SPL 10 Team Vote OFF

[Chester™]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9351767.stm

 

Dont think its been posted but the SPL have scrapped the vote for 10 teams.

[Groot]

Sums up the people who run our game, they know they're not going to get the result they want so they don't have the vote

 

Pitiful

[Randle P McMurphy]

hoo feckin ray. the only downside is we now can expect another lengthy period of inertia. no doubt with the 4 clubs being slated for stopping scottish football moving forward.

[scott_jambo]

F****ing do the vote!

 

Give the clubs a chance to go against it.

 

This reminds me of the European Union and the Lisbon treaty. Lots of blackmail and hand forcing until we all agree it is 'in the best interests of our game'.

 

Joke.

[scott_jambo]

hoo feckin ray. the only downside is we now can expect another lengthy period of inertia. no doubt with the 4 clubs being slated for stopping scottish football moving forward.

 

6 now.

 

Reservation towards SPL 10.

 

St Mirren

Motherwell

Kilmarnock

Caley

Hearts

Dundee United

 

For SPL ten

 

Rangers

Celtic

Hibs

Aberdeen

Hamilton

 

 

 

No idea about St Johnstone's position on the matter. With their recent history in regards to gate money they are probably happy to just be blootered up the erse by the powers that be and the OF as well.

[Victorian]

stop the bus.

 

it's because they need to lodge a formal resolution 14 days in advance of any vote, which hasn't been done.

 

mere incompetence again, no machiavellian scheming.

[scott_jambo]

stop the bus.

 

it's because they need to lodge a formal resolution 14 days in advance of any vote, which hasn't been done.

 

mere incompetence again, no machiavellian scheming.

 

 

True - didn't read the link.

 

Just when I was beginning to look forward to the vote it was cancelled.

 

 

Whatever happened to "all twelve teams are in agreement" "we expect an SPL 10 to be in place"

 

Just like when we told the Israeli and portugese refs they were coming over for a training exercise rather than because of industrial action.

[AlanB]

I wonder which ex-old firm player will be the first to accuse Hearts of holding back scottish football in the tabloids this coming week?

[Tasavallan]

How can this be? I thought everyone was for it.

 

Maybe they didn't have one of these...

 

 

[Victorian]

True - didn't read the link.

 

Just when I was beginning to look forward to the vote it was cancelled.

 

 

Whatever happened to "all twelve teams are in agreement" "we expect an SPL 10 to be in place"

 

Just like when we told the Israeli and portugese refs they were coming over for a training exercise rather than because of industrial action.

 

you should read gordon waddells article in the hunday mail about it. some decent points but also some confused pish.

 

he's giving it the big yeehaw about stephen thompson being a man of true courage for being the one to speak out against everyone being railroaded into a disaster. implying that he's entitled to speak as he runs his football club with his own money, rather than the likes of lawwell, bain and southern who are all "playing with someone else's money".

 

excuse me but please don't drag us into a comparison with the old firm waddell. hearts are also against these plans. hearts have always been along side stephen thompson in all of this.

[Martin_T]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9351767.stm

 

Dont think its been posted but the SPL have scrapped the vote for 10 teams.

 

Aberdeen and Hibs seem to be desperate for it to happen. Apparently the whole reversion to 10 clubs idea is being driven by Stewart Milne, ironic enough given the only open protest against the 10 team league so far was by Aberdeen fans.

 

I think Hearts are against it due to VR being a contrary wee so and so as much as anything else. The likes of Killie, ICT and Motherwell have realised that they would be considerably increasing their chances of being relegated.

 

Of those for, Aberdeen and Hibs are clearly desperate for the four Old Firm gates a season, Hamilton and St Johnstone have accepted their status as yo-yo clubs and simply want a better financial safety net for dropping the first division. The Old Firm want TV income divided up less ways.

[Drylaw Hearts]

14 teams is the way forward.

 

Not 16 and most certainly not 18.

[Victorian]

14 teams is the way forward.

 

Not 16 and most certainly not 18.

 

i think the ICT heid-yin was spot on with his way forward...

 

the status quo.

 

there's no need for a final decision to be made right now. the guy says that we should get all the peripheral stuff implemented by all means but the main issue of the league structure can easily wait a while longer while it's looked at again.

[Rick Grimes]

Sunday Mail also reporting Doncaster & Topping to hold "emergency talks" with Stephen Thompson.... an attempt to divide & conquer?

 

If its just an administrative glitch about not putting out the proposal 14 days in advance why not just do it now & reschedule?

[Rick Grimes]

i think the ICT heid-yin was spot on with his way forward...

 

the status quo.

 

there's no need for a final decision to be made right now. the guy says that we should get all the peripheral stuff implemented by all means but the main issue of the league structure can easily wait a while longer while it's looked at again.

 

absolutely - 12 is actually better than 14; too many games after the split with 14 and too soon to get there. if the major issue is stability for clubs going down & avoiding financial armageddon why not just redistribute some cash in the current set-up?

[Tasavallan]

14 teams is the way forward.

 

Not 16 and most certainly not 18.

I am somewhat apathetic to whether the SPL is made up of 10, 12, 14 or 16 teams, although my preference would be 14 teams with 2 teams relegated to SPL2. What interests me more is a more democratic distribution of the revenue, an SPL2, play-offs plus a SFL regional pyramid system below the SPL2.

 

At the moment it is all about the SPL. They need to be discussing the reorganising of football structure in Scotland not just the turkey vote.

 

 

[Drylaw Hearts]

i think the ICT heid-yin was spot on with his way forward...

 

the status quo.

 

there's no need for a final decision to be made right now. the guy says that we should get all the peripheral stuff implemented by all means but the main issue of the league structure can easily wait a while longer while it's looked at again.

 

I think the restructure will coincide with a new TV/Sponsorship deal which should then lead to a rewriting of the how the pot of cash is divided between the clubs.

 

I don't see the point in changing a wee bit now and another bit later etc etc.

 

A clean sweep in needed.

 

A re-branding of 3 leagues of 14 teams - all under one association.

 

Make it one big, dramatic overhaul which will a lot better/effective than several tinkering sessions.

[Drylaw Hearts]

I am somewhat apathetic to whether the SPL is made up of 10, 12, 14 or 16 teams, although my preference would be 14 teams with 2 teams relegated to SPL2. What interests me more is a more democratic distribution of the revenue, an SPL2, play-offs plus a SFL regional pyramid system below the SPL2.

 

At the moment it is all about the SPL. They need to be discussing the reorganising of football structure in Scotland not just the turkey vote.

 

I'd like to see 2 teams go down with the play off between 3rd bottom and 3rd top.

[bighusref]

Eighteen for me.

 

Five of the top six in the SFL have been in the top league in recent times, all arguably bigger clubs than the likes of Hamilton. I think that the addition of these teams would strengthen them, add a touch of diversity to our league and not be anywhere near as bad as some think.

[Victorian]

absolutely - 12 is actually better than 14; too many games after the split with 14 and too soon to get there. if the major issue is stability for clubs going down & avoiding financial armageddon why not just redistribute some cash in the current set-up?

 

this for me is one of the most fundamental issues involved. ideally what should be forced to happen is that the old firm ( or 1st and 2nd place ) no longer get a ridiculously inflated share of the pot. simply sharing out all monies on a completely equal basis, as well as allowing some of it to filter down would go a hell of a long way to making the overall set-up more viable.

 

what a bizarre little world scottish football is. the product to be improved significantly with this one easy step.... but it's not even a possibility on the table to be discussed. i feel sure that some clubs will be thinking it so why not bring it forward?

[Footballfirst]

14 teams is the way forward.

 

Not 16 and most certainly not 18.

I would prefer 16, but would accept 14 as a compromise position with a view to going to 16/18 within 3 years if the drop in attendances is not arrested.

 

The way that I would make 14 (6/8 split) and indeed 16 work is that there would be play offs for the last Euro place, meaning that in most seasons 1st, 2nd & 3rd would get guaranteed places, but that 4th 5th 6th and 7th would play off for the last place. That way if you make the top six you are guaranteed at least a Euro play off place. Final league positions would determine home advantage in single game play off ties. The top team in the bottom split would also take part thus creating something for them to to play for in the latter part of the season.

 

If the cup winner comes from outwith the top 3 then 3rd place would go into the play offs. If the cup winner came from outside the top 6, I would just create one extra play off game for the top team in the bottom split. The cup final would have to be scheduled before the play offs however.

 

I'd also scrap the league cup in a 14 team set-up..

[Drylaw Hearts]

Eighteen for me.

 

Five of the top six in the SFL have been in the top league in recent times, all arguably bigger clubs than the likes of Hamilton. I think that the addition of these teams would strengthen them, add a touch of diversity to our league and not be anywhere near as bad as some think.

 

The big problem you have with 18 is that there is feck all beyond that.

 

Would having the likes of QOS, Cowdenbeath or Ross County really improve our League ?

[Drylaw Hearts]

I would prefer 16, but would accept 14 as a compromise position with a view to going to 16/18 within 3 years if the drop in attendances is not arrested.

 

The way that I would make 14 (6/8 split) and indeed 16 work is that there would be play offs for the last Euro place, meaning that in most seasons 1st, 2nd & 3rd would get guaranteed places, but that 4th 5th 6th and 7th would play off for the last place. That way if you make the top six you are guaranteed at least a Euro play off place. Final league positions would determine home advantage in single game play off ties. The top team in the bottom split would also take part thus creating something for them to to play for in the latter part of the season.

 

If the cup winner comes from outwith the top 3 then 3rd place would go into the play offs. If the cup winner came from outside the top 6, I would just create one extra play off game for the top team in the bottom split. The cup final would have to be scheduled before the play offs however.

 

I'd also scrap the league cup in a 14 team set-up..

 

With 16 teams there isn't enough matches.

 

30 games is too few.

[Victorian]

The big problem you have with 18 is that there is feck all beyond that.

 

Would having the likes of QOS, Cowdenbeath or Ross County really improve our League ?

 

perhaps not in the very short term but why not turn the question on it's head.

 

would entry to the top league improve the likes of those teams? would it improve the overall standard of scottish football?

[Drylaw Hearts]

perhaps not in the very short term but why not turn the question on it's head.

 

would entry to the top league improve the likes of those teams? would it improve the overall standard of scottish football?

 

I really don't think it would.

[davemclaren]

perhaps not in the very short term but why not turn the question on it's head.

 

would entry to the top league improve the likes of those teams? would it improve the overall standard of scottish football?

 

 

It didn't in the past.

[bighusref]

The big problem you have with 18 is that there is feck all beyond that.

 

Would having the likes of QOS, Cowdenbeath or Ross County really improve our League ?

 

I would say that Ross County and QOS would most definitely offer something to our League. Both have had decent cup runs and I think could improve our league. Cowdenbeath, I dunno, but I'd have said the same about Hamilton before they came up.

[Victorian]

I really don't think it would.

 

well you either have to have a policy of exclusion, which amounts to protectionism, or you have the possibility whereby teams are able to ascend to the top league.

 

under the SPL1, SPL2 and regionalised set-up underneath there will be increased possibilities of 'diddy' teams coming through. the play-off system gives them more chance than the current 1 up - 1 down arrangement.

 

the long term goal surely has to be the 18 team set-up. keep the status quo in the interim until they eventually see that no one compromise can be brought about in order to protect whatever little aspects certain clubs want to protect.

 

right now there are 12 teams in the SPL. those include st.mirren, st.johnstone, hamilton and inverness. why is it that you couldn't then add teams such as dunfermline, raith rovers, partick thistle, morton, livingston and airdrie?

 

haven't these teams been in the top league before? they all have.

[Napoleon Wilson]

Sums up the people who run our game, they know they're not going to get the result they want so they don't have the vote

Pitiful

 

 

This.

 

What a total crock of S*** the SFA is. Speccy Doncaster can get tae ****

[Drylaw Hearts]

I would say that Ross County and QOS would most definitely offer something to our League. Both have had decent cup runs and I think could improve our league. Cowdenbeath, I dunno, but I'd have said the same about Hamilton before they came up.

 

I think the rigours of a full season are different from cup-ties.

 

These teams are too small and would attract even lower crowds than Hamilton and St Mirren.

 

We're trying to get folk back to games not drive them away.

 

 

It's certainly too soon (for them) to have them in the top division - if they make it when we have an increased SPL then fine but I don't think they would cope if presented with that opportunity in a couple of years time.

 

They have to start building now and if they don't make it it could be the end of them.

 

Ross County may cope but the other 2.....no chance imo.

[Drylaw Hearts]

well you either have to have a policy of exclusion, which amounts to protectionism, or you have the possibility whereby teams are able to ascend to the top league.

under the SPL1, SPL2 and regionalised set-up underneath there will be increased possibilities of 'diddy' teams coming through. the play-off system gives them more chance than the current 1 up - 1 down arrangement.

 

the long term goal surely has to be the 18 team set-up. keep the status quo in the interim until they eventually see that no one compromise can be brought about in order to protect whatever little aspects certain clubs want to protect.

 

right now there are 12 teams in the SPL. those include st.mirren, st.johnstone, hamilton and inverness. why is it that you couldn't then add teams such as dunfermline, raith rovers, partick thistle, morton, livingston and airdrie?

 

haven't these teams been in the top league before? they all have.

 

A 14 team SPL offers that.

 

2 new teams every season - with the possibility of 3.

 

Throwing teams into a big league, when they're not ready, would do more damage than good.

 

 

Let them get their gradually.

[Chester™]

A 14 team SPL offers that.

 

2 new teams every season - with the possibility of 3.

 

Throwing teams into a big league, when they're not ready, would do more damage than good.

 

 

Let them get their gradually.

 

So after a few years would you consider further expansion using this model and example?

[The Old Tolbooth]

And yet people still ask for proof that our game is corrupt, you couldn't make it up!

 

 

 

(I feel a wee brown paper bag may be winging it's way to Mr Thompson at Dundee Utd as we speak)

[Drylaw Hearts]

So after a few years would you consider further expansion using this model and example?

 

Possibly.

 

It would have to be 18 teams though as 16 only offers 30 games and thats not enough.

 

However...

 

The thought of watching Hearts play The Blue Brazil twice rather than the Leith Brazil twice really doesn't float ma boat.

[Chester™]

 

 

However...

 

The thought of watching Hearts play The Blue Brazil twice rather than the Leith Brazil twice really doesn't float ma boat.

 

You have to make sure the Hobos dont get relegated then!

[The Merse]

Why did Doncaster announce that the 10-team SPL was close to agreement when there is clearly so much opposition to it?

 

What a tool.

[Drylaw Hearts]

You have to make sure the Hobos dont get relegated then!

 

Now thats different.....

 

I could really handle not playing them because they went down.

 

Kinda softens the blow.

 

 

[davemclaren]

And yet people still ask for proof that our game is corrupt, you couldn't make it up!

 

 

 

(I feel a wee brown paper bag may be winging it's way to Mr Thompson at Dundee Utd as we speak)

 

 

I think it's called negotiating to reach a compromise John.

[Gigolo-Aunt]

I think it's called negotiating to reach a compromise John.

 

[Victorian]

A 14 team SPL offers that.

 

2 new teams every season - with the possibility of 3.

 

Throwing teams into a big league, when they're not ready, would do more damage than good.

 

 

Let them get their gradually.

 

but surely introducing two more teams into a new 14 team set-up would simply add two more teams who would be more than likely to see their new place as a god given right and that no further expansion should be allowed. if we went to 14 teams there's no guarantee that the next step would be allowed to happen. it could just as easily herald the next era of protectionism.

 

if 18 teams is the ultimate goal at this moment in time then it should be forced through now or be set in stone as a guaranteed final solution.

[The Old Tolbooth]

I think it's called negotiating to reach a compromise John.

I'm a tad more cynical than you Dave

[Drylaw Hearts]

but surely introducing two more teams into a new 14 team set-up would simply add two more teams who would be more than likely to see their new place as a god given right and that no further expansion should be allowed. if we went to 14 teams there's no guarantee that the next step would be allowed to happen. it could just as easily herald the next era of protectionism.

 

if 18 teams is the ultimate goal at this moment in time then it should be forced through now or be set in stone as a guaranteed final solution.

 

18 teams isn't the ultimate goal....

 

A better more exciting league with a fairer distribution of cash is the target.

 

I personally don't think Scotland is big enough or do we have enough big clubs to get away with an 18 team league.

 

Walter Smith fancies this set-up because of European football.

 

18 teams mean less league games than now but more league games against poorer opposition - Rangers can play their weaker players in the SPL and the better players in the big games.

 

It further devalues the league imo.

[Ben Dover]

What I would have liked is for the steering group to demonstrate to me that they have actually explored all the avenues available.

Needless to say I'm not getting that impresion.

Have they asked any lapsed supporters WHY they are no longer going along?

Have they asked 'lost' fans what, if anything, can be done to encourage them back?

As a poster elsewhere on the forum pointed out, they are simply expecting the same loyal group of fans to go to MORE games and pay out more cash.

Far from radical change. All we are getting from Doncaster is a bean counters desire to produce impressive figures ........and **** the quality of the product and the aftercare service on offer !

[Chester™]

I personally don't think Scotland is big enough or do we have enough big clubs to get away with and 18 team league.

 

 

 

Im not particularly sure we are big enough to go with your suggestion of three leagues of 14 either. In my view, we can only sustain two top leagues properly.

 

Fairer redistribution is bang on. And we really need a pyramid system.

[Victorian]

18 teams isn't the ultimate goal....

 

A better more exciting league with a fairer distribution of cash is the target.

 

I personally don't think Scotland is big enough or do we have enough big clubs to get away with an 18 team league.

 

Walter Smith fancies this set-up because of European football.

 

18 teams mean less league games than now but more league games against poorer opposition - Rangers can play their weaker players in the SPL and the better players in the big games.

 

It further devalues the league imo.

 

if it helped a number of clubs compete better in europe... would that be a bad thing? it could help us as well.

 

i really don't see how it devalues the league. does a 1st division match between dundee and dunfermline have no value at present? of course it has value. it would have even more value when they meet in the top league.

 

would celtic and rangers playing those teams, or some of the other mentioned have any less meaning than them playing hamilton or st.johnstone?

[Charlie-Brown]

any compromise that involves continuing with 3 or 4 games every season against the same opponents or any kind of split is going to be hugely unpopular and won't do anything to improve supporter dissatisfaction. There are no means by which ten, twelve or fourteen teams can be made to work without keeping the things supporters hate ie too much repetition and the split.

[Drylaw Hearts]

Im not particularly sure we are big enough to go with your suggestion of three leagues of 14 either. In my view, we can only sustain two top leagues properly.

 

Fairer redistribution is bang on. And we really need a pyramid system.

 

What do we do with all the clubs left over from the 2 leagues ?

 

We can't just get rid of them or stick them into regional divisions.

 

 

A pyramid system may be worth a shout - temas like Spartans have an excellent set-up and probably deserve a shot.

 

A play-off from the regional division winners could be promoted to the bottom league.

[Drylaw Hearts]

if it helped a number of clubs compete better in europe... would that be a bad thing? it could help us as well.

 

i really don't see how it devalues the league. does a 1st division match between dundee and dunfermline have no value at present? of course it has value. it would have even more value when they meet in the top league.

 

would celtic and rangers playing those teams, or some of the other mentioned have any less meaning than them playing hamilton or st.johnstone?

 

By playing weakened sides more often it would devalue the league.

[Drylaw Hearts]

any compromise that involves continuing with 3 or 4 games every season against the same opponents or any kind of split is going to be hugely unpopular and won't do anything to improve supporter dissatisfaction. There are no means by which ten, twelve or fourteen teams can be made to work without keeping the things supporters hate ie too much repetition and the split.

 

If said this before...

 

Our biggest home support is in the bigger games.

 

Playing more smaller teams will more than likely lower our average attendance.

[Victorian]

By playing weakened sides more often it would devalue the league.

 

really?

 

wouldn't it also give more players more experience of playing matches? wouldn't it aid the development of more home grown players? wouldn't it allow for more competitive matches between these so-called weakened teams and the opposition.

 

who says they would field weakened teams anyway?