SPL Prize Money

[Rawrrrrrrr]

1st 17%

2nd 15%

3rd 9.5%

4th 8.5%

5th 8%

6th 7.5%

7th 7%

8th 6.5%

9th 6%

10th 5.5%

11th 5%

12th 4.5%

 

Is it just me who thinks the jump between 2nd and 3rd is ridicolous.

 

Apart from between 2nd and 3rd the drop is no more than 1% at any time, given we all know who invariably gets these positions it seems ridicolous.

 

I have to question why every other club agrees to these splits. Yes the winning clubs should get more, but that much more? and the proportion of drop just seems to benefit the OF to such an unfair level.

 

I have just been reading the SPL handbook and its full of such rules geared to let the OF dictate, why exactly did clubs agree to this

[speedbump]

It's obviously to ensure that the old firm recieve the lions share.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

It's obviously to ensure that the old firm recieve the lions share.

 

 

Its a joke, another bizarre rule is that were a KO time determines an overnight stay the home club must pay.

 

Seems quite convenient considering all the early KO's are the OF away so basically everyone else pays for their hotel bills but other games at OF grounds are always 3pm and thus optional and the clubs cost

[speedbump]

Its a joke, another bizarre rule is that were a KO time determines an overnight stay the home club must pay.

 

Seems quite convenient considering all the early KO's are the OF away so basically everyone else pays for their hotel bills but other games at OF grounds are always 3pm and thus optional and the clubs cost

 

Midweek games Vs Aberdeen or Inverness for any club;)

[Victorian]

another one would be the voting system. i believe for motions and the like to be passed, it required an 11-1 majority. this basically allows the OF to do their usual business of sticking to each other like glue when it comes to their self interest.

[Charlie-Brown]

One third of the money goes to one sixth of the league ... that's equitable.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

Midweek games Vs Aberdeen or Inverness for any club;)

 

 

I cant see that in the rules

 

Says early kick offs, no mention of late kick offs

[Rawrrrrrrr]

another one would be the voting system. i believe for motions and the like to be passed, it required an 11-1 majority. this basically allows the OF to do their usual business of sticking to each other like glue when it comes to their self interest.

 

Was it not changed to 9-3 after the revolt a few years ago?

 

Not that it did any good as the OF always find a st midden or well to buy the lube

[Rawrrrrrrr]

A Player shall not be Registered where there is any restriction

or condition, howsoever arising, as to when, against whom or

on what terms the Player concerned shall or shall not Play.

 

 

Thats an interesting one as surely each OF loan were the player cant play against the home team is in breach of that ?

[speedbump]

I cant see that in the rules

 

Says early kick offs, no mention of late kick offs

 

OK early kick offs Vs the afore mentioned teams.

[Victorian]

Was it not changed to 9-3 after the revolt a few years ago?

 

Not that it did any good as the OF always find a st midden or well to buy the lube

not sure. i know what you mean though, there's no shortage of clubs quite happy to dance to the OF tune. motherwell, st.midden, partick...

[Victorian]

A Player shall not be Registered where there is any restriction

or condition, howsoever arising, as to when, against whom or

on what terms the Player concerned shall or shall not Play.

 

 

Thats an interesting one as surely each OF loan were the player cant play against the home team is in breach of that ?

are these cases not always informal agreements between the clubs?

[Rawrrrrrrr]

are these cases not always informal agreements between the clubs?

 

Its still a restriction whether informal or formal.

 

I would love to see what happens if St Mirren play Cuthburt against celtic

[Victorian]

Its still a restriction whether informal or formal.

 

I would love to see what happens if St Mirren play Cuthburt against celtic

don't think it would be a restriction if it was a non-binding gentlemens' agreement.

it's not bending the rules as such, just negotiating a way around them.

[redm]

The prize money split is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that it's the top two positions who stand to gain most from resulting CL matches etc. I'm not disputing that the first spot should be a worthwhile reward but the rest should be more proportionate.

 

Had a wee look at the hotel stuff you mentioned Prancer and apparently the visitors can claim for costs for anything up to 25 people...seems a few too many to me. Pfft.

 

C6.3 Should a morning kick-off necessitate the Visiting Club incurring overnight

hotel expenses, the Visiting Club shall be entitled to claim reasonable costs

(for no more than 25 persons) from the Home Club against the gross gate.

Any dispute in this regard shall be determined by the Board in its absolute

discretion. The Visiting Club must make any such claim within 14 days of the

match in question and payment or referral to the Board if the Home Club

disputes the amount claimed, made by the Visiting Club within 14 days of

receipt of the claim.

[Mr Romanov Saviour of HMFC]

Do people really sit and read the SPL handbook in their spare time?

 

Incredible.

[Rawrrrrrrr]

The prize money split is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that it's the top two positions who stand to gain most from resulting CL matches etc. I'm not disputing that the first spot should be a worthwhile reward but the rest should be more proportionate.

 

Had a wee look at the hotel stuff you mentioned Prancer and apparently the visitors can claim for costs for anything up to 25 people...seems a few too many to me. Pfft.

 

C6.3 Should a morning kick-off necessitate the Visiting Club incurring overnight

hotel expenses, the Visiting Club shall be entitled to claim reasonable costs

(for no more than 25 persons) from the Home Club against the gross gate.

Any dispute in this regard shall be determined by the Board in its absolute

discretion. The Visiting Club must make any such claim within 14 days of the

match in question and payment or referral to the Board if the Home Club

disputes the amount claimed, made by the Visiting Club within 14 days of

receipt of the claim.

 

That rule on its own wouldnt be so bad but I bet the OF apart very few clubs have had need to claim on it and given they already get so much cash I think they should be picking up their own hotel bills.

 

Maybe Im wrong but I reckon the OF are the main benefactors of that rule.

[redm]

Do people really sit and read the SPL handbook in their spare time?

 

Incredible.

 

Mmm. It's a riveting read you know.

 

Sometimes I really let my hair down and read the Sports Law Journal too.

 

Knowledge is power.

 

[redm]

That rule on its own wouldnt be so bad but I bet the OF apart very few clubs have had need to claim on it and given they already get so much cash I think they should be picking up their own hotel bills.

 

Maybe Im wrong but I reckon the OF are the main benefactors of that rule.

 

Especially when you consider that ICT and Aberdeen probably have overnight stays for every away fixture other than Dundee but if they're not regarded as morning kick offs, they won't get a penny.

[topcat]

The prize money split is ridiculous. Especially when you consider that it's the top two positions who stand to gain most from resulting CL matches etc. I'm not disputing that the first spot should be a worthwhile reward but the rest should be more proportionate.

 

Had a wee look at the hotel stuff you mentioned Prancer and apparently the visitors can claim for costs for anything up to 25 people...seems a few too many to me. Pfft.

 

C6.3 Should a morning kick-off necessitate the Visiting Club incurring overnight

hotel expenses, the Visiting Club shall be entitled to claim reasonable costs

(for no more than 25 persons) from the Home Club against the gross gate.

Any dispute in this regard shall be determined by the Board in its absolute

discretion. The Visiting Club must make any such claim within 14 days of the

match in question and payment or referral to the Board if the Home Club

disputes the amount claimed, made by the Visiting Club within 14 days of

receipt of the claim.

 

I know there are a lot of early kickoffs for Old Firm Away games but they usually get 12:30 or 14:00 slots as opposed to actual morning ones.

[redjambo]

1st 17%

2nd 15%

3rd 9.5%

4th 8.5%

5th 8%

6th 7.5%

7th 7%

8th 6.5%

9th 6%

10th 5.5%

11th 5%

12th 4.5%

 

Is it just me who thinks the jump between 2nd and 3rd is ridicolous.

 

Apart from between 2nd and 3rd the drop is no more than 1% at any time, given we all know who invariably gets these positions it seems ridicolous.

 

I have to question why every other club agrees to these splits. Yes the winning clubs should get more, but that much more? and the proportion of drop just seems to benefit the OF to such an unfair level.

 

I have just been reading the SPL handbook and its full of such rules geared to let the OF dictate, why exactly did clubs agree to this

 

Yup, but the biggest problem seems to be the small jump between 1st and 2nd. I would give 2nd something akin to 12%, 3rd 10% and then share the rest out down the line in decreasing amounts.

[redm]

I know there are a lot of early kickoffs for Old Firm Away games but they usually get 12:30 or 14:00 slots as opposed to actual morning ones.

 

I thought they must be referring to 12.30 ko times, but it's difficult to know what they mean as it isn't specified what is meant by the term 'morning'.

 

Maybe it's just a condition designed for unusual circumstances, although I can't remember a proper morning kick off time (i.e. before midday) in recent years.

[topcat]

Yup, but the biggest problem seems to be the small jump between 1st and 2nd. I would give 2nd something akin to 12%, 3rd 10% and then share the rest out down the line in decreasing amounts.

 

Actually as you're assured at least 4.5% regardless. 54% of the sponsors "prize money" is actually flat rate sponsorship and should probably be billed as such.

 

The remainder, the 46% that can actually be competed for is split like this

1: 27.2%

2: 22.8%

3: 10.9%

4: 8.7%

5: 7.6%

6: 6.5%

7: 5.4%

8: 4.3%

9: 3.3%

10: 2.2%

11: 1.1%

12: 0.0%

 

Personally I'd split the whole pot with payments based on how many teams you finished above

1: 11/66 = 16.7%

2: 10/66 = 15.2%

3: 9/66 = 13.6%

4: 8/66 = 12.1%

5: 7/66 = 10.6%

6: 6/66 = 9.1%

7: 5/66 = 7.6%

8: 4/66 = 6.1%

9: 3/66 = 4.5%

10: 2/66 = 3.0%

11: 1/66 = 1.5%

12: 0/66 = 0.0%

 

This would actually leave the Old Firm with the same share but make the differences between the rest of the places far more interesting.

[redjambo]

Actually as you're assured at least 4.5% regardless. 54% of the sponsors "prize money" is actually flat rate sponsorship and should probably be billed as such.

 

The remainder, the 46% that can actually be competed for is split like this

1: 27.2%

2: 22.8%

3: 10.9%

4: 8.7%

5: 7.6%

6: 6.5%

7: 5.4%

8: 4.3%

9: 3.3%

10: 2.2%

11: 1.1%

12: 0.0%

 

Personally I'd split the whole pot with payments based on how many teams you finished above

1: 11/66 = 16.7%

2: 10/66 = 15.2%

3: 9/66 = 13.6%

4: 8/66 = 12.1%

5: 7/66 = 10.6%

6: 6/66 = 9.1%

7: 5/66 = 7.6%

8: 4/66 = 6.1%

9: 3/66 = 4.5%

10: 2/66 = 3.0%

11: 1/66 = 1.5%

12: 0/66 = 0.0%

 

This would actually leave the Old Firm with the same share but make the differences between the rest of the places far more interesting.

 

Interesting idea but pretty harsh for Hamilton, St Mirren and Hibs at the bottom, no?