Ten Team League NO THANKS!!!!

[HibbyDave]

Register your opposition here OR tell Rod how much you love him and will do whatever he says is good for football (even if you have been watchin football for a while and know better).

[Lofarl]

me

[NAE NOOKIE]

C,mon ....... More TV money, more games against the 'big' clubs, whats the problem?

Oh aye:

Watching the same teams at least 4 times a season.

An increased threat of relegation.

Less and less and less fans going to games ... coz whats the point when you have seen Hibs play Motherwell at Easter Road 3 or 4 times in a year.

And at the end of it your club still has about as much chance of winning the league as it ever did.

The Tache like a lot of the folk running our clubs knows a lot about money and still very little about what turns fans off from the game.

Top of that list is lack of variety.

Unfortunately they will only start paying attention about 4 years from now when the SPL average crowds have plummeted to Irish League levels and our game is damaged beyond repair.

[sleeping giant]

I love you Rod

[yekimevol]

the idea is a nightmare ! scrap spl 1 and 2 and make a 20 team league called the spl !!

[Ringothedog]

email to SPL on 20/12/10

I really cannot believe that you have fixtures in the week running up to Christmas. You are meant to be promoting football in Scotland not destroying it!! How many people do you seriously think will turn up for those rearranged games ? Clubs are toiling financially as it is and as for the fans they are struggling even more. My club Hibs have 5 games in 15 days, 3 of which are away from home. Seriously where do you think fans will be able to find the money ?

I am afraid in my opinion our game is run by incompetents and as for the "radical" proposals for a restucture.....does anybody actually listen to what the paying customer wants ? It would appear not!! Everybody can see we need a larger league noy a bloody smaller one. 16 teams playing each other twice is whats needed. If you are worried about fewer games then have a new competition like a SPL Cup with the reward for winning a place in europe. i sent to SPL:

AND THE REPLY RECEIVED 11/3/11:

Brian,

Thank you for your email. Broadly speaking, this is where we are at the moment...

Fans when asked have consistently favoured a 16-team format (once home, once away) over any other.

This is a format that a number of people within the SPL would also ideally favour. However, based on current finances within the game, going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game (based on gate revenue and TV income) – and is therefore not affordable at present.

The issues we have with the current format are:

- Uneven split (reversed fixtures and 18/20 home games)

- Only one team relegated each season

- Only one promotion place from SFL1

- The financial chasm that clubs relegated from the SPL fall into

A new format must address these concerns.

Supporters tell us that they favour play-offs - these are an obvious solution to the issue of only one team relegated / promoted.

But they do not address the financial chasm. This can only be addressed by pushing substantial funding down into the second tier. This funding is created by the distributions that would have gone to positions 11th and 12th, with the move to a 10-team format (the distributions amount to around £1.7m).

The 14-team solution advocated by some supporters is not favoured by the clubs because:

- A 7/7 split would result in ‘blank weekends’ for teams, which cannot be accommodated within the already full fixture list and would result in two teams sitting out the final weekend

- Either a 6/8 or 8/6 split would result in the top section playing a different number of games from the bottom section

- The split would occur much earlier than at present (after fixture 26, rather than fixture 33 currently) giving a number of clubs nothing to play for for substantial parts of their seasons

- It cannot address the financial difference between tiers one and two – indeed, with 14 mouths to feed, rather than 12, it would become even more difficult to push money down to the second tier

The 10-team format will allow the second tier of football to become a more financially robust and exciting environment for clubs to play in. It will ensure that we have 22 properly funded full-time professional clubs – which in turn should allow the creation of a 16-team or 18-team format when finances allow in the future.

Kind regards

David


David Ogilvie
Scottish Premier League
Hampden Park, Glasgow, G42 9DE
tel: 0141 620 4140 (switchboard)
tel: 0141 620 4156 (direct)
fax: 0141 620 4141
website www.scotprem.com
e-mail davidogilvie@scotprem.com

[Luna_Asylum]

"......going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game..." - OGILVIE

What a load of absolute bull

[Mikey]

"......going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game..." - OGILVIE

What a load of absolute bull

Prove it.

[Septimus]

Arguing about hypothetical points is an exercise in futility. The powers that be are determined to maximise financial income for a couple of clubs and are oblivious to the fact that the grass roots of the game are already destroyed.

The thought of creating an interesting format which spreads the funds available could not be further from the minds of the people who run the game.

[Luna_Asylum]

Prove it.

you kiss his ing ass if you want to

[BoltonHibee]

Stuff a 10 team league, not interested!

[Antifa Hibs]

Prove it.

It may well be a correct figure, however, how much of that £20m loss is a result of only 2 Old Firm games? I'd hazard a guess and say around two thirds or three quarters. Which can only be a good thing.


I've yet to meet anyone who is actually in favour of a ten team league.

[Shaggy]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?

[lucky]

I dont want a 10 team league but the argument that we play the same team 4 times a season is weak. We do it just now and we are hoping for a top 6 finish so we can play the big teams :greengrin 4 times this season. 10 team SPL is the only game in town which gives the clubs a decent amount of cash. I would prefer a British league but we would be lucky to get into League 1

[Removed]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?

Gets my vote :thumbsup:

[Moulin Yarns]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?


Same as I suggested back in December.

As to the reply from the SPL, he talks about redistributing a massive (sic) £1.7 million to the second tier of 10 or 12 teams. That's not exactly going to make much difference IMHO.

Let's remember that Neil Lennon even complaind about the number of games against Rangers as stifling.

If the SPL don't want 14, or 16, why did they not look at 18 or 20. Assume the same income, distributed to 18 or 20 clubs instead of oh the proposed 20 or 22. No brainer!!!

[GreenCastle]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?

:agree::thumbsup:

Old Firm - poison of Scottish Football :rolleyes:

[HibbyDave]

How about 16 teams....30 league matches with the league cup revised to "regional sections" which are set to guarantee a derby between hibs/hearts, dundee utd/aberdeen and the infirm. Everyone gets there share of derby fever, the league cup gets interesting V early and more chance of "smaller" teams winning the cup. Maybe even re-introduce european qualification?

Defo no loss of income as fans would attend the derby matches in the cup esp if it was based on a home and away format.

[down the slope]

Doncaster is just a spin doctor brought in by the SPL to force this issue home , the figure of £20 million is a new one which seems to increase the nearer the clubs get to voting. Before we had tv money the most the clubs got was a pat on the back and a flag to fly when you won the league so what is wrong with distributing the tv money equally between sixteen or eighteen teams instead of the OF getting the majority ?. Remember the OF are nothing without the other clubs like ourselves who provide them with a venue every other week to showcase themselves either on sky or espn. I would like to see a bigger league as i think it benefits Scottish football as a whole which is dying on it's feet and i fear the new set up could be the final nail in the coffin for some clubs , to this end i e-mailed our club here http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/page/Feedback/0,,10290,00.html
as to the way the directors/Rod will vote on this issue , i mentioned that i had the ST form recently delivered and that i would not renew if the club has decided to vote for these proposals and that if i never heard from them i would take it that they intended to vote for it, i have heard nothing from the club.

[Luna_Asylum]

Doncaster is just a spin doctor brought in by the SPL to force this issue home , the figure of £20 million is a new one which seems to increase the nearer the clubs get to voting. Before we had tv money the most the clubs got was a pat on the back and a flag to fly when you won the league so what is wrong with distributing the tv money equally between sixteen or eighteen teams instead of the OF getting the majority ?. Remember the OF are nothing without the other clubs like ourselves who provide them with a venue every other week to showcase themselves either on sky or espn. I would like to see a bigger league as i think it benefits Scottish football as a whole which is dying on it's feet and i fear the new set up could be the final nail in the coffin for some clubs , to this end i e-mailed our club here http://www.hibernianfc.co.uk/page/Feedback/0,,10290,00.html
as to the way the directors/Rod will vote on this issue , i mentioned that i had the ST form recently delivered and that i would not renew if the club has decided to vote for these proposals and that if i never heard from them i would take it that they intended to vote for it, i have heard nothing from the club.

Thanks for the link. I have sent an email to ask how the club intends to vote and explained that this may impact upon my decsion on whether to renew my ST or not.

[Saorsa]

But they do not address the financial chasm. This can only be addressed by pushing substantial funding down into the second tier. This funding is created by the distributions that would have gone to positions 11th and 12th, with the move to a 10-team format (the distributions amount to around £1.7m).
That'll do the relegated clubs a lot of good. I was speaking to a director of Inverness (one of the clubs against it) at the last home game. He told me that the last time they went down they lost close tae £2Million. He reckoned the relegated clubs would get about £300,000-£400,000.

That piddling amoun is naewhere near enough for a 2nd tier and it'll make little if any difference tae the relegated clubs so that argument is pish IMO.

substantial funding :hilarious spreading money around Scottish fitba :hilarious

http://cartywheel.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/redherring.png%3Fw%3D320%26h%3D227

[GreenPJ]

[QUOTE=hibbybri;2756777]email to SPL on 20/12/10


This is a format that a number of people within the SPL would also ideally favour. However, based on current finances within the game, going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game (based on gate revenue and TV income) – and is therefore not affordable at present.

The 10-team format will allow the second tier of football to become a more financially robust and exciting environment for clubs to play in. It will ensure that we have 22 properly funded full-time professional clubs – which in turn should allow the creation of a 16-team or 18-team format when finances allow in the future.
QUOTE]

His response whilst quite detailed highlights the problems these decision makers have.

It will remove £20M from the game - where is the info to support this number and secondly Scottish football is unsustainable as it is so the quicker they wake up and realise that at least in the short to medium term the money coming into the game is going to be down regardless. Every other part of society just now has to apply tough fiscal measures for me Scottish football needs to do the same. The clubs should be advised that cloth needs to be cut and cut now. It means a number of seasons of pain and clubs in serious debt are going to find it tough but if they survive they will have come out of it in a lot better position.

22 full-time clubs, can Scotland really support that number. I would suggest fan bases don't support that number without then reducing down the overall number of league clubs.

The business people of Scottish football are not willing to make the difficult decisions needed because clubs like Rangers, Hearts, Dundee Utd and Killie would take a pummelling and some may struggle to survive so the rest of Scottish football has to suffer.

[cabbageandribs1875]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?


not a bad idea :thumbsup:

[hibee92]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?

:top marks

[BroxburnHibee]

you kiss his ing ass if you want to

Don't know if that was intentional or not but that made me laugh out loud.

Cheers :aok:

[Malthibby]

10 team league suits the Bigot Brothers & will kill everyone else. Wish they would just bugger off.

[Luna_Asylum]

Don't know if that was intentional or not but that made me laugh out loud.

Cheers :aok:

I'm happy if it made you laugh. Otherwise if anyone who opposes an 10team SPL
does not make their voice heard it is what we will get. I am seriously disappointed if not depressed at the lack of opposition.

[BroxburnHibee]

I'm happy if it made you laugh. Otherwise if anyone who opposes an 10team SPL
does not make their voice heard it is what we will get. I am seriously disappointed if not depressed at the lack of opposition.

Only thing that will make them take notice is if the fans don't go - personally I don't think that will happen.

We are all creatures of habit, however I think a few years down the line once they realise we're bored of the same setup then bigger leagues might eventually happen.

I've seen the plans and whilst I'm not sure whether 10 teams will work I'll be giving it a chance. (remember it was originally brought in as the league at the time was considered boring)

Thing is as well its not just about the SPL - the whole league structure is being discussed including 'B' teams for whoever wants to have one, further down the leagues. I think that is a great idea and one I'm sure Hibs will be doing.

[Luna_Asylum]

Only thing that will make them take notice is if the fans don't go - personally I don't think that will happen.

We are all creatures of habit, however I think a few years down the line once they realise we're bored of the same setup then bigger leagues might eventually happen.

I've seen the plans and whilst I'm not sure whether 10 teams will work I'll be giving it a chance. (remember it was originally brought in as the league at the time was considered boring)

Thing is as well its not just about the SPL - the whole league structure is being discussed including 'B' teams for whoever wants to have one, further down the leagues. I think that is a great idea and one I'm sure Hibs will be doing.

I despair! Do we have no voice?

[BroxburnHibee]

I despair! Do we have no voice?

Of course you have a voice - how do you propose to make it heard.

I'll repeat - only thing that will make them sit up and notice is if we don't go.

ie. Stop giving them our money

[Removed]

I despair! Do we have no voice?

Everyone who opposes it should cancel their Sky and ESPN subscriptions

[Removed]

Of course you have a voice - how do you propose to make it heard.

I'll repeat - only thing that will make them sit up and notice is if we don't go.

ie. Stop giving them our money

That would just hurt Hibs. Boycott the satellite companies I say :agree:

[inglisavhibs]

Register your opposition here OR tell Rod how much you love him and will do whatever he says is good for football (even if you have been watchin football for a while and know better).

The old 18 club league nearly killed Scottish Football, a sixteen club league would be no different. Too many meaningless games which fans don't attend, too many small provincial clubs in the league dragging standards lower. Hibs for instance could have five home games on the trot against Airdrie, Hamilton, Raith, St Mirren, and Dunfermline. No disrespect to these clubs but their average attendances are no more than a couple of thousand and it hardly whets the appetite. Scotland does not have the poulation to support sixteen top flight clubs especially when more than half of them support two clubs. Ten clubs is not perfect but it's the only chance of a competitive set up and if truth be told we are lucky if we can support 10 clubs. As a Hibs supporter I would far rather see two home league fixtures against Hearts, Rangers, Aberdeen etc than watch a number of smaller provincial teams coming in their place.

[BroxburnHibee]

That would just hurt Hibs. Boycott the satellite companies I say :agree:

I'd agree with that Billy - my point was/is that money is the only driver and its the only way to hurt them.

They didn't get rid of Mixu till they saw the ST sales were non existent.

PS. I dont have Sky Sports/ESPN :greengrin

[Luna_Asylum]

Of course you have a voice - how do you propose to make it heard.

I'll repeat - only thing that will make them sit up and notice is if we don't go.

ie. Stop giving them our money

ok we are on some kind of different level

yesterday i emailed hibs and the sfa to say quite simply I do not want a 10 team SPL

you say they wont take notice - you may be right but IMHO it's a million times better to do something than ""^^ all

[down the slope]

The old 18 club league nearly killed Scottish Football, a sixteen club league would be no different. Too many meaningless games which fans don't attend, too many small provincial clubs in the league dragging standards lower. Hibs for instance could have five home games on the trot against Airdrie, Hamilton, Raith, St Mirren, and Dunfermline. No disrespect to these clubs but their average attendances are no more than a couple of thousand and it hardly whets the appetite. Scotland does not have the poulation to support sixteen top flight clubs especially when more than half of them support two clubs. Ten clubs is not perfect but it's the only chance of a competitive set up and if truth be told we are lucky if we can support 10 clubs. As a Hibs supporter I would far rather see two home league fixtures against Hearts, Rangers, Aberdeen etc than watch a number of smaller provincial teams coming in their place.

So how was that Celtic won the European Cup when we had an eighteen team league ?, the old league set up did not nearly kill Scottish football, as for meaningless games there are only meaningless games when our team is not in contention for anything, if we were chasing a place in Europe then then you would be glad to have a home run against the so called lesser teams. Football has moved on from when we had a larger league , the way teams are organised now means that there are no easy games and i do not have to remind you of what has happened to Hibs against the so called minnows recently . Ten teams means that two are in line for the drop every season ie on fifth of the new league, now what if in succeeding years Hibs, Aberdeen ,United or Hearts get relegated and don't return to the top flight , far fetched but it is possible so where does that leave the new set up ?. All the teams outwith the OF will be in a relegation fight from the first day of the season with every team desperate not to lose, the whole thing is a recipe for disaster driven by the tv companies desire for more OF games but you forgot to mention the main point of this shambles namely that the vast majority of fans want nothing to do with it but it is being pushed through aided and abetted by those on our board. The fact that our board have never even canvassed our fans-easily done by e-mail if they so desired is a disgrace , once more they think that the punters will turn up regardless but this could be step to far for many !.

[BEEJ]

New solution......... 2 spl leagues.........

Spl1
Rangers
Celtic
playing each other 40 times.....and good luck wi the tv money.

SPL2 - League o 18, playing twice, once home and away
Hibs
Hertz
Aberdeen
Dundee Utd
and aw the rest
....................... an exciting league, who would win it??? where would the tv go then ?
That's a winner with me. :thumbsup:

By the time SPL1 had got a quarter of the way through it's league programme all the main protagonists would have been locked up and several thousand of their dedicated followers would have annihilated one another. :greengrin

Gets my vote.

[inglisavhibs]

So how was that Celtic won the European Cup when we had an eighteen team league ?, the old league set up did not nearly kill Scottish football, as for meaningless games there are only meaningless games when our team is not in contention for anything, if we were chasing a place in Europe then then you would be glad to have a home run against the so called lesser teams. Football has moved on from when we had a larger league , the way teams are organised now means that there are no easy games and i do not have to remind you of what has happened to Hibs against the so called minnows recently . Ten teams means that two are in line for the drop every season ie on fifth of the new league, now what if in succeeding years Hibs, Aberdeen ,United or Hearts get relegated and don't return to the top flight , far fetched but it is possible so where does that leave the new set up ?. All the teams outwith the OF will be in a relegation fight from the first day of the season with every team desperate not to lose, the whole thing is a recipe for disaster driven by the tv companies desire for more OF games but you forgot to mention the main point of this shambles namely that the vast majority of fans want nothing to do with it but it is being pushed through aided and abetted by those on our board. The fact that our board have never even canvassed our fans-easily done by e-mail if they so desired is a disgrace , once more they think that the punters will turn up regardless but this could be step to far for many !.
All about opinions mate but why then do Hibs have to give away cheap or free tickets against the provincial teams? It's because fans don't find them attractive. More of these games certainly wouldn't bring back support. Not arguing that Hibs would have more chance of relegation but for me that's part of football.

[HibbyDave]

So how was that Celtic won the European Cup when we had an eighteen team league ?, the old league set up did not nearly kill Scottish football, as for meaningless games there are only meaningless games when our team is not in contention for anything, if we were chasing a place in Europe then then you would be glad to have a home run against the so called lesser teams. Football has moved on from when we had a larger league , the way teams are organised now means that there are no easy games and i do not have to remind you of what has happened to Hibs against the so called minnows recently . Ten teams means that two are in line for the drop every season ie on fifth of the new league, now what if in succeeding years Hibs, Aberdeen ,United or Hearts get relegated and don't return to the top flight , far fetched but it is possible so where does that leave the new set up ?. All the teams outwith the OF will be in a relegation fight from the first day of the season with every team desperate not to lose, the whole thing is a recipe for disaster driven by the tv companies desire for more OF games but you forgot to mention the main point of this shambles namely that the vast majority of fans want nothing to do with it but it is being pushed through aided and abetted by those on our board. The fact that our board have never even canvassed our fans-easily done by e-mail if they so desired is a disgrace , once more they think that the punters will turn up regardless but this could be step to far for many !.

What he said. Especially the bit in BOLD TYPE. They are supposed to represent us THE FANS but the truth is they don't give **** for our thoughts just as long as we pay our cash and follow blindly. I love hibs make no mistake but I will not give cash up front to a board that simply does it's own thing with no regard to the paying customer. Also, quite like the idea targeting the TV companies to let them know we don't want a ten team league set up. Anyone had a reply from hibs/TV companies etc that actually says something worthwhile about why they want to go down this route?

[Sunny1875]

The old 18 club league nearly killed Scottish Football, a sixteen club league would be no different. Too many meaningless games which fans don't attend, too many small provincial clubs in the league dragging standards lower. Hibs for instance could have five home games on the trot against Airdrie, Hamilton, Raith, St Mirren, and Dunfermline. No disrespect to these clubs but their average attendances are no more than a couple of thousand and it hardly whets the appetite. Scotland does not have the poulation to support sixteen top flight clubs especially when more than half of them support two clubs. Ten clubs is not perfect but it's the only chance of a competitive set up and if truth be told we are lucky if we can support 10 clubs. As a Hibs supporter I would far rather see two home league fixtures against Hearts, Rangers, Aberdeen etc than watch a number of smaller provincial teams coming in their place.

Your Argument is shot to pieces in that one statement when was the last time that the league was actually 'competitive' in the 12 seasons of the SPL Celtic and Rangers have each won 6 titles Celtic have finished second 6 times and Rangers 5 times. From season1998/99 to the end of season 2009/10 Both are out in front with almost with almost 400 more points than third placed Hearts. Coincidently Hibs have a goal difference of +3 over that period which would place them fourth in the goal difference stats, Hearts are +62, Rangers +624 and Celtic +668. Every other team has a minus goal difference over that period.

Of the current top 12, 8 teams have been crowned Scottish champions. The last time for each was 84/85 Aberdeen (managed by A. Ferguson) 82/83 Dundee Utd 64/65 Kilmarnock 59/60 Hearts 51/52 Hibs and Motherwell in 31/32

More Competitive where ? ... 2007/08 was the first time since 1970 that 3 Scottish clubs have had any interest in Europe after Christmas. The same season that Rangers bored the European audiences to the UEFA cup Final. Their first final since they won in 1972, how was the league setup back then ?, Same as it was when Celtic won in Europe in 1967.

Celtic and Rangers will continue to dominate Scottish football if we have 10, 12, 16 or 40 teams in the top league. I don't doubt this they invariably have but if any stato's out there would like to go back in time before the premier division and give us an idea how close the other sides came, before they had to play the oldfirm for 24 points a season. a few teams have proven that Celtic and Rangers can be beaten over the seasons but to mount a serious challenge both need to matched over four games each, a tall order for any team who have very small pools and resources available in comparison.

Too many tough fixtures have been spoken about by managers as they chase domestic and European trophies, well if the Big clubs have a European interest they would feasibly be able to rest players against smaller domestic opposition, Possibly even bringing in homegrown youngsters and giving them some experience. Clubs that do this include Barcelona, Bayern and Manchester Utd admittedly their pool players are of semi decent standard.

More of the same then :-
4 games a season against the same opposition, 12 points up for grabs against everyone ?. Managers who are too afraid to lose instead of adventurous enough to win. week in week out journeymen pro's preferred over up and coming youngsters, who cant be risked in a league that stifles attacking football for most of its participants.

How many on here are old enough to remember Turnbulls Tornadoes. if you remember them then you will certainly remember the free flowing football under much of Alex Miller's tenure. I am not having a dig at Miller, statistics showed he was a successful manager at Hibs, he was by being Defensive and boring for a long period of his time in charge.

Or time for a change, fresh blood into the game and ultimately a more competitive league and more competitive teams representing Scotland in Europe.

Dont Just Email Hibernian as hibs fans Email each Team in the SPL and the SPL itself . as a football fan.

[down the slope]

Your Argument is shot to pieces in that one statement when was the last time that the league was actually 'competitive' in the 12 seasons of the SPL Celtic and Rangers have each won 6 titles Celtic have finished second 6 times and Rangers 5 times. From season1998/99 to the end of season 2009/10 Both are out in front with almost with almost 400 more points than third placed Hearts. Coincidently Hibs have a goal difference of +3 over that period which would place them fourth in the goal difference stats, Hearts are +62, Rangers +624 and Celtic +668. Every other team has a minus goal difference over that period.

Of the current top 12, 8 teams have been crowned Scottish champions. The last time for each was 84/85 Aberdeen (managed by A. Ferguson) 82/83 Dundee Utd 64/65 Kilmarnock 59/60 Hearts 51/52 Hibs and Motherwell in 31/32

More Competitive where ? ... 2007/08 was the first time since 1970 that 3 Scottish clubs have had any interest in Europe after Christmas. The same season that Rangers bored the European audiences to the UEFA cup Final. Their first final since they won in 1972, how was the league setup back then ?, Same as it was when Celtic won in Europe in 1967.

Celtic and Rangers will continue to dominate Scottish football if we have 10, 12, 16 or 40 teams in the top league. I don't doubt this they invariably have but if any stato's out there would like to go back in time before the premier division and give us an idea how close the other sides came, before they had to play the oldfirm for 24 points a season. a few teams have proven that Celtic and Rangers can be beaten over the seasons but to mount a serious challenge both need to matched over four games each, a tall order for any team who have very small pools and resources available in comparison.

Too many tough fixtures have been spoken about by managers as they chase domestic and European trophies, well if the Big clubs have a European interest they would feasibly be able to rest players against smaller domestic opposition, Possibly even bringing in homegrown youngsters and giving them some experience. Clubs that do this include Barcelona, Bayern and Manchester Utd admittedly their pool players are of semi decent standard.

More of the same then :-
4 games a season against the same opposition, 12 points up for grabs against everyone ?. Managers who are too afraid to lose instead of adventurous enough to win. week in week out journeymen pro's preferred over up and coming youngsters, who cant be risked in a league that stifles attacking football for most of its participants.

How many on here are old enough to remember Turnbulls Tornadoes. if you remember them then you will certainly remember the free flowing football under much of Alex Miller's tenure. I am not having a dig at Miller, statistics showed he was a successful manager at Hibs, he was by being Defensive and boring for a long period of his time in charge.

Or time for a change, fresh blood into the game and ultimately a more competitive league and more competitive teams representing Scotland in Europe.

Dont Just Email Hibernian as hibs fans Email each Team in the SPL and the SPL itself . as a football fan.

Spot on !, and before i get the uber fans on my back this is not an anti board rant this is about the greater good for Scottish football-well in my view anyway. Anyone who feels strongly about this should get in touch with the club and let them know your feelings on the subject.

[Luna_Asylum]

Your Argument is shot to pieces in that one statement when was the last time that the league was actually 'competitive' in the 12 seasons of the SPL Celtic and Rangers have each won 6 titles Celtic have finished second 6 times and Rangers 5 times. From season1998/99 to the end of season 2009/10 Both are out in front with almost with almost 400 more points than third placed Hearts. Coincidently Hibs have a goal difference of +3 over that period which would place them fourth in the goal difference stats, Hearts are +62, Rangers +624 and Celtic +668. Every other team has a minus goal difference over that period.

Of the current top 12, 8 teams have been crowned Scottish champions. The last time for each was 84/85 Aberdeen (managed by A. Ferguson) 82/83 Dundee Utd 64/65 Kilmarnock 59/60 Hearts 51/52 Hibs and Motherwell in 31/32

More Competitive where ? ... 2007/08 was the first time since 1970 that 3 Scottish clubs have had any interest in Europe after Christmas. The same season that Rangers bored the European audiences to the UEFA cup Final. Their first final since they won in 1972, how was the league setup back then ?, Same as it was when Celtic won in Europe in 1967.

Celtic and Rangers will continue to dominate Scottish football if we have 10, 12, 16 or 40 teams in the top league. I don't doubt this they invariably have but if any stato's out there would like to go back in time before the premier division and give us an idea how close the other sides came, before they had to play the oldfirm for 24 points a season. a few teams have proven that Celtic and Rangers can be beaten over the seasons but to mount a serious challenge both need to matched over four games each, a tall order for any team who have very small pools and resources available in comparison.

Too many tough fixtures have been spoken about by managers as they chase domestic and European trophies, well if the Big clubs have a European interest they would feasibly be able to rest players against smaller domestic opposition, Possibly even bringing in homegrown youngsters and giving them some experience. Clubs that do this include Barcelona, Bayern and Manchester Utd admittedly their pool players are of semi decent standard.

More of the same then :-
4 games a season against the same opposition, 12 points up for grabs against everyone ?. Managers who are too afraid to lose instead of adventurous enough to win. week in week out journeymen pro's preferred over up and coming youngsters, who cant be risked in a league that stifles attacking football for most of its participants.

How many on here are old enough to remember Turnbulls Tornadoes. if you remember them then you will certainly remember the free flowing football under much of Alex Miller's tenure. I am not having a dig at Miller, statistics showed he was a successful manager at Hibs, he was by being Defensive and boring for a long period of his time in charge.

Or time for a change, fresh blood into the game and ultimately a more competitive league and more competitive teams representing Scotland in Europe.

Dont Just Email Hibernian as hibs fans Email each Team in the SPL and the SPL itself . as a football fan.

Good idea. Can anyone conjure up a list of email addresses.
I have received already a reply from the email I sent on Saturday to Hibs but nothing yet from Ogilvie @ SPL.

[inglisavhibs]

Your Argument is shot to pieces in that one statement when was the last time that the league was actually 'competitive' in the 12 seasons of the SPL Celtic and Rangers have each won 6 titles Celtic have finished second 6 times and Rangers 5 times. From season1998/99 to the end of season 2009/10 Both are out in front with almost with almost 400 more points than third placed Hearts. Coincidently Hibs have a goal difference of +3 over that period which would place them fourth in the goal difference stats, Hearts are +62, Rangers +624 and Celtic +668. Every other team has a minus goal difference over that period.

Of the current top 12, 8 teams have been crowned Scottish champions. The last time for each was 84/85 Aberdeen (managed by A. Ferguson) 82/83 Dundee Utd 64/65 Kilmarnock 59/60 Hearts 51/52 Hibs and Motherwell in 31/32

More Competitive where ? ... 2007/08 was the first time since 1970 that 3 Scottish clubs have had any interest in Europe after Christmas. The same season that Rangers bored the European audiences to the UEFA cup Final. Their first final since they won in 1972, how was the league setup back then ?, Same as it was when Celtic won in Europe in 1967.

Celtic and Rangers will continue to dominate Scottish football if we have 10, 12, 16 or 40 teams in the top league. I don't doubt this they invariably have but if any stato's out there would like to go back in time before the premier division and give us an idea how close the other sides came, before they had to play the oldfirm for 24 points a season. a few teams have proven that Celtic and Rangers can be beaten over the seasons but to mount a serious challenge both need to matched over four games each, a tall order for any team who have very small pools and resources available in comparison.

Too many tough fixtures have been spoken about by managers as they chase domestic and European trophies, well if the Big clubs have a European interest they would feasibly be able to rest players against smaller domestic opposition, Possibly even bringing in homegrown youngsters and giving them some experience. Clubs that do this include Barcelona, Bayern and Manchester Utd admittedly their pool players are of semi decent standard.

More of the same then :-
4 games a season against the same opposition, 12 points up for grabs against everyone ?. Managers who are too afraid to lose instead of adventurous enough to win. week in week out journeymen pro's preferred over up and coming youngsters, who cant be risked in a league that stifles attacking football for most of its participants.

How many on here are old enough to remember Turnbulls Tornadoes. if you remember them then you will certainly remember the free flowing football under much of Alex Miller's tenure. I am not having a dig at Miller, statistics showed he was a successful manager at Hibs, he was by being Defensive and boring for a long period of his time in charge.

Or time for a change, fresh blood into the game and ultimately a more competitive league and more competitive teams representing Scotland in Europe.

Dont Just Email Hibernian as hibs fans Email each Team in the SPL and the SPL itself . as a football fan.

Football has changed (not for the better) due to money and freedom of contract. I started watching Hibs in 1964 long before Turnbull's tornadoes and watched in awe at Bobby Duncan opening the scoring against Napoli. In these days Scottish clubs could compete with most in Europe and Hibs for instance sored a fair few goals against what were then inferior teams. Unfortunately Turnbulls Tornados and the Dundee United/Aberdeen teams (won leagues and did great in Europe) can't happen in todays market place as the players would move on at the end of their contracts for greater rewards. People forget that players could not move clubs even at the end of their contracts unless the club agreed and also the differentials in wages between top clubs and say Hibs and Hearts was not nearly so great as it is now.Rangers and Celtic domination returned to 100% when David Murray started investing heavily in both foreign and English players and Celtic followed suit, and wages suddenly became 10 times the size of all other Scottish clubs. Even now with Rangers in financial turmoil their wages are way ahead of other teams and they can pick the best players from other Scottish teams. Back to the point of a larger league. What fans say and what they actually do are often quite different. When Hibs were playing Inverness recently I like many others got my free ticket and tried to give it away to at least eight Hibs supporters before finally finding someone to take it. These Hibs supporters are the same ones who will all be buying tickets for the Hearts match coming up soon. That's the problem we face in Scotland, there are just not enough decent size clubs who are atttractive to the general public.What you are really saying is that you wish Hibs were playing say Airdrie in April rather than Hearts?
The other point about youngsters getting held back is just not true. I can't think of many youngsters in over forty years of football involvement who have been good enough and didn't get their chance no matter what size the league was. If any manager thinks players are good enough they will play them no matter what age they are.

[down the slope]

Football has changed (not for the better) due to money and freedom of contract. I started watching Hibs in 1964 long before Turnbull's tornadoes and watched in awe at Bobby Duncan opening the scoring against Napoli. In these days Scottish clubs could compete with most in Europe and Hibs for instance sored a fair few goals against what were then inferior teams. Unfortunately Turnbulls Tornados and the Dundee United/Aberdeen teams (won leagues and did great in Europe) can't happen in todays market place as the players would move on at the end of their contracts for greater rewards. People forget that players could not move clubs even at the end of their contracts unless the club agreed and also the differentials in wages between top clubs and say Hibs and Hearts was not nearly so great as it is now.Rangers and Celtic domination returned to 100% when David Murray started investing heavily in both foreign and English players and Celtic followed suit, and wages suddenly became 10 times the size of all other Scottish clubs. Even now with Rangers in financial turmoil their wages are way ahead of other teams and they can pick the best players from other Scottish teams. Back to the point of a larger league. What fans say and what they actually do are often quite different. When Hibs were playing Inverness recently I like many others got my free ticket and tried to give it away to at least eight Hibs supporters before finally finding someone to take it. These Hibs supporters are the same ones who will all be buying tickets for the Hearts match coming up soon. That's the problem we face in Scotland, there are just not enough decent size clubs who are atttractive to the general public.What you are really saying is that you wish Hibs were playing say Airdrie in April rather than Hearts?
The other point about youngsters getting held back is just not true. I can't think of many youngsters in forty years of football involvement who have been good enough and didn't get their chance no matter what size the league was. If any manager thinks players are good enough they will play them no matter what age they are.

Regarding you not being able to give away the ICT ticket i do not get your point as ICT are still going to be in the ten team league so no change there , the bare facts are we are not able to play Hearts every second week and we have to play against the so called lesser teams but the lack of fans wanting the ticket is more to do with the way we are playing than anything else. Unless teams play in the major countries of Europe then we will always have fixtures against the smaller clubs and the same goes for Holland, Denmark, Sweden and so on and it does not seem to do their football much harm !. The point i made earlier post was that rather than exclude these teams from the SPL a larger league with an equal payout of the tv money would benefit all , would it not make sense to make the smaller clubs richer by this method and therefor able to pay players of a decent standard and making the league as a whole more competitive ?. As regards to my e-mail to the club i have heard nothing from them, (see earlier post).

[basehibby]

10 team league??? NO THANKS :na na:

It's been tried before - at length - nobody liked it but do they (the SPL) care???

It would seem not.

The SPL need to be brave and throw away their calculators in favour of common sense. A 16 or 18 team league will undoubtably lead to reduced revenue for SOME clubs, but will also lead to INCREASED revenue for at least four others as well as giving the fans what they actually want - a sensible league! Give the paying customers what they want and you never know - they might just turn up in greater numbers - worth a try I would have said :dunno:

[Kojock]

I'm happy if it made you laugh. Otherwise if anyone who opposes an 10team SPL
does not make their voice heard it is what we will get. I am seriously disappointed if not depressed at the lack of opposition.

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.

[Saorsa]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.Every poll I remember seeing on this site had something like 80%+ against it. There was an independent online poll which finished with 88% against it. The SPL carried out their own poll which the last time I saw it was heading in the same direction, odd that that disappeard from sight and we've never seen the results of it. I looked round other SPL clubs fans sites and the results and opinions were much the same. Plenty of people against it, just too many with nae will tae do anything about it so the OF and TV companies will have their way as usual. I'll certainly not be going if a 10 team league gets the go-ahead.

[basehibby]

The old 18 club league nearly killed Scottish Football, a sixteen club league would be no different. Too many meaningless games which fans don't attend, too many small provincial clubs in the league dragging standards lower. Hibs for instance could have five home games on the trot against Airdrie, Hamilton, Raith, St Mirren, and Dunfermline. No disrespect to these clubs but their average attendances are no more than a couple of thousand and it hardly whets the appetite. Scotland does not have the poulation to support sixteen top flight clubs especially when more than half of them support two clubs. Ten clubs is not perfect but it's the only chance of a competitive set up and if truth be told we are lucky if we can support 10 clubs. As a Hibs supporter I would far rather see two home league fixtures against Hearts, Rangers, Aberdeen etc than watch a number of smaller provincial teams coming in their place.

You argue your points well but I don't buy them.

Have a look at the attendance stats here...
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn.htm
with particular emphasis on these ones for Portugal and Norway...
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/aveprt.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/avenor.htm

Both have one or two dominant teams along with lots of smaller provincial clubs - very similar stats to what you'd see in Scotland - both have 16 team leagues and... guess what??? both are doing just fine thank you very much.

there's also a couple of smaller (but bigger than Scotland) european nations - Denmark and Austria - who have opted for a smaller league
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/aveaut.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/avednk.htm
- and guess what??? their attendances are crap and I haven't noticed any of their number setting Europe alight either!

In general, most smaller nations have a sensible, equitable and UEFA recommended set up of 18 teams and none of them seem to suffer from it.

In my view, it means a broader spread of the money at the top table and as a direct consequence, a greater number of young players given their chance at the top level - maybe not directly beneficial for Hibs or any of the bigger clubs, but certainly good for the national game - and isn't that what we should be aiming for in a league set up afterall?!?

[Saorsa]

You argue your points well but I don't buy them.

Have a look at the attendance stats here...
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn.htm
with particular emphasis on these ones for Portugal and Norway...
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/aveprt.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/avenor.htm

Both have one or two dominant teams along with lots of smaller provincial clubs - very similar stats to what you'd see in Scotland - both have 16 team leagues and... guess what??? both are doing just fine thank you very much.

there's also a couple of smaller (but bigger than Scotland) european nations - Denmark and Austria - who have opted for a smaller league
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/aveaut.htm
http://www.european-football-statistics.co.uk/attn/avednk.htm
- and guess what??? their attendances are crap and I haven't noticed any of their number setting Europe alight either!

In general, most smaller nations have a sensible, equitable and UEFA recommended set up of 18 teams and none of them seem to suffer from it.

In my view, it means a broader spread of the money at the top table and as a direct consequence, a greater number of young players given their chance at the top level - maybe not directly beneficial for Hibs or any of the bigger clubs, but certainly good for the national game - and isn't that what we should be aiming for in a league set up afterall?!?Too bad those running the SPL have nae interest in whats good for Scottish fitba even if that's what they're trying tae sell this 10 team crap as. Their only interest is preserving the status quo (or even increasing the gulf) of those at the top.

[basehibby]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.

Have a look through the archives at ANY poll that has been posted on the subject - you'll find that support for a 10 team set up peaks at no more than 15% whereas opposition averages around 80%.

I'm surprised you've never noticed - maybe you should apply for a job with the SPL as you seem to possess the requisite powers of observation.

[Luna_Asylum]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.

I think you may be right.

[Groathillgrump]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.

Well here's another one who's dead against a 10 team league. :na na:

A backward step and probably the final nail in Scottish fitba's coffin, a nail which the Hibs board is helping to drive in.

[Moulin Yarns]

Well here's another one who's dead against a 10 team league. :na na:

A backward step and probably the final nail in Scottish fitba's coffin, a nail which the Hibs board is helping to drive in.

Me too. I hate the way the SPL say the driving force is TV money, the bulk of which goes to the ugly sisters to perpetuate their dominance.

Before David Murray took over at Ibrox there was a much more level playing field and the wages paid were probably fairly similar across the top teams, now the Glasgow pair can pay 10x more than even Hearts, Hibs and Aberdeen.

I think we should look at the USA for a model where the clubs are more controlled in what is able to be paid to top players, and the league is comprised of clubs that are financially sound. This will avoid the clubs going into administration.

[down the slope]

why is it that people who are in favour of the ten team league always mention Airdrie as the bench mark team from the lower division ?, they could of course mention Dundee, Dunfermline or Partick but they chose not to for some reason !. Much better to bring these teams in from oblivion than to make the OF richer !!!.

[Phil MaGlass]

Only thing that will make them take notice is if the fans don't go - personally I don't think that will happen.

We are all creatures of habit, however I think a few years down the line once they realise we're bored of the same setup then bigger leagues might eventually happen.

I've seen the plans and whilst I'm not sure whether 10 teams will work I'll be giving it a chance. (remember it was originally brought in as the league at the time was considered boring)

Thing is as well its not just about the SPL - the whole league structure is being discussed including 'B' teams for whoever wants to have one, further down the leagues. I think that is a great idea and one I'm sure Hibs will be doing.

Its been happening the last few years, football is stale, The SFA,s attitude to anything new sucks, OF winning league by a mile year in year out. The OF full stop, fans have had enuff and are turning their backs on Scottish football.
Have a 10 team league without the OF or a 16 team league with them.Either way both would get my support.

[Greentinted]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.


90% against!

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?202054-10-Team-SPL-For-or-Against&p=2695627&highlight=#post2695627

[Kojock]

90% against!

http://www.hibs.net/showthread.php?202054-10-Team-SPL-For-or-Against&p=2695627&highlight=#post2695627

Your Poll only got 177 votes, seems to me theres a lot of people not interested either way.

[Moulin Yarns]

Your Poll only got 177 votes, seems to me theres a lot of people not interested either way.

unfortunately that is the case in many polls. Apathy rules.

In a similar vein, a Planning Application receives about 100 objections, out of a population of 2500 in Pitlochry, but the objectors claim the majority support their view, when in fact the majority have not bothered to voice their opinion one way or the other.

[Kojock]

unfortunately that is the case in many polls. Apathy rules.

In a similar vein, a Planning Application receives about 100 objections, out of a population of 2500 in Pitlochry, but the objectors claim the majority support their view, when in fact the majority have not bothered to voice their opinion one way or the other.

Nail on head.

[basehibby]

Your Poll only got 177 votes, seems to me theres a lot of people not interested either way.


Where have you been???? There's been multiple polls on here - all with similar results - there's been national newspaper polls - once again mirroring the results of the one linked - there's been polls of fans of other clubs - all reflecting the same views - sure you don't work for the SPL already??? :ostrich:

[Phil MaGlass]

I think the fact that this has been done to death over the last months also has alot to do with it, there were polls popping up on every football website, you cant blame folk if they dont wish to make yet another comment on a subject that has been done to death??

[Golden Bear]

I think the fact that this has been done to death over the last months also has alot to do with it, there were polls popping up on every football website, you cant blame folk if they dont wish to make yet another comment on a subject that has been done to death??

:agree:

Exactly the way I see it.

[Kojock]

Where have you been????

Living my life :rolleyes:

[basehibby]

Living my life :rolleyes:

on a desert island :confused:

[HibsMax]

email to SPL on 20/12/10

I really cannot believe that you have fixtures in the week running up to Christmas. You are meant to be promoting football in Scotland not destroying it!! How many people do you seriously think will turn up for those rearranged games ?
Just as an aside, sporting events are played over here on Thanksgiving (a bigger holiday for the US than Christmas) and on Christmas Day too, and they aren't hurting for fans at the games. While I personally agree with you that it would be better if games were not on holidays, it can work.

[HibbyDave]

I think the fact that this has been done to death over the last months also has alot to do with it, there were polls popping up on every football website, you cant blame folk if they dont wish to make yet another comment on a subject that has been done to death??

You can blame them - the issue is not done and dusted YET. The SPL would love the fans to go quiet and simply accept the wondrous new 10 team OF Cash Cow league.

UNLESS THE FANS CONTINUE TO MAKE A NOISE AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME MEDIA SUPPORT THE GAME IS DEAD-LONG LIVE THE GAME.
GGTTH

[down the slope]

I think the fact that this has been done to death over the last months also has alot to do with it, there were polls popping up on every football website, you cant blame folk if they dont wish to make yet another comment on a subject that has been done to death??

You can blame them - the issue is not done and dusted YET. The SPL would love the fans to go quiet and simply accept the wondrous new 10 team OF Cash Cow league.

UNLESS THE FANS CONTINUE TO MAKE A NOISE AND HOPEFULLY GET SOME MEDIA SUPPORT THE GAME IS DEAD-LONG LIVE THE GAME.
GGTTH

Your right on there, i wonder why the EN never questions our board about this ?, it seems Hardie is quite content to ignore one of the biggest stories in Scottish football as long as he is spoon fed anything from the training ground, lazy journalism at best !.

[blackpoolhibs]

Every poll i have seen, whether on here or other sites have all been dead against a 10 team league. I dont want it, and it does seem the majority dont want it but yet again the fans are dismissed out of hand. :bitchy:

Is it just me who has noticed it, but are attendances all over Scotland not dropping?

Of course there are many reasons, but one of the main ones imo is the 4 games a season against the same teams, sometimes more. Its strange how they ignore this?

[inglisavhibs]

Regarding you not being able to give away the ICT ticket i do not get your point as ICT are still going to be in the ten team league so no change there , the bare facts are we are not able to play Hearts every second week and we have to play against the so called lesser teams but the lack of fans wanting the ticket is more to do with the way we are playing than anything else. Unless teams play in the major countries of Europe then we will always have fixtures against the smaller clubs and the same goes for Holland, Denmark, Sweden and so on and it does not seem to do their football much harm !. The point i made earlier post was that rather than exclude these teams from the SPL a larger league with an equal payout of the tv money would benefit all , would it not make sense to make the smaller clubs richer by this method and therefor able to pay players of a decent standard and making the league as a whole more competitive ?. As regards to my e-mail to the club i have heard nothing from them, (see earlier post).
You are missing the point maybe, I know Inverness are in the current league but bringing in more teams with little resources makes it worse. I find it almost impossible to get Hibs minded floating supporters along to games like Inverness, Hamilton, St Mirren etc but find it easier with Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts even Dundee. Thirty league games is too few games and going back to sections in the league cup is no answer either.

[Golden Bear]

I sincerely hope the proposed 10 team league is a non-starter but the financial /commercial/sponsorship aspects of the 10 team set up and what it means to each club has never been fully explained to the fans. Maybe it's about time it was.

[Golden Bear]

You are missing the point maybe, I know Inverness are in the current league but bringing in more teams with little resources makes it worse. I find it almost impossible to get Hibs minded floating supporters along to games like Inverness, Hamilton, St Mirren etc but find it easier with Aberdeen, Dundee United, Hearts even Dundee. Thirty league games is too few games and going back to sections in the league cup is no answer either.

I think you may also be missing the point by not understanding that both the present and proposed structure are boring the fans to death.

[Greentinted]

I have read through this thread and it appears there is only a half dozen or so posters against the 10 team league. It seems you are in the minority here. Maybe there are not as many people against the idea as you think or would like.


Your Poll only got 177 votes, seems to me theres a lot of people not interested either way.

Of course 177 people polled can't be deemed completely representative but its a lot more indicative than the 6 or so (posited above in first quote) who had hitherto posted on this thread.
I've yet to speak with anyone who is in favour of another travesty for the fans. But, in balance, thats not to say there aren't any.

[NorthNorfolkHFC]

Jumping in here but i like the idea of....

10 team super league

2 lower leagues of 14/16. These leagues are regional to keep cost low. At the end of the season winners of both leagues get automatic promotion with 2nd and 3rd in each league into playoff for one place. 3 up, 3 down.

Greater transparency down the leagues with teams able to come up from the regional leagues below. IE. Junior sides able to make step up so Scottish football has a triangle format.

Hell, if we are feeling confident. Proposition 3 main universities in Scotland and run and dedicated football scholarship. at end of their degree Scottish football has a draft system with the bottom club in the super league getting top pick.

[Lago]

Jumping in here but i like the idea of....

10 team super league

2 lower leagues of 14/16. These leagues are regional to keep cost low. At the end of the season winners of both leagues get automatic promotion with 2nd and 3rd in each league into playoff for one place. 3 up, 3 down.

Greater transparency down the leagues with teams able to come up from the regional leagues below. IE. Junior sides able to make step up so Scottish football has a triangle format.

Hell, if we are feeling confident. Proposition 3 main universities in Scotland and run and dedicated football scholarship. at end of their degree Scottish football has a draft system with the bottom club in the super league getting top pick.

Me too & it's going to happen have to do somethin to liven up Scottish football.

[NorthNorfolkHFC]

we are a small country so lets encourage youth+education and it's importance.

i watch la liga and have 0 interest in almeria vs murca etc. so we shouldnt have 14, 16 or whatever.

scottish football needs transparency and a pyramid system to give the smaller teams aspiration and 3 relegation keeps the standard high.

[Wakeyhibee]

[QUOTE=HibbyDave;2756707]Register your opposition here OR tell Rod how much you love him and will do whatever he says is good for football (even if you have been watchin football for a while and know better).[/Q

NO to a 10 team SPL, i hope the next OF fixture ends in similar scenes promting authorities to intervene and insist on 2 fixtures a year. But that's the only hope we have of a larger league.

[Wakeyhibee]

Jumping in here but i like the idea of....

10 team super league

2 lower leagues of 14/16. These leagues are regional to keep cost low. At the end of the season winners of both leagues get automatic promotion with 2nd and 3rd in each league into playoff for one place. 3 up, 3 down.

Greater transparency down the leagues with teams able to come up from the regional leagues below. IE. Junior sides able to make step up so Scottish football has a triangle format.

Hell, if we are feeling confident. Proposition 3 main universities in Scotland and run and dedicated football scholarship. at end of their degree Scottish football has a draft system with the bottom club in the super league getting top pick.

Are you on the wrong forum by any chance? this is association football not American

[NorthNorfolkHFC]

Are you on the wrong forum by any chance? this is association football not American

what's your point?

their system works, ours doesn't!!!! no harm sharing good practise!!!

[inglisavhibs]

I think you may also be missing the point by not understanding that both the present and proposed structure are boring the fans to death.

So early in April you would rather be waking up with Hibs about to play Raith Rovers rather than Hearts. Not me and not the people who run Hibs. There is a big financial side to this and our income which is low enough just now would reduce substantially. I too was bored earlier in the season but nothing to do with the size of the league and more to do with the poor players that were playing for us at the time. If income drops then so does the standard of player we can attract and then the product on the park suffers. Vicious circle.

[marinello59]

So early in April you would rather be waking up with Hibs about to play Raith Rovers rather than Hearts. Not me and not the people who run Hibs. There is a big financial side to this and our income which is low enough just now would reduce substantially. I too was bored earlier in the season but nothing to do with the size of the league and more to do with the poor players that were playing for us at the time. If income drops then so does the standard of player we can attract and then the product on the park suffers. Vicious circle.
:agree:
I don't want a ten team SPL but as long as it is a temporary stepping stone on the way to an expanded league then I can see the logic in it. Hopefully the increased revenue given to SPL2 teams will enable them to improve to the point where a 16 or 18 team league is viable in the future.

[soupy]

Everybody goes on about the financial side, how much wed lose by only playing raith instead of hearts, etc, but as long as hibs are doing well and winning games the fans will turn up, as already proven the year we won the 1 st division.

[StevieC]

Only thing that will make them take notice is if the fans don't go

The trouble with that is that it will happen AFTER the 10 team league has been introduced.

I have already made my feelings known to the club regarding a 10 team league and have stated I will NOT be renewing my season tickets if a 10 team league is introduced.

[down the slope]

So early in April you would rather be waking up with Hibs about to play Raith Rovers rather than Hearts. Not me and not the people who run Hibs. There is a big financial side to this and our income which is low enough just now would reduce substantially. I too was bored earlier in the season but nothing to do with the size of the league and more to do with the poor players that were playing for us at the time. If income drops then so does the standard of player we can attract and then the product on the park suffers. Vicious circle.

What you fail to get is that we do not get to play hearts every other week, we will still have the ICT's and Hamiltons to play every so often. So with a bigger league we might be about to play Raith Rovers and it would be the first and only time you will see them that season and if we were doing well and playing for a place in Europe for example are you telling me the place would not be packed ?. This move to a bigger league just plays into the hands of the OF and i want nothing to do with , i dont want it , it's being forced on me and i'm no gonna watch it.

[StevieC]

What you are really saying is that you wish Hibs were playing say Airdrie in April rather than Hearts?

I dont think anyone arguing against a 10 team league is saying they would rather be playing Airdrie than Hearts, and it could easily be flipped to ask "Do you want to be playing Hamilton 4 times a season?" Infact, even the current set-up will have us playing Hamilton instead of Hearts come the end of the season!

With a league that you have absolutely zero chance of winning what is there to offer the supporters?
Playing less teams more often .. or .. VARIETY?

:hmmm:

[StevieC]

This move to a bigger league just plays into the hands of the OF and i want nothing to do with , i dont want it , it's being forced on me and i'm no gonna watch it.

:not worth

[Septimus]

I started watching Hibs in the 1940's. At that time "lesser Teams" were the Alloas, Albion Rovers, Dundee United etc. Teams like Partick Thistle, Dundee, St.Mirren could be relied upon to provide adequate competition for the likes of Rangers and Hibs. The crowds were large. I seem to recall crowds in the 40-60 thousand and Easter Road was alive on match days with a solid phalanx of men walking to the match.

Sadly the "lesser Teams" now include the Partick Thistles, Dundee and St.Mirren and the reason is plain to see. Money. There is only one way to bring competitiveness back to the game in Scotland and that is to distribute the money evenly throughout the league.

Hibs, it has to be said, are teetering on the brink of becoming a "Lesser Team" if they are not already there. The number of teams in the league is irrelevant if only two teams can win it. I tend to agree with those above who say that the OF should be kicked into touch and a Lesser League should be formed where there is some doubt at the beginning and throughout the season as to who is going to win. That might bring the crowds back.

[StevieC]

the financial /commercial/sponsorship aspects of the 10 team set up and what it means to each club has never been fully explained to the fans. Maybe it's about time it was.

Let me give my take on it ....

The Old Firm need to play each other at least 4 times a season to be able to maintain their current income stream through TV/Sponsorship/Commercial revenues. If the Old Firm don't play each other at least 4 times a season then EVERY club has to take a hit with their finances (with the Old Firm being hit the hardest because they currently have the highest percentage) due to reduced TV/Sponsorship/Commercial revenues.
Did I mention that at least 50% of the Old Firm are in serious financial trouble (and reduced revenue could tip them over the edge?)?

:rolleyes:

[down the slope]

Let me give my take on it ....

The Old Firm need to play each other at least 4 times a season to be able to maintain their current income stream through TV/Sponsorship/Commercial revenues. If the Old Firm don't play each other at least 4 times a season then EVERY club has to take a hit with their finances (with the Old Firm being hit the hardest because they currently have the highest percentage) due to reduced TV/Sponsorship/Commercial revenues.
Did I mention that at least 50% of the Old Firm are in serious financial trouble (and reduced revenue could tip them over the edge?)?

:rolleyes:

Good, if they are in trouble it's because they are living and winning due to overspending.

[StevieC]

Good, if they are in trouble it's because they are living and winning due to overspending.

Not so good really because it looks like we are the ones that are going to have a 10 team league forced upon us, partly due to their financial troubles.

[StevieC]

At the end of the season winners of both leagues get automatic promotion with 2nd and 3rd in each league into playoff for one place. 3 up, 3 down.

3 up/3 down would signal the death of a lot of clubs, why do you think it changed to one up one down.

Clubs like Motherwell, Inverness, St Mirren, St Johnstone, Kilmarnock would not be able to sustain full time football with regular spells in the lower divisions. Ourselves, Dundee United and Aberdeen could just about manage it with the larger core support but it could affect our ability to be as competitive when playing a season with one eye on the financial implications of relegation.

Just look at the likes of Dundee, Livingston, Dunfermline and Falkirk if you want to see teams that have fallen from grace and would now struggle to compete at the top level.

[Kojock]

Of course 177 people polled can't be deemed completely representative but its a lot more indicative than the 6 or so (posited above in first quote) who had hitherto posted on this thread.
I've yet to speak with anyone who is in favour of another travesty for the fans. But, in balance, thats not to say there aren't any.

There are only about six posters on here who are jumping up and down threatening not to go back to ER if this / when this goes ahead the rest whilst they may not be too happy will still attend ER..

Unfortunately its all about the money, its simple really the clubs need money to survive and they make a lot more money playing the OF, Hearts etc than they do playing Dunfermline, Raith Rovers etc.

Lets wait until after the split and see the poor crowds we get playing 5 meaningless games against Hamilton, St Mirren etc.

[Moulin Yarns]

There are only about six posters on here who are jumping up and down threatening not to go back to ER if this / when this goes ahead the rest whilst they may not be too happy will still attend ER..

Unfortunately its all about the money, its simple really the clubs need money to survive and they make a lot more money playing the OF, Hearts etc than they do playing Dunfermline, Raith Rovers etc.

Lets wait until after the split and see the poor crowds we get playing 5 meaningless games against Hamilton, St Mirren etc.

Really? Our highest crowd this season is about 17500, and we are talking about losing 3 games with that sort of attendance, not forgetting the increased policing costs attached to those games. Increasing the number of teams to 18 will replace those high attendance/high cost games with crowds of around, for arguments sake, 12500 but with the lesser costs involved.

Now, I don't know how much it costs to pay for all the costs involved in either case, but I would be reasonably confident that the 5000 extra customers does not equate to the equivalent extra income.

Just my opinion of course, but you don't back up your claim with figures.

[Luna_Asylum]

Really? Our highest crowd this season is about 17500, and we are talking about losing 3 games with that sort of attendance, not forgetting the increased policing costs attached to those games. Increasing the number of teams to 18 will replace those high attendance/high cost games with crowds of around, for arguments sake, 12500 but with the lesser costs involved.

Now, I don't know how much it costs to pay for all the costs involved in either case, but I would be reasonably confident that the 5000 extra customers does not equate to the equivalent extra income.

Just my opinion of course, but you don't back up your claim with figures.

You could also add the income from people that will come and see us play a game that is at 3.00 on Saturday rather than lunchtime Sat/Sun and people that will come because it's not on TV

But that would upset the £20m lost income figure the SPL are quoting and Hamish is believing.

[Kojock]

Really? Our highest crowd this season is about 17500, and we are talking about losing 3 games with that sort of attendance, not forgetting the increased policing costs attached to those games. Increasing the number of teams to 18 will replace those high attendance/high cost games with crowds of around, for arguments sake, 12500 but with the lesser costs involved.

Now, I don't know how much it costs to pay for all the costs involved in either case, but I would be reasonably confident that the 5000 extra customers does not equate to the equivalent extra income.

Just my opinion of course, but you don't back up your claim with figures.

Dont know where you get the figure 12500 from, there is no way on earth that playing the way we were we would get anywhere near that figure for the "lesser teams" Hibs are giving free tickets out every week and struggling to get decent crowds.

5000 x £27 = £135,000 (This figure does not include the other few thousand walk ups who would have to pay £27 rather than £22) plus around £80,000 from TV, extra revenue from advertising and corporate.

As for Policing fees clubs only pay for the officers inside the ground, which by using stewards instead keeps the cost down.

I obviously dont have exact figures but going by what Rod Petrie told me that they make much more money from the bigger games, hence the reason the vote for a ten team league.

[Kojock]

But that would upset the £20m lost income figure the SPL are quoting and Hamish is believing.

Where did I say that :confused:

I dont really care how much the SPL lose I am more concerned with the amount Hibs would lose.

[blackpoolhibs]

A 10 team league will have me watching around half the games that are staged at easter road, maybe slightly more. An 18 team league would have me at most if not all home games.

I bet i'm not the only one who fits that scenario. 1 home game against rantic and hearts i'd be there regardless if its on tv or not. Thats not the case when its twice for me.

[StevieC]

I dont really care how much the SPL lose I am more concerned with the amount Hibs would lose.


It's all proportional. Hibs might well lose some money but it would not affect them anywhere near as much as it would the Old Firm. In fact it could be argued they are in a better position than most to take a hit.

The bottom line though, is that money should be secondary in the plans to improve the game.

[Luna_Asylum]

It's overdue time to discredit the myth that much money would be lost.
The SPL will not give details of how they come up with their figure so.....

Overall revenue from gate receipts would not go down.

What would be lost is only the TV revenue from 2 OF games

£20m loss = £10m per OF game. Sky are paying that?

[down the slope]

A 10 team league will have me watching around half the games that are staged at easter road, maybe slightly more. An 18 team league would have me at most if not all home games.

I bet i'm not the only one who fits that scenario. 1 home game against rantic and hearts i'd be there regardless if its on tv or not. Thats not the case when its twice for me.

That's the way it should be as the game keeps it's freshness and you know if you miss a game it's a year until you get to see the opposition again. Again for those of you who think that these proposals are a good idea please try and think of the greater good for Scottish football , this is more than just about the Hibs and some people need to get the blinkers off and think of the wider implications if these changes are made. By the way one of the major players in all this is Stuart Milne , need i say any more.

[Part/Time Supporter]

what's your point?

their system works, ours doesn't!!!! no harm sharing good practise!!!

University scholarship system works in American football because 18 year old kids would get killed playing in the NFL, it's that physical. High school kids are forced to take a university scholarship. The other American sports (baseball, hockey and basketball) have a mixture of players who go to university and players who sign straight out of high school, because in those less physical sports some kids can go straight into a big club's first team at 18/19 (as is the case in the professional "soccer" leagues in Europe).

[marinello59]

It's overdue time to discredit the myth that much money would be lost.
The SPL will not give details of how they come up with their figure so.....

Overall revenue from gate receipts would not go down.

What would be lost is only the TV revenue from 2 OF games

£20m loss = £10m per OF game. Sky are paying that?

If this is not motivated by cash then why do you think it is being forced through. Or haven't those running the game checked their own figures properly?
I have seen a couple of breakdowns and IF the figures are correct there is a logical financial argument for going to a ten team SPL. I don't want to see that happen but as a stepping stone to an eventual 18 team top tier I could accept it.

[Saorsa]

If this is not motivated by cash then why do you think it is being forced through. Or haven't those running the game checked their own figures properly?
I have seen a couple of breakdowns and IF the figures are correct there is a logical financial argument for going to a ten team SPL. I don't want to see that happen but as a stepping stone to an eventual 18 team top tier I could accept it.aye, that's the line they're spinning but moving tae a top 10 will be the one and only step. It'll go nae further if the OF have their way and others continue bending over and taking up the erse from them.

[inglisavhibs]

That's the way it should be as the game keeps it's freshness and you know if you miss a game it's a year until you get to see the opposition again. Again for those of you who think that these proposals are a good idea please try and think of the greater good for Scottish football , this is more than just about the Hibs and some people need to get the blinkers off and think of the wider implications if these changes are made. By the way one of the major players in all this is Stuart Milne , need i say any more.

how on earth will football improve by adding more teams to the league?

[marinello59]

aye, that's the line they're spinning but moving tae a top 10 will be the one and only step. It'll go nae further if the OF have their way and others continue bending over and taking up the erse from them.

It may well be spin. If it does prove to be a package of lies then they will have broken the game beyond repair. Going straight to an 18 team top tier could prove just as suicidal. The authorities really should be making the financial implications of both options more accessible.

[Kojock]

That's the way it should be as the game keeps it's freshness and you know if you miss a game it's a year until you get to see the opposition again. Again for those of you who think that these proposals are a good idea please try and think of the greater good for Scottish football , this is more than just about the Hibs and some people need to get the blinkers off and think of the wider implications if these changes are made. By the way one of the major players in all this is Stuart Milne , need i say any more.

You as much as anyone should remember the times when we had an 18 team league. There were numerous unappetising games and the crowd would be aroun 4000. Do you want to return to those days.

[Golden Bear]

how on earth will football improve by adding more teams to the league?

It is essential that there is a "comfort zone" in the middle of the league where Teams are free from the stresses and strains of relegation worries. Under these circumstances, Managers are far more likely to blood young players into the team which can only be good for the the game in general.

[Saorsa]

It may well be spin. If it does prove to be a package of lies then they will have broken the game beyond repair. Going straight to an 18 team top tier could prove just as suicidal. The authorities really should be making the financial implications of both options more accessible.Fat chance of that, you'll hear/see what they want you tae so their 'facts' will be the only ones proving that they are right and everything else will be a disaster.

as an aside I wonder what the new voting rules for the ten team league will be, will all the other 'great men' :rolleyes: running non OF clubs agree tae two out voting the majority again, that'll keep their ten team league :bitchy:

I'm still living in hope (very faint hope) that at least two of the teams currently against it will stick tae their guns and that the rule will backfire on them this time and kill it stone dead or hopefully the SFL clubs will want nothing tae do with it.

[down the slope]

I e-mailed the SPL about my concerns and had a reply from Ogilvie which was good of him to take the time to do so.


Thank you for your email. I note your comments and you obviously feel stongly about the game. I do hope you remain a supporter whatever size of league we end up with. Broadly speaking, this is where we are at the moment...

Fans when asked have consistently favoured a 16-team format (once home, once away) over any other



This is a format that a number of people within the SPL would also ideally favour. However, based on current finances within the game, going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game (based on gate revenue and TV income) – and is therefore not affordable at present



The issues we have with the current format are:



- Uneven split (reversed fixtures and 18/20 home games)

- Only one team relegated each season (the lowest proportion in Europe)

- Only one promotion place from SFL1 (which harms that competition)

- The financial chasm that clubs relegated from the SPL fall into



A new format must address these concerns



Supporters tell us that they favour play-offs - these are an obvious solution to the issue of only one team relegated / promoted



But they do not address the financial chasm. This can only be addressed by pushing substantial funding down into the second tier. This funding is created by the distributions that would have gone to positions 11th and 12th, with the move to a 10-team format (the distributions amount to around £1.7m)



The 14-team solution advocated by some supporters is not favoured by the clubs because:



- A 7/7 split would result in ‘blank weekends’ for teams, which cannot be accommodated within the already full fixture list and would result in two teams sitting out the final weekend

- Either a 6/8 or 8/6 split would result in the top section playing a different number of games from the bottom section

- The split would occur much earlier than at present (after fixture 26, rather than fixture 33 currently) giving a number of clubs nothing to play for for substantial parts of their seasons

- It cannot address the financial difference between tiers one and two – indeed, with 14 mouths to feed, rather than 12, it would become even more difficult to push money down to the second tier



The 10-team format will allow the second tier of football to become a more financially robust and exciting environment for clubs to play in. It will ensure that we have 22 properly funded full-time professional clubs – which in turn should allow the creation of a 16-team or 18-team format when finances allow in the future.



Kind regards



David



David Ogilvie
Scottish Premier League

Hampden Park, Glasgow, G42 9DE

tel: 0141 620 4140 (switchboard)

tel: 0141 620 4156 (direct)

fax: 0141 620 4141

website www.scotprem.com

e-mail davidogilvie@scotprem.com


At least he had the decency to get back to me which is more than be said for our board. I already see where i could shoot holes through some of his arguments but i will need to take time study it a bit more -feel free to do the same.

[Saorsa]

I e-mailed the SPL about my concerns and had a reply from Ogilvie which was good of him to take the time to do so.


Thank you for your email. I note your comments and you obviously feel stongly about the game. I do hope you remain a supporter whatever size of league we end up with. Broadly speaking, this is where we are at the moment...

Fans when asked have consistently favoured a 16-team format (once home, once away) over any other



This is a format that a number of people within the SPL would also ideally favour. However, based on current finances within the game, going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game (based on gate revenue and TV income) – and is therefore not affordable at present



The issues we have with the current format are:



- Uneven split (reversed fixtures and 18/20 home games)

- Only one team relegated each season (the lowest proportion in Europe)

- Only one promotion place from SFL1 (which harms that competition)

- The financial chasm that clubs relegated from the SPL fall into



A new format must address these concerns



Supporters tell us that they favour play-offs - these are an obvious solution to the issue of only one team relegated / promoted



But they do not address the financial chasm. This can only be addressed by pushing substantial funding down into the second tier. This funding is created by the distributions that would have gone to positions 11th and 12th, with the move to a 10-team format (the distributions amount to around £1.7m)



The 14-team solution advocated by some supporters is not favoured by the clubs because:



- A 7/7 split would result in ‘blank weekends’ for teams, which cannot be accommodated within the already full fixture list and would result in two teams sitting out the final weekend

- Either a 6/8 or 8/6 split would result in the top section playing a different number of games from the bottom section

- The split would occur much earlier than at present (after fixture 26, rather than fixture 33 currently) giving a number of clubs nothing to play for for substantial parts of their seasons

- It cannot address the financial difference between tiers one and two – indeed, with 14 mouths to feed, rather than 12, it would become even more difficult to push money down to the second tier



The 10-team format will allow the second tier of football to become a more financially robust and exciting environment for clubs to play in. It will ensure that we have 22 properly funded full-time professional clubs – which in turn should allow the creation of a 16-team or 18-team format when finances allow in the future.



Kind regards



David



David Ogilvie
Scottish Premier League

Hampden Park, Glasgow, G42 9DE

tel: 0141 620 4140 (switchboard)

tel: 0141 620 4156 (direct)

fax: 0141 620 4141

website www.scotprem.com

e-mail davidogilvie@scotprem.com


At least he had the decency to get back to me which is more than be said for our board. I already see where i could shoot holes through some of his arguments but i will need to take time study it a bit more -feel free to do the same.That must be the stock reply for any objections tae the 10 team format, it's the same one as on the 1st page, you'll be lucky if he read it, more likely tae have been sent by his secretary

[BoltonHibee]

I e-mailed the SPL about my concerns and had a reply from Ogilvie which was good of him to take the time to do so.


Thank you for your email. I note your comments and you obviously feel stongly about the game. I do hope you remain a supporter whatever size of league we end up with. Broadly speaking, this is where we are at the moment...

Fans when asked have consistently favoured a 16-team format (once home, once away) over any other



This is a format that a number of people within the SPL would also ideally favour. However, based on current finances within the game, going to a 16-team format would remove around £20million from the game (based on gate revenue and TV income) – and is therefore not affordable at present



The issues we have with the current format are:



- Uneven split (reversed fixtures and 18/20 home games)

- Only one team relegated each season (the lowest proportion in Europe)

- Only one promotion place from SFL1 (which harms that competition)

- The financial chasm that clubs relegated from the SPL fall into



A new format must address these concerns



Supporters tell us that they favour play-offs - these are an obvious solution to the issue of only one team relegated / promoted



But they do not address the financial chasm. This can only be addressed by pushing substantial funding down into the second tier. This funding is created by the distributions that would have gone to positions 11th and 12th, with the move to a 10-team format (the distributions amount to around £1.7m)



The 14-team solution advocated by some supporters is not favoured by the clubs because:



- A 7/7 split would result in ‘blank weekends’ for teams, which cannot be accommodated within the already full fixture list and would result in two teams sitting out the final weekend

- Either a 6/8 or 8/6 split would result in the top section playing a different number of games from the bottom section

- The split would occur much earlier than at present (after fixture 26, rather than fixture 33 currently) giving a number of clubs nothing to play for for substantial parts of their seasons

- It cannot address the financial difference between tiers one and two – indeed, with 14 mouths to feed, rather than 12, it would become even more difficult to push money down to the second tier



The 10-team format will allow the second tier of football to become a more financially robust and exciting environment for clubs to play in. It will ensure that we have 22 properly funded full-time professional clubs – which in turn should allow the creation of a 16-team or 18-team format when finances allow in the future.



Kind regards



David



David Ogilvie
Scottish Premier League

Hampden Park, Glasgow, G42 9DE

tel: 0141 620 4140 (switchboard)

tel: 0141 620 4156 (direct)

fax: 0141 620 4141

website www.scotprem.com

e-mail davidogilvie@scotprem.com


At least he had the decency to get back to me which is more than be said for our board. I already see where i could shoot holes through some of his arguments but i will need to take time study it a bit more -feel free to do the same.

Why did we switch from a ten team league to a league with more teams in it in the first place?

Why if the 10 team league was unsuccesful all those years ago would it work now?

Perhaps they should be trying to secure further funding in other areas to expand the league which would on the face of it what a lot of teams would prefer and also, more importantly what the fans want...

[Dashing Bob S]

Scottish football's latest periodic reshuffling of deck chairs on the titanic doesn't impress, but you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. If the football authorities hadn't pandered to the Infirm and taken a stance against sectarianism years ago (they still can't bear to do it) then we'd have a more interesting and balanced league (though Rantic would still be in dominant position.)

[inglisavhibs]

It is essential that there is a "comfort zone" in the middle of the league where Teams are free from the stresses and strains of relegation worries. Under these circumstances, Managers are far more likely to blood young players into the team which can only be good for the the game in general.

The public are not interested in meaningless games and as far as not playing younsters because the game means something, that's a myth. I have watched Hibs for 45 years and can't think of any young players who didn't get a chance in the first team. There were plenty who were not good enough and still got their chance. As another poster points out, our games after the split will be free from stress as you call it and we will see how many fans turn out for these games. Personally i would much rather Hibs had another 3 home games against the top clubs.

[Golden Bear]

The public are not interested in meaningless games and as far as not playing younsters because the game means something, that's a myth. I have watched Hibs for 45 years and can't think of any young players who didn't get a chance in the first team. There were plenty who were not good enough and still got their chance. As another poster points out, our games after the split will be free from stress as you call it and we will see how many fans turn out for these games. Personally i would much rather Hibs had another 3 home games against the top clubs.

If they do way with the crazy "split" then you can still have a middle of the league but the clubs involved could have meaningful fixtures against teams at both the bottom and the top.

And I wonder if Callum Booth would have got his chance by now if a certain previous Manager had still been at the helm?

[blackpoolhibs]

Is there anywhere i can see a breakdown of this £20m we will lose, should we have a bigger league?

[Golden Bear]

Is there anywhere i can see a breakdown of this £20m we will lose, should we have a bigger league?

:agree:

The nitty gritty.

We're all stabbing in the dark without proper knowledge of the financial implications and let's face it the financial case must be overwhelming for the powers at be to be pushing so hard for a 10 team set up.

It can't be purely for the promotion of the game of football that's for sure.

[NorthNorfolkHFC]

3 up/3 down would signal the death of a lot of clubs, why do you think it changed to one up one down.

Clubs like Motherwell, Inverness, St Mirren, St Johnstone, Kilmarnock would not be able to sustain full time football with regular spells in the lower divisions. Ourselves, Dundee United and Aberdeen could just about manage it with the larger core support but it could affect our ability to be as competitive when playing a season with one eye on the financial implications of relegation.

Just look at the likes of Dundee, Livingston, Dunfermline and Falkirk if you want to see teams that have fallen from grace and would now struggle to compete at the top level.

i see your point, i just wanted a playoff available to attract interest in the lower leagues.
it would be a shame to have a playoff for the winner but i think playoffs are essential.
The sports that highlight their success: superleague, rugby league and the championship.
I do think we could take a few lessons from american sports set ups though!!

[Dinkydoo]

Why did we switch from a ten team league to a league with more teams in it in the first place?

Why if the 10 team league was unsuccesful all those years ago would it work now?

Perhaps they should be trying to secure further funding in other areas to expand the league which would on the face of it what a lot of teams would prefer and also, more importantly what the fans want...

Maybe the 10 team league generated enough cash to move to the 12 team but now, with the financial climate as bad as it is it seems reasonable to revert back - with a view to moving to a 16 or 18 format in the future.

I don't actually know though whether the 10 team league structure will generate that much income, it's just a guess.

[BoltonHibee]

Maybe the 10 team league generated enough cash to move to the 12 team but now, with the financial climate as bad as it is it seems reasonable to revert back - with a view to moving to a 16 or 18 format in the future.

I don't actually know though whether the 10 team league structure will generate that much income, it's just a guess.

And I would guess it's buttons in the wider scheme of things.

They should be doing more to secure additional funding, perhaps away from the TV companies through other sponsorship or Private/ Public funding. But that is probably too much like hard work for them

[Lago]

Thought about this for some time & then cast my mind back to the time when Scottish football had a top league of 18 teams, yes I'm that old, by this time of the sason I can tell you, the football for the main was the pits. Nothing to play for, low crowds, league already won, teams at the lower end of the league more or less part time you name it. Can't see what would be any different if we went back to that today. Sponsor ship is hard enough to get now think how hard it would be under those circumstances.

[inglisavhibs]

If they do way with the crazy "split" then you can still have a middle of the league but the clubs involved could have meaningful fixtures against teams at both the bottom and the top.

And I wonder if Callum Booth would have got his chance by now if a certain previous Manager had still been at the helm?
Much less chance of meaningless games with 10 (although of course there might be some meaningless games) and the reason Booth didn't play under Hughes is that he didn't think Booth was good enough at that time.

[marinello59]

And I would guess it's buttons in the wider scheme of things.

They should be doing more to secure additional funding, perhaps away from the TV companies through other sponsorship or Private/ Public funding. But that is probably too much like hard work for them

And who is going to want to put money in to sponsorship without the mass exposure that TV coverage brings?

[Luna_Asylum]

Is there anywhere i can see a breakdown of this £20m we will lose, should we have a bigger league?

Yes I have it here on a email I received yesterday from the SPL in response to my request for information.

"In a 16-team format, it is likely TV revenue would be halved from the current £13m per season and gate money and matchday hospitality would also drop considerably given that each club would play 15 rather than 19 home games."

Not sure what to make of that. So it would seem that Sky/ESPN have said - change the league structure and we will cut in half what we pay you? Not sure I believe that. In fact if the BBC highlights money stayed the same Sky/ESPN we are being told will pay less than half what they pay now!

That leaves £13.5 million in lost gate money. As the significant majority of gate money is from season ticket sales the only way they could arrive at that is to cut season ticket prices in proportion to reduced games. Even then you could not get to £13.5m.

Next stage is to ask the clubs if they trust these figures which are the basis of what they are going to vote on. Hibs with lots of accountants on the board would be in a good position to respond but I doubt they will bother. Unless enough people ask perhaps.

[marinello59]

Yes I have it here on a email I received yesterday from the SPL in response to my request for information.

"In a 16-team format, it is likely TV revenue would be halved from the current £13m per season and gate money and matchday hospitality would also drop considerably given that each club would play 15 rather than 19 home games."

Not sure what to make of that. So it would seem that Sky/ESPN have said - change the league structure and we will cut in half what we pay you? Not sure I believe that. In fact if the BBC highlights money stayed the same Sky/ESPN we are being told will pay less than half what they pay now!

That leaves £13.5 million in lost gate money. As the significant majority of gate money is from season ticket sales the only way they could arrive at that is to cut season ticket prices in proportion to reduced games. Even then you could not get to £13.5m.

Next stage is to ask the clubs if they trust these figures which are the basis of what they are going to vote on. Hibs with lots of accountants on the board would be in a good position to respond but I doubt they will bother. Unless enough people ask perhaps.

Are you seriously suggesting the Hibs board will blindly back this without bothering to check the figures?

[Luna_Asylum]

Are you seriously suggesting the Hibs board will blindly back this without bothering to check the figures?

Not sure where you got that from!

[marinello59]

Next stage is to ask the clubs if they trust these figures which are the basis of what they are going to vote on. Hibs with lots of accountants on the board would be in a good position to respond but I doubt they will bother. Unless enough people ask perhaps.


Not sure where you got that from!

Ah, maybe I misread that. Are you saying that they won't bother to respond to your question? Surely the only response possible would be , yes, they do trust the figures. Otherwise why would they back it?

[BoltonHibee]

And who is going to want to put money in to sponsorship without the mass exposure that TV coverage brings?

Sorry, I must have missed the bit stating there would be no mass tv coverage.

[marinello59]

Sorry, I must have missed the bit stating there would be no mass tv coverage.

Didn't you say that they should be doing more to secure additional funding away from the TV companies? The two go hand in hand. Without the TV exposure sponsorship funding dries up.

[BoltonHibee]

Didn't you say that they should be doing more to secure additional funding away from the TV companies? The two go hand in hand. Without the TV exposure sponsorship funding dries up.

Yes I did, and not necessarily

[down the slope]

I've had a chance to look at Ogilvies reply and to me some things don't add up , the £20 million figure quoted seems to be the sum if most of the tv money just disappeared but maybe i'm wrong about that one as he gave no in depth breakdown of how that figure was achieved. The reasons for moving to ten in his order are
UNEVEN SPLIT 18/20 HOME GAMES.
Hardly most clubs concerned i would think as it must even itself out over the years.ONLY ONE TEM RELEGATED, SMALLEST PERCENT IN EUROPE.
Again hardly an issue with most clubs or supporters , if we move to a smaller league we could see 20% of the clubs relegated ! from the sublime to the ridiculous. We could increase to two the number relegated but keep the twelve as a present.
FINANCIAL CHASM.
The magic figure he gave that will change the lower league of twelve is £1.7 million , now if this is spread amongst the twelve it gives them roughly 140k !. This will be welcome no doubt but is hardly going to cause a football revolution in the SFL. If the money is for the one or two relegated then what is the point of change for the rest ?.


It seems there are more questions than answers whilst leaving the OF sitting pretty as usual. Feel free to pick holes on my take of things.

[Part/Time Supporter]

I've had a chance to look at Ogilvies reply and to me some things don't add up , the £20 million figure quoted seems to be the sum if most of the tv money just disappeared but maybe i'm wrong about that one as he gave no in depth breakdown of how that figure was achieved. The reasons for moving to ten in his order are
UNEVEN SPLIT 18/20 HOME GAMES.
Hardly most clubs concerned i would think as it must even itself out over the years.ONLY ONE TEM RELEGATED, SMALLEST PERCENT IN EUROPE.
Again hardly an issue with most clubs or supporters , if we move to a smaller league we could see 20% of the clubs relegated ! from the sublime to the ridiculous. We could increase to two the number relegated but keep the twelve as a present.
FINANCIAL CHASM.
The magic figure he gave that will change the lower league of twelve is £1.7 million , now if this is spread amongst the twelve it gives them roughly 140k !. This will be welcome no doubt but is hardly going to cause a football revolution in the SFL. If the money is for the one or two relegated then what is the point of change for the rest ?.


It seems there are more questions than answers whilst leaving the OF sitting pretty as usual. Feel free to pick holes on my take of things.

The change from 12 to 10 appears to be mainly for the benefit of the OF, who moan every year about the unfairness of the split. Funnily enough though, they've never had 20 or 18 home games. It also slightly eases their fixture congestion (moving from 38 to 36 games), another OF bugbear.

I don't think everyone else is that bothered about the split. Aye it's a slight pain in the backside, but it does keep a certain amount of interest going. Hibs' season would basically be over now if it wasn't for the split (ditto Caley Thistle after last night).

I think the one getting relegated out of 12 is a problem, it is too few. But you don't need to change the size of the league to fix that! Either make it two down or one plus a playoff of some sort.

The £20M thing does seem a bit "back of the fag packet".

[basehibby]

Yes I have it here on a email I received yesterday from the SPL in response to my request for information.

"In a 16-team format, it is likely TV revenue would be halved from the current £13m per season and gate money and matchday hospitality would also drop considerably given that each club would play 15 rather than 19 home games."

Not sure what to make of that. So it would seem that Sky/ESPN have said - change the league structure and we will cut in half what we pay you? Not sure I believe that. In fact if the BBC highlights money stayed the same Sky/ESPN we are being told will pay less than half what they pay now!

That leaves £13.5 million in lost gate money. As the significant majority of gate money is from season ticket sales the only way they could arrive at that is to cut season ticket prices in proportion to reduced games. Even then you could not get to £13.5m.

Next stage is to ask the clubs if they trust these figures which are the basis of what they are going to vote on. Hibs with lots of accountants on the board would be in a good position to respond but I doubt they will bother. Unless enough people ask perhaps.

What a sad sad state of affairs! Basically it's Sky/ESPN who are calling the shots regarding the future of Scottish football - despite the fact that they treat us collectively like a piece of sheight that got stuck to their shoe.
Meanwhile, the people who really care and who actually stump up the cash - the fans - are willfully ignored at every stage. :rolleyes:

[ancient hibee]

If season ticket income drops by around 20% because of 4 fewer home games it wouldn't take long to rack up over £10M.For the OF alone it would be about £6M.

[Removed]

What a sad sad state of affairs! Basically it's Sky/ESPN who are calling the shots regarding the future of Scottish football - despite the fact that they treat us collectively like a piece of sheight that got stuck to their shoe.
Meanwhile, the people who really care and who actually stump up the cash - the fans - are willfully ignored at every stage. :rolleyes:

:agree: but how many folk are going to cancel their Sky? They'd probably rather boycott Hibs :bitchy:

[down the slope]

If season ticket income drops by around 20% because of 4 fewer home games it wouldn't take long to rack up over £10M.For the OF alone it would be about £6M.

So it would seem that the OF are the biggest losers , what a shame. again it seems as if they are calling the shots , to make up the loss from the fewer home games the league cup could go back to sections of four as it used to be , problem solved.

[alexedwards]

It is well noted that the SPL continually dodge the question of making up the fixtures via other competitions.
Make no mistake the figures are a complete work of fiction and the best shot of the 10-teams not going through lies with the SFL clubs.
A proposal has been presented to the SPL and member clubs, SFA and SFL clubs displaying a new compeition the Scottish Premier Cup (SPC) and the benefits available from seeding of OF, Edinburgh & North-East clubs to cover extra matches,
ensure TV revenue and reach home match targets.
In addition there is a further leap to a North European Cup competition for smaller euro nations. However, it appears that the ambition of Celtic/Rangers in this department is questionable as they don't appear to be pioneers within the football industry. PSV led the last Atlantic venture and UEFA did not stand in anyone's way, however, it was the clubs themselves that did not have the drive to make it happen. Celtic/Rangers could push a project of this nature forward, however, there are appears to be a great deal of fear of failure. So as there is so much fear of failure kicking about why not let the OF settle for a 10-team league and allow them to be the major benefactors. Yes, you heard it let the whole of Scottish football suffer because the OF elite can't actually achieve their own ambitions.

[marinello59]

It is well noted that the SPL continually dodge the question of making up the fixtures via other competitions.
Make no mistake the figures are a complete work of fiction and the best shot of the 10-teams not going through lies with the SFL clubs.
A proposal has been presented to the SPL and member clubs, SFA and SFL clubs displaying a new compeition the Scottish Premier Cup (SPC) and the benefits available from seeding of OF, Edinburgh & North-East clubs to cover extra matches,
ensure TV revenue and reach home match targets.
In addition there is a further leap to a North European Cup competition for smaller euro nations. However, it appears that the ambition of Celtic/Rangers in this department is questionable as they don't appear to be pioneers within the football industry. PSV led the last Atlantic venture and UEFA did not stand in anyone's way, however, it was the clubs themselves that did not have the drive to make it happen. Celtic/Rangers could push a project of this nature forward, however, there are appears to be a great deal of fear of failure. So as there is so much fear of failure kicking about why not let the OF settle for a 10-team league and allow them to be the major benefactors. Yes, you heard it let the whole of Scottish football suffer because the OF elite can't actually achieve their own ambitions.

Do you have the real figures then? Why have the likes of Petrie and Co. gone along with this deception? That truly baffles me if you are indeed correct.

[Luna_Asylum]

Do you have the real figures then? Why have the likes of Petrie and Co. gone along with this deception? That truly baffles me if you are indeed correct.

How can we produce real figures to satisfy you? We could make them up but that would bring us down to their (SPL) level.

SPL say TV revenue will drop by 50% with a bigger league. Anyone who buys that is nuts IMHO.

They say matchday income drops by £13.5m but that is based on clubs reducing ST prices in proportion to less matches. Clubs will never reduce ST prices so that's rubbish also.

Petries silence does not mean the figures are correct.

[alexedwards]

The reason the SPL clubs "go along" with this are simply that it drops the income share from 12 to 10, the OF generate income via 4 OF matches, and supposedly that
teams require 2 home matches against OF.
However, the SPL are so slippery in their presentation (probably because they tried to force it through quickly - not a good sign) that when offered alternative solutions
it falls on deaf ears and answers are supplied that do not directly refer to the questions (refer to email from SPL earlier in thread).
The SPL also manipulate the media and vice-versa in a fashion that promotes to the public the final decision is theirs and clearly ignoring the SFL clubs.
So far the SPL are ignoring fans and SLF club members, not providing evidence of figures, lying on the radio and we wonder why Rod Petrie would support this - he is a major part of this.
We went down this road as recently as 2007 and the SFL clubs voted against it - terminating the project. This time around the SPL 2 is increased by 2 clubs from 10 to 12 creating a further 2 votes in favour of the SPL plan.
This crew will do anything to get their way.

[marinello59]

How can we produce real figures to satisfy you? We could make them up but that would bring us down to their (SPL) level.

SPL say TV revenue will drop by 50% with a bigger league. Anyone who buys that is nuts IMHO.

They say matchday income drops by £13.5m but that is based on clubs reducing ST prices in proportion to less matches. Clubs will never reduce ST prices so that's rubbish also.

Petries silence does not mean the figures are correct.

There has been a few back of a fag packet figures produced here used here to suggest that the backers of a ten team SPL are being dishonest when they say TV income etc would fall significantly. I oppose the ten team SPL on footballing grounds but I don't think that an 18 team league would be economically viable in the short term. The TV money just won't be there. Of course the authorities could be truly revolutionary and move to summer football giving us a niche TV market. I can't see them ever being that bold though.

[marinello59]

The reason the SPL clubs "go along" with this are simply that it drops the income share from 12 to 10, the OF generate income via 4 OF matches, and supposedly that
teams require 2 home matches against OF.
However, the SPL are so slippery in their presentation (probably because they tried to force it through quickly - not a good sign) that when offered alternative solutions
it falls on deaf ears and answers are supplied that do not directly refer to the questions (refer to email from SPL earlier in thread).
The SPL also manipulate the media and vice-versa in a fashion that promotes to the public the final decision is theirs and clearly ignoring the SFL clubs.
So far the SPL are ignoring fans and SLF club members, not providing evidence of figures, lying on the radio and we wonder why Rod Petrie would support this - he is a major part of this.
We went down this road as recently as 2007 and the SFL clubs voted against it - terminating the project. This time around the SPL 2 is increased by 2 clubs from 10 to 12 creating a further 2 votes in favour of the SPL plan.
This crew will do anything to get their way.

Where is the money from SPL2 coming from then?

[alexedwards]

SPL 2 is required to gain support from current SFL clubs for SPL 1 to go through
(they couldn't care less about the current Scottish First Division) - it's a smokescreen.
It's unlikely the "suggested" additional cash on offer would make the proposed SPL 2 "more robust" if it went ahead bearing in mind it would have 2 additional teams in comparison 1st Div.

[marinello59]

SPL 2 is required to gain support from current SFL clubs for SPL 1 to go through
(they couldn't care less about the current Scottish First Division) - it's a smokescreen.
It's unlikely the "suggested" additional cash on offer would make the proposed SPL 2 "more robust" if it went ahead bearing in mind it would have 2 additional teams in comparison 1st Div.

So the whole SPL2 thing is part of a cunning conspiracy theory. (I do agree that the top teams don't give a stuff about the lower reaches of the SFL though. Their claim to be acting for the good of ALL of Scottish football is laughable.)
You haven't actually answered my question though. You suggested that the SPL money will only be split amongst 10 teams rather than 12 as at present. So where is the money for SPL2 coming from?

[Luna_Asylum]

So the whole SPL2 thing is part of a cunning conspiracy theory. (I do agree that the top teams don't give a stuff about the lower reaches of the SFL though. Their claim to be acting for the good of ALL of Scottish football is laughable.)
You haven't actually answered my question though. You suggested that the SPL money will only be split amongst 10 teams rather than 12 as at present. So where is the money for SPL2 coming from?

You are a master at putting words into other peoples mouths.

[alexedwards]

Can't see where your coming from - on the one hand it's not a conspiracy and on the other it's laughable that the top tier may give a stuff about the second.
This is exactly how items such as this are passed - because people can't actually believe it's going on. You won't directly hear it from anyone but it is happening.
We can see it now - Lawwell and Bain sitting together saying "that was tough on Inverness being in the second tier last year, think we should do something about that so that it doesn't happen again."
The money for SPL 2 (£1.7m) would be paid from the void left by 2 teams dropping out from SPL 1 into SPL 2. However, the SPL have to pay the SFL a sum each year which as I understand would be lost under the new set up so the SFL would completely be bust for lower level teams in Divs 2 and 3.
Not here to convince you - your choice - believe or believe not.

[marinello59]

You are a master at putting words into other peoples mouths.

Read his post below yours then.

[marinello59]

Can't see where your coming from - on the one hand it's not a conspiracy and on the other it's laughable that the top tier may give a stuff about the second.
This is exactly how items such as this are passed - because people can't actually believe it's going on. You won't directly hear it from anyone but it is happening.
We can see it now - Lawwell and Bain sitting together saying "that was tough on Inverness being in the second tier last year, think we should do something about that so that it doesn't happen again."
The money for SPL 2 (£1.7m) would be paid from the void left by 2 teams dropping out from SPL 1 into SPL 2. However, the SPL have to pay the SFL a sum each year which as I understand would be lost under the new set up so the SFL would completely be bust for lower level teams in Divs 2 and 3.
Not here to convince you - your choice - believe or believe not.

Just because I don't believe in any conspiracy doesn't mean I think that the SPL act in the interests of clubs other than those actually in the SPL (and the proposed SPL2). A single ruling body would address that issue though.

[Luna_Asylum]

Read his post below yours then.

I have. If you don't know the difference between a conspiricy thoeory and a smokescreen that's your problem. Like alexedwards I'm not here to convince you. Believe what you want.

[alexedwards]

A single ruling body would address that issue.
However, my understanding is that the SPL would have 2 leagues only - where would that leave the rest of the clubs - perhaps finished in senior Scottish football.
The question that needs to be asked - (bearing in mind the SPL need the SFL vote to go forward).
If you are a SFL club would you vote for the loss of the league structure you currently play in?
The best example here is Inverness (have spoken with them) - advised by club sec that they would never as a club be in favour of a 10-team SPL - why is that when apparently they are a club who would benefit from this SPL 1 & 2 set-up in the future?
FWIW I am not here to convince anyone of my view merely suggest that if a bout of Doncaster propoganda goes through then many clubs & fans will pay for this for a long time to come.

[marinello59]

I have. If you don't know the difference between a conspiricy thoeory and a smokescreen that's your problem. Like alexedwards I'm not here to convince you. Believe what you want.

Thanks.

[marinello59]

A single ruling body would address that issue.
However, my understanding is that the SPL would have 2 leagues only - where would that leave the rest of the clubs - perhaps finished in senior Scottish football.
The question that needs to be asked - (bearing in mind the SPL need the SFL vote to go forward).
If you are a SFL club would you vote for the loss of the league structure you currently play in?
The best example here is Inverness (have spoken with them) - advised by club sec that they would never as a club be in favour of a 10-team SPL - why is that when apparently they are a club who would benefit from this SPL 1 & 2 set-up in the future?
FWIW I am not here to convince anyone of my view merely suggest that if a bout of Doncaster propoganda goes through then many clubs & fans will pay for this for a long time to come.

You won't get any argument from me about that. The remaining SFL clubs will be left to sink. That's what happens when we have several ruling bodies with different priorities. This is all mere tinkering. We need radical reform and neither the 10 team SPL or going straight to an 18 team SPL will significantly improve the standards of football we have at present. IMHO of course.

[alexedwards]

We need "radical" reform - absolutely.
That is what we were told was planned - it would appear unfortunate that we do not have the people in place to bring it about at this time nor can we trust them IMHO.

[down the slope]

Just checked this out on the SPL website,


Our Aims and Objectives

Mission Statement

"The mission of the Scottish Premier League is to provide an environment in which Scotland's foremost clubs can improve their quality and image, maximise the commercial value of the game and thus ensure its long term future and prosperity".

The objectives of the Scottish Premier League are to:
Build a league competition with standing and recognition throughout Europe;
Represent and safeguard the interests of its members;
Modernise the league structure and support system;
Maximise the commercial value of Scottish Premier League football by fully exploiting commercial rights and properties;
Organise a league competition, adhering to rules and regulations set down by the governing bodies of the game and - encouraging attractive and entertaining football;
Provide leadership in the development of key initiatives to improve the quality of the game in Scotland, particularly youth development, and to set a pace and direction for the whole of Scottish football;
Liaise with other organisations to ensure effective co-ordination between the Scottish Premier League and other football organisations across the country and across the borders.

Not a word about the supporters !, how did they manage to miss us out ?.
By the way did you know that Rod is on the board of the SPL ?>

[alexedwards]

Just checked this out on the SPL website,


Our Aims and Objectives

Mission Statement

"The mission of the Scottish Premier League is to provide an environment in which Scotland's foremost clubs can improve their quality and image, maximise the commercial value of the game and thus ensure its long term future and prosperity".

The objectives of the Scottish Premier League are to:
Build a league competition with standing and recognition throughout Europe;
Represent and safeguard the interests of its members;
Modernise the league structure and support system;
Maximise the commercial value of Scottish Premier League football by fully exploiting commercial rights and properties;
Organise a league competition, adhering to rules and regulations set down by the governing bodies of the game and - encouraging attractive and entertaining football;
Provide leadership in the development of key initiatives to improve the quality of the game in Scotland, particularly youth development, and to set a pace and direction for the whole of Scottish football;
Liaise with other organisations to ensure effective co-ordination between the Scottish Premier League and other football organisations across the country and across the borders.

Not a word about the supporters !, how did they manage to miss us out ?.
By the way did you know that Rod is on the board of the SPL ?>

Mission Staement: "Take the fans of every SPL club for granted as they are mugs and will turn up regardless for whatever garbage we throw at them.
Set the pace and direction of Scottish football at the behest of our 2 favourite clubs and let no other club stand in their way."

[Saorsa]

Mission Staement: "Take the fans of every SPL club for granted as they are mugs and will turn up regardless for whatever garbage we throw at them.
Set the pace and direction of Scottish football at the behest of our 2 favourite clubs and let no other club stand in their way.":agree:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/jamie1971/Hammering_in.gif

aided and abetted by those who run the other clubs who continually bend over and drop their drawers.

[brog]

I've lived in London for over 30 years but still have a season ticket. I'm a shareholder & Hibernians member also but won't be renewing my season if we revert to a 10 team league. I'm writing to Rod to tell him this. I believe any supposed loss in revenue ( personally I'm not convinced ) from a 12 or 14 team league v a 10 team league will be offset if we lose 1,000 seasons. I believe that is a strong possibility & as RP only understands money that's the message we need to get across.

[jgl07]

I have made it clear that I will not renew if the SPL moves to a ten-team format.

I have only been to one SPL league game since mid-December and don't expect to be going back again this season.

If anyone wants my season ticket (FF upper tier), the first decent donation to the Dnipro kids fund gets it.

[HibbyDave]

Please keep this thread going. But please encourage others to register their opposition or to side with our suspiciously silent board in the beLIEf that a ten team league is better.

[ancient hibee]

I have made it clear that I will not renew if the SPL moves to a ten-team format.

I have only been to one SPL league game since mid-December and don't expect to be going back again this season.

If anyone wants my season ticket (FF upper tier), the first decent donation to the Dnipro kids fund gets it.

Why do you bother having a ST if you never go if you don't mind me asking?

[StevieC]

Why do you bother having a ST if you never go if you don't mind me asking?

I'll not answer for him, but lots of people will buy season tickets to show their support despite the fact that they know they will not manage every game (and know that it would be much cheaper to pay on a game by game basis).

I reckon that a 10 team league will test that resolve to the max and there will be a lot of supporters, in the above bracket (myself included), that wont renew.

[Phil MaGlass]

no 10 team league thanks.

[GreenCastle]

I have talked about the 10 ten league on here many times before but a few quick points.

1 - Scottish Football needs change and needs to make it more competitive - The Old Firm winning the league every year isn't competitive.

2 - Fans are getting ripped off for ticket prices

3 - Fans are board of playing the same teams x3, x4 or like Rangers and Celtic this season x7 times!

4 - A smaller league didn't work before - it won't work again.

5 - A larger league and pyramid system below through the levels is the way forward to get fans back - play each other x2 a season - once home and away.

6 - The 10 team league is all about SHORT TERM THINKING AND MONEY...longer term for the next generation of players (possibly your kids..) we may not have a league if they don't make the right choice when they vote.

[blackpoolhibs]

I'll not answer for him, but lots of people will buy season tickets to show their support despite the fact that they know they will not manage every game (and know that it would be much cheaper to pay on a game by game basis).

I reckon that a 10 team league will test that resolve to the max and there will be a lot of supporters, in the above bracket (myself included), that wont renew.

That certainly was my reason when we owned the hotel. I felt i was doing my bit, standing up and being counted even though i might only have made 10 home games.

From a personal point of view, the 10 team league is just boring and some of those who stood up and were counted, just might be staying home, picking there games and watching Jeff Stelling a lot more in the future.

[jgl07]

Why do you bother having a ST if you never go if you don't mind me asking?

I have been a season ticket holder for most years since 1995 and went to virtually every home match plus a large number away until this ten team nonsense came up again.

The first match I missed this season was the Aberdeen match on Boxing day. I have been to two matches since then including the Ayr cup tie.

I simply decided I was sick of the sight of the same 11 teams visiting each year. The prospect of the cut-throat competition with three teams going down next year followed by at least two out of eight teams going down in subsequent seasons would make the spectacle not worth considering.

The earlier start to the season, meaning I would have missed matches due to holidays and the mid-winter break didn't help either although the 10-team SPL was a deal breaker by itself. I am also fed up with the 12:30 PM Sunday starts and the ridiculous fixture pattern with three to five week gaps between home fixtures (or any fixtures) and then four or five matches in the next three weeks.

I would have probably seen the season out but according to reports, Hibs were one of the main proponents of the insane plan so I called it a day in January.

To be honest I haven't missed going at all even though Hibs have hardly stopped winning since then.

Scottish Football will have to get used to losing paying supporters over the next couple of seasons.

[GreenPJ]

Whilst I am still against a 10 team league without reservation I did receive a very comprehensive response from Fife Hyland when I had sent Hibs an email to register my thoughts on a 10 team league.

I did not agree with a number of the points he was making although he does have factual information as opposed to my subjective beliefs.

It did at least give me the comfort that Hibs will have fully thought out the impact on fans, Hibs and the wider game before making a final decision.

[Luna_Asylum]

Whilst I am still against a 10 team league without reservation I did receive a very comprehensive response from Fife Hyland when I had sent Hibs an email to register my thoughts on a 10 team league.

I did not agree with a number of the points he was making although he does have factual information as opposed to my subjective beliefs.

It did at least give me the comfort that Hibs will have fully thought out the impact on fans, Hibs and the wider game before making a final decision.

If you have the time to share that with us I would be gratefull

[down the slope]

Whilst I am still against a 10 team league without reservation I did receive a very comprehensive response from Fife Hyland when I had sent Hibs an email to register my thoughts on a 10 team league.

I did not agree with a number of the points he was making although he does have factual information as opposed to my subjective beliefs.

It did at least give me the comfort that Hibs will have fully thought out the impact on fans, Hibs and the wider game before making a final decision.

Should they not have asked the fans first before they decided to go for the ten ?, if Rod has been instrumental in setting the whole thing up then it seems like it's a done deal but what does he care about what we think.

[inglisavhibs]

Just checked this out on the SPL website,


Our Aims and Objectives

Mission Statement

"The mission of the Scottish Premier League is to provide an environment in which Scotland's foremost clubs can improve their quality and image, maximise the commercial value of the game and thus ensure its long term future and prosperity".

The objectives of the Scottish Premier League are to:
Build a league competition with standing and recognition throughout Europe;
Represent and safeguard the interests of its members;
Modernise the league structure and support system;
Maximise the commercial value of Scottish Premier League football by fully exploiting commercial rights and properties;
Organise a league competition, adhering to rules and regulations set down by the governing bodies of the game and - encouraging attractive and entertaining football;
Provide leadership in the development of key initiatives to improve the quality of the game in Scotland, particularly youth development, and to set a pace and direction for the whole of Scottish football;
Liaise with other organisations to ensure effective co-ordination between the Scottish Premier League and other football organisations across the country and across the borders.

Not a word about the supporters !, how did they manage to miss us out ?.
By the way did you know that Rod is on the board of the SPL ?>

Most of the Hibs fans I know are eagerly looking forward to the Derby against Hearts, but it seems a good few on here would rather us be playing a current first division team bringing a few hundred fans (if that). Hibs don't need a poll to find out what the fans want, they know what games fans turn out for. It's not rocket science.

[down the slope]

Most of the Hibs fans I know are eagerly looking forward to the Derby against Hearts, but it seems a good few on here would rather us be playing a current first division team bringing a few hundred fans (if that). Hibs don't need a poll to find out what the fans want, they know what games fans turn out for. It's not rocket science.

You just don't get it do you ?, sure everyone looks forward to the games against Hearts but we cannot play them every week. The point i'm trying to make is that we should be looking forward to games against the likes of Dundee and Dunfermline , with a proper distribution of the tv money teams such as these could raise their standards and pay better players but some like you want the OF to retain control of Scottish football. Bye the way how many fans did Ayr bring for the cup game ? aye more than a few hundred , that's what happens when you play teams such as those only once a season.

[inglisavhibs]

You just don't get it do you ?, sure everyone looks forward to the games against Hearts but we cannot play them every week. The point i'm trying to make is that we should be looking forward to games against the likes of Dundee and Dunfermline , with a proper distribution of the tv money teams such as these could raise their standards and pay better players but some like you want the OF to retain control of Scottish football. Bye the way how many fans did Ayr bring for the cup game ? aye more than a few hundred , that's what happens when you play teams such as those only once a season.
Sorry I do get it. Teams always bring more fans for a Scottish Cup tie. How many fans do you think Ayr would bring for a league game in April if they were sitting in the lower half of a big league and how many Hibs fans would turn out for that one. And in case you didn't know we don't play Hearts every week and playing them twice at home in one year is not a problem. Bringing more provincial clubs in to the league will reduce standards as less money is generated and ultimately poorer players. I watched Hibs regularly at the end of the eighteen club league and we don't want to go back there. It would be even worse now as gates were split and the smaller teams lived of the old firm . This can't happen now.

[millarco]

You just don't get it do you ?, sure everyone looks forward to the games against Hearts but we cannot play them every week. The point i'm trying to make is that we should be looking forward to games against the likes of Dundee and Dunfermline , with a proper distribution of the tv money teams such as these could raise their standards and pay better players but some like you want the OF to retain control of Scottish football. Bye the way how many fans did Ayr bring for the cup game ? aye more than a few hundred , that's what happens when you play teams such as those only once a season.

That rise in income still won't take us anywhere near OF levels. I agree a more even distribution would help in theory make us better but that could also be achieved in any league set-up. It's ridiculous how much the prize money is for the first two places compared to the rest, but it's still not that much in the grand scheme of things. There isn't a structure that will end the OF's stranglehold on the league, the only way it can be done is by heavy investment ala Romanov (which will soon be almost impossible under UEFA FFP rules) or maybe slowly bridging the gap and getting a good team together for a few years.

As for the Ayr game, IIRC the attendance from our fans was pretty poor, despite so many moaning about facing the same teams every week. Fans will turn up when teams are winning, regardless of how many teams are in the league IMO.

I'm not exactly a fan of the 10-team set up, I just think s 16 team league would be worse.

[marinello59]

You just don't get it do you ?, sure everyone looks forward to the games against Hearts but we cannot play them every week. The point i'm trying to make is that we should be looking forward to games against the likes of Dundee and Dunfermline , with a proper distribution of the tv money teams such as these could raise their standards and pay better players but some like you want the OF to retain control of Scottish football. Bye the way how many fans did Ayr bring for the cup game ? aye more than a few hundred , that's what happens when you play teams such as those only once a season.

Going to a 16/ 18 team league will see TV revenue drop significantly. How will standards rise when there is less money available in the first place? SPL2 should be a stepping stone to wards an attractive and competitive expanded top flight which is what most of us want to see. I am not convinced we have the strength in depth to go straight there. Only my opinion of course
I don't really understand the point you are making about the Ayr United game. The home attendance was fairly poor for that game. That doesn't seem to support the argument that we will turn out in numbers for a league game against a club currently plying their trade in the lower reaches of the First Division just because we only play them once a season.

[flash]

Let's face it you would have to be a moron to give up your season ticket, making Hibs suffer, because there are two less teams in the SPL.

Seems to me either there is a lot of grandstanding going on here or people were looking for an excuse not to renew anyway.

I mean an 18 team league. Gies peace.

Those home games against Morton and Queen of the South will really be the turning point for Scottish fitba.

[down the slope]

Let's face it you would have to be a moron to give up your season ticket, making Hibs suffer, because there are two less teams in the SPL.

Seems to me either there is a lot of grandstanding going on here or people were looking for an excuse not to renew anyway.

I mean an 18 team league. Gies peace.

Those home games against Morton and Queen of the South will really be the turning point for Scottish fitba.

Why do you mention Morton and QOS ?, you could also mention Dundee and Dunfermline ? , a lot of people are bored with what we have and changing to a ten just plays into the OF's hands. Everyone is entitled to their views but watching ICT and Hamilton at least twice a season just does not do it for me anymore. Bye the way i was not put on this planet to subsidize Hibs and please do not tell me how to spend my money !. As for being a moron i think you should take a look in the mirror then grow up !.

[flash]

Why do you mention Morton and QOS ?, you could also mention Dundee and Dunfermline ? , a lot of people are bored with what we have and changing to a ten just plays into the OF's hands. Everyone is entitled to their views but watching ICT and Hamilton at least twice a season just does not do it for me anymore. Bye the way i was not put on this planet to subsidize Hibs and please do not tell me how to spend my money !. As for being a moron i think you should take a look in the mirror then grow up !.

Where did i tell you how to spend your money? If you don't want to watch Hibs anymore then don't. I do.

[blackpoolhibs]

Let's face it you would have to be a moron to give up your season ticket, making Hibs suffer, because there are two less teams in the SPL.

Seems to me either there is a lot of grandstanding going on here or people were looking for an excuse not to renew anyway.

I mean an 18 team league. Gies peace.

Those home games against Morton and Queen of the South will really be the turning point for Scottish fitba.

Or that person could just be fed up paying to watch the same teams over and over again. Maybe someone who's willing to do that is a moron?:confused:

[StevieC]

Let's face it you would have to be a moron to give up your season ticket, making Hibs suffer, because there are two less teams in the SPL.

Seems to me either there is a lot of grandstanding going on here or people were looking for an excuse not to renew anyway.

I mean an 18 team league. Gies peace.

Those home games against Morton and Queen of the South will really be the turning point for Scottish fitba.

Well I must be a moron then, but at least I'm a moron that knows when he is getting shafted and will act accordingly.

Certainly not looking for an excuse not to renew, had a season ticket every season for over 12 years. In fact not renewing will probably end up costing me more money!

And if anyone thinks that a 10 team league is just a stepping stone to a larger league then more fool you. Do you honestly think that the Old Firm will allow a larger league once they get their way with this 10 team set-up?

[flash]

Or that person could just be fed up paying to watch the same teams over and over again. Maybe someone who's willing to do that is a moron?:confused:

But it's been like that since 1970 odd. If you think anyone who wants to watch Hibs is a moron then that's your call.

[marinello59]

Well I must be a moron then, but at least I'm a moron that knows when he is getting shafted and will make act accordingly.

Certainly not looking for an excuse not to renew, had a season ticket every season for over 12 years. In fact not renewing will probably end up costing me more money!

And if anyone thinks that a 10 team league is just a stepping stone to a larger league then more fool you. Do you honestly think that the Old Firm will allow a larger league once they get their way with this 10 team set-up?


I think it should be a stepping stone to a larger league. That doesn't make me a fool does it? Whether I trust the authorities to deliver that or not is another thing. It would have to be timetabled in before I would find a ten team league acceptable at all.
To those who oppose a ten team SPL under any circumstances, what should the alternative be? Is the status quo an option? It might be preferable to a headlong rush to change things for the sake of it. If the only way that an expanded league could attract the same TV revenue as now was by moving to Summer football would that be acceptable? That's my preference but that might just be a step to far for some of the games traditionalists.

[down the slope]

I think it should be a stepping stone to a larger league. That doesn't make me a fool does it? Whether I trust the authorities to deliver that or not is another thing. It would have to be timetabled in before I would find a ten team league acceptable at all.
To those who oppose a ten team SPL under any circumstances, what should the alternative be? Is the status quo an option? It might be preferable to a headlong rush to change things for the sake of it. If the only way that an expanded league could attract the same TV revenue as now was by moving to Summer football would that be acceptable? That's my preference but that might just be a step to far for some of the games traditionalists.

Bad as it is just now i would rather keep the twelve until we have had a proper debate which includes the fans before we change the structure , Doncaster is trying to bulldoze this through with scare stories about a 20 million shortfall in revenue-it was seven million a few weeks ago , what will it be next week when we get nearer the vote ?, he needs to be called to account as to where he gets his figures.
Doncaster has said that in the longterm he would like to see a bigger league but what is it in the future that will bring this about that he is unable to do now ?. Once he gets his way and delivers the new structure to his OF pals we will never get a change.

[brog]

Most of the Hibs fans I know are eagerly looking forward to the Derby against Hearts, but it seems a good few on here would rather us be playing a current first division team bringing a few hundred fans (if that). Hibs don't need a poll to find out what the fans want, they know what games fans turn out for. It's not rocket science.

Having a 14 team league should not preclude having 4 games a year against Yams. It's not a case of either/or. All both teams need to do is make top 7, or even both make bottom 7!! Ironically, if we don't make Top 6 this year it's probable Yams will lose more money than us as they won't get a second derby home game - shame!!

[blackpoolhibs]

But it's been like that since 1970 odd. If you think anyone who wants to watch Hibs is a moron then that's your call.

Yes its been that way since the 70s, and maybe you are not fed up with it but more and more people are. I dont think anyone who chooses to watch Hibs or not watch Hibs are morons.

[Dashing Bob S]

I'd be all for a ten-club league if it excluded Hearts. Its the only way I could see it work.

[Luna_Asylum]

La Coruna Fans Protest New Spanish TV Deal, Compare La Liga to Scottish Football
January 8, 2011: La Coruna Fans Protest New Spanish TV Deal, Compare La Liga to Scottish Football

Fans of Deportivo La Coruna protest a new agreement on how television revenue will be shared among Spanish football clubs at the team’s La Liga match against Barcelona. Under the new agreement, Barcelona will receive approximately 17 percent of all revenue, while La Coruna will get less than three percent (see Shortly Before January 8, 2011). One banner displayed by the fans reads, “We don’t want a Scottish league.” [Sports Illustrated, 1/14/2011]

[alexedwards]

If you have the time to share that with us I would be gratefull

As usual ask for a qualified piece of genuine, factual paperwork from any SPL club or administrator and the slience is deafening.

[GreenPJ]

If you have the time to share that with us I would be gratefull

Apologies for the delay. I haven't included the whole response but some of the key responses are below:

"Scottish football attendances are actually the highest in Europe per head of population. Perhaps surprising given the self-inflicted doom we all seem to put on our game, particularly in the media.

A pyramid structure for Scottish football; a real meritocracy; slimmed down and effective governing bodies; the best v the best on the pitch thereby increasing standards and competition, and impacting on the standard we take as a nation toward our European coefficients and with the national team; excitement weekly at every game, with every single result having an impact; increased access to, and churn from, the top league for teams; increased investment into the lower leagues. These are among the key goals – what is disappointing is the fixation with 10 team league and the perceived detrimental effect this will have on the game.

I am not arguing the case of one or the other – but the simple fact is that the standard of football will decline in a larger league. Yes, there will be less finance available – TV companies will not spend the same amount of money for less games between and featuring the big clubs (Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, the Old Firm etc), which is what a 16 or 18 team league will necessitate. With less TV exposure comes less sponsorship as the profile available for corporate spend drops significantly. This all in turn results in player spend cutbacks – clubs cutting their cloth to suit and hiring players on lower wages than currently available. Then we have supporters bemoaning the drop in standards on the pitch and lose crowds. We want to create an upwards circle of achievement, not a downwards spiral.

Added to that, despite the sentiment from supporters that an enlarged league is preferable, when I actually speak to people and ask them would they rather come to watch Hearts / Aberdeen or Raith Rovers / Queen of the South the answer is always the former. Scottish football used to have an 18 team league and it provided endless meaningless mid-table games. "

The comment about the football attendances really surprised me. Now admittedly whether that figure is stable, on the up or is actually in decline isn't clear but I was surprised that per head of population Scotland had the highest in Europe.

I also presume that they have canvassed sponsers and potential sponsers on some of the proposals on the table and take their comments on board when they talk about not only a reduction in TV money but also overall sponsorship money.

The argument about larger leagues having been tried before is also worth noting albeit I do believe that fans would happily watch Hibs vs Morton (no offence to Morton) in the hope that it would be more likely to result in a win and as was proven when we were in Division 1, winning brings people through the doors.

For me whilst I would like to see a 16 team league I do recognise the financial impacts and difficulties that would bring but still think that 10 is the wrong solution.

I do think that the biggest area that is being missed in this review is the shambles that are the governing bodies. Firstly have one and secondly get rid of the current incumbents and bring in people who are there on merit and make it a transparent accountable organisation who have clear unbiased aims for the good of Scottish football.

[alexedwards]

Apologies for the delay. I haven't included the whole response but some of the key responses are below:

"Scottish football attendances are actually the highest in Europe per head of population. Perhaps surprising given the self-inflicted doom we all seem to put on our game, particularly in the media.

A pyramid structure for Scottish football; a real meritocracy; slimmed down and effective governing bodies; the best v the best on the pitch thereby increasing standards and competition, and impacting on the standard we take as a nation toward our European coefficients and with the national team; excitement weekly at every game, with every single result having an impact; increased access to, and churn from, the top league for teams; increased investment into the lower leagues. These are among the key goals – what is disappointing is the fixation with 10 team league and the perceived detrimental effect this will have on the game.

I am not arguing the case of one or the other – but the simple fact is that the standard of football will decline in a larger league. Yes, there will be less finance available – TV companies will not spend the same amount of money for less games between and featuring the big clubs (Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, the Old Firm etc), which is what a 16 or 18 team league will necessitate. With less TV exposure comes less sponsorship as the profile available for corporate spend drops significantly. This all in turn results in player spend cutbacks – clubs cutting their cloth to suit and hiring players on lower wages than currently available. Then we have supporters bemoaning the drop in standards on the pitch and lose crowds. We want to create an upwards circle of achievement, not a downwards spiral.

Added to that, despite the sentiment from supporters that an enlarged league is preferable, when I actually speak to people and ask them would they rather come to watch Hearts / Aberdeen or Raith Rovers / Queen of the South the answer is always the former. Scottish football used to have an 18 team league and it provided endless meaningless mid-table games. "

The comment about the football attendances really surprised me. Now admittedly whether that figure is stable, on the up or is actually in decline isn't clear but I was surprised that per head of population Scotland had the highest in Europe.

I also presume that they have canvassed sponsers and potential sponsers on some of the proposals on the table and take their comments on board when they talk about not only a reduction in TV money but also overall sponsorship money.

The argument about larger leagues having been tried before is also worth noting albeit I do believe that fans would happily watch Hibs vs Morton (no offence to Morton) in the hope that it would be more likely to result in a win and as was proven when we were in Division 1, winning brings people through the doors.

For me whilst I would like to see a 16 team league I do recognise the financial impacts and difficulties that would bring but still think that 10 is the wrong solution.

I do think that the biggest area that is being missed in this review is the shambles that are the governing bodies. Firstly have one and secondly get rid of the current incumbents and bring in people who are there on merit and make it a transparent accountable organisation who have clear unbiased aims for the good of Scottish football.

And when supporters were asked about a 16-team league we found 90% in favour in most polls (none of these polls were by the SPL as they didn't find it necessary to ask their support) - but we won't bother mentioning that.

[marinello59]

And when supporters were asked about a 16-team league we found 90% in favour in most polls (none of these polls were by the SPL as they didn't find it necessary to ask their support) - but we won't bother mentioning that.

That doesn't mean it is automatically the best way forward though. Where the SPL high heid yins have failed miserably is in putting forward the logical arguments for the way they think we should go more forcefully. That doesn't mean they are right either but at least the debate would move beyond people saying that they don't like it and they just don't believe that the revenue would drop significantly in an expanded league.

[BroxburnHibee]

That rise in income still won't take us anywhere near OF levels. I agree a more even distribution would help in theory make us better but that could also be achieved in any league set-up. It's ridiculous how much the prize money is for the first two places compared to the rest, but it's still not that much in the grand scheme of things. There isn't a structure that will end the OF's stranglehold on the league, the only way it can be done is by heavy investment ala Romanov (which will soon be almost impossible under UEFA FFP rules) or maybe slowly bridging the gap and getting a good team together for a few years.

As for the Ayr game, IIRC the attendance from our fans was pretty poor, despite so many moaning about facing the same teams every week. Fans will turn up when teams are winning, regardless of how many teams are in the league IMO.

I'm not exactly a fan of the 10-team set up, I just think s 16 team league would be worse.

:agree:



Apologies for the delay. I haven't included the whole response but some of the key responses are below:

"Scottish football attendances are actually the highest in Europe per head of population. Perhaps surprising given the self-inflicted doom we all seem to put on our game, particularly in the media.

A pyramid structure for Scottish football; a real meritocracy; slimmed down and effective governing bodies; the best v the best on the pitch thereby increasing standards and competition, and impacting on the standard we take as a nation toward our European coefficients and with the national team; excitement weekly at every game, with every single result having an impact; increased access to, and churn from, the top league for teams; increased investment into the lower leagues. These are among the key goals – what is disappointing is the fixation with 10 team league and the perceived detrimental effect this will have on the game.

I am not arguing the case of one or the other – but the simple fact is that the standard of football will decline in a larger league. Yes, there will be less finance available – TV companies will not spend the same amount of money for less games between and featuring the big clubs (Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, the Old Firm etc), which is what a 16 or 18 team league will necessitate. With less TV exposure comes less sponsorship as the profile available for corporate spend drops significantly. This all in turn results in player spend cutbacks – clubs cutting their cloth to suit and hiring players on lower wages than currently available. Then we have supporters bemoaning the drop in standards on the pitch and lose crowds. We want to create an upwards circle of achievement, not a downwards spiral.

Added to that, despite the sentiment from supporters that an enlarged league is preferable, when I actually speak to people and ask them would they rather come to watch Hearts / Aberdeen or Raith Rovers / Queen of the South the answer is always the former. Scottish football used to have an 18 team league and it provided endless meaningless mid-table games. "

The comment about the football attendances really surprised me. Now admittedly whether that figure is stable, on the up or is actually in decline isn't clear but I was surprised that per head of population Scotland had the highest in Europe.

I also presume that they have canvassed sponsers and potential sponsers on some of the proposals on the table and take their comments on board when they talk about not only a reduction in TV money but also overall sponsorship money.

The argument about larger leagues having been tried before is also worth noting albeit I do believe that fans would happily watch Hibs vs Morton (no offence to Morton) in the hope that it would be more likely to result in a win and as was proven when we were in Division 1, winning brings people through the doors.

For me whilst I would like to see a 16 team league I do recognise the financial impacts and difficulties that would bring but still think that 10 is the wrong solution.

I do think that the biggest area that is being missed in this review is the shambles that are the governing bodies. Firstly have one and secondly get rid of the current incumbents and bring in people who are there on merit and make it a transparent accountable organisation who have clear unbiased aims for the good of Scottish football.

As far as I am aware this IS being discussed.

[down the slope]

Again the opposition he mentioned was Raith and QOS, why not Dundee Falkirk Partick or Dunfermline, lets face it maybe two of these teams could get promoted in the one season so are they good enough then ?, does it mean the tv companies will not want the package if they are in the league , the whole thing is a load of cobblers !. I repeat why not make these clubs attractive once more by including them instead of the same old repetition that they are trying to flog now.

[millarco]

Again the opposition he mentioned was Raith and QOS, why not Dundee Falkirk Partick or Dunfermline, lets face it maybe two of these teams could get promoted in the one season so are they good enough then ?, does it mean the tv companies will not want the package if they are in the league , the whole thing is a load of cobblers !. I repeat why not make these clubs attractive once more by including them instead of the same old repetition that they are trying to flog now.

For me Raith would be more attractive than Partick, but that's another argument. When you're increasing the number of teams you can't hand select who comes up and who goes down, it depends on events on the park.

I don't think it makes too much of a difference to the argument though. We'd still end up with a host of meaningless games with teams having little to play for. For me there is little difference between playing a Hamilton or St Mirren compared to playing a Falkirk or a Dunfermline, but I'd much rather play Hearts than any of the above.

And Sky/ESPN pay for the Old Firm, IMO it's naive to think otherwise. That's where the fanbase is and that's why they're on every other week. Again I don't think it matters to them whether the OF are playing St Johnstone or Dundee, but they'd much rather cover an Old Firm derby than one of these, and they, along with the Edinburgh derby, are the games we'd lose.

I don't disagree with any of what Fyfe Hyland says in the e-mail. 10 team isn't perfect, but I don't think the Scottish game, in its current state, could sustain a 16-team top league.

[alexedwards]

That doesn't mean it is automatically the best way forward though. Where the SPL high heid yins have failed miserably is in putting forward the logical arguments for the way they think we should go more forcefully. That doesn't mean they are right either but at least the debate would move beyond people saying that they don't like it and they just don't believe that the revenue would drop significantly in an expanded league.

Nobody said it was automatically the best way forward. It is just another point that the SPL fail to address while they rush through their proposal.
It is so rushed that certain chairmen were given days to approve the proposal.
It is the ignoring of fans, relevant questions, SFL clubs, etc. that is getting most folks backs up and creating suspicion. Why must they go about it in this way?
Crikey! If they really had a case it would have been listened to - no problem.
It's not about the size of the league - it's about the lying, the sneaking, the ignorance, the dodging, the smokescreens, the lack of comment from the OF.
TBH not here to convince anyone and if there are those who think this is anything other than tic/gers modelling this for themselves then best of luck - live with it when it happens.

[StevieC]

"what is disappointing is the fixation with 10 team league and the perceived detrimental effect this will have on the game."


Fixation?? We've had a 10 team league .. it didn't work.


"I am not arguing the case of one or the other – but the simple fact is that the standard of football will decline in a larger league. "


And this statement is based on what? There are more "larger" leagues than "smaller" ones and there doesn't seem to be much in the way of associations screaming out to reduce them. Even the Championship seems to be doing okay as a second tier "larger" league.


"TV companies will not spend the same amount of money for less games between and featuring the big clubs (Hibs, Hearts, Aberdeen, the Old Firm etc), which is what a 16 or 18 team league will necessitate. ".

No-one is saying that money wont drop. It dropped when we lost out on the big SKY deal. It dropped when Setanta went bust. Down south it dropped with the collapse of ITV Digital. Did it result in any league folding? Are the teams that are playing now any worse than the ones riding the TV money gravy train of the 90's (where players were on double what they are just now)? The only teams, as far as I can see, that have seen a significant drop in the quality of player is .. yes, you guessed it .. the Old Firm. Gone are the Old Firm teams packed with English/Irish/Italian/Swedish international players .. what a shame.


"With less TV exposure comes less sponsorship as the profile available for corporate spend drops significantly. This all in turn results in player spend cutbacks – clubs cutting their cloth to suit and hiring players on lower wages than currently available. Then we have supporters bemoaning the drop in standards on the pitch and lose crowds. ".

Won't it just be the same players though, on slightly less wages? Are they expecting a mass exodus of Scottish talent to England, Germany, Italy and Spain?


"Added to that, despite the sentiment from supporters that an enlarged league is preferable, when I actually speak to people and ask them would they rather come to watch Hearts / Aberdeen or Raith Rovers / Queen of the South the answer is always the former. Scottish football used to have an 18 team league and it provided endless meaningless mid-table games. ".

This is actually quite insulting. Does anyone think that asking a supporter if they would rather watch their team play Hearts or watch them play Queen of the South that anyone would actually say "Queen of the South"??
Has no-one pointed out to him that this season we will actually only be playing Hearts/OF 3 times whereas we will likely have 4 games against Hamilton, St Mirren, St Johnstone and Inverness!!
Maybe he could try asking a supporter if he would prefer no games against a "big" team in the final quarter or a couple of "big" games and a wider variety of "smaller" teams over the course of a season?

If that's the best response they can come up with in favour of a 10 team league then they are still a long way off from convincing me.

[alexedwards]

Added to that, despite the sentiment from supporters that an enlarged league is preferable, when I actually speak to people and ask them would they rather come to watch Hearts / Aberdeen or Raith Rovers / Queen of the South the answer is always the former. Scottish football used to have an 18 team league and it provided endless meaningless mid-table games. "

"However, despite the fact that we think an 18-tem league is endless and meaningless we do claim in other quotes that an 16/18 team league is our eventual target."
Absolute bananas - round and round and round in circles. This is the Blair/Bush weapons of mass destruction all over - say it enough and you'll believe it yourself.
There is no intention for this lot (particularly OF) to ever target a bigger league.

[brog]

What really p's me off is is this ludicrous assertion that it's either a 10 team league or an 18 team league & 18 doesn't work! There are plenty other alternatives, including the status quo & my own preference for a 14 team league with a 7/7 split. Both are better than a 10 team league IMO! The 18 team doomsday scenario is a complete red herring. These are like the statements of discredited politicians, hello Henry McLeish, rather than from someone with a genuine interest in advancing Scottish football.

[Luna_Asylum]

[QUOTE=GreenPJ;2763830]Apologies for the delay. I haven't included the whole response but some of the key responses are below:

Thanks. I love the bit him about asking fans if they would rather see a game against our biggest rivals or Queen of the South. I think he borrowed that one from on here. And he claims he is "not arguing the case......" Well he could have fooled me.

[BEEJ]

What really p's me off is is this ludicrous assertion that it's either a 10 team league or an 18 team league & 18 doesn't work! There are plenty other alternatives, including the status quo & my own preference for a 14 team league with a 7/7 split. Both are better than a 10 team league IMO! The 18 team doomsday scenario is a complete red herring. These are like the statements of discredited politicians, hello Henry McLeish, rather than from someone with a genuine interest in advancing Scottish football.
:top marks

Agree entirely and the bit in bold is particularly relevant. No-one has yet adequately explained why a 14 team set-up is inappropriate - other than it continues the league split.

The split is an inevitable requirement in a country where the support / finance of the game is so skewed towards just a couple of sides.

[Luna_Asylum]

What really p's me off is is this ludicrous assertion that it's either a 10 team league or an 18 team league & 18 doesn't work! There are plenty other alternatives, including the status quo & my own preference for a 14 team league with a 7/7 split. Both are better than a 10 team league IMO! The 18 team doomsday scenario is a complete red herring. These are like the statements of discredited politicians, hello Henry McLeish, rather than from someone with a genuine interest in advancing Scottish football.

"But the reality is per head of population more people go to watch games in Scotland over a weekend than anywhere else in Europe.

Neil Doncasterr

“Scottish football attendances are actually the highest in Europe per head of population.”

Fife Hyland

One of these men is pushing hard for a 10 team SPL. The other claims not be arguing the case. Can you tell which is which.

[BEEJ]

"But the reality is per head of population more people go to watch games in Scotland over a weekend than anywhere else in Europe.

Neil Doncaster
But don't we 'import' a significant number of our fans on a weekly basis?

I'd like to see the stats for how many people cross national borders to watch OF matches in Scotland. The OF attract hordes of followers from Ireland, N. Ireland and parts of England who regularly travel long distances to Scotland to watch 'their side' play.

Reckon that would put in some context this quoted stat which is 'per head of population'.

[Peevemor]

:top marks

Agree entirely and the bit in bold is particularly relevant. No-one has yet adequately explained why a 14 team set-up is inappropriate - other than it continues the league split.

The split is an inevitable requirement in a country where the support / finance of the game is so skewed towards just a couple of sides.

Is there not a problem with a 7/7 split, in that one team in each section will have a blank weekend? This could put those sitting out on the last day at a huge disadvantage, with their near rivals knowing exactly what result they might need.

You could always do an 8/6 split, but then one section has 7 matches to play, with only 5 for the other.

[easty]

And this statement is based on what? There are more "larger" leagues than "smaller" ones and there doesn't seem to be much in the way of associations screaming out to reduce them. Even the Championship seems to be doing okay as a second tier "larger" league.

You can't compare the SPL to the Championship. We're the kid at school with his dads hand me down, hole in the sole, Gola trainers from 1970 compared to the little **** with the new Paul Smith efforts on.

Won't it just be the same players though, on slightly less wages? Are they expecting a mass exodus of Scottish talent to England, Germany, Italy and Spain?

There would be an exodus. Do you honestly believe that decent players would stay in Scotland for less money when they could make more in League 1 or League 2 down south? We'd end up with players like the squad players who are at St Johnstone/Hamilton/St Mirren just now, and those standard of team would bring in players from lower leagues. We'd maybe still find the odd Ivan Sproule type, but we'd no longer be able to lure the likes of a Stokes or a Miller.

This is actually quite insulting. Does anyone think that asking a supporter if they would rather watch their team play Hearts or watch them play Queen of the South that anyone would actually say "Queen of the South"??
Has no-one pointed out to him that this season we will actually only be playing Hearts/OF 3 times whereas we will likely have 4 games against Hamilton, St Mirren, St Johnstone and Inverness!!
Maybe he could try asking a supporter if he would prefer no games against a "big" team in the final quarter or a couple of "big" games and a wider variety of "smaller" teams over the course of a season?

Eh? What?



I just want a league where we are winning games and challenging for Europe every year. If that's a 10 team league so be it.

I can see why, financially, the 18 team set-up isn't attractive to the board. If the finances were to be a constant regardless of league size then I'd really like a bigger league, but realistically that's just not possible.

[BEEJ]

Is there not a problem with a 7/7 split, in that one team in each section will have a blank weekend. This could put those sitting out on the last day at a huge disadvantage, with their near rivals knowing exactly what result they might need.
The teams finishing in the middle of the table pre-split (i.e. 7th and 8th) sit out the last weekend.

They get an extended summer as a prize for their mediocrity. :wink:

[easty]

Is there not a problem with a 7/7 split, in that one team in each section will have a blank weekend? This could put those sitting out on the last day at a huge disadvantage, with their near rivals knowing exactly what result they might need.

You could always do an 8/6 split, but then one section has 7 matches to play, with only 5 for the other.

That's how I see it as well. Unless we get this 3 sided, triangle pitch, football on the go.

[Peevemor]

The teams finishing in the middle of the table pre-split (i.e. 7th and 8th) sit out the last weekend.

They get an extended summer as a prize for their mediocrity. :wink:

That'll be us then.

[Peevemor]

"But the reality is per head of population more people go to watch games in Scotland over a weekend than anywhere else in Europe.

Neil Doncasterr

“Scottish football attendances are actually the highest in Europe per head of population.”

Fife Hyland

One of these men is pushing hard for a 10 team SPL. The other claims not be arguing the case. Can you tell which is which.

Take the OF out of the equation and that wouldn't be the case. They should only count heads that have something in them.

[GreenPJ]

But don't we 'import' a significant number of our fans on a weekly basis?

I'd like to see the stats for how many people cross national borders to watch OF matches in Scotland. The OF attract hordes of followers from Ireland, N. Ireland and parts of England who regularly travel long distances to Scotland to watch 'their side' play.

Reckon that would put in some context this quoted stat which is 'per head of population'.

Why does it matter where they came from? The point is a large number of people attend football matches in Scotland when compared to the population . Presumably regardless of whether this was a 10, 12, 14, 16 team league they would continue to come unless the OF were no longer involved.

[Wakeyhibee]

Why does it matter where they came from? The point is a large number of people attend football matches in Scotland when compared to the population . Presumably regardless of whether this was a 10, 12, 14, 16 team league they would continue to come unless the OF were no longer involved.

Only becuase of the OF, remove them and it would probably be the same per capita or worse than average. It was wasn't the case pre Rangers 9 in a row, that's when a huge shift in fans happened and the OF doubled their averages as the smaller teams halved theira and Hibs/Hearts/Aberdeen stayed in the middle gaining a little in general.

That is why the financial arguement for a 16 + league is struggling only 5 teams left with a support to market to. Sky & sponsors will not be as attracted although I don't believe it's as bad as the £20m quoted.

Unfortunately we've already killed the other potential markets/competiton in the game by having a ***** league set up for 35 years.

Problem is now a 10 team league with higher relegation could (even with parachute payments) effectively kill off other teams and create more 'Dundee's if they were unlucky enough to be relegated. Conversely TV/Sponsors money and the sharing of, is a problem with a 16+ top league.

I see there being no option but to bite the bullet financially for the long term good of the game for a broader base of 1st class teams. Either that or everyone bar the OF will adopt a high risk survival strategy which inevitably will drive fans away. It will not as they say pave the way for a larger league in the future.

[down the slope]

Could this be one of the reasons the SPL are desperate to merge with the SFA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/9434772.stm

There is obviously a lot going on behind the scenes and i think this strengthens the SFA's hand in any dealings with Doncaster and his crew.

[Part/Time Supporter]

Could this be one of the reasons the SPL are desperate to merge with the SFA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/9434772.stm

There is obviously a lot going on behind the scenes and i think this strengthens the SFA's hand in any dealings with Doncaster and his crew.

They aren't. The proposed merger is between SPL and SFL.

[JimBHibees]

I am not sure I agree with the comment that the standard would automatically drop if the league was bigger. I think and may be talking nonsense that a less pressurised league would lead to teams playing with a bit more freedom and adopting a more attacking approach in games. It may also lead to more dependence on younger Scottish players being developed rather than being replaced by foreign Bosman signings many of which arent any better.

Seeing other teams and other players would also IMO freshen things up. It may also generate a bit more support in some of the traditional names in Scottish football like Raith, Morton, QOF, Partick Thistle etc if they were involved in the SPL and got more of a cut from the game.

Bigger games would be seen as more important, more of an occasion and probably more likely sell out than is the case now. I think the best thing about an 18 team league would IMO be that there is every chance that the league would be more competitive in that a team could go on a great winning run and not have to beat or do well against the Old Firm in the 8 times they play them. The league would IMO be tighter with less gaps between the OF and the next group of teams. They would still have the most cash and clout however I think there wouldnt be the same dominance as now which would be much better than the current scenario.

I can see why financial and Executive titled people in the game are for it in terms of the tv, sponsorship and corporate revenue however sometimes the sport itself should be the main driver in any fundamental decision.

[Part/Time Supporter]

I am not sure I agree with the comment that the standard would automatically drop if the league was bigger. I think and may be talking nonsense that a less pressurised league would lead to teams playing with a bit more freedom and adopting a more attacking approach in games. It may also lead to more dependence on younger Scottish players being developed rather than being replaced by foreign Bosman signings many of which arent any better.

Seeing other teams and other players would also IMO freshen things up. It may also generate a bit more support in some of the traditional names in Scottish football like Raith, Morton, QOF, Partick Thistle etc if they were involved in the SPL and got more of a cut from the game.

Bigger games would be seen as more important, more of an occasion and probably more likely sell out than is the case now. I think the best thing about an 18 team league would IMO be that there is every chance that the league would be more competitive in that a team could go on a great winning run and not have to beat or do well against the Old Firm in the 8 times they play them. The league would IMO be tighter with less gaps between the OF and the next group of teams. They would still have the most cash and clout however I think there wouldnt be the same dominance as now which would be much better than the current scenario.

I can see why financial and Executive titled people in the game are for it in terms of the tv, sponsorship and corporate revenue however sometimes the sport itself should be the main driver in any fundamental decision.

This and last season being classic case studies. Hibs and United were pretty close last year until they were both smashed by the Huns at Christmas. Hertz lasted until late January this year when they had to visit Glasgow twice in a week. If a challenging team only had to visit Glasgow twice in a season they would have a reasonable chance of maintaining their form and staying close to the end.

[ancient hibee]

Attendance per capita is a red herring.Any, call it,Saturday total attendances in Scotland are 100,000 spread over 21 games.Or more particularly 50,000 spread over 20 games.More people go to the library on a Saturday than a pro football match-far more go shopping in Buchanan Street and Princes Street.A 10 club top league is the last throw of the dice for top professional football in Scotland.A 16or 18 club league will never be the answer for the top level-there aren't and never will be enough clubs to fill it.If fans won't turn out to watch their clubs in the SFL which are pretty competetive they are not going to turn out to see them get slaughtered regularly-and they would.

[marinello59]

Could this be one of the reasons the SPL are desperate to merge with the SFA

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/scotland/9434772.stm

There is obviously a lot going on behind the scenes and i think this strengthens the SFA's hand in any dealings with Doncaster and his crew.


They aren't. The proposed merger is between SPL and SFL.

The three bodies should be merged ASAP. Maybe then we will see a genuine attempt to benefit the whole of Scottish football. Having three bodies protecting their own areas of interest is a total nonsense.

[Mikey]

Just as it slips onto page 2 and into obscurity, some arse has to bring it back to the top :greengrin

Anyway, I've just been having a nose over the road and this topic doesn't get much of an airing. They don't seem too concerned and I can't see any of them turning their back on their club because the authorities are proposing a ten team league.

It's amazing what a wee run of decent results will do for the mindset :wink:

[Luna_Asylum]

Just as it slips onto page 2 and into obscurity, some arse has to bring it back to the top :greengrin

Anyway, I've just been having a nose over the road and this topic doesn't get much of an airing. They don't seem too concerned and I can't see any of them turning their back on their club because the authorities are proposing a ten team league.

It's amazing what a wee run of decent results will do for the mindset :wink:

That's an very well thought out addition to the debate and i'm sure we will all take it on board - thanks

[StevieC]

Anyway, I've just been having a nose over the road and this topic doesn't get much of an airing. They don't seem too concerned and I can't see any of them turning their back on their club because the authorities are proposing a ten team league.

Mikey, I think "turning their back on their club" is a bit harsh. Not seen too many saying they will turn their back. A lot, myself included, are saying that they wont be renewing season tickets in protest, but that doesn't mean that they wont still be attending games and paying the walk-up price (for the "big" games :hmmm:).

In fact, I would go so far as to say that if anyone was "turning their backs" it was the clubs, in relation to the wishes of the supporters. They're not even willing to have open and frank discussions on the matter.

It was discussed a fair bit over the road back in Dec/Jan when it was first announced and it pops up from time to time when there's new "soundbites" in the papers. Almost to a man though it has been opposed (with talk of boycotts and petitions), so with no-one actually arguing that it's a good thing it doesn't run into 6 pages.

[alexedwards]

That's an very well thought out addition to the debate and i'm sure we will all take it on board - thanks

All SPL/SFL fans concerned regarding the possibility of a 10-team premier league and knock-on effects.
If it goes through there will be repercussions at the gates all over Scotland - this is about much more than league size.

[ancient hibee]

Mikey, I think "turning their back on their club" is a bit harsh. Not seen too many saying they will turn their back. A lot, myself included, are saying that they wont be renewing season tickets in protest, but that doesn't mean that they wont still be attending games and paying the walk-up price (for the "big" games :hmmm:).

In fact, I would go so far as to say that if anyone was "turning their backs" it was the clubs, in relation to the wishes of the supporters. They're not even willing to have open and frank discussions on the matter.

It was discussed a fair bit over the road back in Dec/Jan when it was first announced and it pops up from time to time when there's new "soundbites" in the papers. Almost to a man though it has been opposed (with talk of boycotts and petitions), so with no-one actually arguing that it's a good thing it doesn't run into 6 pages.
So you are only going to turn up for the "big games"despite being opposed to a league where most of the games will be big games and favouring a league where a lot of the games will be "wee games".A bit inconsistent isn't it?Surely you shuld only turn up for games against Hamilton,St.Mirren and the likes?

[Brando7]

Last time i looked into this changing to a 16 team league going on last seasons figures would see an average drop of 350 fans per home game...roughly

Money talks :agree:

[down the slope]

So you are only going to turn up for the "big games"despite being opposed to a league where most of the games will be big games and favouring a league where a lot of the games will be "wee games".A bit inconsistent isn't it?Surely you shuld only turn up for games against Hamilton,St.Mirren and the likes?

Aye, wee games you only see once a season , do you think there are any wee games for the OF ?, if you are up there challenging for something every game counts. Remember that wee team East Fife when Brownlie broke his leg ?, there was 19,000 or so there that day because we were up there with a chance of the league and correct me if i'm wrong but we only won 1-0.

[AlbertK86]

16 Team League - Playing each other twice

Start league Cup in July with 7 mini leagues of six.

Seeded to get balance of teams from all divisions depending on previous years league standings.

Play each other home and away

First 4 games Sat, Wed, Sat, Wed over first two weeks and thereafter spread remainder throughout season to avoid Euro ties.

7 group winners, runners up and 2 best runners up through to the last 16.

Teams knocked out compete in Alba Cup or whatever it is called for teams outwith SPL

This will give teams chance to get fitness up early in competitive games and also a chance to blood youngsters in a competitive enviroment.

That's giving you a minimum of 40 league and league cup games with potentially another 4 if you get to final.

Scottish Cup remains as is

Appreciate the income will not be the same but our game definately needs freshened up big time.

More youngsters with lesser wages getting more of a chance instead of 2nd rate journeymen taking thousands out our clubs for mediocre performances.

If the Old firm and the JTs dinnae like it ....see ya.!!!.... no scottish club going to win either euro trophy in near future anyway so lets shipout the journos,
reformat our product and give the young boys a chance.

If they're good enough they'll soon get a move down south as per Fletcher, McCarthy, McArthur, Adams, Griffiths etc.

More scots in EPL than ever these days and i think the trend will continue if we give more a chance in our league

[down the slope]

16 Team League - Playing each other twice

Start league Cup in July with 7 mini leagues of six.

Seeded to get balance of teams from all divisions depending on previous years league standings.

Play each other home and away

First 4 games Sat, Wed, Sat, Wed over first two weeks and thereafter spread remainder throughout season to avoid Euro ties.

7 group winners, runners up and 2 best runners up through to the last 16.

Teams knocked out compete in Alba Cup or whatever it is called for teams outwith SPL

This will give teams chance to get fitness up early in competitive games and also a chance to blood youngsters in a competitive enviroment.

That's giving you a minimum of 40 league and league cup games with potentially another 4 if you get to final.

Scottish Cup remains as is

Appreciate the income will not be the same but our game definately needs freshened up big time.

More youngsters with lesser wages getting more of a chance instead of 2nd rate journeymen taking thousands out our clubs for mediocre performances.

If the Old firm and the JTs dinnae like it ....see ya.!!!.... no scottish club going to win either euro trophy in near future anyway so lets shipout the journos,
reformat our product and give the young boys a chance.

If they're good enough they'll soon get a move down south as per Fletcher, McCarthy, McArthur, Adams, Griffiths etc.

More scots in EPL than ever these days and i think the trend will continue if we give more a chance in our league

Sounds good to me , you should send your idea to Mr Doncaster and Rod but the trouble is it's to clever for them , much easier to let the OF dictate what we watch than try an original idea like yours.

[marinello59]

16 Team League - Playing each other twice

Start league Cup in July with 7 mini leagues of six.

Seeded to get balance of teams from all divisions depending on previous years league standings.

Play each other home and away

First 4 games Sat, Wed, Sat, Wed over first two weeks and thereafter spread remainder throughout season to avoid Euro ties.

7 group winners, runners up and 2 best runners up through to the last 16.

Teams knocked out compete in Alba Cup or whatever it is called for teams outwith SPL

This will give teams chance to get fitness up early in competitive games and also a chance to blood youngsters in a competitive enviroment.

That's giving you a minimum of 40 league and league cup games with potentially another 4 if you get to final.


Seriously? You want to change the format of a cup competition that is successful because ties are decided on the night and go to a group system? A system that was binned in the 80's because it was boring beyond belief? Basically it would be trying to replace meaningful league fixtures with an insipid and largely meaningless series of cup ties. That is madder than a box of frogs in party hats.

[StevieC]

So you are only going to turn up for the "big games"despite being opposed to a league where most of the games will be big games and favouring a league where a lot of the games will be "wee games".A bit inconsistent isn't it?Surely you shuld only turn up for games against Hamilton,St.Mirren and the likes?

The quotation marks and the smiley were obviously lost in translation ..

:rolleyes:

[StevieC]

Last time i looked into this changing to a 16 team league going on last seasons figures would see an average drop of 350 fans per home game...roughly

Money talks :agree:

You're right .. there is no doubt that a larger league would result in a drop in income.

From day one though, this was promoted as a radical shake up and a way to improve the Scottish game from top to bottom.

It seems to me now that it is a radical shake up so long as it still allows 4 Old Firm games a season, and the associated cash that goes with that.

If the Scottish game improves on the back of that it will be more by luck than design.

[alexedwards]

Doncaster should be sacked for lying on radio regarding the issue of the proposal to clubs.

[marinello59]

Doncaster should be sacked for lying on radio regarding the issue of the proposal to clubs.

Are you willing to expand on that. What was said? And where? A link would be much appreciated.

[alexedwards]

Are you willing to expand on that. What was said? And where? A link would be much appreciated.

From an earlier thread - I listened to the broadcast live but you may wish to locate a link.

Doncaster the Liar


Michael Johnston came across as brilliant in this - having to deflect playground insults from Ronnie MacDonald as he went along trying to tell the truth and expose in-house bullying from the OF.
The main item in here was that Johnston claimed he had not seen the 100+ page proposal for change until mid-december giving him a whopping 6 days to review the doc. From this Jonhston knew he was being railroaded into the plan but arrogant Doncaster claimed he had it for 10 weeks. Mcdonald was asked to verify but tried to completely ignore the question, however, further pressure ensured that Johston was correct and that Doncaster lied.
This Doncaster is a blatant liar, and although he appears non-confrontational - he has to be as he would trip himself up on the lies if he got emotional.
Also important is that bar a twinge of conscience Mcdonald would have lied also.
We all know where the lying starts!

[marinello59]

From an earlier thread - I listened to the broadcast live but you may wish to locate a link.

Doncaster the Liar


Michael Johnston came across as brilliant in this - having to deflect playground insults from Ronnie MacDonald as he went along trying to tell the truth and expose in-house bullying from the OF.
The main item in here was that Johnston claimed he had not seen the 100+ page proposal for change until mid-december giving him a whopping 6 days to review the doc. From this Jonhston knew he was being railroaded into the plan but arrogant Doncaster claimed he had it for 10 weeks. Mcdonald was asked to verify but tried to completely ignore the question, however, further pressure ensured that Johston was correct and that Doncaster lied.
This Doncaster is a blatant liar, and although he appears non-confrontational - he has to be as he would trip himself up on the lies if he got emotional.
Also important is that bar a twinge of conscience Mcdonald would have lied also.
We all know where the lying starts!

Sorry, who has been quoted and on which thread so I can follow the whole discussion. Many thanks.
And which broadcast am I looking for a link to?

[alexedwards]

Sorry, who has been quoted and on which thread so I can follow the whole discussion. Many thanks.
And which broadcast am I looking for a link to?

The hibs.net thread is titled Neil Doncaster. The quote in the last reply is what I heard on radio. It is from a from a BBC radio debate with; James Traynor; Chick Young; Michael Johnston; Neil Doncaster & Hamilton Chairman (McDonald)
If you want a link you have to dig it out yourself but maybe there's one on the thread.
Again not here to convince just wary of Doncaster's intentions.

[marinello59]

The hibs.net thread is titled Neil Doncaster. The quote in the last reply is what I heard on radio. It is from a from a BBC radio debate with; James Traynor; Chick Young; Michael Johnston; Neil Doncaster & Hamilton Chairman (McDonald)
If you want a link you have to dig it out yourself but maybe there's one on the thread.
Again not here to convince just wary of Doncaster's intentions.

Sorry could you provide a link to the thread? The only one I could find was one you started yourself with a series of statements and a link that didn't work.
I can accept that there has been a lot of spin going about but outright lying? That would be more serious.
Just to back up your assertion, who have you actually quoted from this radio broadcast that has no link?