Thistle and Well moaning about fixtures

[Biffa Bacon]

The support from some clubs when we were struggling was much appreciated.... But it has nothing to do with this issue.

 

IF we accept the position that there is a split ....and all clubs do, then every club will play every other club either 3 times or 4 times depending on league position after 33 games.

No one should prejudge how the fixtures should pan out ....and which teams will be in the top or bottom, all clubs start on an equal footing. To suggest that some clubs will be disadvantaged because they will finish in the bottom 6, and the OF will finish in the top 6 is frankly a sad indictment on Scottish football. What message does it deliver to the supporters that pay their money every week? It is not that long ago that Motherwell finished near the top of the league, why can't they do it again? Or any team for that matter?

The one aspect that is most annoying, is that there seems to have been some gerrymandering in the past, to manipulate the fixture list based on away attendance and anticipated league position....an absolute disgrace.

[graygo]

Could understand if they were hacked off from a sporting disadvantage.

 

However all they're bothered about is losing out on money from a club they voted out in the league in 2012.

 

Who were voted out the league?

[Pistol1874]

The support from some clubs when we were struggling was much appreciated.... But it has nothing to do with this issue.

The issue could just as easily be discussed without disrespecting those same clubs though.

[frankblack]

The issue could just as easily be discussed without disrespecting those same clubs though.

Nope. Their statement has made them a laughing stock - an utter embarrassment to the league and their own supporters.

 

Put your own supporters first or your fans walk away.

[niblick1874]

Both teams wanted rangers out now greeting about not playing them enough lol

The supporters wanted them out. Big difference.

 

Some short memories.

When our gigantic super duper club with its millions of fans was on its arse because we spent more than we took in, it was these 'diddy clubs' (who should be closed down apparently), that weighed in with some of their revenue from away support.

A little more self-awareness and respect wouldn't go amiss on this thread.

Btw. If they do close down, who do we play?

 

 Well said.

[Watt-Zeefuik]

This whole story is so depressing.  Sure, it's doing them over financially, but how much does it say that Partick and 'Well are financially dependent upon a club that's drunkenly staggered its way through the bottom tiers of Scottish football, and that comparatively strong performances from Hearts and Aberdeen mean nothing at this point?

 

Also, it's yet another strike against the ridiculous three-times-through setup.  That's even worse than the split IMO -- find a way to make the schedule balanced, whether it's a bigger top flight or a split into divisions or a different split or something.

[frankblack]

This whole story is so depressing. Sure, it's doing them over financially, but how much does it say that Partick and 'Well are financially dependent upon a club that's drunkenly staggered its way through the bottom tiers of Scottish football, and that comparatively strong performances from Hearts and Aberdeen mean nothing at this point?

 

Also, it's yet another strike against the ridiculous three-times-through setup. That's even worse than the split IMO -- find a way to make the schedule balanced, whether it's a bigger top flight or a split into divisions or a different split or something.

These teams have made it clear they won't go for any solution that means fewer home games against Celtic and Sevco.

 

It's no wonder our game is ****ed.

[Jason Dufner]

Who were voted out the league?

Rangers.

[Biffa Bacon]

The issue could just as easily be discussed without disrespecting those same clubs though.

No disrespect in my post.....if fact the opposite, all clubs are equal members and should be treated equally, which is why fixtures should be determined without regard for OF visits.

[frankblack]

Rangers.

Do you understand what liquidated means? Rangers no longer exist. The team at Ibrox is a tribute act.

[fabienleclerq]

Rangers.

I think you'll find they were voted in against the rules.

[Pistol1874]

No disrespect in my post.....if fact the opposite, all clubs are equal members and should be treated equally, which is why fixtures should be determined without regard for OF visits.

Yep, not aimed at you.

[Mikey1874]

Rangers.

correct. A vote on whether Rangers were admitted directly to the Premier League took place

 

semantics with words doesn't change that

[McCrae]

These are the clubs that are stopping proper league reconstruction and refuse to listen to what the fans want. Very few fans want to see a club play a team 4 times every year in the league.

 

As soon as we get back to playing a team once at home and once away in the league, it will be better for the game in Scotland.

[The Don]

Small team, OF sphincter sucking nobody's quicker these teams and others with the same attitude F off out of business or get relegated to the doldrums of Scottish football the better. One of the causes of this countries footballing shiteness and shite marketability.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MacDonald Jardine]

These are the clubs that are stopping proper league reconstruction and refuse to listen to what the fans want. Very few fans want to see a club play a team 4 times every year in the league.

 

As soon as we get back to playing a team once at home and once away in the league, it will be better for the game in Scotland.

No it won't. And you can't blame these clubs for looking at where their revenue comes from and questioning any potential drop off.

 

We are in a fortunate position at the moment in that it doesn't matter too much who the opposition is in terms of match day revenue.

That wasn't always the case and may not be on the future.

 

To suggest other clubs should just "grow their support" is easier said than done. .

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[frankblack]

No it won't. And you can't blame these clubs for looking at where their revenue comes from and questioning any potential drop off.

 

We are in a fortunate position at the moment in that it doesn't matter too much who the opposition is in terms of match day revenue.

That wasn't always the case and may not be on the future.

 

To suggest other clubs should just "grow their support" is easier said than done. .

 

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

 

Its catch 22 - crap football leads to poor home crowds for these teams.

 

If the league was expanded and changed to only play each other once home and away, football standards would improve and these teams would win more games to boost their fans interest.

[Jammy T]

Having said what I did surely these clubs have been running budgets based on Rangers not being in the league for the last 4 years?

[Bazzas right boot]

I disagree, you make a valid point about the unfair advantage of playing them away twice, but they are complaining about the money they will lose. On the matter of playing them away twice, that's the luck of the draw, did they put their hands up in previous seasons when the advantage was with them, I'd suggest not.

If the league programme is not fit for purpose, then they should perhaps do something about it and change it. however perhaps it's only not fit for purpose when they feel others have an advantage over them.

 

The luck of the draw, for me that tells you everything that is wrong with the set up, a league format shouldn't require luck.

 

I appreciate that they are really only complaining now as there is a financial impact, however its is a valid point, ?200k swing is allot of  money, and a league set up should be fair and equal.

The fact that they didn't complain before doesn't make them wrong this time.

 

It's a silly set up, makes us look mickey mouse and clubs are quite correct to raise the issue.

[Bazzas right boot]

The fact is that the league setup is that much of a farce that these things become an issue.

 

In a normal league where you play each other the same times and the league is equal, it wouldn't be an issue.

 

We even manager to make a farce of a league, jesus, when I was about 10 I could set up a league on sensible soccer, literally the easiest thing to do, we have somehow made it complicated.

 

It's All to pander to two horrible  institutions, it makes me sad, really does.

 

Some of the disrespect shown to the clubs is bad patter, reeks of the way Rangers talk about clubs.

[alicante jambo]

correct. A vote on whether Rangers were admitted directly to the Premier League took place

 

semantics with words doesn't change that

The fact there was even a vote sums up scottish football.They shouldve been punted down to the juniors.Our authorities are a joke aswell all need sacked.

[FarmerTweedy]

Rangers.

 

Actually, they weren't. What happened was that they died, another Rangers came along and tried to take their place, and the remaining clubs voted not to let the new rangers take the place of the old rangers.

 

Nobody was actually voted out.

[FarmerTweedy]

No disrespect in my post.....if fact the opposite, all clubs are equal members and should be treated equally, which is why fixtures should be determined without regard for OF visits.

 

Biffa gets it entirely.

 

There are lots of reasons why the split, as it works at the moment, is a problem, but the pre-split fixtures are set as they are in the best attempt possible to try to give balanced fixtures within the format we have.  It's easy to look at things as they are this season and assume that rangers will have a big travelling support, and be a strong team on the park, etc, but the only fair, and objective, way to treat them is as a newly promoted team.  That's what the SPFL have done, and it's the correct thing to do.

[Jason Dufner]

Actually, they weren't. What happened was that they died, another Rangers came along and tried to take their place, and the remaining clubs voted not to let the new rangers take the place of the old rangers.

 

Nobody was actually voted out.

Which I was happy with.

 

But it's the new Rangers that they voted out and are now pissed off at that they don't get as much money from them.

[Noddy1874]

Farmer Tweedy has posted some amount of mince on this thread.

[Bellion]

Farmer Tweedy has been absolutely spot on throughout this thread.

[Gambo]

Having said what I did surely these clubs have been running budgets based on Rangers not being in the league for the last 4 years?

Robably for 3 years, we screwed them over for another year :-)

[2205ian]

Farmer Tweedy has posted some amount of mince on this thread.

So wrong it's not true!!

 

Farmer Tweedy has been absolutely spot on throughout this thread.

This is the correct post by a wide margin

[eyesandears]

The irony here is these teams may actually gain a competitive advantage. Not saying it;s right as the fixture selection inequity is wrong of course. But it could be argued if you aren't having the OF twice each at home then you are having a nearer rival to you at home which could be deemed more advantageous. These teams will simply view points against the OF - home as well as away - as a bonus whereas points against their nearest rivals are a double benefit in the fight to avoid the drop or gain top six place. So getting them at home arguably gives them a better advantage.

Bottom line is their complaint is about loss of income. 'Sporting integrity' argument works both ways on this one.

[i8hibsh]

I love how we do not rely and base our season's budget on games v the bigot brothers.

[Sandy Clark]

Do you understand what liquidated means? Rangers no longer exist. The team at Ibrox is a tribute act.

Do you not understand apart from a sabatical from the top league nothing has changed. It's still Rangers, sadly, so stop trying to kid yourself and move on. Aye but liquidation ken!!!

[Doctor FinnBarr]

The fact there was even a vote sums up scottish football.They shouldve been punted down to the juniors.Our authorities are a joke aswell all need sacked.

 

Seniors actually, South of Scotland league or the likes

[Mollo]

Disagree. All clubs have something to say about the game being run badly over the years and about the old firm bias etc. They have a right to complain and I think it's more embarrassing that we are moaning about them moaning. If all is made fair none of this moaning would be going on. 

 

It's the attitude that clubs should bend over and take everything dished out that's wrong with the mentality of the game. IMO.

[The Treasurer]

It would appear that everyone (especially the media) are just assuming the both arse cheeks will automatically make the top 6.

 

As for the clubs that are complaining, if you're not happy with the set up do something about it.

Come up with a better solution and campaign to get others to back you in a vote.

[chrisyboy7]

They just need to finish in the top six and they'd sorted. Muppets

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bellion]

Disagree. All clubs have something to say about the game being run badly over the years and about the old firm bias etc. They have a right to complain and I think it's more embarrassing that we are moaning about them moaning. If all is made fair none of this moaning would be going on. 

 

It's the attitude that clubs should bend over and take everything dished out that's wrong with the mentality of the game. IMO.

That's the point. This is a rare example of the SFA treating Rangers as though they are any other club. They replace Dundee Utd in the top flight & so assume their fixtures.

 

They've been given the exact opposite of what Utd had last season. Last year, Utd got 2x home fixtures against Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee, us, ICT and Kilmarnock. This year, Rangers get 2x home fixtures against Hamilton, Partick, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone. Just like last year, when we got the exact opposite of what St Mirren had when they got relegated in 2014/15.

 

That's how it works. It is completely fair and anything else would be changing the established rules to reflect the supposed difference between the OF and everyone else. I'm sorry they won't get as much money as they'd have wanted, but the rules can't be changed to pander to that sort of thing.

 

The rest of Scottish football has rightfully been drawing attention to the OF getting special treatment for years, but you can't have it both ways: they're either treated differently or they're the same as everyone else. And aside from the double standards involved in demanding that the goalposts be moved when it suits, it's so depressingly defeatist it's almost untrue.

 

It's mid-June FFS, and they've been given an easier set of home games. They should go and make an effort to win those, qualify for the top 6 and stop making noise about non-complaints. If the extent of their ambition in the Premiership is generating an extra ?120,000 in cash, they should probably count themselves lucky to be in it in the first place. 

[jambali]

correct. A vote on whether Rangers were admitted directly to the Premier League took place

 

semantics with words doesn't change that

A vote on whether a new club should be admitted directly was what was held. Rangers voted for that!

[Mollo]

That's the point. This is a rare example of the SFA treating Rangers as though they are any other club. They replace Dundee Utd in the top flight & so assume their fixtures.

 

They've been given the exact opposite of what Utd had last season. Last year, Utd got 2x home fixtures against Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee, us, ICT and Kilmarnock. This year, Rangers get 2x home fixtures against Hamilton, Partick, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone. Just like last year, when we got the exact opposite of what St Mirren had when they got relegated in 2014/15.

 

That's how it works. It is completely fair and anything else would be changing the established rules to reflect the supposed difference between the OF and everyone else. I'm sorry they won't get as much money as they'd have wanted, but the rules can't be changed to pander to that sort of thing.

 

The rest of Scottish football has rightfully been drawing attention to the OF getting special treatment for years, but you can't have it both ways: they're either treated differently or they're the same as everyone else. And aside from the double standards involved in demanding that the goalposts be moved when it suits, it's so depressingly defeatist it's almost untrue.

 

It's mid-June FFS, and they've been given an easier set of home games. They should go and make an effort to win those, qualify for the top 6 and stop making noise about non-complaints. If the extent of their ambition in the Premiership is generating an extra ?120,000 in cash, they should probably count themselves lucky to be in it in the first place. 

Totally respect your points and your opinion. But still disagree.

 

It still makes an embarrassment of us that we are moaning about clubs who want some oddities ironed out. Where does progress come from if we all fall into the old camp of "tough thats the way it was before so leave it like that forever and shut up moaning"?

 

It's all fair enough saying that as you don't think it's a problem they should go and get on with it "FFS" as you put it. But I respect the fact they have found themselves in a position they didn't want to be in, and have raised it.

 

It all smacks a bit of "we're happy so you should be" - and that's all a bit "Old Firmy" for me.

[Bellion]

Totally respect your points and your opinion. But still disagree.

 

It still makes an embarrassment of us that we are moaning about clubs who want some oddities ironed out. Where does progress come from if we all fall into the old camp of "tough thats the way it was before so leave it like that forever and shut up moaning"?

 

It's all fair enough saying that as you don't think it's a problem they should go and get on with it "FFS" as you put it. But I respect the fact they have found themselves in a position they didn't want to be in, and have raised it.

 

It all smacks a bit of "we're happy so you should be" - and that's all a bit "Old Firmy" for me.

I take your point about not just lying down and taking whatever the SFA throw at you - I think we can all agree that's not always sensible - but in this case the SFA have, IMO, done the right thing.

 

Can you imagine the reaction if the SFA had, hypothetically, decided to treat Rangers as the #2 club in the Premiership just because they're "back" again, and ensured that everyone got 3x home games against the OF just because? People would be seething. Once in a while, it's good to see that not everything is done from the standpoint that the OF are innately different from everyone else and the rest of us have to fit in around whatever suits them.  

 

I actually quite like Partick as a club and like I said, it's unfortunate that they'll miss out financially. I know it's probably quite a lot of money to them and that it's not their fault that much of their natural support base tends towards one of the uglies. It is unfortunate, but that's how it works out sometimes, and raising statements like theirs does absolutely nothing to advance the case that the OF should be treated on the same basis as the rest of us - which is surely what everyone should want. 

[FarmerTweedy]

That's the point. This is a rare example of the SFA treating Rangers as though they are any other club. They replace Dundee Utd in the top flight & so assume their fixtures.

 

They've been given the exact opposite of what Utd had last season. Last year, Utd got 2x home fixtures against Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee, us, ICT and Kilmarnock. This year, Rangers get 2x home fixtures against Hamilton, Partick, Motherwell, Ross County and St Johnstone. Just like last year, when we got the exact opposite of what St Mirren had when they got relegated in 2014/15.

 

That's how it works. It is completely fair and anything else would be changing the established rules to reflect the supposed difference between the OF and everyone else. I'm sorry they won't get as much money as they'd have wanted, but the rules can't be changed to pander to that sort of thing.

 

The rest of Scottish football has rightfully been drawing attention to the OF getting special treatment for years, but you can't have it both ways: they're either treated differently or they're the same as everyone else. And aside from the double standards involved in demanding that the goalposts be moved when it suits, it's so depressingly defeatist it's almost untrue.

 

It's mid-June FFS, and they've been given an easier set of home games. They should go and make an effort to win those, qualify for the top 6 and stop making noise about non-complaints. If the extent of their ambition in the Premiership is generating an extra ?120,000 in cash, they should probably count themselves lucky to be in it in the first place.

 

Well said!

[OTT]

to make up the short fall they need to sell approximately 330 tickets more for each of the home games they have.

[FarmerTweedy]

Totally respect your points and your opinion. But still disagree.

 

It still makes an embarrassment of us that we are moaning about clubs who want some oddities ironed out. Where does progress come from if we all fall into the old camp of "tough thats the way it was before so leave it like that forever and shut up moaning"?

 

It's all fair enough saying that as you don't think it's a problem they should go and get on with it "FFS" as you put it. But I respect the fact they have found themselves in a position they didn't want to be in, and have raised it.

 

It all smacks a bit of "we're happy so you should be" - and that's all a bit "Old Firmy" for me.

They don't want oddities ironed out, they want a new oddity introduced (or rather one we've all seen far too many times before employed yet again). As has already been pointed out, they're calling for rangers and celtic to be treated separately from everyone else, as if they're somehow 'special' and every other club is less important, less significant. Partick and Motherwell aren't being criticised for simply moaning, it's for what they're moaning about, which is rangers being treated like any other newly promoted club.

 

It's ridiculous to suggest that Hearts fans should back complaints from other clubs regardless of what those complaints are about. If Partick and Motherwell were actually being treated unfairly, I'd be happy to support their complaint, and I suspect most Hearts fans would too. They're not though, and their complaint is ridiculous, so I'll continue to ridicule them, and I suspect others will too.

[Mollo]

They don't want oddities ironed out, they want a new oddity introduced (or rather one we've all seen far too many times before employed yet again). As has already been pointed out, they're calling for rangers and celtic to be treated separately from everyone else, as if they're somehow 'special' and every other club is less important, less significant. Partick and Motherwell aren't being criticised for simply moaning, it's for what they're moaning about, which is rangers being treated like any other newly promoted club.

 

It's ridiculous to suggest that Hearts fans should back complaints from other clubs regardless of what those complaints are about. If Partick and Motherwell were actually being treated unfairly, I'd be happy to support their complaint, and I suspect most Hearts fans would too. They're not though, and their complaint is ridiculous, so I'll continue to ridicule them, and I suspect others will too.

I haven't said we should back them to be fair. If you read what I wrote that was never suggested. We all have opinions, I like the good debating it brings up. You ridicule away, fill your boots

[Mollo]

I take your point about not just lying down and taking whatever the SFA throw at you - I think we can all agree that's not always sensible - but in this case the SFA have, IMO, done the right thing.

 

Can you imagine the reaction if the SFA had, hypothetically, decided to treat Rangers as the #2 club in the Premiership just because they're "back" again, and ensured that everyone got 3x home games against the OF just because? People would be seething. Once in a while, it's good to see that not everything is done from the standpoint that the OF are innately different from everyone else and the rest of us have to fit in around whatever suits them.  

 

I actually quite like Partick as a club and like I said, it's unfortunate that they'll miss out financially. I know it's probably quite a lot of money to them and that it's not their fault that much of their natural support base tends towards one of the uglies. It is unfortunate, but that's how it works out sometimes, and raising statements like theirs does absolutely nothing to advance the case that the OF should be treated on the same basis as the rest of us - which is surely what everyone should want. 

Again, I do hear your points and it's all interesting stuff to weigh up.

 

But for me, while I see the issue of not making Rangers seen as #2 club.. money is, without doubt, the be all and end all of football. It's abhorent stuff but it's true. And for some clubs, they see a needed revenue and a wee bit of home advantage against these 2 much wealthier clubs with these home fixtures. For them to raise this - I see both sides, but I can't blame them for challenging it if the games allows them a voice to do so, that's all I mean.

[Bellion]

Again, I do hear your points and it's all interesting stuff to weigh up.

 

But for me, while I see the issue of not making Rangers seen as #2 club.. money is, without doubt, the be all and end all of football. It's abhorent stuff but it's true. And for some clubs, they see a needed revenue and a wee bit of home advantage against these 2 much wealthier clubs with these home fixtures. For them to raise this - I see both sides, but I can't blame them for challenging it if the games allows them a voice to do so, that's all I mean.

Fair enough mate. I understand that money talks, and that it's a not insignificant sum. But if Partick do want to pursue this, they'll have to think very carefully about complaining next time (and there will be a next time) they feel aggrieved because they perceive that they've been treated differently from Celtic or Rangers. Implying that the SFA should treat bigger clubs differently is very dangerous territory.

 

Like I said before, they can't expect to have it both ways, and potentially selling yourself down the river for the sake of an argument worth ?120,000 is both silly and short-termist IMO, especially when you've no chance of winning the argument.

[Hagar the Horrible]

Its a bit bazaar all of this, and it does stink of double standards, when this set up was introduced, it was done with a slight bias to ensure every club had 3 home ties against the OF,  However because Sevco are being treated as they should be, a newly promoted Championship side and as such seeded as a club in the bottom six, as we were,  then it has thrown up some anomalies in the fixtures.  It is weird that a club in the top six could be complaining because they ARE being treated fairly as a top six side????  at the end of the day finish in the top six and you will get an extra game against them.

 

Except that might not happen because as like us last season who did finish in the top six as an unseeded (bottom six) team it creates an imbalance with those fixtures, so in theory they wont get 2 home games after the split either. We should get both away from home post split, but we might score an extra one, in which case you will really hear from the Old Firm about it, should we still be i the mix, as will Aberdeen.

 

Lets see what happens if Sevco dont make the top six?

 

You have to remember that these clubs did set it up and agreed to it, that fixtures are based on where you finished last season, and when one of the top six fails to finish there, it chucks up some horrible things

 

Remember it was also set up to ensure they the OF do get 19 home and 19 away, BUT as for the rest of us,  and  this  has happened due to somebody in the bottom six showing ambition by finishing in the top six the following year, sometimes you can have 20 home and 18 away games (and vice versa) which has happened to us

 

an 18 team league playing each other twice is the ONLY fair way to do this, but that wont happen as the greed from the OF coming to town impairs common sense decisions!!!!!

[Bellion]

Its a bit bazaar all of this, and it does stink of double standards, when this set up was introduced, it was done with a slight bias to ensure every club had 3 home ties against the OF,  However because Sevco are being treated as they should be, a newly promoted Championship side and as such seeded as a club in the bottom six, as we were,  then it has thrown up some anomalies in the fixtures.  It is weird that a club in the top six could be complaining because they ARE being treated fairly as a top six side????  at the end of the day finish in the top six and you will get an extra game against them.

 

Except that might not happen because as like us last season who did finish in the top six as an unseeded (bottom six) team it creates an imbalance with those fixtures, so in theory they wont get 2 home games after the split either. We should get both away from home post split, but we might score an extra one, in which case you will really hear from the Old Firm about it, should we still be i the mix, as will Aberdeen.

 

Lets see what happens if Sevco dont make the top six?

 

You have to remember that these clubs did set it up and agreed to it, that fixtures are based on where you finished last season, and when one of the top six fails to finish there, it chucks up some horrible things

 

Remember it was also set up to ensure they the OF do get 19 home and 19 away, BUT as for the rest of us,  and  this  has happened due to somebody in the bottom six showing ambition by finishing in the top six the following year, sometimes you can have 20 home and 18 away games (and vice versa) which has happened to us

 

an 18 team league playing each other twice is the ONLY fair way to do this, but that wont happen as the greed from the OF coming to town impairs common sense decisions!!!!!

I reckon we'll be lucky to get an extra game against Rangers seeing as they are due 3 post-split home matches and we are only due 2. 

 

Although Rangers should get us, Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee at Ibrox post-split, so if everyone qualifies, you never know!

[Hackney Hearts]

Maybe if they introduced a rule where clubs weren't allowed to tolerate/encourage any form of religious/political bigotry, then perhaps support would be more evenly spread, particularly in Glasgow and the West of Scotland.

 

Just checking - there isn't already such a rule in place, is there?

[Irufushi]

Just seen on ssn that thistle are meeting with the sfa over compensation what a ****ing joke.

[Hearts007]

 

PARTICK THISTLE have vowed to continue their fight for compensation in their SPFL fixture row.

 

The Jags are set to meet to League chiefs this week and insist they haven?t been informed it?s a lost cause.

 

Thistle , Motherwell and Hamilton all claimed to be unfairly treated after each being handed just one home match against Celtic and Rangers before the Premiership split.

 

It was a decision they claimed will cost them in excess of ?100,000 and also leaves them at a sporting disadvantage.

 

 

Fir Park chief Alan Burrows appeared to admit defeat when he told Record Sport last week: ?We are extremely disappointed with the SPFL?s response and the Board will take time to review its options before deciding who to do next.?

 

But Thistle released a statement saying: ?Thistle has secured a meeting with the SPFL this week to discuss the situation in more detail.

 

?We are also in touch with the other clubs in the League and will be arranging to meet them at a separate time.

 

 

?We recognise that changing the fixture list now would be disruptive to fans. Reluctantly, we accept that there will be a sporting disadvantage in the coming season.

 

?However, we will press the SPFL to show how it intends to avoid this recurring in future. As fixtures can?t be changed, the question of compensation remains live for clubs affected. We look forward to a positive and robust exchange of views on this matter at the meeting.

 

?The Board hopes that the SPFL would not have agreed to a meeting if minds have already been made up on this important matter.?