Club Statement

[RAG]

1 minute ago, Prahakillie said:

There shouldn't be. 

Here are the fixtures, take your pick... 

I still think the crowd control more thanTV (and short term timing of the splits scheduling) means the big teams, with derbies within cities will get a more predictable schedule.

Would be interesting to see if it is us, St Johnstone, Motherwell, Inverness maybe Aberdeen are historically the ones who have an uneven schedule..

[Bigdodge]

2 hours ago, SaucyJackPirate said:

Can't agree with the boring comment.  We have 5 big games coming up with something to prove and something to play for.  That's also true for another 7 out of the 12 clubs.  That to me is a lot more exciting that rounding out the season with meaningless games and meandering to the final day.

Total guff..... are we saying that the SPFL know better than any other league in the planet how to avoid meaningless games? They get slated at every turn and now you are basically saying by extension, they know their stuff. Having no split and you would still have teams fighting to win the league, qualify for Europe , avoid relegation. Try telling other teams that their games are meaningless when finishing a place higher gets them more money.

We won't always finsh in the top 6 and won't always be involved in relegation battles.This season has been an exception to the rule of the past few years, so yes it is exciting. That was not my point. My point is about not having to worry about bawbags in the league deciding fixtures. No split means no f**king about. People griping about having to go to Sevco for a 3rd time can be avoided if there was no split. Dobber.

[Prahakillie]

10 minutes ago, Bigdodge said:

Total guff..... are we saying that the SPFL know better than any other league in the planet how to avoid meaningless games? They get slated at every turn and now you are basically saying by extension, they know their stuff. Having no split and you would still have teams fighting to win the league, qualify for Europe , avoid relegation. Try telling other teams that their games are meaningless when finishing a place higher gets them more money.

We won't always finsh in the top 6 and won't always be involved in relegation battles.This season has been an exception to the rule of the past few years, so yes it is exciting. That was not my point. My point is about not having to worry about bawbags in the league deciding fixtures. No split means no f**king about. People griping about having to go to Sevco for a 3rd time can be avoided if there was no split. Dobber.

so your solution is to play 44 games? 

[SaucyJackPirate]

3 minutes ago, Bigdodge said:

Total guff..... are we saying that the SPFL know better than any other league in the planet how to avoid meaningless games? They get slated at every turn and now you are basically saying by extension, they know their stuff. Having no split and you would still have teams fighting to win the league, qualify for Europe , avoid relegation. Try telling other teams that their games are meaningless when finishing a place higher gets them more money.

We won't always finsh in the top 6 and won't always be involved in relegation battles.This season has been an exception to the rule of the past few years, so yes it is exciting. That was not my point. My point is about not having to worry about bawbags in the league deciding fixtures. No split means no f**king about. People griping about having to go to Sevco for a 3rd time can be avoided if there was no split. Dobber.

5

Talk about getting stressed out over nothing.  You said the split was boring, I said this year it wasn't.  Fact is this year it's not and you've agreed.  I said nothing else about anything except that most teams have something to play for.  We have 5 games and I'm looking forward to all of them. 

I'll just enjoy these next 6 games till the summer and you can continue your absolute conniption about the SPFL, other planets, The Rangers, finsh and whatever else is on your mental coupon.

[Bullitt]

5 minutes ago, Prahakillie said:

so your solution is to play 44 games? 

Proper solution is 16 teams. 30 games.

Charity shield cup thing pre season which would likely be dominated by both sides of the arse cheek to appease the TV companies and make quarter and semi final in Scottish cup two legged affairs. Again, greater chance Celtic and Rangers draw each other at that stage.

 

[Squirrelhumper]

9 minutes ago, Bullitt said:

Proper solution is 16 teams. 30 games.

Charity shield cup thing pre season which would likely be dominated by both sides of the arse cheek to appease the TV companies and make quarter and semi final in Scottish cup two legged affairs. Again, greater chance Celtic and Rangers draw each other at that stage.

 

30 games over a season? That would be pish IMO.

Don't think clubs would vote for 4 less league games.

[KFC_Macca]

It is an utter embarrassment that we have a league setup which allows this kind of nonsense. The founding principle of a league, as opposed to a cup, is that it’s a long competition where each team plays each other an equal number of times home and away. A true test of performance as everyone is measured on an equal footing. Not this garbage. 

 

 

[PrestersKtid]

Seen this before:

14 team league. Play each other twice. 26 games

Then split into 2 groups of 7. Play each other twice again. 12 extra games

Total 38 (same as just now) and no mismatch in home and aways.

[KFC_Macca]

I can see the following options:

1) 10 teams, play each other 4 times. 36 games. League too small

2) 12 teams, play each other 4 times. 44 games. Was tried before. Unpopular

3) 14 teams, split into top 7, bottom 7 (play home away after split). Would be 1 team sitting out each game post split

4) 14 teams, split top 6, bottom 8(play home away after split). 36/40 games. Different no of games depending on where you finish

5) 16 teams, split top 8, bottom 8 (play home away after split). 44 games. Some would say too many games but championship in England is 46 games. Also may help clubs to generate a bit more revenue.

6) A classic 18 or 20 team league, play each other twice. 34 or 38 games. Too many teams for Scotland?

Out of the above, I’d actually like number 5, but could hear arguments for 3, 4 or 6

Edited April 12, 2018 by KFC_Macca

[Al#1]

4 hours ago, plunkit said:

Maybe they could take the money TiK has sitting in a bank account for them 

But the reality is if the spfl did not s**t themselves with every single old firm issue , the Kfc would likely add £100,000 to their bottom line. A Political decision by one fanny from his desk in Hampden outstrips the good work of all those contributing to Tik!

[Al#1]

5 hours ago, azertyuiop said:

Powder puff statement that doesn't actually state anything other than we wanted some hun money.

 

Tend to agree. I would have given that Press release to Kenny Shiels to re write.i don't think he would have held his punches. Those running the SPFL are a joke! And in fairness to MJ after waiting 6 years to be in the top 6 he would have endured a different outcome.

 

its about sporting integrity first, money second.

[PrestersKtid]

13 minutes ago, KFC_Macca said:

I can see the following options:

1) 10 teams, play each other 4 times. 36 games. League too small

2) 12 teams, play each other 4 times. 44 games. Was tried before. Unpopular

3) 14 teams, split into top 7, bottom 7 (play home away after split). Would be 1 team sitting out each game post split

4) 14 teams, split top 6, bottom 8(play home away after split). 36/40 games. Different no of games depending on where you finish

5) 16 teams, split top 8, bottom 8 (play home away after split). 44 games. Some would say too many games but championship in England is 46 games. Also may help clubs to generate a bit more revenue.

6) A classic 18 or 20 team league, play each other twice. 34 or 38 games. Too many teams for Scotland?

Out of the above, I’d actually like number 5, but could hear arguments for 3, 4 or 6

20 team league isn't ridiculous imo.

Add St Mirren, Dunfermline, Dundee United, Inverness, Falkirk, Livingston, Qos, Morton and the level isn't reduced greatly.

Most are reasonably well supported aswell. 

Then have 2 leagues of 12 and 10 OR 1 league of 22 made up of Brechin, Dumbarton and leagues 1 and 2. Realistically 4/5 teams in that league that can get promotion. Ayr, raith and Airdrie.

 

But it all boils down to the media want more than 2 old firm games 

[Squirrelhumper]

6 minutes ago, PrestersKtid said:

20 team league isn't ridiculous imo.

Add St Mirren, Dunfermline, Dundee United, Inverness, Falkirk, Livingston, Qos, Morton and the level isn't reduced greatly.

Most are reasonably well supported aswell. 

Then have 2 leagues of 12 and 10 OR 1 league of 22 made up of Brechin, Dumbarton and leagues 1 and 2. Realistically 4/5 teams in that league that can get promotion. Ayr, raith and Airdrie.

 

But it all boils down to the media want more than 2 old firm games 

20 is too big.

Basically any team getting relegated would be going part time.

Don't think many teams could sustain full time football against the likes of Clyde, Elgin and Berwick.

Edited April 12, 2018 by Squirrelhumper

[KFC_Macca]

8 minutes ago, PrestersKtid said:

20 team league isn't ridiculous imo.

Add St Mirren, Dunfermline, Dundee United, Inverness, Falkirk, Livingston, Qos, Morton and the level isn't reduced greatly.

Most are reasonably well supported aswell. 

Then have 2 leagues of 12 and 10 OR 1 league of 22 made up of Brechin, Dumbarton and leagues 1 and 2. Realistically 4/5 teams in that league that can get promotion. Ayr, raith and Airdrie.

 

But it all boils down to the media want more than 2 old firm games 

I’d agree with that. 

Would reluctantly concede that tv money for a league with 4 old firm games would be greater. If we could then arrange such a league with a more equitable split of the  money then we’re moving in the right direction. A better spread of higher quality players across more teams would create a virtuous (?!) cycle whereby the standard of the competition slowly improved,

Edited April 12, 2018 by KFC_Macca

[KFC_Macca]

3 minutes ago, Squirrelhumper said:

20 is too big.

Basically any team getting relegated would be going part time.

Don't think many teams could sustain full time football against the likes of Clyde, Elgin and Berwick.

Good point, SH. What would be your preference?

[PuttersBar]

Don't disagree with the principle, however, any increase in the number of teams will dilute prize money and there are  two Glasgow teams with possible others who would , I suspect, be reluctant to allow it to happen!

[KFC_Macca]

2 minutes ago, PuttersBar said:

Don't disagree with the principle, however, any increase in the number of teams will dilute prize money and there are  two Glasgow teams with possible others who would , I suspect, be reluctant to allow it to happen!

True, but you can work round that. Some of the money already cascades down the leagues. Some would simply be reapportioned back to the new top flight.

 

[Bigdodge]

1 hour ago, Prahakillie said:

so your solution is to play 44 games?

Why 44 games? 18 teams playing each other twice = 34 games. With the league cup sections done a bit better, there is room to make up the shortfall in games/revenue.

[Squirrelhumper]

18 minutes ago, KFC_Macca said:

Good point, SH. What would be your preference?

I like the 14 or 16 team league and split after 2 rounds of games.

14 team probably my preference.

[Bigdodge]

I am sure in years gone by that one of the governing reasons that you got more teams into Europe from league and from the cup was dependent on the size of your league. A minimum of 18 teams meant more teams qualifying from the league positions and from League cup???? can someone confirm if this is/was the case? When we had a 10 team premier league, how many teams qualified through the league?

[CB]

9 minutes ago, Bigdodge said:

I am sure in years gone by that one of the governing reasons that you got more teams into Europe from league and from the cup was dependent on the size of your league. A minimum of 18 teams meant more teams qualifying from the league positions and from League cup???? can someone confirm if this is/was the case? When we had a 10 team premier league, how many teams qualified through the league?

European co-efficient. The better you do in europe, the more places you get. If size mattered the likes of san marino would play a 40 team league, surely.

In the 10 team league, we got extras, because england were banned mind you.

[Stuart]

My preference is that Rangers and Celtic break away to play in a league of 2 and we then form a league of 16. Simple! 

[Candygram for mongo]

6 hours ago, azertyuiop said:

Powder puff statement that doesn't actually state anything other than we wanted some hun money.

 

Disagree. I think it hit the right notes and set the correct tone. What it really says is:

We're not happy...we know where we stand in the eyes of the governing body...we know you're ripping the pish from us...we know you'd prefer Hibs, Rangers and Aberdeen representing Scotland in Europe and have effectively ended the small chance we had...we know you've taken the easy option as there was always going to be far less of an outcry if it's us that get the s**tty end of the stick.

And then the rallying cry for the supporters to be as one and continue with their backing. Like it!

The SPFL will know exactly what it says but it's done with a bit of dignity.

[S SMITH]

I would rather eat my nuts than pay to go to Ibrox and give them my money

[killie1961]

1 hour ago, Candygram for mongo said:

Disagree. I think it hit the right notes and set the correct tone. What it really says is:

We're not happy...we know where we stand in the eyes of the governing body...we know you're ripping the pish from us...we know you'd prefer Hibs, Rangers and Aberdeen representing Scotland in Europe and have effectively ended the small chance we had...we know you've taken the easy option as there was always going to be far less of an outcry if it's us that get the s**tty end of the stick.

And then the rallying cry for the supporters to be as one and continue with their backing. Like it!

The SPFL will know exactly what it says but it's done with a bit of dignity.

THE 3 above teams who get knocked out in the 1st round of europe or even the preminarys