a lot more cunning about it.
Not often I would agree with that cold, dead midden – Jamie Saxt (the sublime poetry of the language of “The King James Bible” translation apart). But the opportunist little shit had the right idea about the scourge of football/soccer: Ban it from every square inch of Scotland.
An idea centuries ahead of its time, and awaiting fruition.
It and religion both mass opiates; although, am not sure which is more stultifying.
As always with Dons fans, its always about the Rangers :)……. Seems to me that Rangers have little to do with the plans at all. So it must therefore be some high level conspiracy….
I’d apply Occams Razor and say its more likely just crap analysis and proposal from Scottish football authorities rather than some big scheme to fix the Rangers issue. At best Rangers are a bolt on.
More rearranging of the deckchairs on the Titanic.
There is only one, long-term solution to the ills of Scottish football – a cull of the diddy teams.
London (pop 8 million +) – 14 senior football teams.
Scotland (pop 5 million +) – 42 senior football teams.
“As always with Dons fans, its always about the Rangers”
Because, as the feature points out at some length, they’re the only ones who get anything out of it. We know from 2012 that the Scottish football authorities will stop at nothing to get them back into the top league as quickly and easily as is humanly possible. Fans and clubs revolted against the idea of getting them there FASTER, so instead they’ve tried to make it EASIER.
Unless, of course, you’re suggesting that the SPL came up with this grand plan as a means of funnelling some extra cash to Annan Athletic and Brechin City…
“There is only one, long-term solution to the ills of Scottish football – a cull of the diddy teams.”
I instinctively support this theory – if not the derogatory language – but there’s an interesting thread going on at Pie And Bovril which points out the holes in it.
http://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php/topic/193515-scottish-football-reconstruction/
Why oh why can’t we go back to the glory years of the Premier Division, 1st & 2nd in the 80s.
Scotland qualified for almost every world cup, Aberdeen won the Cup winners cup and super cup, Dundee UTD made european finals, Celtic had decent runs in Europe. It was a golden period for us. We produced decent players and played decent football. We weren’t world beaters but we had something to be proud of.
Damn you fat cat chairmen!
Having only one automatic relegation place from the SPL has led to stagnation – this season Dundee are already down and although there is no runaway leader of SFL 1, last season Ross County were in that position, leading to stagnation in SFL 1 below them. With no automatic relegation from the SPL under these proposals things look even more stagnant..
“Having only one automatic relegation place from the SPL has led to stagnation”
Yes. That’s the one thing in the current set-up that really does need changed. Should be two-up-two-down, but at a bare minimum we need a 9th-vs-2nd playoff.
Scottish football will be stuck in a limbo until the heads of the SFL/SPL/SFA are all gone and a proper inquiry is carried out into the corruption in our game.
What’s in the secret ‘5 way agreement’ ?
Why are Sevco in the SFL which is illegal under the present rules. ? ( 3 yrs audited accounts/ proper person checks on directors etc)
Why are Sevco allowed to claim to be the same club despite oldco being liquidated leaving £90m in debts ? If they’re the same club then why don’t they pay their debts and why is their points co efficient suspended at FIFA ?
Why is Mr Green allowed to slag off the SFA / promote boycotts etc and bring the game into disrepute with no comeback ?
What have Sevco supporters actually bought shares in ? Rangers International ?
By fiddling the rules to keep Sevco on board they’ve just put the problem on the back burner with Sevco itching to exact their ‘revenge’ on the rest of us when they get back up the league.
Many supporters will have abandoned the game long before then rather than face all the hatred and bile coming down the road.
Rev. Stuart Campbell says:
7 January, 2013 at 12:43 pm
“Having only one automatic relegation place from the SPL has led to stagnation”
On the other hand the entertainment and quality of football this season has been really good under just these circumstances.
I don’t think that we could afford to go back to two down from ten or twelve while the financial gap is so wide between SPL and SFL1. Play-offs are the answer to that one.
The “middle 8” would effectively be an extended play-off and could be great entertainment.
I’ve posted my thoughts on league reconstruction before which includes a 16-16-16 senior leagues (with splits and playoffs) and 16-16-16-18 regional leagues and how it could work. Instead of going through that extensively again, all I say is to stop stagnation you need movement in a pyramid system. This allows a three-up three down with ambitious clubs to grow and strive for success and less ambitious to fall down till they find their level. This keeps a healthy circulation of clubs keeping leagues interesting. What I am absolutely sick of is the Self Preservation League consistently coming up with a plan which really only serves six or seven clubs in the whole of Scotland. Scottish football needs massive investment on all levels but instead of thinking of innovative ways of attracting that investment, we have the SPL chairmen working with such narrow self interested parameters that vision and ambition is severely lacking. We have a football league set up that does not encourage positivity or a favourable outlook, it is a set up which maintains a banal survival, a grey porridge league system that does not curry favour for a new generation of fans. Before long we will be a league of comparable size to NI or Wales because that’s how interesting it will become and the fans will continue to look elsewhere for their entertainment. When you buy in League Two players, you get a League Two team, simples! The Scottish league system is a vicious circle of a lack of investment, lack of vision and a lack of ambition. And this new proposal is not radical enough and won’t change a thing because those SPL Chairman are more keen on self preservation and everything else is a token gesture. Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic comes to mind.
I’m going to find my original proposal that I’ve previously posted on this blog and I’m going to email it to every Scottish football club and governing body because, effectively, I can’t do much more than that! … and I’ve convinced myself that my ideas for league construction is a good one, so I’ll probably be duly ignored and laughed at 🙂
“The “middle 8? would effectively be an extended play-off and could be great entertainment.”
Yeah, I’m not convinced there’s anything WRONG with the three-league split as such (except the point that in a tight season like this year it could be really harsh on the team in 9th place at the halfway stage), more that it simply doesn’t achieve anything other than easing The Rangers’ path back to the top.
Rev – re the reduction of senior clubs in Scotland, I would not, as the guy in Pie&Bovril suggests, start a series of grotesque surgical procedures around the country creating such Frankenstein monsters as an Ayrshire Academicals or Racing Club of Lanarkshire. Heaven forbid footy ends up in the mess rugby got itself into. But the wee clubs really should be playing in an entirely separate league structure from professional outfits. Having to share revenues, TV rights and the like around 42 clubs – however unfairly that may currently be done – is simply spreading the money too thinly to make a difference to anyone.
One more thing – would the supporters of every other club in the country other than Celtic and The Rangers either stop moaning about the Old Firm and the relative poverty of their own clubs OR start going to games themselves. I’m fed up being lectured to about the imbalance in the game by so-called supporters of clubs who regularly play in front of three old guys and a dug.
The problem always has been and will continue to be the Old Firm, we need to shoehorn them off to the EPL or some sort of North Atlantic league. Once we have done that 4 divisions of 10 with one up/one down and a relegation play-off wouldn’t seem so tedious. If you look at this season’s SPL table the top six teams would be separated by 5/6 points.
Aldos Rendos – “The problem always has been and will continue to be the Old Firm, we need to shoehorn them off to the EPL or some sort of North Atlantic league.”
And what message would that give to England and the rest of the world in the run up to 2014 – that far from being self-confident about ourselves, big enough to sustain serious European class football clubs, we think we should just chuck them overboard ‘cos they’re destabilising our wee boat? Maybe we should ditch RBS, Standard LIfe, Clyde Blowers and anyone else who looks like they might be too big for poor wee us to handle?
@Dcanmore
Was going to say something similar, but you said it much better than I would have! I agree with everything you said, especially about self-interested SPL chairmen.
League reconstruction is needed in Scotland, but how to do it, and what is the best way are just so difficult to answer. With any new league reconstruction it can’t be deemed a success or failure until it’s actually been implemented and run for at least two full seasons. Until the perfect scheme has been devised it will always be done in a trial-and-error wait-and-see fashion -unfortunate, but true. This latest proposal for Scotland falls into that wait-and-see category. Though, being aware of Scotland’s ‘football authorities” less than successful history, unfortunately only trepidation awaits!
I’ve read loads of ideas for reconstruction in Scotland, ranging from really innovative to really bonkers! The real gist I get from FANS is that the ‘product’ in Scotland is dull and boring, same old, same old. Of course, if money was thrown at it as in England with Sky and all the other media hype involved the ‘product’ would, at least, seem to be much more exciting and something to support and follow. But it’s not like that in Scotland, as we know, so we have to make-do-and-mend as best we can.
Too many ‘senior’ clubs? I believe so, yes. I’ve had a look at what Uruguay does for its league system. Why Uruguay? Well, with a population of only 3.5 million they produce some great players and the national team are pretty damn successful. Is it because of their league system, or not? Can’t say for sure when matters such as nurturing of players and national culture are involved. Also, their best players tend to leave for European teams at a young age.
Anyway, Uruguay has a 16 team Primera Division (professional) with the winners decided on an Apertura and Clausara end-of-season play-off. Three teams go down and three come up.
The Secunda Division (professional) has 14 teams with the winners decided on the same Aprtura and Clausera system. They then have a 10-team play-off to decide who also gets promoted with the ‘winners’ and the runners-up with one of those gaining promotion. Three teams go down and three come up.
The third division is an amateur league. Again the same systems of winners and those relegated as the two leagues above apply.
There then follows a series of regional amateur leagues. All leagues have three up and three down. There is a pyramidal system where, for example, in theory a team could start at the very bottom of that league pyramid system and with a great deal of luck, skill and resources(!) progress all the way up to the very top league. (As an aside, two sides dominate in Uruguay, Penarol and Nacional.)
The Uruguayan system may sound a bit convoluted, especially the Apertura and Clausara and Secunda Division 10-team play-off, but couldn’t some thought be given for something similar here? God knows, the FANS of football in Scotland are crying out, not only for skill, but also excitement. It is supposed to be entertainment, after all. For Christ sake Scotland’s ‘football authorities’, innovate or die!
Sorry for the long post – football in the blood!
a)We have 42 senior clubs but most of them are part time so there is no point comparing that with the full time leagues in any other country.
b) Celtic and Sevco are and always will be the problem as long at they get all the tv money, home advantage in cup finals and the help of bent referees and administrators.
c) In every other sport they try to get the best to play against each other more often to raise the standards and provide for the spectators. Why does this not apply in Scotland?
d) As long as the media is run by foreigners then the amount of money in our game will continue to be a pittance compared to other NATIONS.
Yet more anti Rangers drivel from the Rev Sheepy. To argue that the new setup has been devised to make it easier for Rangers to reach the SPL is frankly pathetic. Under the present set up Rangers must finish top of Div1 (nominally 13th best team in Scotland) for SPL qualification. The new setup would require Rangers to finish at least 4th in mini league (nominally 12th). A rather tall order for a team that you assert may not be good enough to win Div1. (You actually come to same conclusion in point2 above!!!)
“The new setup would require Rangers to finish at least 4th in mini league (nominally 12th)”
That’s not how leagues work, though. You don’t play teams in the division above you, so your “overall” position means nothing. What they’d actually have to do is be in the top four of a 12-team league after half a season, then in the top four of an eight-team league for the other half. The current set-up requires them to finish in the top two of a 10-team league over a full season, then to win another 10-team league over another season. A first or second then a first, or two top-fours? The latter is plainly far easier. Easy on the Buckie at this early hour, eh?
Make up your mind, there either is or isnt (to use your own words) “a significant gulf in class between the upper two divisions.” If Rangers could not win Div 1 outright they at best would be 2nd and we just need to look at “how badly Dundee are struggling in the SPL this season”. There is mitigating circumstances in Dundee’s case but they were still the 2nd best team in Div 1 last season. I get it that you hate Rangers, but you let yourself and this otherwise excellent site down with your petty attacks on the club. By the way Ive never tasted Buckie have you ? at least you could use that as an excuse for the drivel you posted above
“Make up your mind, there either is or isnt (to use your own words) “a significant gulf in class between the upper two divisions.” If Rangers could not win Div 1 outright they at best would be 2nd and we just need to look at “how badly Dundee are struggling in the SPL this season”. There is mitigating circumstances in Dundee’s case but they were still the 2nd best team in Div 1 last season. “
The connection between that and anything we’re talking about is a mystery to me. Have another go.
Does anyone seriously believe that there would be any moves to change the league set up if Glasgow Rangers hadn’t been liquidated ?
League reconstruction is being rushed through ( after years of zero interest) in order to get Sevco2012 Ltd ( Rangers International) into the top league as soon as possible for the ‘greater good’ of Scottish football. And nothing else.
Ok final try….You stated that there is “a significant gulf in class between the upper two divisions” so how does Rangers playing in a mini league with 4 “superior” SPL teams make it easier to get to the top flight ???
Take yir time…
Because they have a hundred times more money than any of them, and they only have to finish above ONE of them.
I don’t see any particular setup as being a problem, just have their various points of interest—strengths and weaknesses (with teams as close this year, the top six split might be unfair where the team 7th after 33 will be denied a shot at Europe). The main issues as I see them are: player development and means to hang on to developing players.
Sure this may be a new dawn with the Ryan Frasers, Jamie Murphys and Tony Watts coming through, is this an emerging trend or just a moderately promising crop of players that happen to appear at the same time? Do they have the necessary fire in the belly to compete at the highest level? Do we still breed the coaches (Fergusons, Telfers, etc) that breathe fire and are tactically savvy?
And how can we make Aberdeen, Motherwell, Dundee, Edinburgh, Kilmarnock, etc. attractive places for our young footballers to establish a reputation? Money? Education? Personal assistance/life coaching? There should certainly be top-down support for world class facilities at as many population centres as is possible—no one wants to play on ground no better than a tatty field.
And how about a bit more love for the university teams? Many players are late bloomers, could be a way to catch a few more that would otherwise slip through the net…
Agh you had me there Rev…
Lets recap your theory…The SPL/SFL are so worried that in 2 years time a Rangers team with what £10m, £15m, £20m, whatever of further investment will so struggle to win Div1 that they have to cobble together this compromise. Whereby, rather than just finish on top of Div 1 Rangers now have to beat the best 3 other Div 1 teams AND an SPL team in the 8 team play-off (or some other such combination). Here’s a thing, why didnt they just introduce playoffs between SPL and Div 1 to save all this palaver ?..never mind
Brilliant, absolute quality, I fell for yir mince hook, line and sinker..ha ha where’s ma buckie?!?!
“The SPL/SFL are so worried that in 2 years time a Rangers team with what £10m, £15m, £20m, whatever of further investment will so struggle to win Div1 that they have to cobble together this compromise. Whereby, rather than just finish on top of Div 1 Rangers now have to beat the best 3 other Div 1 teams AND an SPL team in the 8 team play-off (or some other such combination). Here’s a thing, why didnt they just introduce playoffs between SPL and Div 1 to save all this palaver ?”
Because anyone can win over 90/180 minutes. How many cups have The Rangers been knocked out of this year, despite being vastly richer than their opponents?
Just so we’re clear, BW: it’s your argument that it’s easier to finish in the top two in a league and then win one than it is to twice finish in the top four? Right?
“Because anyone can win over 90/180 minutes. How many cups have The Rangers been knocked out of this year, despite being vastly richer than their opponents?”
haha still at it “The” Rangers ..superb…
“Just so we’re clear, BW: it’s your argument that it’s easier to finish in the top two in a league and then win one than it is to twice finish in the top four? Right?”
Depends how difficult the league is and in your own words how vast the “gulf in class is between the competing teams”.
Seriously… this is all a conspiracy to aid Rangers…fantastic sir!!…thats me …goodnight
2 leagues of 16. Each league splits into 4 for sectional league cup games seeded from previous season. points from sections taken into main league this will give all enough meaningful games and healthy competion at end of season as everyone will want to be in highest pot for league cup draw. old firm glasgow cup for charity. All boxes ticked . Any comments.
“Any comments. “
I’m thinking the pubs open quite late round your way 😀
The League Cup needs to go altogether. If we need any extra fixtures for anything, pad out the Scottish Cup in the style of the Champions League. Almost no leagues have two cup competitions.
“haha still at it “The” Rangers ..superb…”
That’s its name, isn’t it? If it’s the same club, why is it in SFL3? It was neither relegated nor demoted.
“Seriously… this is all a conspiracy to aid Rangers…fantastic sir!!…thats me …goodnight”
Then do tell us what purpose it actually serves, and why it’s happening in such a rush when people have been talking about reconstruction for about a decade without achieving anything.
For all lovers of good football.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/video/2013/jan/07/greek-children-goal-video
Rev..
The recent share certificate said that Sevco were ‘Rangers International’..
iyfmgz.jpg (JPEG Image, 588 × 639 pixels) – Scaled (94%)
“Rangers FC “(IL) seem to have been suspended at the UEFA rankings as well. See No88. Probably just a glitch or something as it’s still the same club.
Same problem with Birmingham and Portsmouth etc…
Member associations – UEFA rankings – Club coefficients – UEFA.com
“The recent share certificate said that Sevco were ‘Rangers International’..”
…owners of “THE Rangers Football Club”.
I still can’t take seriously any league where there’s a “split” or where a team can end up playing an unequal number of home/away games. How can a league be a true representation of the pecking order of the teams in it unless each team is asked to fulfil the exact same fixtures? The SPL needs to go back to a 10-team league playing four rounds of fixtures like the SFL clubs do, or Scottish football needs to return to the situation forty years ago where it had two large divisions who only played a once-home and once-away season.
I don’t think that the Rangers situation is a huge factor in all of this other than that their absence has removed even more money from the SPL and made change more urgent. When you speak of the “footballing authorities” trying to fast-track Rangers back to the top flight, you better include every single SPL club in that list, because despite their protestations that Rangers newco shouldn’t be accepted into the SPL, not one of them publicly professed a preference for Rangers to drop all the way to SFL 3. A sort of “integrity-lite” if you like.
“not one of them publicly professed a preference for Rangers to drop all the way to SFL 3.”
Mmmm, I wonder why ?
Then do tell us what purpose it actually serves, and why it’s happening in such a rush when people have been talking about reconstruction for about a decade without achieving anything.
Maybe to help the Dons win a trophy ? Were the integrity brigade not shouting for reconstruction as well ?
“Maybe to help the Dons win a trophy ? Were the integrity brigade not shouting for reconstruction as well ?”
The “integrity brigade” was pretty much everyone in the country except Rangers fans. And no, I don’t recall any particular call for league reconstruction during RangersGate.
Please do not include the word Celtic and the word potato in the same paragraph. Some people are very touchy about that sort of thing.
As for Freddy’s suggestion of culling the “diddy teams”, Scottish football, and indeed Scotland would be far healthier without the bigot brothers. Cull them first.
Actually i think most Rangers fans were also in alignment with 3rd division option, so this blanket accusation against Rangers seems at odds with the facts.
Rangers one would assume get one vote on the proposals. Problem you have is that you don’t know which way to turn. Your sensible head tells you something is wrong with Scottish football but your crazy football supporter head looks for Rangers conspiracy in every move and so resists any change.
You’d be happier with no OF but not in any real altruistic way as regards Scottish football as a whole, its purely as a tool to get Aberdeen into the same position of hegemony.
Are you happy with the status quo ? Do you think Scottish football is healthy ?
Just for the record, I think the plans are too complicated. I don’t really have a solution as I’m no football analyst, just a supporter. If pushed I’d say back to 2 or 3 leagues and play each other less would at least spread the riches a bit more. I also like the idea of playing different teams. The last few years of 9 in a row at Ibrox was when my interest diminished, bizarre as that sounds winning can be boring.
We’d have 3 up and 3 down with playoffs. It seems to provide entertainment at the end of the season and that should be the end goal. I agree with fairer split of league cash, however I’m not sure it really helps as more money just creates wage and transfer inflation so is in the end self defeating.
BTW try to resist the temptation to accuse me of attempting to get Rangers back up earlier by suggesting 2 or 3 leagues…..
“Rangers one would assume get one vote on the proposals.”
No. The Rangers FC is still only an associate member of the SFL and gets no vote.
“Your sensible head tells you something is wrong with Scottish football but your crazy football supporter head looks for Rangers conspiracy in every move and so resists any change.”
I don’t “resist any change”. Where have I said that I resist this change? I can’t see that it even IS a change, hence the title of the article. It does neither harm nor good as far as I can see. We absolutely need a single body in charge. We absolutely need more movement between SPL and SFL1. I’m all in favour of those changes.
“You’d be happier with no OF but not in any real altruistic way as regards Scottish football as a whole, its purely as a tool to get Aberdeen into the same position of hegemony.”
No, and only an OF supporter would ever think that way. Why would Aberdeen have a “hegemony” over Scottish football if there was no Old Firm? We’re currently 5th of 11 non-OF teams in the SPL.
League champions since 1985:
Celtic, Rangers, Celtic, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Celtic, Rangers, Rangers, Celtic, Celtic, Rangers, Celtic, Rangers, Celtic, Celtic, Celtic, Rangers, Rangers, Rangers, Celtic.
Best placed w/o OF:
Hearts, Dundee U, Hearts, Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Hearts, Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Motherwell, Aberdeen, Dundee U, Hearts, St Johnstone, Hearts, Hibernian, Livingston, Hearts, Hearts, Hibernian, Hearts, Aberdeen, Motherwell, Hearts, Dundee U, Hearts, Motherwell.
Rangers seemingly regecting proposals that according to ‘sources in the know ‘ were created just for them….. You could not make this up. Shows your article to be rather poorly thought out on that front plus sadly shows Rangers management to be off their nut…
“Rangers seemingly regecting proposals that according to ‘sources in the know ‘ were created just for them”
http://wingsland.podgamer.com/thoughts-on-a-single-question-referendum/
I honestly can’t work out from Traynor’s bilious rant what it is that TRFC are actually upset about. Maybe you can explain it to me. (Genuine question.)
They have a valid complaint that if the proposals are agreed this month, this season’s SFL3 will be largely meaningless. But then, if you reconstruct the league there HAS to be a season in which normal promotion/relegation/championships get screwed with. You can’t make an omelette without breaking a couple of eggs.
Secondly, what’s the beef? If TRFC win SFL3 this year and the setup stays the same, they’ll find themselves in the third tier of Scottish football with 22 clubs above them in two divisions. Under the new arrangement, they’d find themselves in, er, the third tier of Scottish football with 24 clubs above them in two divisions. Oh, big boo-hoo. Especially when as compensation there are eight promotion places available instead of three.
Plus they’d have the rest of this season for their inexperienced young players to learn their trade in a no-pressure environment. So seriously, truly, what ARE they whining about?
Probably the same thing you were whining about in the original article, some sort of perceived bias where none really exists. I know its hard but sometimes you really need to try to put your own petty personal prejudices aside when looking at a situation. I know its hard as a football fan especially when you’ve won nothing since the mid 90’s :D. I know I’ve got bias but I don’t look for conspiracy in every situation.
As I said yesterday, simplest solution is usually best, SPL,SFL and SFA are fighting for their existence. We’ve have more than our fair share of club failures and the Scottish football scene is hardly inspiring. If it was a report card it would read ‘Could do better’. Nothing looks better than big action, regardless of effectiveness of the action. Bold and brash action by the football bodies, keeps the masses from the gates.
Rangers management have a legitimate excuse for being nutters in that they are commercially in a very delicate position and are probably shitting bricks. There is nothing more effective at creating a siege mentality than the CEO pronouncing the world is against us. Look how it worked for Celtic in the past, galvanizing club,support and manager to one seething mass of persecution.
Do you not see the comedy value in you lambasting the plans as being made up for Rangers and Rangers also complaining they were not consulted. Its like two drunk guys fighting over who buys the next round. Its essentially football in a microcosm, shows there is little or no logic when it comes to supporting a team.
“Do you not see the comedy value in you lambasting the plans as being made up for Rangers and Rangers also complaining they were not consulted.”
The difference is that what I say doesn’t have a hidden agenda behind it, of course. You admit yourself in the preceding paragraph that Green is creating a siege mentality, a phenomenon also observed by many in the media (Spiers was good in the Herald on the subject yesterday).
Green doesn’t give a shit about being consulted – he’s already said The Rangers will never play in the SPL while he’s CEO, so why does he care what its structure is? But making a song-and-dance about it fires up the support and their persecution complex and gets punters through the turnstiles.
(And of course, it doesn’t hurt if it brings a few website views in at 99p a throw either.)
“Its essentially football in a microcosm, shows there is little or no logic when it comes to supporting a team.”
I notice you keep failing to find any holes in the article’s logic. I can’t see that the proposal will make any significant difference to Aberdeen at all, in either direction, so I have no dog in the fight when it comes to the league proposals in themselves. I’m neither excited nor outraged about them. I simply applied logic and deduction to see whose benefit they could conceivably be in, and there’s only one club that really stands to gain anything substantial.
SPL CLUBS: Lose money, increased danger of relegation, but less financial damage if it occurs. They’re trading potential income for a bit more security. A relegation-insurance policy, basically.
SFL1 CLUBS: Better prospect of promotion, but also loss of ANY guaranteed promotion, and increased danger of relegation. Bit more money. Probably overall gainers, but only just.
SFL2 CLUBS: Will barely notice any difference.
SFL3 CLUBS: Get the much-vaunted play-twice-a-season league. More chance of promotion, but also danger of relegation where previously there was none. One-off financial boost through another season of games against TRFC. Little change.
THE RANGERS: No longer have to come 1st or 2nd in SFL2 with limited, transfer-embargoed squad. No longer have to win tough, competitive SFL1 to reach top division. No difference in number of seasons required to get back to top. No discernible downside of any kind. All win.
It wasn’t me who said it was all constructed to suit Rangers and in fact you went as far as saying the plans were conjured in their entirety just for Rangers, that was you. That is primarily where our opinions differ. I said the plans looked too complex and that to me were neutral. Later I said that it was action for the sake of being seen to do something to save the SFA et al themselves, its not about improving things although that could be a side effect.
Your opinion of whether is is positive for Aberdeen is of course only half the picture, if it was harmful to Rangers then that’s a plus for you. As you couldn’t see it being harmful to Rangers then you believe it must be positive and allude to some high level pro Rangers conspiracy.
Bottom line is that one less OF team means you’d have a better chance of winning anything, even Aberdeen. Its a natural reaction big team, we all culturally prefer underdogs and of course Rangers you see as some sort of part of the anti Scottish establishment. I understand that view and am sympathetic as my dislikes of Celtic as a club are based on similar viewpoints. This virulent Pro Irishness I think undermines my own Scottishness, you’ve not lived until its been in a street where dozens of people fly Tri colours out the windows. The McGeady situation is a perfect analogy for the whole club, born in Glasgow, parents born in Glasgow yet chooses to play for the Republic.
I’m laughing as you and Green both see it as a ‘conspiracy’ yet from completely polar opposites. The comedy in that is that the same scenario can be viewed by different protagonists completely differently.
Although I do concede in your last post you do come round and say its pretty even, even though I think its partially driven by your knee jerk rejection of Greens pronouncements.
Personally I see Green as in it for the money , Fergus McCannesque. That way I can view him as a necessary evil.
All this sabre ratting about not playing in the SPL and playing elsewhere is nonsense. If I’m wrong I wouldn’t support the club if they played outside of Scotland.
As they say… “Its all about opinions”.
“I’m laughing as you and Green both see it as a ‘conspiracy’ yet from completely polar opposites. The comedy in that is that the same scenario can be viewed by different protagonists completely differently.”
As I noted, that assumes Green was being honest yesterday, rather than cynically rabble-rousing. I put the likelihood of the former at about 5%.
“even though I think its partially driven by your knee jerk rejection of Greens pronouncements.”
My post came before Green’s interview, of course.
“Bottom line is that one less OF team means you’d have a better chance of winning anything, even Aberdeen. Its a natural reaction big team,”
I’m a bit confused. The proposed reorganisation makes no difference at all to the likely speed of The Rangers’ journey to the top division. If Green WAS being honest, I should be thrilled about the reorganisation, since he says the club doesn’t want to play in that league and will leave Scotland.
@Kenny Campbell
I think I lot of the feeling against the Old Firm in Scotland is to do with how their domination came about, rather than their domination per se. The division between Catholics and Protestants annoys, bores a lot of people in Scotland. Also, Celtic and Rangers do seem to bring politics into football, the IRA songs from some Celtic supporters, and the ‘Bobby Sands is dead’ song from some Rangers supporters. Then you have the Palestinian flags and Israeli flags at some Old Firm games.
I don’t disagree, if I wasn’t a Rangers fan I’d hate them. There are aspects around the club I don’t like but I can’t change my club for that. I’m not sure changing club is really possible outside of childhood. I’ve watched other clubs regularly while working abroad and wanted them to win but its still not the same.
I think you are at a tangent on the Aberdeen thing. I stated that you’d prefer no OF clubs as it would be better for Aberdeen, you denied this, despite some interesting stats later from AndrewFraeGovan who showed 7 wins in top leag sans OF for Aberdeen. . I nowhere said Aberdeen benefited from reconstruction and neither did you.
My post came before Green’s interview, of course.
Yes but in the initial post you said it was pro Rangers, then Green spouted his pish and you softened your stance and said it was effectively neutral…my beef was that I couldn’t see how it was pro Rangers and found it utterly unbelievable that it was all just for Rangers. My stance is still the same, your view has taken on a subtle change since you posted the original article and Green was the driver.
“I stated that you’d prefer no OF clubs as it would be better for Aberdeen, you denied this”
When did I do that?
“then Green spouted his pish and you softened your stance and said it was effectively neutral”
When did I do that? I said TRFC got advantages and no discernible downside.
“I stated that you’d prefer no OF clubs as it would be better for Aberdeen, you denied this”
Me:“You’d be happier with no OF but not in any real altruistic way as regards Scottish football as a whole, its purely as a tool to get Aberdeen into the same position of hegemony.”
You: No, and only an OF supporter would ever think that way. Why would Aberdeen have a “hegemony” over Scottish football if there was no Old Firm? We’re currently 5th of 11 non-OF teams in the SPL.
So i said you’d prefer no OF, you said No I was wrong…..
““I stated that you’d prefer no OF clubs as it would be better for Aberdeen, you denied this”
Me:“You’d be happier with no OF but not in any real altruistic way as regards Scottish football as a whole, its purely as a tool to get Aberdeen into the same position of hegemony.”
You: No, and only an OF supporter would ever think that way. Why would Aberdeen have a “hegemony” over Scottish football if there was no Old Firm? We’re currently 5th of 11 non-OF teams in the SPL.
So i said you’d prefer no OF, you said No I was wrong…..”
I’ve read that six times now, and I’m too busy to read it another six to see if it’ll make any sense the twelfth time. Sorry.