Post-split fixtures - No second visit to Pittodrie

**marinello59** · 19-03-2019 06:53 PM

Originally Posted by greenpaper55

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Garbage, give us a sixteen team league and be done with this madness.

Which would leave us with a load of totally meaningless games. It ain’t perfect but the split actually works when it comes to keeping things interesting. It’s grown on me.

**HibeeHibernian4** · 19-03-2019 07:03 PM

Originally Posted by greenpaper55

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Garbage, give us a sixteen team league and be done with this madness.

Originally Posted by marinello59

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Which would leave us with a load of totally meaningless games. It ain’t perfect but the split actually works when it comes to keeping things interesting. It’s grown on me.

And this is why I think I have the perfect answer (not to toot my own horn or anything).

A 16 team league, everybody plays each other home and away, so we get to 30 games.

Then, the league splits into a top 8 and a bottom 8. Seven more games takes us to 37, which is one game fewer than we currently have now.

Each season, 4 teams in each half will miss out on the extra home game, but hopefully when a pattern develops the fixture boffins would be able to work out who's due the extra home game every season.

I think that would answer everybody's problems. We'd stop having to play sides 4 times a season (which is dull). The most you could play a side in the league would be three times, and you'd only play the other half of the league twice. Throw in the Scottish and League Cups, and the most you could play a side in a season is 6 times, and that would only be if you finished in the same half, drew them in the League Cup and drew them in the Scottish and a replay was required. For context, Rangers and Aberdeen have already played each other 6 times season and will be ending up in the same half of the split come April.

This would make games, in my opinion, more exclusive and special. For example:

August - Hibs vs Hearts
January - Hearts vs Hibs
April/May - Hibs vs Hearts

The hope is that the first two derbies would generate hype purely by being derbies (and occurring less often than under the current system), then the final derby might well have European football or the like riding on it, so there'd be high stakes and it wouldn't be a meaningless end of season friendly as you would have more of under the 30 games a season model.

Also, I'd have 15th and 16th going automatically down, with 14th in a relegation play-off against the winners of 3rd vs 4th* in the Championship. This would hopefully keep things more exciting down the bottom, and you wouldn't just get one or two teams being cut adrift.

Feedback welcome on this, but I honestly think it's the best way forward in terms of a league structure.

**greenpaper55** · 19-03-2019 07:43 PM

Originally Posted by marinello59

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Which would leave us with a load of totally meaningless games. It ain’t perfect but the split actually works when it comes to keeping things interesting. It’s grown on me.

You could be seventh in the league and twenty points clear of relegation, plenty meaningless games there.

***Danderhall Hibs*** · 19-03-2019 07:57 PM

So if the top 6 is the same as last season how have they managed to get an uneven number of fixtures?

***Billy Whizz*** · 19-03-2019 08:01 PM

Originally Posted by Danderhall Hibs

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

So if the top 6 is the same as last season how have they managed to get an uneven number of fixtures?

All I can think is they work on an equation based on last few seasons placings,not season to season, which is understandable

***Danderhall Hibs*** · 19-03-2019 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by Billy Whizz

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

All I can think is they work on an equation based on last few seasons placings,not season to season, which is understandable

They’ve led us to believe over the years that the uneven fixtures are due to change in “prediction” though.

Maybe they’re just making it up?

**inglisavhibs** · 19-03-2019 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And this is why I think I have the perfect answer (not to toot my own horn or anything).

A 16 team league, everybody plays each other home and away, so we get to 30 games.

Then, the league splits into a top 8 and a bottom 8. Seven more games takes us to 37, which is one game fewer than we currently have now.

Each season, 4 teams in each half will miss out on the extra home game, but hopefully when a pattern develops the fixture boffins would be able to work out who's due the extra home game every season.

I think that would answer everybody's problems. We'd stop having to play sides 4 times a season (which is dull). The most you could play a side in the league would be three times, and you'd only play the other half of the league twice. Throw in the Scottish and League Cups, and the most you could play a side in a season is 6 times, and that would only be if you finished in the same half, drew them in the League Cup and drew them in the Scottish and a replay was required. For context, Rangers and Aberdeen have already played each other 6 times season and will be ending up in the same half of the split come April.

This would make games, in my opinion, more exclusive and special. For example:

August - Hibs vs Hearts
January - Hearts vs Hibs
April/May - Hibs vs Hearts

The hope is that the first two derbies would generate hype purely by being derbies (and occurring less often than under the current system), then the final derby might well have European football or the like riding on it, so there'd be high stakes and it wouldn't be a meaningless end of season friendly as you would have more of under the 30 games a season model.

Also, I'd have 15th and 16th going automatically down, with 14th in a relegation play-off against the winners of 2nd vs 3rd in the Championship. This would hopefully keep things more exciting down the bottom, and you wouldn't just get one or two teams being cut adrift.

Feedback welcome on this, but I honestly think it's the best way forward in terms of a league structure.

Would rather watch Hibs playing, Aberdeen, Hearts, Rangers, Celtic twice at Easter Road than having teams like Inverness, Ross County, Morton etc come and shut up shop. Proof is in the pudding and the bigger the game the more Hibs fans go. Not perfect but the best we can do in Scotland with our population distribution.

**HibeeHibernian4** · 19-03-2019 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by inglisavhibs

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would rather watch Hibs playing, Aberdeen, Hearts, Rangers, Celtic twice at Easter Road than having teams like Inverness, Ross County, Morton etc come and shut up shop. Proof is in the pudding and the bigger the game the more Hibs fans go. Not perfect but the best we can do in Scotland with our population distribution.

Each to their own, I think it's artificial and overkill. Get completely bored of playing everyone at Easter Road twice a season. Games would mean much more if you had them as one-offs a year.

***BoomtownHibees*** · 19-03-2019 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Each to their own, I think it's artificial and overkill. Get completely bored of playing everyone at Easter Road twice a season. Games would mean much more if you had them as one-offs a year.

It’s a decent idea in principle but would be worth looking at how much income would be lost with playing “smaller” teams instead of getting Cat A games

**inglisavhibs** · 19-03-2019 08:22 PM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Each to their own, I think it's artificial and overkill. Get completely bored of playing everyone at Easter Road twice a season. Games would mean much more if you had them as one-offs a year.

We have enough games in Scotland with circa 2000 crowds, your solution would mean far more of the same.

**HibeeHibernian4** · 19-03-2019 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by inglisavhibs

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have enough games in Scotland with circa 2000 crowds, your solution would mean far more of the same.

How is Scotland ever supposed to grow its game if we, the fans, just decide that only four or five games a season actually matter?

***WhileTheChief..*** · 19-03-2019 09:03 PM

Thought this thread was like, you know, a fact type one going by the title!

**marinello59** · 19-03-2019 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by greenpaper55

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You could be seventh in the league and twenty points clear of relegation, plenty meaningless games there.

You could be. A 16 team league could have more teams in that situation.
We weren’t in relegation danger prior to the split in the season we went down. Sadly every game mattered after it.

***Greenfly*** · 19-03-2019 09:54 PM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And this is why I think I have the perfect answer (not to toot my own horn or anything).

A 16 team league, everybody plays each other home and away, so we get to 30 games.

Then, the league splits into a top 8 and a bottom 8. Seven more games takes us to 37, which is one game fewer than we currently have now.

Each season, 4 teams in each half will miss out on the extra home game, but hopefully when a pattern develops the fixture boffins would be able to work out who's due the extra home game every season.

I think that would answer everybody's problems. We'd stop having to play sides 4 times a season (which is dull). The most you could play a side in the league would be three times, and you'd only play the other half of the league twice. Throw in the Scottish and League Cups, and the most you could play a side in a season is 6 times, and that would only be if you finished in the same half, drew them in the League Cup and drew them in the Scottish and a replay was required. For context, Rangers and Aberdeen have already played each other 6 times season and will be ending up in the same half of the split come April.

This would make games, in my opinion, more exclusive and special. For example:

August - Hibs vs Hearts
January - Hearts vs Hibs
April/May - Hibs vs Hearts

The hope is that the first two derbies would generate hype purely by being derbies (and occurring less often than under the current system), then the final derby might well have European football or the like riding on it, so there'd be high stakes and it wouldn't be a meaningless end of season friendly as you would have more of under the 30 games a season model.

Also, I'd have 15th and 16th going automatically down, with 14th in a relegation play-off against the winners of 2nd vs 3rd in the Championship. This would hopefully keep things more exciting down the bottom, and you wouldn't just get one or two teams being cut adrift.

Feedback welcome on this, but I honestly think it's the best way forward in terms of a league structure.

If 15th and 16th go down, who comes up to replace them? 1st obviously but who else if 2nd and 3rd from championship are already playing 14th from Premiership? Maybe I'm missing something obvious?

Apart from that bit of head-scratching I think you've got a really interesting idea with some attractions. The reality of course is that TV want the twisted twins playing each other as often as possible (at least 4 times a season) and we all bow down to the TV companies.

**HibeeHibernian4** · 19-03-2019 10:01 PM

Originally Posted by Greenfly

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If 15th and 16th go down, who comes up to replace them? 1st obviously but who else if 2nd and 3rd from championship are already playing 14th from Premiership? Maybe I'm missing something obvious?

Apart from that bit of head-scratching I think you've got a really interesting idea with some attractions. The reality of course is that TV want the twisted twins playing each other as often as possible (at least 4 times a season) and we all bow down to the TV companies.

My mistake, I meant 3rd and 4th in the Championship play each other and 2nd would come up automatically to replace 15th. Will fix it now, thanks for spotting it.

Re. your point about TV companies, you're absolutely correct. It would require Rangers and Celtic to grow a bit of awareness for what's best for the game rather than themselves for once. I won't be holding my breath on that one...

**hibbysam** · 20-03-2019 07:37 AM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

My mistake, I meant 3rd and 4th in the Championship play each other and 2nd would come up automatically to replace 15th. Will fix it now, thanks for spotting it.

Re. your point about TV companies, you're absolutely correct. It would require Rangers and Celtic to grow a bit of awareness for what's best for the game rather than themselves for once. I won't be holding my breath on that one...

You single out rangers and Celtic, surely that goes for nearly every other club who don’t want to lose an 2 old firm home games each season and the money that brings them.

I’m all for a bigger league purely due to the competitiveness that brings the top of the league but to blame only rangers and Celtic for it not happening is utter nonsense.

**Aim Here** · 20-03-2019 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by greenpaper55

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You could be seventh in the league and twenty points clear of relegation, plenty meaningless games there.

If you're seventh, then sure, you maybe have five meaningless games, but the pre-split games are likely not meaningless, in that you were fighting for that top 6 spot; in a larger league with no split, you'd likely have the last 10 or 15 games without much to play for.

**Steven79** · 20-03-2019 12:22 PM

Originally Posted by Aim Here

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

If you're seventh, then sure, you maybe have five meaningless games, but the pre-split games are likely not meaningless, in that you were fighting for that top 6 spot; in a larger league with no split, you'd likely have the last 10 or 15 games without much to play for.

Other leagues manage to get round this around the world why not in Scotland? It would hardly be the last 15-10 games either....

**JeMeSouviens** · 20-03-2019 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by HFCEighteen75

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

And this is why I think I have the perfect answer (not to toot my own horn or anything).

A 16 team league, everybody plays each other home and away, so we get to 30 games.

Then, the league splits into a top 8 and a bottom 8. Seven more games takes us to 37, which is one game fewer than we currently have now.

Each season, 4 teams in each half will miss out on the extra home game, but hopefully when a pattern develops the fixture boffins would be able to work out who's due the extra home game every season.

I think that would answer everybody's problems. We'd stop having to play sides 4 times a season (which is dull). The most you could play a side in the league would be three times, and you'd only play the other half of the league twice. Throw in the Scottish and League Cups, and the most you could play a side in a season is 6 times, and that would only be if you finished in the same half, drew them in the League Cup and drew them in the Scottish and a replay was required. For context, Rangers and Aberdeen have already played each other 6 times season and will be ending up in the same half of the split come April.

This would make games, in my opinion, more exclusive and special. For example:

August - Hibs vs Hearts
January - Hearts vs Hibs
April/May - Hibs vs Hearts

The hope is that the first two derbies would generate hype purely by being derbies (and occurring less often than under the current system), then the final derby might well have European football or the like riding on it, so there'd be high stakes and it wouldn't be a meaningless end of season friendly as you would have more of under the 30 games a season model.

Also, I'd have 15th and 16th going automatically down, with 14th in a relegation play-off against the winners of 3rd vs 4th* in the Championship. This would hopefully keep things more exciting down the bottom, and you wouldn't just get one or two teams being cut adrift.

Feedback welcome on this, but I honestly think it's the best way forward in terms of a league structure.

The problem with the split is that all teams don't have the same set of fixtures. Your proposal makes that much worse. 2 teams going for the league and one gets 2 games at home vs the other but only 1 away?

**Fuzzywuzzy** · 20-03-2019 12:48 PM

Always thought the 3 points for an away win, 2 for a home and 1 point for the draw would make things interesting.

***Keith_M*** · 20-03-2019 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Fuzzywuzzy

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Always thought the 3 points for an away win, 2 for a home and 1 point for the draw would make things interesting.

Current		Fuzzy's
Celtc	70	Celtc	56
T'Rangers	60	T'Rangers	50
Aberdeen	52	Aberdeen	45
Kilmarnock	51	Kilmarnock	43
Hearts	47	Hearts	40
Hibs	45	Hibs	39
Motherwell	40	Motherwell	34
Livingston	38	St Johnstone	34
St Johnstone	38	Livingston	29
Hamilton	24	Hamilton	20
Dundee	18	Dundee	17
St Mirren	17	St Mirren	14

**007** · 20-03-2019 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by grammyb111

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Despite the top six looking like it'll be the same this year as last, there will still end up being an imbalance of home/away games if we play the return games as scheduled. Aberdeen would end up with 20 home and 18 away and us the opposite. That'll mean we'll play them three times at home, shame given their home record and it being a good away day.

Assuming we make the top 6 then yes, us to play Aberdeen at home would the sensible way to do it, which is why the SPFL will probably decide to do something different.

***ian cruise*** · 20-03-2019 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by Keekaboo

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Current		Fuzzy's
Celtc	70	Celtc	56
T'Rangers	60	T'Rangers	50
Aberdeen	52	Aberdeen	45
Kilmarnock	51	Kilmarnock	43
Hearts	47	Hearts	40
Hibs	45	Hibs	39
Motherwell	40	Motherwell	34
Livingston	38	St Johnstone	34
St Johnstone	38	Livingston	29
Hamilton	24	Hamilton	20
Dundee	18	Dundee	17
St Mirren	17	St Mirren	14

Impossible to prove I know, but 8f the points were allocated as suggested by Fuzzy then you might find some teams pushing for an away win rather than settle for a point away from home?

**Fuzzywuzzy** · 20-03-2019 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Keekaboo

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Current		Fuzzy's
Celtc	70	Celtc	56
T'Rangers	60	T'Rangers	50
Aberdeen	52	Aberdeen	45
Kilmarnock	51	Kilmarnock	43
Hearts	47	Hearts	40
Hibs	45	Hibs	39
Motherwell	40	Motherwell	34
Livingston	38	St Johnstone	34
St Johnstone	38	Livingston	29
Hamilton	24	Hamilton	20
Dundee	18	Dundee	17
St Mirren	17	St Mirren	14

Cheers for that. Certainly makes things look tighter!

***Keith_M*** · 20-03-2019 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by ian cruise

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Impossible to prove I know, but 8f the points were allocated as suggested by Fuzzy then you might find some teams pushing for an away win rather than settle for a point away from home?

You could be right.

**Hibee Mac** · 20-03-2019 07:04 PM

Would be interesting to see where we would have ended up last season had the points been as fuzzy mentions earlier with more for away wins.

If I remember correctly our away form was great.

***Keith_M*** · 20-03-2019 07:13 PM

Originally Posted by Hibee Mac

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Would be interesting to see where we would have ended up last season had the points been as fuzzy mentions earlier with more for away wins.

If I remember correctly our away form was great.

In terms of points, it makes a big difference to Livingston. They've had nine home wins and only one away.

***McD*** · 20-03-2019 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by May2116

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You single out rangers and Celtic, surely that goes for nearly every other club who don’t want to lose an 2 old firm home games each season and the money that brings them.

I’m all for a bigger league purely due to the competitiveness that brings the top of the league but to blame only rangers and Celtic for it not happening is utter nonsense.

Theres too many clubs who bank on those games - don’t killie give the OF something like 2/3 - 3/4s of rugby park when they visit? It’s all about raking in the cash when rantic come to town.