SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Bazzas right boot]

10 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

14 actually works much better than 12 and the split guarantees equal home and away fixtures.

 

16 with 30 games would be a non starter as clubs lose revenue from 4 (or likely 4, you never know with current split) home games. I’ve seen a suggestion of splits with groups of 4 but that sounds unbelievably pish.

 

I like the idea of 18 and only playing everyone twice but don’t think we have enough big clubs for it (we had it before and it was a failure so it got scrapped) and only 34 games might be an issue for clubs.

 

We had a league of 10 in arguably Scottish football’s strongest decade in the 80’s but the clubs would never vote to reduce it to 10 again. 
 

So probably leaves 14 as the best option imo with splits of 7 and 7 or 6 and 8.  One thing for sure is the current set up is the worst we’ve ever had in the top division.  Beyond belief that the clubs voted for it and that some still think it works. What hope have we got when we’ve got morons running clubs that thought it was a good idea?

 

 

Yip, the odd number of aeay/ home games is a farce imo. 

 

14 does work better but a split after 22 games will scare teams imo. 

 

16 works better for total numbers as well imo

30 then 14.

 

14 is better than 12 tho. 

 

 

[Anything2]

2 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

I've never understood the opposition to leagues containing an odd number of teams. What do you have against them? When you're playing everyone twice anyway, it doesn't matter whether there are an even or an odd number of teams in the league. Or am I missing something?

I think they play each other 3 times alternating each season so you play a team twice at home one season you play them twice away the next. Means that seasons are not balanced, you could have titles decided on playing your nearest rival away by random chance. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Anything2

[Jambo66]

7 minutes ago, Jamie3lb said:

I didn’t say they sit in silence. I guarantee my experience in court is certainly not somewhat limited. Hope we appear against each other and get a pint afterwards 😊

Fair enough 👍

[Jambo66]

5 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

I've never understood the opposition to leagues containing an odd number of teams. What do you have against them? When you're playing everyone twice anyway, it doesn't matter whether there are an even or an odd number of teams in the league. Or am I missing something?

I think the problem is the potential for an unfair advantage on the last day of the season when 1 team has already finished all of its games.

Pretty unlikely to matter much, but we can all think of several occasions over the years where titles and relegations have been decided on the last day.

[redjambo]

Just now, Anything2 said:

I think they play each other 3 times alternating each season. 

 

Ok, that I'm not a fan of. I thought you were having a go at the fact that they had an odd number of teams in the league.

 

Edit: Just checked. They have 14 teams in the league and play each other twice during the regular season. The league then splits into a championship group of 6 and two relegation groups of 4, and they play each other twice, so a total of 36 games each for the top guns and 34 each for the bottom guns, ignoring the relegation play-offs. Well at least that's what happened in 2018-2019. Weird, as you say. But maybe that's we'll be having a go at next season.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018–19_Danish_Superliga

[gjcc]

10 minutes ago, Jamie3lb said:

I didn’t say they sit in silence. I guarantee my experience in court is certainly not somewhat limited. Hope we appear against each other and get a pint afterwards 😊

Garry O’Jos is that you?  

[redjambo]

Just now, Jambo66 said:

I think the problem is the potential for an unfair advantage on the last day of the season when 1 team has already finished all of its games.

Pretty unlikely to matter much, but we can all think of several occasions over the years where titles and relegations have been decided on the last day.

 

Nice one, J66. I hadn't thought of that.

[rory78]

All this with QOS and Dunfermline etc makes you wonder why these teams and everyone else were made to make a quick decision on Scottish football??each team got 2 days to decide their future it looks like and in that Doncaster and his cronies have probably wiped out half of Scottish Football 🙄

 

[gjcc]

2 minutes ago, rory78 said:

All this with QOS and Dunfermline etc makes you wonder why these teams and everyone else were made to make a quick decision on Scottish football??each team got 2 days to decide their future it looks like and in that Doncaster and his cronies have probably wiped out half of Scottish Football 🙄

 

Canny even hold a jumble sale either. Grim. 

[Deevers]

1 minute ago, rory78 said:

All this with QOS and Dunfermline etc makes you wonder why these teams and everyone else were made to make a quick decision on Scottish football??each team got 2 days to decide their future it looks like and in that Doncaster and his cronies have probably wiped out half of Scottish Football 🙄

 

Quite simply they were treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed a load of shite.  Not all the options were put to them and other stuff was hidden from them.  Coerced and conned covers it nicely. However these are people who have been in the game for a while and should have been able to  see through all the lies and misinformation. Scottish football just now exists only to fulfil Celtics agenda. Sad but true.

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Restonbabe said:

That's the 1st proposal. Its very complex and all hinges on what exactly the govt are doing. Its looking like August at the earliest before we can even talk about sport up here in whatever form can restart. 

Training is being lobbied to the govt. For 10th June. However with furlough engulfing 99% of all clubs I cannot see how they can. It is effectively work isn't it 

 

42 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Might get away with it, it's classed as training and doesn't earn money which is allowed.

 

Furlough ends till end June if you go back to work.

 

From July it changes to allow for part time work. Details still to be announced. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

16 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Yip, the odd number of aeay/ home games is a farce imo. 

 

14 does work better but a split after 22 games will scare teams imo. 

 

16 works better for total numbers as well imo

30 then 14.

 

14 is better than 12 tho. 

 

 

I never thought of 44 games under 16 teams.  Maybe too many to fit in a tight fixture schedule though but would give Sky their 4 OF games (which is another reason 18 is a no no).

 

With 14 teams the split is after 26 not 22.

[gavin1985]

38 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

TV revenue. The broadcasters want it.

 

And that is down to the SPLF and Doncaster being useless at selling the game. 
 

There is literally no top league where the league is dependant on 4 fixtures from the same 2 teams. 
 

Ditch the TV deal, get a league where you play one home and one away game. End of, no spilts, no playing 3/4 times a season. 
Then and only then hunt for a new TV deal. Surely better as more derbies will be available. 

[redjambo]

2 minutes ago, gavin1985 said:

And that is down to the SPLF and Doncaster being useless at selling the game. 
 

There is literally no top league where the league is dependant on 4 fixtures from the same 2 teams. 
 

Ditch the TV deal, get a league where you play one home and one away game. End of, no spilts, no playing 3/4 times a season. 
Then and only then hunt for a new TV deal. Surely better as more derbies will be available. 

 

For that you need reconstruction, and there are too many smaller Premiership clubs who want at least 3 visits of OF fans a season to allow that to happen.

[Bazzas right boot]

10 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

I never thought of 44 games under 16 teams.  Maybe too many to fit in a tight fixture schedule though but would give Sky their 4 OF games (which is another reason 18 is a no no).

 

With 14 teams the split is after 26 not 22.

 

Doh. 

 

Aye. 

Pros and cons. 

Less games v more. Maybe a trade off? 

 

It's a pile of shite anyway, based only on 4 of games is a shit show tbh. 

[gavin1985]

Just now, redjambo said:

 

For that you need reconstruction, and there are too many smaller Premiership clubs who want at least 3 visits of OF fans a season to allow that to happen.

Unfortunately I completely agree with you. 
 

It’s these clubs that keep us in this shite setup with a spilt and the “4 OF” games a season. 
 

As usual all about the short term and not long term. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

Might get away with it, it's classed as training and doesn't earn money which is allowed.

If you’re on furlough you’re not allowed to carry out work requested by your employer so they would not be allowed to take part in club training sessions.  So as soon as clubs get the green light to recommence training sessions they’ll have to start paying the players again. 
 

Its one of the reasons Cormack said he wouldn’t furlough the Aberdeen players.

 

Edit : I see there are changes from August to allow part time working so who knows how this will affect footballers. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Fozzyonthefence

[Jambo66]

4 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

For that you need reconstruction, and there are too many smaller Premiership clubs who want at least 3 visits of OF fans a season to allow that to happen.

Christ knows why anyone would want 3 visits a season from the fans of those 2.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Jambo66

[Beast Boy]

21 minutes ago, Deevers said:

Quite simply they were treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed a load of shite.  Not all the options were put to them and other stuff was hidden from them.  Coerced and conned covers it nicely. However these are people who have been in the game for a while and should have been able to  see through all the lies and misinformation. Scottish football just now exists only to fulfil Celtics agenda. Sad but true.

 

[Worthing Jambo]

8 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

For that you need reconstruction, and there are too many smaller Premiership clubs who want at least 3 visits of OF fans a season to allow that to happen.

Is that not why a 6-8 split was suggested?

It gives the bottom 8 an extra 2 home games to compensate.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Jambo66 said:

Christ knows why anyone would want e visits a season from the fans of those 2.

 

Indeed.

 

If we had decent media deals, teams wouldn't be so dependent on gate receipts, especially those from the ugly twins. But that then brings us back to the media wanting 4 OF games a season, which they're so used to having now that they wouldn't give up lightly. That's why we never get anywhere regarding reconstruction. Where's Barry Hearn when you need him?

[rory78]

30 minutes ago, Deevers said:

Quite simply they were treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed a load of shite.  Not all the options were put to them and other stuff was hidden from them.  Coerced and conned covers it nicely. However these are people who have been in the game for a while and should have been able to  see through all the lies and misinformation. Scottish football just now exists only to fulfil Celtics agenda. Sad but true.

 

Dunfermline guy was on the SPFL Board he must know they're sailing up a creek without a paddle??

[annushorribilis III]

1 hour ago, SUTOL said:

 

He managed to administer Celtic a 9th title in a row. 

 

Just what his puppet-master wanted. 

He misled UEFA into believing the majority of clubs in Scotland wanted the season ended (before any vote was held) and got a big slice of sympathy to shutting down early - just so Celtic weren't refused a CL slot.

.He shoehorned a bunch of spineless clubs into accepting an end of season vote so they could get their cash. 

 

While he tells us how it's all about the clubs , he's dragging them by the nose to vote on resolutions that inflame a lot of clubs. 

 

And then they turned down a chance to have him investigated. 

 

That's quite impressive. 

[John mcCartney]

27 minutes ago, Deevers said:

Quite simply they were treated like mushrooms - kept in the dark and fed a load of shite.  Not all the options were put to them and other stuff was hidden from them.  Coerced and conned covers it nicely. However these are people who have been in the game for a while and should have been able to  see through all the lies and misinformation. Scottish football just now exists only to fulfil Celtics agenda. Sad but true.

all I see nowadays is septic minded surnames involved in shit.
Everywhere in the media and positions held in influence.
We need a Revolution.
 

[kila]

[The Verminator]

Just now, kila said:

Damn, I was gonna post something like that given the page number!

[Deevers]

39 minutes ago, rory78 said:

All this with QOS and Dunfermline etc makes you wonder why these teams and everyone else were made to make a quick decision on Scottish football??each team got 2 days to decide their future it looks like and in that Doncaster and his cronies have probably wiped out half of Scottish Football 🙄

 

And the only team to benefit from any of this being Celtic - who have been as quiet as mice throughout this whole debacle.  The game here stinks and needs root and breach reform starting with the sacking of the idiot Doncaster.

[Boris]

4 minutes ago, John mcCartney said:

all I see nowadays is septic minded surnames involved in shit.
Everywhere in the media and positions held in influence.
We need a Revolution.
 

😳

 

You'll be asking what school they went to next...

[annushorribilis III]

1 hour ago, Bourne Jambo said:

 

Just a quick question, why does there have to be 4 old firm games ?  2 is enough surely. Is there any league, anywhere, with a similar set up.  Bonkers.

Another myth but it makes sense that IF there are 4 such games it makes the TV deal more attractive. 

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Boris said:

😳

 

You'll be asking what school they went to next...

 

My thoughts exactly. We could do without that type of bigotry on here. John comes across as staunchly old school though, I doubt he'll be changing soon.

[The Verminator]

7 minutes ago, annushorribilis III said:

Another myth but it makes sense that IF there are 4 such games it makes the TV deal more attractive. 

 

1 hour ago, Bourne Jambo said:

 

Just a quick question, why does there have to be 4 old firm games ?  2 is enough surely. Is there any league, anywhere, with a similar set up.  Bonkers.

What was the Sky deal like when the Huns were not in the top division for four seasons - was it any less than last season?

[gorgie rd eh11]

5 minutes ago, Boris said:

😳

 

You'll be asking what school they went to next...

 

 That's not the question that needs to be asked.

 

 Who took you out for dinner last night? or where did your references come from? they'd be more interesting answers.

[annushorribilis III]

3 minutes ago, The Verminator said:

 

What was the Sky deal like when the Huns were not in the top division for four seasons - was it any less than last season?

Something weird went on - SPFL paid for their games to be covered ? I can't recall but it was weird. 

 

Edit - before the trivia merchants pile on - it was the SPL then. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by annushorribilis III

[The Verminator]

Just now, annushorribilis III said:

Something weird went on - SPFL paid for their games to be covered ? I can't recall but it was weird. 

Sorry, again I have expressed myself  poorly. I know the The Rangers games were covered by Sky but was any deal reduced in financial terms because they were no Old FIrm Derbies?

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, Jambo66 said:

I agree that we seem to have a good case. However, any compensation claim really is only there in case we lose the other arguments. The goal is to avoid expulsion, not to get compensated for it.

So you are confirming with 100% certainty that the court will have the authority and the jurisdiction to order the SPFL to keep Hearts in the Premier league or to set aside the resolution or to null and void the league ? Any of those things ?

 

Do you also have a legally qualified view on whether the SPFL will refer us to UEFA for taking a football authority to a civil court and whether in fact we’ve broken any rule if we do that ?

Edited May 22, 2020 by JimmyCant

[Anything2]

1 hour ago, redjambo said:

 

Ok, that I'm not a fan of. I thought you were having a go at the fact that they had an odd number of teams in the league.

 

Edit: Just checked. They have 14 teams in the league and play each other twice during the regular season. The league then splits into a championship group of 6 and two relegation groups of 4, and they play each other twice, so a total of 36 games each for the top guns and 34 each for the bottom guns, ignoring the relegation play-offs. Well at least that's what happened in 2018-2019. Weird, as you say. But maybe that's we'll be having a go at next season.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018–19_Danish_Superliga

Seems like they changed the format in 2016. I was correct about the 2 home 1 away format however it would appear they only had 12 teams not 13. 

 

Also the top 6 from the previous season were rewarded with the an extra home game. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Anything2

[brunoatemyhamster]

17 minutes ago, annushorribilis III said:

Another myth but it makes sense that IF there are 4 such games it makes the TV deal more attractive. 

They could just as easily commission " The Old Firm" trophy or something, having them play home and away. 

Call it the Bigot Bowl or something catchy. 

There's your 2 league plus 2 extra every year. 

Doesn't suit to have potential challengers only going to Glasgow twice though. 

Cuts the handicap down from 12 to 6 points. 

Edited May 22, 2020 by brunoatemyhamster

[GorgieRules22]

1 minute ago, JimmyCant said:

So you are confirming with 100% certainty that the court will have the authority and the jurisdiction to order the SPFL to keep Hearts in the Premier league or to set aside the resolution or to null and void the league ? Any of those things ?

 

Do you also have a legally qualified view on whether the SPFL will refer us to UEFA for taking a football authority to a civil court and whether we’ve broken any rule if we do that ?

I would hazard a guess that if we couldn’t take the Spfl to court it would have been mentioned by now you not think ?

[annushorribilis III]

1 minute ago, The Verminator said:

Sorry, again I have expressed myself  poorly. I know the The Rangers games were covered by Sky but was any deal reduced in financial terms because they were no Old FIrm Derbies?

Not that I recall.  But it's weird about their games still being covered - maybe that was the get out to any reduction in the contract value. 

[JimmyCant]

3 minutes ago, GorgieRules22 said:

I would hazard a guess that if we couldn’t take the Spfl to court it would have been mentioned by now you not think ?

There is a rule of some kind covering that. Been trying to find it but haven’t done so far. Maybe it’s the type of rule you can ignore and take a slap on the wrist for, like Celtic have done 14 times in the last 11 years 

Edited May 22, 2020 by JimmyCant

[annushorribilis III]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

There is a rule of some kind covering that. Been trying to find it but haven’t done so far. Maybe it’s the type of rule you can ignore and take a slap in the wrist for, like Celtic have done 14 times in the last 11 years 

There isn't a rule against it. In fact the SPFL were ready for a legal battle after expelling Hearts : their lawyers warned them to expect it (they even referenced PTFC as a specific previous example) and they planned their strategy around that happening. 

[Beast Boy]

29 minutes ago, annushorribilis III said:

He misled UEFA into believing the majority of clubs in Scotland wanted the season ended (before any vote was held) and got a big slice of sympathy to shutting down early - just so Celtic weren't refused a CL slot.

.He shoehorned a bunch of spineless clubs into accepting an end of season vote so they could get their cash. 

 

While he tells us how it's all about the clubs , he's dragging them by the nose to vote on resolutions that inflame a lot of clubs. 

 

And then they turned down a chance to have him investigated. 

 

That's quite impressive. 

Stockholm/StuckHome Syndrome.

[Deevers]

19 minutes ago, BarneyBattles said:

Loads of clubs have benefitted. Raith, Brechin, Hamilton, St Mirren etc. 

All of this done though to suit what Celtic desired. No doubt about it Some others did benefit, however let’s not kid ourselves on, this was done only to suit Celtic. They feared the season being called nul and void. “In a Row” was all that mattered. 

[OldGorgie]

2 hours ago, Jamie3lb said:

You do know that’s not how court works? The judge doesn’t sit there and fire off a load of questions. Writ/Summons lodged>defences>adjustment period>record lodged (evidence can only be led from what’s in the record (final document with both side’s pleadings> evidential heading> witnesses give evidence>QC’s give legal submissions> Judge will take avizandum most likely> written Judgment issued. 
 

unless the case is won at debate (legal point/arguments), therefore case is won at that point and no evidence is led. 

Not being pedantic but in Scotland it will be advocates and senior advocates who take part in court case. Some of them may be QC’s. Scottish civil law is not the same as English.

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

If you’re on furlough you’re not allowed to carry out work requested by your employer so they would not be allowed to take part in club training sessions.  So as soon as clubs get the green light to recommence training sessions they’ll have to start paying the players again. 
 

Its one of the reasons Cormack said he wouldn’t furlough the Aberdeen players.

 

Edit : I see there are changes from August to allow part time working so who knows how this will affect footballers. 

 

Aside from furlough ending I thought training and development was allowed. Accept I could be wrong with that.

 

Edit: not conclusive but this article says they probably can train.

 

https://ai-law.co.uk/covid-19-footballers-and-furlough-leave/

Edited May 22, 2020 by graygo

[Biffa Bacon]

1 hour ago, Smoked-Glass said:

all proposed set ups must include 4 old firm games.    No Point in discussing anything that cuts that out.  

Yep afraid so. No big change will be accepted, a minor tweak has more change of being adopted.

[Beast Boy]

11 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

So you are confirming with 100% certainty that the court will have the authority and the jurisdiction to order the SPFL to keep Hearts in the Premier league or to set aside the resolution or to null and void the league ? Any of those things ?

 

Do you also have a legally qualified view on whether the SPFL will refer us to UEFA for taking a football authority to a civil court and whether in fact we’ve broken any rule if we do that ?

Jimmy, can I just ask you something?

 

Why are you so absolutely against HMFC fighting to protect themselves from this? 
 

No accusations or anything, I’m just trying to understand how your comments are so passionately against us defending ourselves from what is a total injustice and potentially (for the club) life-threatening? 

[annushorribilis III]

2 minutes ago, Deevers said:

All of this done though to suit what Celtic desired. No doubt about it Some others did benefit, however let’s not kid ourselves on, this was done only to suit Celtic. They feared the season being called nul and void. “In a Row” was all that mattered. 

They absolutely did and a key part of the Board's behaviour was to find a strategy that would satisfy UEFA, get Celtic declared "winners" but not jeopardise the Champs league slot. 

 

And just to make sure Celtic got it - the SPFL had their legal opinion that voiding the season would expose the clubs to having to repay their sponsors and season ticket holders - which they waved in the faces of the clubs . So, guess what ? the clubs shat the bed when presented with this risk (it was only an "opinion" after all) - I mean , who wants to take that risk ? 

 

It was straight out of "Suits". 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

2 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

I’ll wait on the list.

Its called the hygiene factor. 

 

Any ordinary time we don't even consider Neil Doncaster, because things tick along fine. Same as a referee, nobody applauds a referee for doing their job. 

 

I would say in any given year,  probably at least 350 days of the year we would be oblivious to him or the general administration of the SPFL. 

 

We don't applaud him, great fixture list,  great organisation of match officials. 

 

We didn't actually bother to thank him or his organisation for being extremely supportive when we built a new stand.

 

I will say it one final time,  got no real desire to defend the fud, but I reckon he can administrate and ordinarily well. 

 

But he is a god awful front man. And for the life of me I will never know why he would earn 388k, astonishing. 

 

And he is a ***** 

 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Sir Gio

[Biffa Bacon]

9 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Jimmy, can I just ask you something?

 

Why are you so absolutely against HMFC fighting to protect themselves from this? 
 

No accusations or anything, I’m just trying to understand how your comments are so passionately against us defending ourselves from what is a total injustice and potentially (for the club) life-threatening? 

In my view we should be realistic about what is achievable, I think Jimmy is right to raise some questions, if they can be answered without just opinion then we can put them to bed and move on. There are different expectations about what a court can rule on, some just demanding some action, but we should be aware what the likely outcomes are, what are the costs and timescales. To add to the confusion we get various opinions about other clubs not being able to survive, which may or may not be true, but is not the immediate question that we face.