League Reconstruction

[Sudds_1]

I'm picking up that despite what we are hearing in the press, the vote on 10 team set up will be going ahead. Nothing too dramatic there since I'm also told the proposal will fail to achieve the required 11-1.

What I did find interesting was the (apparent) claim that under the proposal (supported by Rod Petrie) the ugly sisters share of TV revenue would increase from 32.5% to 35% each, with the remander shared by the other 18 clubs in the 2 tier set up.

Apart from the nonsense of the proposal itself, why would our man be supporting any kind of proposal that increased their revenue, and presumably diminished ours? :confused: As a non footballing person I can see why he'd be oblivious to the damage the new set up would do to Scottish Football.....

...but as a business man???? :confused:

[down the slope]

Rod must have a "cunning plan" , remember what happened to Baldricks ?,

[thebakerboy]

Think that last nights crowd of 13000 at Ibrox (their lowest for 25 years) may be proof that more games between premier league clubs not at 3pm on a Saturday is not what the fans want even the bigot bros. If Rangers cannot get a bigger crowd than that against Kilmarnock currently on a good run of form what chance is there for more games at odd times and I do understand cup matches are generally not being attended in great numbers but I do think fans are fed up of this.

[Ritchie]

I'm picking up that despite what we are hearing in the press, the vote on 10 team set up will be going ahead. Nothing too dramatic there since I'm also told the proposal will fail to achieve the required 11-1.

What I did find interesting was the (apparent) claim that under the proposal (supported by Rod Petrie) the ugly sisters share of TV revenue would increase from 32.5% to 35% each, with the remander shared by the other 18 clubs in the 2 tier set up.

Apart from the nonsense of the proposal itself, why would our man be supporting any kind of proposal that increased their revenue, and presumably diminished ours? :confused: As a non footballing person I can see why he'd be oblivious to the damage the new set up would do to Scottish Football.....

...but as a business man???? :confused:

seriously, i cant believe this is still allowed to happen!

its daylight robbery!

how can anybody expect to compete??

R.I.P Scottish Football

[Sudds_1]

seriously, i cant believe this is still allowed to happen!

its daylight robbery!

how can anybody expect to compete??

R.I.P Scottish Football


Very much my view also... the belief that Scottish Football delivers equitable treatment to all it's member clubs seems hollow when you find that 18 clubs have to share 65% revenue whilst the other two, who are already able to generate cash via their fanbase , marketing, brand etc continue to get the lions share.


Maybe we're not expected to compete. How could I have been so blind :wink:

[blackpoolhibs]

Very much my view also... the belief that Scottish Football delivers equitable treatment to all it's member clubs seems hollow when you find that 18 clubs have to share 65% revenue whilst the other two, who are already able to generate cash via their fanbase , marketing, brand etc continue to get the lions share.


Maybe we're not expected to compete. How could I have been so blind :wink:

And remember the other clubs actually voted in favour of this. :grr:

[paxtonhibby]

I assume the reason RP is backing the 10 team proposal is to get the bigots as much as possible at ER.Worringly if it does go through it will backfire on him due to fed up fans sick of the monotony.

[sambajustice]

Very much my view also... the belief that Scottish Football delivers equitable treatment to all it's member clubs seems hollow when you find that 18 clubs have to share 65% revenue whilst the other two, who are already able to generate cash via their fanbase , marketing, brand etc continue to get the lions share.


Maybe we're not expected to compete. How could I have been so blind :wink:

My reading of the OP was that "The 18" get 30% between them while Celtic and Rangers 35% get each...

[Beefster]

I'm picking up that despite what we are hearing in the press, the vote on 10 team set up will be going ahead. Nothing too dramatic there since I'm also told the proposal will fail to achieve the required 11-1.

What I did find interesting was the (apparent) claim that under the proposal (supported by Rod Petrie) the ugly sisters share of TV revenue would increase from 32.5% to 35% each, with the remander shared by the other 18 clubs in the 2 tier set up.

Apart from the nonsense of the proposal itself, why would our man be supporting any kind of proposal that increased their revenue, and presumably diminished ours? :confused: As a non footballing person I can see why he'd be oblivious to the damage the new set up would do to Scottish Football.....

...but as a business man???? :confused:

32.5% to each of Rangers and Celtic? So, at the moment, the other 10 SPL clubs share 35% of the TV revenue?

[WindyMiller]

32.5% to each of Rangers and Celtic? So, at the moment, the other 10 SPL clubs share 35% of the TV revenue?

ATM, the teams finishing in the top 2 places get around 33% of the pot, IIRC.

[Moulin Yarns]

Maybe RP should push for a system where the TV revenue is split as follows,

goals scored by a club divided by the total number of goals at the end of the league season times 100 = the percentage of the TV revenue each club gets.

Yes the bigots would still get most, but it would also encourage attacking football :thumbsup:

[WindyMiller]

From the SPL handbook


“The Basic Facility Fee Pool”, 48% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be shared equally amongst the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question; and “The Supplementary Facility Fee Pool”, 52% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be paid to the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question in accordance with their respective league positions at the end of that Season.

League Position Total % of Net Commercial Revenues

1 ...........................................17.0%
2 ...........................................15.0%
3 .............................................9.5%
4 .............................................8.5%
5 .............................................8.0%
6 .............................................7.5%
7..............................................7.0 %
8 .............................................6.5%
9 .............................................6.0%
10 ...........................................5.5%
11 ...........................................5.0%
12 ...........................................4.5%

I think the OP has her info mixed up.

[Disc O'Dave]

I see the Daily Record are championing 14 teams, splits into 2 x 7 half way, then top 7 play each other twice and bottom play each other twice....

My fear through all of this is, when the 14 teams and split half way (I think it was top 6, bottom 8) was first aired, and was rightly greeted with dismay, that the whole 10 team thing was going to be a bluff to make opting for the 14 suddenly seem like a better option....

[Sudds_1]

32.5% to each of Rangers and Celtic? So, at the moment, the other 10 SPL clubs share 35% of the TV revenue?


No...badly written by me.

As I understand it the proposal sees the uglies get 35% of tv revenue with the other 18 sharing the remaining 65%.

[down the slope]

Do you think our board had a meeting about voting for a new set up or is do you think Rod just tells the rest to tag along ?. However it was decided they never even have the sense to keep us informed of how and why they decided to go the way they have , the board/ Petrie must think that we are a bunch of mugs that will turn up to watch any old nonsense , they should never take us for granted.

[easty]

I see the Daily Record are championing 14 teams, splits into 2 x 7 half way, then top 7 play each other twice and bottom play each other twice....

My fear through all of this is, when the 14 teams and split half way (I think it was top 6, bottom 8) was first aired, and was rightly greeted with dismay, that the whole 10 team thing was going to be a bluff to make opting for the 14 suddenly seem like a better option....

I don't like that 14 team format at all, I'd prefer the 10 team league to that.

We're miserable enough without being stuck with the last 12 games of the season being home and away games with the rest of the dregs of the league. Attendances would be shocking.

[jgl07]

As things stand there will be no change. The SPL leadership have tried to 'bounce' this one through despite the fact that only six or seven of the 12 are prepared to vote for it.

I would support the move to 14 teams to pave the way for a transition to 16 or 18 teams in the future. It is far from perfect but a move in the right direction.

The naive faith that extra matches against the OF will bail out the SPL is not bourne out by reality. 13,000 at Ibrox for an all-SPL cup tie (2nd v 4th) last night says it all.

The OF fans are not travelling to away matches in the same numbers as in years gone past. The silly kick off times for such matches does not help. Take away the visiting support and the attendance at ER for OF matches is probably no more than average. I can't even raise the enthusiasm to go to the Celtic match on Saturday even though I have a season ticket.

A move to 10 team SPL (or even a retention of 12 teams) would probably finish things off for me. Starting the season in June and shutting down in January will not help either.

[down-the-slope]

i'm assuming that the idea with 10 / 10 set up is to increase the total pot of cash by having 20 teams featured as being 'SPL' on a sliding scale of position....

People should realise that quoting what the OF get is spurious as it based on then finishing 1/2...if Hearts were to finish 2nd one of them would only get 3rd place cash

[Beefster]

ATM, the teams finishing in the top 2 places get around 33% of the pot, IIRC.


From the SPL handbook


“The Basic Facility Fee Pool”, 48% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be shared equally amongst the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question; and “The Supplementary Facility Fee Pool”, 52% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be paid to the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question in accordance with their respective league positions at the end of that Season.

League Position Total % of Net Commercial Revenues

1 ...........................................17.0%
2 ...........................................15.0%
3 .............................................9.5%
4 .............................................8.5%
5 .............................................8.0%
6 .............................................7.5%
7..............................................7.0 %
8 .............................................6.5%
9 .............................................6.0%
10 ...........................................5.5%
11 ...........................................5.0%
12 ...........................................4.5%

I think the OP has her info mixed up.




No...badly written by me.

As I understand it the proposal sees the uglies get 35% of tv revenue with the other 18 sharing the remaining 65%.

Cheers guys. 30 odd percent is bad enough!

[jdships]

As things stand there will be no change. The SPL leadership have tried to 'bounce' this one through despite the fact that only six or seven of the 12 are prepared to vote for it.o

I would support the move to 14 teams to pave the way for a transition to 16 or 18 teams in the future. It is far from perfect but a move in the right direction.

The naive faith that extra matches against the OF will bail out the SPL is not bourne out by reality. 13,000 at Ibrox for an all-SPL cup tie (2nd v 4th) last night says it all.

The OF fans are not travelling to away matches in the same numbers as in years gone past. The silly kick off times for such matches does not help. Take away the visiting support and the attendance at ER for OF matches is probably no more than average. I can't even raise the enthusiasm to go to the Celtic match on Saturday even though I have a season ticket.

A move to 10 team SPL (or even a retention of 12 teams) would probably finish things off for me. Starting the season in June and shutting down in January will not help either.


Agree with what you write.
Have had enough of this playing each other four times a season lark :bye:
Re the attendance last night : to be fair it was an atrocious night , game was on telly and nearly 40% of Rankers ST holders live outwith Scotland and wouldn't travel for a Monday game .
Once again " TV money rules " :rolleyes:

[greenginger]

I don't like that 14 team format at all, I'd prefer the 10 team league to that.

We're miserable enough without being stuck with the last 12 games of the season being home and away games with the rest of the dregs of the league. Attendances would be shocking.


A " Best of the rest " shield with some decent money as a prize for the top of the bottom tier might just make it a little bit interesting.

[ancient hibee]

The 10 team league will definitely go ahead-this is all about hammering out a deal.

[ancient hibee]

Agree with what you write.
Have had enough of this playing each other four times a season lark :bye:
Re the attendance last night : to be fair it was an atrocious night , game was on telly and nearly 40% of Rankers ST holders live outwith Scotland and wouldn't travel for a Monday game .
Once again " TV money rules " :rolleyes:
For some clubs the prize pool money makes up half the total revenue so it's not surprising they want to keep TVon side.

[greenlex]

The 10 team league will definitely go ahead-this is all about hammering out a deal.
Disagree. The 14 team compromise will win the day. TV Old Firm games remain and there is breathing space in the relegation stakes to blood youngsters.
Also fans looking to reduce gate income by an even larger league and not playing a possible times are not really thinking this through and not living in the real harsh economic world IMO.

[ancient hibee]

Disagree. The 14 team compromise will win the day. TV Old Firm games remain and there is breathing space in the relegation stakes to blood youngsters.
Also fans looking to reduce gate income by an even larger league and not playing a possible times are not really thinking this through and not living in the real harsh economic world IMO.
A 14 team league with some sort of split will lead to -either 1 team missing a game each week-or a bottom 8 with plenty of meaningless games I'm afraid.Get back to 10 and have someone else winning the league for a change-like last time.

[PolmontHibby]

From the SPL handbook


“The Basic Facility Fee Pool”, 48% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be shared equally amongst the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question; and “The Supplementary Facility Fee Pool”, 52% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be paid to the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question in accordance with their respective league positions at the end of that Season.

League Position Total % of Net Commercial Revenues

1 ...........................................17.0%
2 ...........................................15.0%
3 .............................................9.5%
4 .............................................8.5%
5 .............................................8.0%
6 .............................................7.5%
7..............................................7.0 %
8 .............................................6.5%
9 .............................................6.0%
10 ...........................................5.5%
11 ...........................................5.0%
12 ...........................................4.5%

I think the OP has her info mixed up.



Having trouble finding the SPL Handbook online - can anyone point me in the right direction.
I would be interested to know how "net commercial revenues" are calculated. If payments for number of TV appearances are deducted to arrive at the "net", then the Old Firm will get a far bigger overall % than the 32% above because they are on TV all the time. The same applies if TV companies pay money direct to clubs appearing on TV that doesnt go into the SPL pot.

Non OF club strategy seems to be to pick up what cash dregs they can from TV deals that include the OF.......knowing the OF will of course leave the SPL first chance they get. Doesnt seem like a good plan to me.

[greenlex]

A 14 team league with some sort of split will lead to -either 1 team missing a game each week-or a bottom 8 with plenty of meaningless games I'm afraid.Get back to 10 and have someone else winning the league for a change-like last time.
There are Clubs who are in the SPL who are regularly in the bottom six fihting relegation and Clubs who have been down the 1st division. They won't vote for a ten team set up as it would be financial suicide for them as we would lose two places in the SPL. Some have already said they wont vote for it. It wont happen there needs to be an 11-1 vote. The bigger 14 team set up ticks the boxes and allows two clubs from the 1st division to make the step up.

[ancient hibee]

Having trouble finding the SPL Handbook online - can anyone point me in the right direction.
I would be interested to know how "net commercial revenues" are calculated. If payments for number of TV appearances are deducted to arrive at the "net", then the Old Firm will get a far bigger overall % than the 32% above because they are on TV all the time. The same applies if TV companies pay money direct to clubs appearing on TV that doesnt go into the SPL pot.

Non OF club strategy seems to be to pick up what cash dregs they can from TV deals that include the OF.......knowing the OF will of course leave the SPL first chance they get. Doesnt seem like a good plan to me.
The number of times teams are on the box in an SPL game has nothing to do with the amount of a payment.There are payments for cup games to individual teams.

[sunshine1875]

From the SPL handbook


“The Basic Facility Fee Pool”, 48% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be shared equally amongst the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question; and “The Supplementary Facility Fee Pool”, 52% of the Net Commercial Revenues, which shall be paid to the Clubs participating in the League during the Season in question in accordance with their respective league positions at the end of that Season.

League Position Total % of Net Commercial Revenues

1 ...........................................17.0%
2 ...........................................15.0%
3 .............................................9.5%
4 .............................................8.5%
5 .............................................8.0%
6 .............................................7.5%
7..............................................7.0 %
8 .............................................6.5%
9 .............................................6.0%
10 ...........................................5.5%
11 ...........................................5.0%
12 ...........................................4.5%

I think the OP has her info mixed up.



Anyone know what the % split in the English Premier League is? Or the Championship?

[PolmontHibby]

Having trouble finding the SPL Handbook online - can anyone point me in the right direction.
I would be interested to know how "net commercial revenues" are calculated. If payments for number of TV appearances are deducted to arrive at the "net", then the Old Firm will get a far bigger overall % than the 32% above because they are on TV all the time. The same applies if TV companies pay money direct to clubs appearing on TV that doesnt go into the SPL pot.

Non OF club strategy seems to be to pick up what cash dregs they can from TV deals that include the OF.......knowing the OF will of course leave the SPL first chance they get. Doesnt seem like a good plan to me.

Found it - was getting blocked by work filter.

[ancient hibee]

Found it - was getting blocked by work filter.
Net Commercial Revenues is after deduction of costs such as salaries of SPL staff dealing with sponsorship and prize money.

[ronaldo7]

There are Clubs who are in the SPL who are regularly in the bottom six fihting relegation and Clubs who have been down the 1st division. They won't vote for a ten team set up as it would be financial suicide for them as we would lose two places in the SPL. Some have already said they wont vote for it. It wont happen there needs to be an 11-1 vote. The bigger 14 team set up ticks the boxes and allows two clubs from the 1st division to make the step up.

I thought I read Doncaster saying it only takes a 10-2 vote for League reconstruction. However the full package of changes requires the 11-1 vote.

[greenlex]

I thought I read Doncaster saying it only takes a 10-2 vote for League reconstruction. However the full package of changes requires the 11-1 vote.
Possibly Ronnie but I still dont think it will happen.

[ronaldo7]

Possibly Ronnie but I still dont think it will happen.

14 team League seems to be garnering support. Anything but the 10

[Sioux]

If the SPL handbook quote is right;

Say the net commercial revenues are £1,000,000. Each club gets a share of 48% of £1m = £480k.

The league winner gets 17% of £520k = £88,400, so a total of £128,400.
The bottom club gets 4.5% of £520k = £23,400, so a total of £63,400

Not got a clue what the annual income from Sky. But the commecial revenues will also incluse Clydesdale bank and other sponsors.

[WindyMiller]

Having trouble finding the SPL Handbook online - can anyone point me in the right direction.
I would be interested to know how "net commercial revenues" are calculated. If payments for number of TV appearances are deducted to arrive at the "net", then the Old Firm will get a far bigger overall % than the 32% above because they are on TV all the time. The same applies if TV companies pay money direct to clubs appearing on TV that doesnt go into the SPL pot.

Non OF club strategy seems to be to pick up what cash dregs they can from TV deals that include the OF.......knowing the OF will of course leave the SPL first chance they get. Doesnt seem like a good plan to me.

I believe all TV money is pooled.

[Gatecrasher]

i posted this on the PM board but i have some concerns about a 14 team league

"The thing i dont like about the 14 team league is that come end of the season the team in 7th place could end up with enough points to finish 3rd and miss out on europe, also if you get off to a slow start your season is done before its begun.

imagine hibs in 7th place at the split coming into form (far fetched i know ) but we cant progress any further because the league splits half way in. That for me would be a total waste of time and the season imo"

we cant progress above 7th after half way through sounds daft

[jgl07]

i posted this on the PM board but i have some concerns about a 14 team league

"The thing i dont like about the 14 team league is that come end of the season the team in 7th place could end up with enough points to finish 3rd and miss out on europe, also if you get off to a slow start your season is done before its begun.

imagine hibs in 7th place at the split coming into form (far fetched i know ) but we cant progress any further because the league splits half way in. That for me would be a total waste of time and the season imo"

we cant progress above 7th after half way through sounds daft
That can happen with the current setup.

In 2002-3, Hibs finished 7th on 51 points. That was 7 more than Dundee in 6th and 5 more than Dunfermline in 5th.

[Diclonius]

I'd take a 14 team league.

Play each other twice, league splits into 8 team top and 6 team bottom or 7/7. Sorted. :agree:

[tony]

i posted this on the PM board but i have some concerns about a 14 team league

"The thing i dont like about the 14 team league is that come end of the season the team in 7th place could end up with enough points to finish 3rd and miss out on europe, also if you get off to a slow start your season is done before its begun.

imagine hibs in 7th place at the split coming into form (far fetched i know ) but we cant progress any further because the league splits half way in. That for me would be a total waste of time and the season imo"

we cant progress above 7th after half way through sounds daft

The reality is that the 14 team, like the 10 team solution, is all about the OF playing each other four times a season, and the carrot for the 'bigger' of the other clubs is that they get the 'pleasure' of playing them 4 times as well. The split and the sheer nonsense you point out above is of no concern whatsover to the powers that be.

Deep down every supporter knows that playing teams four times a season is wrong. All the best leagues play each other twice, and each game has a sense of occasion. It allows for player and football development. Its that simple and its what we need to be fighting for. Talk of economic sense is meaningless as the economics are going down the tube as the game gets worse. And the OF couldn't care less. Why not let us destroy our own league, have crowds dwindle to nothing as the pointlessness of it kills us, and they get into the English league by default.

My question is, what do we do? I think this is more serious than the Yams trying to take us over, as the 'powers that be' are killing our game. Anything that continues the 4 game a year cycle should be resisted as to let it happen will be the end.

A national campaign? Boycott?

I remember how much fun the campaign against Mercer was. God knows anything would be better than watching what passes for football these days.

[Gatecrasher]

That can happen with the current setup.

In 2002-3, Hibs finished 7th on 51 points. That was 7 more than Dundee in 6th and 5 more than Dunfermline in 5th.
i dont like the current set up, never have never will :agree:

The reality is that the 14 team, like the 10 team solution, is all about the OF playing each other four times a season, and the carrot for the 'bigger' of the other clubs is that they get the 'pleasure' of playing them 4 times as well. The split and the sheer nonsense you point out above is of no concern whatsover to the powers that be.

Deep down every supporter knows that playing teams four times a season is wrong. All the best leagues play each other twice, and each game has a sense of occasion. It allows for player and football development. Its that simple and its what we need to be fighting for. Talk of economic sense is meaningless as the economics are going down the tube as the game gets worse. And the OF couldn't care less. Why not let us destroy our own league, have crowds dwindle to nothing as the pointlessness of it kills us, and they get into the English league by default.

My question is, what do we do? I think this is more serious than the Yams trying to take us over, as the 'powers that be' are killing our game. Anything that continues the 4 game a year cycle should be resisted as to let it happen will be the end.

A national campaign? Boycott?

I remember how much fun the campaign against Mercer was. God knows anything would be better than watching what passes for football these days.

i dont know what we do, but i dont want a 10 team league and a 14 team league could/will be a farce. 16/18 wont work as the clubs cant live within thir means. I might just give up and spend my money on something else

[hibeedonald]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-ABfw7Pmi4

[greenlex]

The reality is that the 14 team, like the 10 team solution, is all about the OF playing each other four times a season, and the carrot for the 'bigger' of the other clubs is that they get the 'pleasure' of playing them 4 times as well. The split and the sheer nonsense you point out above is of no concern whatsover to the powers that be.

Deep down every supporter knows that playing teams four times a season is wrong. All the best leagues play each other twice, and each game has a sense of occasion. It allows for player and football development. Its that simple and its what we need to be fighting for. Talk of economic sense is meaningless as the economics are going down the tube as the game gets worse. And the OF couldn't care less. Why not let us destroy our own league, have crowds dwindle to nothing as the pointlessness of it kills us, and they get into the English league by default.

My question is, what do we do? I think this is more serious than the Yams trying to take us over, as the 'powers that be' are killing our game. Anything that continues the 4 game a year cycle should be resisted as to let it happen will be the end.

A national campaign? Boycott?

I remember how much fun the campaign against Mercer was. God knows anything would be better than watching what passes for football these days.
Do you think that this is the real driver? Its a driver for sure but the other clubs having the old firm visiting a possible four times is probably a bigger driver than them playing each other four times. Hibs Hearts Aberdeen DundeeUtd Motherwell etc all need that income at the moment probably as much if not more than the old firm need each other IMO.
I have said it before and will say it again any club being relatively successful in this league will not care how many times you play an opposition. If you are winning thats all that matters. 10 teams 14 team 12 teams it makes no difference. Boredom is an excuse. If we were winning we wouldnt be bored.

[sunshine1875]

14 team League seems to be garnering support. Anything but the 10

Looks like it!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9359765.stm

[down the slope]

The 10 team league will definitely go ahead-this is all about hammering out a deal.

I doubt it, Doncaster said that more meaning full games would bring back the crowds , like the recent cup games for instance, What could be more meaning full than a Scottish cup tie with all it's history ?, The recent crowds at these games have been a disgrace and fans having to cough up money to see teams they saw a week or two ago completely blows the argument away for teams playing each other four times a season.
Just give the customers what they want instead of telling us that a system that failed ten years ago will work now.

[BEEJ]

i posted this on the PM board but i have some concerns about a 14 team league

"The thing i dont like about the 14 team league is that come end of the season the team in 7th place could end up with enough points to finish 3rd and miss out on europe, also if you get off to a slow start your season is done before its begun.

imagine hibs in 7th place at the split coming into form (far fetched i know ) but we cant progress any further because the league splits half way in. That for me would be a total waste of time and the season imo"

we cant progress above 7th after half way through sounds daft
I read this so often and count to ten each time ....... :rolleyes:

By definition the league campaign after the split is a different one from the competition pre-split. One section of the split league CANNOT be compared to the other as the opposing teams are entirely different.

So although you start the post-split set of matches with the points amassed up to that stage in the season, that is only to maintain the relative positions of the teams in each of the post-split sections. It is not to enable you to compare between the two sections.

You cannot cross from one section to the other. The split effectively marks the start of a new competition. Comparisons post-split between top half and bottom half are therefore utterly irrelevant..............

(breathe deeply) :greengrin

I agree that the split isn't ideal. But the finances of the game in Scotland, skewed as they are by the OF, dictate that we'll probably always have one. In that respect the 14 team version is superior to the one we have just now for the reasons stated.

[Gatecrasher]

I read this so often and count to ten each time ....... :rolleyes:

By definition the league campaign after the split is a different one from the competition pre-split. One section of the split league CANNOT be compared to the other as the opposing teams are entirely different.

So although you start the post-split set of matches with the points amassed up to that stage in the season, that is only to maintain the relative positions of the teams in each of the post-split sections. It is not to enable you to compare between the two sections.

You cannot cross from one section to the other. The split effectively marks the start of a new competition. Comparisons post-split between top half and bottom half are therefore utterly irrelevant..............

(breathe deeply) :greengrin

I agree that the split isn't ideal. But the finances of the game in Scotland, skewed as they are by the OF, dictate that we'll probably always have one. In that respect the 14 team version is superior to the one we have just now for the reasons stated.


ok fair point comparing points from 2 divisions within the division may not be the best point however the very thought of splitting the league half way through worries me. your season could be over by Christmas whether you like it or not, whether your 3 points off third or 15 you dont really get a decent shot at it before the split. at least as things stand the league only splits 5 games from the end.

[BEEJ]

ok fair point comparing points from 2 divisions within the division may not be the best point however the very thought of splitting the league half way through worries me. your season could be over by Christmas whether you like it or not, whether your 3 points off third or 15 you dont really get a decent shot at it before the split. at least as things stand the league only splits 5 games from the end.
I see your point.

But at least that means the 14 team format plays to Hibs early season strengths (present season being an obvious exception). :wink:

[jgl07]

Anyone know what the % split in the English Premier League is? Or the Championship?
The EPL split TV revenues equally between all clubs.

[Gatecrasher]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9359765.stm

[PaulSmith]

Can we start a 14 team league from next season, please.

[down the slope]

Desperate times if this is true ,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/jan/12/scottish-premier-league-10-teams?cat=football&type=article

[Diclonius]

We have three options. A 10 team league, 14 team league, or keep the original setup.

I'd go for the 14 team league, with either an 8-6 or 7-7 split.

[Heckys Wheel]

I don't know all the ins and outs of the options but as far a can see, the complaint for a 10 team league is that it would be boring to visit the same teams 4 times a season.

The money men complaining about bigger leagues are saying we'll lose the income from 2 games against Rangers Celtic, Hearts, Aberdeen etc a season.

Looks to me, we'll be swapping games against Rangers, Celtic and Hearts, to watch Hibs play Morton, Dundee, Falkirk etc. All the while, decreasing our gate income from 2-4 thousand OF fans to 30 Morton fans.

And as a bonus, we won't have this split nonsense any more.

I think I must be missing something because I seem to be going against the grain on this one.

[Moulin Yarns]

The thought that only 30 fans would turn up from some of the 'smaller' clubs is disproved in some measure by the attendance of Ayr United fans last Saturday. The chance of an away day to some of us 'so called bigger clubs' would have the opposite affect IMHO. Maybe not to the same extent as the OF following, but some home fans don't go to OF games anyway.

[greenlex]

The thought that only 30 fans would turn up from some of the 'smaller' clubs is disproved in some measure by the attendance of Ayr United fans last Saturday. The chance of an away day to some of us 'so called bigger clubs' would have the opposite affect IMHO. Maybe not to the same extent as the OF following, but some home fans don't go to OF games anyway.
Scottish cup tie will always bring a bigger support from a smaller club. Dunfermline Dundee etc might bring the sane as Ayr but Motherwell Hamilton and St Johnstome numbers would become the norm.

[Hermit Crab]

The SFA will find a way of influencing the vote results so that the vote magically goes through for the 10 team lge to please themselves.