The Split

[IMA MAROON]

If we make the top six we have everything to play for.

 

If we are in the bottom eight it gives us a chance to play the kids in pressure free games.

[colinmaroon]

If ten team leagues playing each other 4 times per season or 12 or 14 team leagues with variable home and away fixtures against opponents then a fudged split league arragement are such a great idea how come not one of the serious footballing nations in Europe has ever bothered to copy these abominable formats? How come they ALL manage to cope with bigger league formats of 16-24 teams and in England even all the way down into non-league conference divisions?

 

 

First, the TV money has created an "unreal" situation down South!

 

Second, even with that money, there are casualties.

 

Third, there are changes muted for down south but unlikely to happen, because the power and the money is central in decision making, not the "good" of the game!

 

I am certain that money and power comes into effect in other European countries!

 

Its the same, if not greater issue in Scottish Football.

 

Weve seen in the past that 10 doesn't work. 12 has been relatively, marginally, better and, for the reasons given in my previous post, I believe that 14 is worth a try. There is more chance of getting to 16 or 18 from 14!!!

 

 

At the end of the day, it's not the league format that's the issue, it's power and money!

 

The Bundesliga has certain rules in place that enhance competition and stop an uneven playing field, for example.

[kingantti1874]

Any league where you start the season not knowing how many home and away games you will have is a farce.

 

The 14 team league with the split and balanced fixtures would actually settle a lot of my issues with it.

 

But you'll have split in early winter and have 4 more games in total if you finish in the bottom 8..

 

I despair at some of the views on here-wait till we finish 7th on goal difference at the split 4 or 5 points from 3rd... 14 games to go in the season an we are out of contention.. I guarantee this board will be in meltdown if that scenario occurs.

[Francis Albert]

But you'll have split in early winter and have 4 more games in total if you finish in the bottom 8..

 

I despair at some of the views on here-wait till we finish 7th on goal difference at the split 4 or 5 points from 3rd... 14 games to go in the season an we are out of contention.. I guarantee this board will be in meltdown if that scenario occurs.

This board is in permanent meltdown any time we are outside the top 6 anyway!

[Guest C00l K1d]

I dislike it, particularly this season because there is a 99% chance we won't get to pump the hibs after april

[Socrates]

It would get a bit silly in those years when 7th is still well in contention for Europe. Also, if you're not in contention for Europe, I don't think most people care much about making the top 6 or not. Maybe it's important if you are a diddy club or something.

 

The 14 team split would be so dull for the teams who narrowly miss out on the top 6. 14 meaningless games against shitty opposition, with no risk of relegation. Attendances will be truly awful for these teams.

[Tasavallan]

A 14 team SPL with a 6/8 split has it's attractions, especially if it's 2 teams relegated and the 3rd bottom team in the play-offs. However, 14 teams with only the bottom team guaranteed of relegation means a potential large middle of mediocrity.

 

Of course my opinion would be different if Hearts were currently below the line.

[CavySlaveJambo]

Really what is wrong with playing 44 games. Footballers earn enough that they should earn the money.

[Socrates]

A 14 team SPL with a 6/8 split has it's attractions, especially if it's 2 teams relegated and the 3rd bottom team in the play-offs. However, 14 teams with only the bottom team guaranteed of relegation means a potential large middle of mediocrity.

 

Of course my opinion would be different if Hearts were currently below the line.

 

1 down would be awful. 2 should be the minimum, and a playoff would be good as well.

[dobmisterdobster]

I'm gonna be hip & cool by saying I dislike it!

[Ben Dover]

Really what is wrong with playing 44 games. Footballers earn enough that they should earn the money.

 

 

We had a 12 team setup in the old Premier league for seasons 86-87, 87-88

However it was considered to be too many games back then !

Not sure if thats when Wednesday nights became a fairly regular thing?

If so then you are immediately back to match schedules that make life harder for the fans !

[Ben Dover]

If ten team leagues playing each other 4 times per season or 12 or 14 team leagues with variable home and away fixtures against opponents then a fudged split league arragement are such a great idea how come not one of the serious footballing nations in Europe has ever bothered to copy these abominable formats? How come they ALL manage to cope with bigger league formats of 16-24 teams and in England even all the way down into non-league conference divisions?

 

 

As Colin suggests, the English leagues are more or less being propped up by SKY money.

As for the rest of 'civilised' Europe though?

What are the Dutch, the French and the Portuguese leagues doing...........surviving on a shoestring perhaps?

We've already seen that the game in Germany ( top end anyway ) appears to be thriving?

Sadly Henry McLeish doesnt give that even a passing glance as a model worth copying !

Granted their population is much greater but it surely deserves a wee look ?

Instead we get Doncasters classic shortsighted beancouters view..............sack 100% of the staff and the bottom line looks great with a zero wage bill !!

Just wait till Monday morning though and see how your business fairs !

[Francis Albert]

1 down would be awful. 2 should be the minimum, and a playoff would be good as well.

So a split is a distortion of the principle of a league competition but an artificial mini-cup competition tacked onto the league season would be good? The idea of play-offs for the title wasn't given a micro-second's consideration, but play-offs for relegation (potentially MUCH more significant for the clubs involved) seem to be widely accepted as a good thing. I wonder why.

[Socrates]

So a split is a distortion of the principle of a league competition but an artificial mini-cup competition tacked onto the league season would be good? The idea of play-offs for the title wasn't given a micro-second's consideration, but play-offs for relegation (potentially MUCH more significant for the clubs involved) seem to be widely accepted as a good thing. I wonder why.

The play-off is because I think 2 from 14 is not enough relegation and 3 is too many. I don't see a two-leg playoff between 3rd bottom of 1 league and third top of the league below as distorting the league system.

[Francis Albert]

The play-off is because I think 2 from 14 is not enough relegation and 3 is too many. I don't see a two-leg playoff between 3rd bottom of 1 league and third top of the league below as distorting the league system.

2 out of 14 is in effect 2 out of 12 because 2 clubs will never be relegated. Seems quite tight enough to me.

And if a team finishes 20 points clear in third bottom, and the third top in the lower division is 20 points adrift of second, how is a one-off game to decide who plays in the top flight not a distortion of the principle of a league competition? Seems to me a lot less "fair" than anything the split throws up.

[colinmaroon]

2 out of 14 is in effect 2 out of 12 because 2 clubs will never be relegated. Seems quite tight enough to me.

And if a team finishes 20 points clear in third bottom, and the third top in the lower division is 20 points adrift of second, how is a one-off game to decide who plays in the top flight not a distortion of the principle of a league competition? Seems to me a lot less "fair" than anything the split throws up.

 

 

I think the Play off should be over two legs!

[Socrates]

2 out of 14 is in effect 2 out of 12 because 2 clubs will never be relegated. Seems quite tight enough to me.

And if a team finishes 20 points clear in third bottom, and the third top in the lower division is 20 points adrift of second, how is a one-off game to decide who plays in the top flight not a distortion of the principle of a league competition? Seems to me a lot less "fair" than anything the split throws up.

 

I thought 2 from 10 was OK in the past. 2 from 14 is probably fine, although I think relegation is a good thing for football, so a bit more wouldn't hurt. I don't see a home and away play-off between two teams from different leagues to determine who is better, and should go into the higher league as a distortion of league competition - it would be if it involved teams in the same division, but I don't know if the third worst team in the SPL is worse than the third best team in the first division. The league system doesn't tell us that, but a playoff would help (and yes, I know, that the best team doesn't necessarily win every two-leg playoff).

 

Also, a split like the one suggested for a 14 team league doesn't impact on the integrity of the competition, as the rules are known in advance and everyone is treated equally. It just wouldn't be very good.

[topcat]

I like the split and if at some point in the future Hearts are struggling to get above 7th after 33 games then the team deserves what if gets (they did in 2008)

 

There's a few problems which should be sorted out though

There was an issue in 2008 where our last pre split match against Kilmarnock was the day before Falkirk and Aberdeen (the other two teams in contention for 6th) met. As it happened we drew with Killie and it probably made no difference but that kind of situation should be avoided.

 

Secondly and more importantly there is often a problem with fixture imbalance after the split either in terms of teams visiting certain opponents a 3rd time times and/or hosting others for a 3rd time or not getting an even split of 18 home and 18 away games over the season, as was the case with Motherwell and Aberdeen last season.

 

This is to some degree inescapable and unless the composition of the top 6 happens to be convenient the league will have to choose between various imperfect compromises. What makes this worse is the way that this choice is made in secret with no reasons given.

 

Motherwell were given a 3rd visit to Celtic Park and only 17 home games this season without anybody telling them why,

 

If there had been a rule known from the start of the season that the team in 6th at the split will get the shitty end of that stick then they'd at least know that it was their teams inability to accumulate enough points from the opening 33 that was the problem

 

Celtic Supporters were furious about Rangers going to Easter Road for a 3rd time and Hosting Hearts for a 3rd time so that the Edinburgh Derby would be balanced but if it was in the rules that clubs could opt to protect the balance of key pairings then only the densest of them could claim it was a conspiracy.

 

It's not even particularly important what system is used to make these decisions all that matters is that it's transparent and doesn't leave room for discretionary decisions.

[Charlie-Brown]

I like the split and if at some point in the future Hearts are struggling to get above 7th after 33 games then the team deserves what if gets (they did in 2008)

 

There's a few problems which should be sorted out though

There was an issue in 2008 where our last pre split match against Kilmarnock was the day before Falkirk and Aberdeen (the other two teams in contention for 6th) met. As it happened we drew with Killie and it probably made no difference but that kind of situation should be avoided.

 

Secondly and more importantly there is often a problem with fixture imbalance after the split either in terms of teams visiting certain opponents a 3rd time times and/or hosting others for a 3rd time or not getting an even split of 18 home and 18 away games over the season, as was the case with Motherwell and Aberdeen last season.

 

This is to some degree inescapable and unless the composition of the top 6 happens to be convenient the league will have to choose between various imperfect compromises. What makes this worse is the way that this choice is made in secret with no reasons given.

 

Motherwell were given a 3rd visit to Celtic Park and only 17 home games this season without anybody telling them why,

 

If there had been a rule known from the start of the season that the team in 6th at the split will get the shitty end of that stick then they'd at least know that it was their teams inability to accumulate enough points from the opening 33 that was the problem

 

Celtic Supporters were furious about Rangers going to Easter Road for a 3rd time and Hosting Hearts for a 3rd time so that the Edinburgh Derby would be balanced but if it was in the rules that clubs could opt to protect the balance of key pairings then only the densest of them could claim it was a conspiracy.

 

It's not even particularly important what system is used to make these decisions all that matters is that it's transparent and doesn't leave room for discretionary decisions.

 

Non transparent inconsistent and discretionary decisions ARE Scottish Football TC - it's what we're all about - without them the game as we know it would be unrecognisable !!!