What’s the actual point of The Split?

[LustForLeith]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.

[OldEast]

It seems to be very popular certainly with quite a few on here. Beats me though, just a nonsense IMO

[JohnM1875]

The split is fantastic if you finish top six. Five games that are usually sell outs or close to. Just because we've been **** this season and in the bottom six doesn't mean the split is pointless.

Top six split under Lennon is up there with my favourite ever spells supporting Hibs.

[bingo70]

Think the split is brilliant.

Great way of keeping the season relevant for nearly all teams all season.

[Allant1981]

Funnily enough my dad and i were saying the exact same earlier, no real purpose to it

[easty]

The purpose of it is so the season is 38 games long. With no split there would be 44 league games.

[Allant1981]

Think the split is brilliant.

Great way of keeping the season relevant for nearly all teams all season.

Does it, How so?

[Clarence]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.

Think it’s more exciting that the teams that are direct rivals for league positions are playing each other. Isn’t that the obvious point of the split or am I missing something about why that doesn’t really serve a purpose?

[bingo70]

Does it, How so?

Because teams want to try and finish in the top six?

[Nicho87]

Farcical

In a tight season like this year hibs Livingston would still be within a shout of fourth

More exciting that an old firm could be playing a team nearly winning the league an one fighting to survive

Where as clubs stuck in the middle have nothing to play for against at least 3 other games/ teams.

Hate the split

To solve the issue

I’d make top league 14 with each team playing each other 3 x

Problem solved

2 automatically relegated with 3rd bottom into a play off match versus winner of 3rd v 4th championship one off game

[MWHIBBIES]

Yeah split is dog****. Get rid.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

I think it's been cancelled after series three. 😉

[Since452]

Split is good. We aren't.

[Greencore]

Split is stupid. Can come 7th but have more points then 6th or even 5th

[Waxy]

It was to keep the number of fixtures down if i remember (whilst also guarenteeing four old firm fixtures of you think like that)

[LaMotta]

Was it any less interesting before the split was brought in? If it genuinely added something to football then why dont more leagues go for it? As far as i know we are the only league that does it(might be wrong though)

You are wrong, it happens in number of leagues in Europe.

Belgium, Austria, Slovakia, Czech Republic to name a few....

[hibstag]

It feels pointless this season as all the team from 4 to 10 are so close and the prize of Europe is there for 5th.

The split allegedly removes the dead rubber games but also the opportunity for some crackers imagine dundee v hearts where one needs a win for the title one needs to win to avoid going down... We had St mirren needing a point in the championship a few years ago

[JohnM1875]

We finish top six there's absolutely no chance this is a thread after the first round of games. We're looking forward to games against the old firm and an Edinburgh derby.

We've been pish. Accept that and move on. The split isn't the issue the quality of our team is.

[Daily Hibs]

Split has been in place 21 years now. It's to ensure a 38 game season.

Perhaps if we weren't so poor ending up in bottom six we wouldn't be questioning it's purpose.

For a more radical league structure see Belgiumsome Jupiter league.

[Smartie]

It allows a nation of awkward size that doesn't really have enough big teams for a big league to have the right number of fixtures in a league season.

It's imperfect but probably less bad than every other option.

We've unfortunately been a bit too pish this season and been on the wrong side of the inconvenience of it.

Personally, I think it's fine.

[Daily Hibs]

We finish top six there's absolutely no chance this is a thread after the first round of games. We're looking forward to games against the old firm and an Edinburgh derby.

We've been pish. Accept that and move on. The split isn't the issue the quality of our team is.
Absolutely.

[Daily Hibs]

It allows a nation of awkward size that doesn't really have enough big teams for a big league to have the right number of fixtures in a league season.

It's imperfect but probably less bad than every other option.

We've unfortunately been a bit too pish this season and been on the wrong side of the inconvenience of it.
Top flight should be 16/18 teams playing each other twice that avoids the need for a split. That structure would spread the wealth amongsthe a greater number of clubs.

[hibbyfraelibby]

The split is great for reinvigerating the season.

In the games leading up to it evryone is trying to get into top 6/ avoiding bottom 6 resulting in meaningful games.

Once the slit happens you only play trams atound you which means big swings if you win or lose.

Top 6 trying for the 4/5 European places and the bottom 6 to avoid auto relegation or the play offs.

Up until a fortnight ago we were in the hunt for Europe then overnight facing the prospect, now happily receding, of being dragged into a potential relegation battle

Good for the game, bad for the dickie tickers

[Danderhall Hibs]

Because teams want to try and finish in the top six?

For 2 teams if not more it ended their season with 5 games to go whereas with no split it would be a more exciting end.

Normally there’s a clearer top and bottom half though.

[hibbyfraelibby]

Was it any less interesting before the split was brought in? If it genuinely added something to football then why dont more leagues go for it? As far as i know we are the only league that does it(might be wrong though)

You're right, you're wrong😉

[scoopyboy]

Top flight should be 16/18 teams playing each other twice that avoids the need for a split. That structure would spread the wealth amongsthe a greater number of clubs.

I remember when the top flight was 18 teams playing each other twice.

The number of meaningless games from December on was terrible.

That's why we moved away from it.

[Smartie]

Top flight should be 16/18 teams playing each other twice that avoids the need for a split. That structure would spread the wealth amongsthe a greater number of clubs.

I thought that for a while, but I'm not convinced that having more games against weaker opponents, more games with less to play for and less games between the biggest clubs actually makes the league any better.

[chippy]

Split has been in place 21 years now. It's to ensure a 38 game season.

Perhaps if we weren't so poor ending up in bottom six we wouldn't be questioning it's purpose.

For a more radical league structure see Belgiumsome Jupiter league.

Exactly I’m all for the Belgian model. They’ve increased league size to 18 clubs too.

[Allant1981]

You are wrong, it happens in number of leagues in Europe.

Belgium, Austria, Slovakia, Czech Republic to name a few....

Disnt realise as many leagues also had a split, as i said i wasnt sure but clearly wrong, maakes you wonder why none of the major leagues do it. i just dont see the point or need for a split, someone mentioned about another derby if we had finished top 6, we would have had another anyway if there was no split. The league needs something to make it interesting, just not sure this is it

[Allant1981]

You're right, you're wrong😉

If la motta hadnt mentioned those leagues would you have known without googling it?

[Centre Hawf]

Personally think this season has shown the point of it. Everyone was desperate to make top 6 for Europe a few weeks ago so you had almost last day of the season feel to it. Added some drama to what would otherwise be a normal week of fixtures.

Then you get some really good 6 pointers at the bottom end of the table like St Johnstone/Dundee today, had St Johnstone won that all of a sudden a few team are looking over their shoulder and the 6 pointers come thick and fast. The top 6 has teams scrapping with each other for better European spots and the title.

It's bit us in the arse this season but I would rather it stayed personally.

[angus hibby]

Get rid. Yes, there was drama two weeks ago about who was going to finish top/bottom 6. But if we didn’t have it, there would have been 7 teams fighting for Europe. Much more exciting.

After today’s result, we’re “4th” again.

[ThisIsTheYear]

I normally like the split and plenty similar size nations also use this structure. This season is a bit different due to how close everyone was. But only reason folk are moaning is due to fact we have been poor.

[SHODAN]

It's a decent song, I guess? :dunno:


https://youtu.be/A0H7HK6w2OE

[Keith_M]

In some larger leagues, there's a number of teams that finish mid table with no chance of a European place or of being involved in a relegation play off.

In 1975, Scotland reduced from eighteen to a top ten, with everybody playing each other four times instead of twice. to try to reduce the number of meaningless games.

Then they decided to increase the size of the league to twelve teams, but playing each other four times would have meant a 44 game season, which was too much hence the rethink and the split.

[LunasBoots]

The standard of the league is very poor currently, if it was better the split wouldn't be too bad but when it's all a bit of a slog like this season there's just no point

[Eyrie]

The point of the split is to ensure that teams in our position have five meaningless games to finish the season instead of competing for a European place.

[J-C]

The split is a nonsense and the fact we're now level with Dun U and equal 4th makes it a mockery, we could finish with enough points for Europe but still be in the bottom 6. It's time to expand the league and play a normal season again.

[The dalmeny]

Does it, How so?

Not really paying attention are you

[bigwheel]

Think the split is brilliant.

Great way of keeping the season relevant for nearly all teams all season.

I’m with you on this …gives a real importance to where you are in the league as the split date starts approaching … quite exciting

[bingo70]

The split is a nonsense and the fact we're now level with Dun U and equal 4th makes it a mockery, we could finish with enough points for Europe but still be in the bottom 6. It's time to expand the league and play a normal season again.

That makes complete sense though, no offence but I never understand the issue that causes.

In the final 5 games we are playing rubbish teams where as Motherwell and Ross county will be playing Rangers, Celtic etc.

Of course the team in 7th place can finish on more points than 6th place.

[GordonHFC]

Increase the numbers to 18 and play each other twice. The only problem with that is Sky dont get their 4 arse cheek matches so it will never happen.

[LaMotta]

If la motta hadnt mentioned those leagues would you have known without googling it?

TBF I only know cause of my gambling habit which has me scouring the leagues for value every weekend usually to be let down by one team:greengrin

[bigwheel]

Increase the numbers to 18 and play each other twice. The only problem with that is Sky dont get their 4 arse cheek matches so it will never happen.

Would be a terrible that ..so many meaningless games . I’m old enough to remember that first time around - there were well thought through reasons why we went to a smaller league - they are as valid today as ever …we’ve got a league were most games right to the end of the season involve championship , European places or relegation ..it works - no idea why people want a bigger league - would be dreadful ..half the team will be in little danger of relegation or Europe all season long

[GordonHFC]

Would be a terrible that ..so many meaningless games . I’m old enough to remember that first time around - there were well thought through reasons why we went to a smaller league - they are as valid today as ever …we’ve got a league were most games right to the end of the season involve championship , European places or relegation ..it works - no idea why people want a bigger league - would be dreadful ..half the team will be in little danger of relegation or Europe all season long

Works in England

[J-C]

That makes complete sense though, no offence but I never understand the issue that causes.

In the final 5 games we are playing rubbish teams where as Motherwell and Ross county will be playing Rangers, Celtic etc.

Of course the team in 7th place can finish on more points than 6th place.

Hence it's a mockery, make it a proper bloody league again and play a normal season, by all means have the play offs for promotion and relegation but this having more points than a team in the top 6 is stupid, it always has been.

[bigwheel]

Works in England

Because they are much better quality in the league - teams can beat each other much more …and they have seven European places …

[houstonhibbee]

The split is a nonsense and the fact we're now level with Dun U and equal 4th makes it a mockery, we could finish with enough points for Europe but still be in the bottom 6. It's time to expand the league and play a normal season again.
But the fact is we wouldn’t have played st miren yesterday so your point is moot

[JohnM1875]

But the fact is we wouldn’t have played st miren yesterday so your point is moot

Exactly. The amount of folk getting bent out of shape about the split now we're in the bottom six.

[J-C]

Increase the numbers to 18 and play each other twice. The only problem with that is Sky dont get their 4 arse cheek matches so it will never happen.


Therein lies one of the stumbling blocks to a league reform but after saying that there wasn't any OF games when the Huns went down the leagues.

[Sir David Gray]

Split is stupid. Can come 7th but have more points then 6th or even 5th

Please don't take this personally as you're not the only person I've seen making this point but I think we need to try and get into the mindset of thinking that after 33 games it's effectively two separate leagues and the team in 7th is playing worse teams for that last 5 games than the teams in 5th or 6th.

[GordonHFC]

Ask why Celtic and Rangers are the only teams never to have played each other three times at home and once away but everyone else has. We are at Dundee 3 times this season but they have never done that.

[Killiehibbie]

Therein lies one of the stumbling blocks to a league reform but after saying that there wasn't any OF games when the Huns went down the leagues.

They didn't go down the leagues they jumped a few to start with.

[J-C]

But the fact is we wouldn’t have played st miren yesterday so your point is moot


No matter who you play it makes no odds, we were 3 points behind Dun U so there was always a good chance of catching them for 4th no matter who we played, the league is very tight between 4th and 10th and a few points either way makes it more exciting. With a split like this year the excitement has vanished as there is nothing to play for, look at England 3 teams all vying to get that last Champions league spot, another 4-5 teams looking for the Europa places and relegation tighter than ever, still all to play for down there.

[J-C]

They didn't go down the leagues they jumped a few to start with.


They re started in Div 2

[Allant1981]

Not really paying attention are you

Yes i am thanks

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Please don't take this personally as you're not the only person I've seen making this point but I think we need to try and get into the mindset of thinking that after 33 games it's effectively two separate leagues and the team in 7th is playing worse teams for that last 5 games than the teams in 5th or 6th.

It's not exactly rocket science.

[Allant1981]

TBF I only know cause of my gambling habit which has me scouring the leagues for value every weekend usually to be let down by one team:greengrin

I know that feeling

[J-C]

Please don't take this personally as you're not the only person I've seen making this point but I think we need to try and get into the mindset of thinking that after 33 games it's effectively two separate leagues and the team in 7th is playing worse teams for that last 5 games than the teams in 5th or 6th.


We understand how it works, just some of us don't like the way it works.

[Killiehibbie]

They started in Div 2

Which was a few above where any other new team would.

[Sir David Gray]

We understand how it works, just some of us don't like the way it works.

Yes I just don't understand the "it's ridiculous that 7th ends up with more points than 5th" argument as a reason for it being criticised.

[bingo70]

Yes I just don't understand the "it's ridiculous that 7th ends up with more points than 5th" argument as a reason for it being criticised.

Agreed.

[Since452]

7th sometimes ends up with more points than 5th because they're playing worse teams. Doesn't mean they're better. Split is a great idea. One of the few things Scottish football has got right.

[007]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.

It does serve a purpose, it keeps the number of league matches to a reasonable level - 38. It doesn't deny drama it produces more drama. Maybe not the scenario you've described but there's plenty of other drama. There are the teams in the top half battling it out for all the European places plus teams battling to stay out of 11th and 12th. There was also the drama of 7 teams all in with a chance of getting 3 of the top 6 places in the final game before the split.

Don't really see why a top v bottom game would be that dramatic, for a start the chances of the fixtures ending up with such a match up on the last day of the season are slim and if it did there'd be a good chance the top team would get a couple of goals ahead early on in the match and nullify any possible drama. With the split there's a lot more chance of teams battling each other for a Euro place or to avoid 11th or 12th playing each other on the last day, which is much more dramatic than top v bottom.

As for resetting points to nil after the split, that's the most ridiculous suggestion I've heard. Top place was 42 points ahead of 6th at the split, not very fair to wipe that out altogether. You talk of a non-event but in that scenario Celtic and Rangers would have scored enough points to make the top 6 half way through December so both would have had 15+ matches that were non events. We've got a bad enough TV deal as it is but in that situation, which would happen just about every season, we wouldn't get anyone at all wanting to pay for the TV broadcast rights.

We were 13 points ahead of Dundee at the split, imagine if the points were reset to nil and we then got relegated on goal difference as a result. Hardly fair.

[greenlex]

The split is strangling proper league/player development. Teams battling relegation right up till the death and the same with European challenge are too scared to blood youngsters. The “meaningless” games are not meaningless but an opportunity to give youth and fringe players much needed game time with the added benefit of being able to rotate international players who rarely get a rest these days a break. Minimum 4 games or even 3 as it is now is boring too. Bigger league. Three up three down( keep the play offs if you must) but the current format is stale IMO. It’s also not an accident Scotlands best European club performances came pre smaller leagues. As mentioned TV wouldn’t get their bigot fest but I’d tell TV to bolt too. We would find a level without their pittance.

[Franck Stanton]

Farcical

In a tight season like this year hibs Livingston would still be within a shout of fourth

More exciting that an old firm could be playing a team nearly winning the league an one fighting to survive

Where as clubs stuck in the middle have nothing to play for against at least 3 other games/ teams.

Hate the split

To solve the issue

I’d make top league 14 with each team playing each other 3 x

Problem solved

2 automatically relegated with 3rd bottom into a play off match versus winner of 3rd v 4th championship one off game


This definitely. Won't happen however, as teams with smaller support rely on those of us that do to give them financial support.

[007]

Farcical

In a tight season like this year hibs Livingston would still be within a shout of fourth

More exciting that an old firm could be playing a team nearly winning the league an one fighting to survive

Where as clubs stuck in the middle have nothing to play for against at least 3 other games/ teams.

Hate the split

To solve the issue

I’d make top league 14 with each team playing each other 3 x

Problem solved

2 automatically relegated with 3rd bottom into a play off match versus winner of 3rd v 4th championship one off game

It's not farcical. 33 matches is more than enough for us to have comfortably established a place in the top 6 but we blew it. This season was unusual in that there were so many teams in contention for 3 top 6 places with 1 game to go before the split.

There is no perfect setup. The flaw with the current one is that sometimes a couple of teams play either 18 / 20 home games instead of 19 or a couple in the same side of the split don't play each other twice at home and twice away, it's 3 & 1. However, they usually manage to work it so it is teams with the least to play for.

In your setup half the league will get 20 home games and half will only get 19 and no teams will play each other the same number of times at home as they will away. Not exactly solving an issue, rather creating more issues.

It will rarely be the case where every team has something to play for right to the end of the season, no matter what the league structure is. However, the bigger you make the league then the more likely it is there will be teams in the middle with nothing to play for, and with more games remaining.

The extra relegation/promotion spots is a better suggestion.

[gaz1875]

Lets scrap the split because a few people on here don't get why we have it!!

[Smartie]

The split is strangling proper league/player development. Teams battling relegation right up till the death and the same with European challenge are too scared to blood youngsters. The “meaningless” games are not meaningless but an opportunity to give youth and fringe players much needed game time with the added benefit of being able to rotate international players who rarely get a rest these days a break. Minimum 4 games or even 3 as it is now is boring too. Bigger league. Three up three down( keep the play offs if you must) but the current format is stale IMO. It’s also not an accident Scotlands best European club performances came pre smaller leagues. As mentioned TV wouldn’t get their bigot fest but I’d tell TV to bolt too. We would find a level without their pittance.

I don’t think having more meaningless games helps player development. The league cup group stages are pretty good for introducing players to the first team and I like it when we do that.

If a young player is good enough he’s old enough, he gets an opportunity to influence games with meaning and if he does well enough, stays in the team.

[chippy]

It does serve a purpose, it keeps the number of league matches to a reasonable level - 38. It doesn't deny drama it produces more drama. Maybe not the scenario you've described but there's plenty of other drama. There are the teams in the top half battling it out for all the European places plus teams battling to stay out of 11th and 12th. There was also the drama of 7 teams all in with a chance of getting 3 of the top 6 places in the final game before the split.

Don't really see why a top v bottom game would be that dramatic, for a start the chances of the fixtures ending up with such a match up on the last day of the season are slim and if it did there'd be a good chance the top team would get a couple of goals ahead early on in the match and nullify any possible drama. With the split there's a lot more chance of teams battling each other for a Euro place or to avoid 11th or 12th playing each other on the last day, which is much more dramatic than top v bottom.

As for resetting points to nil after the split, that's the most ridiculous suggestion I've heard. Top place was 42 points ahead of 6th at the split, not very fair to wipe that out altogether. You talk of a non-event but in that scenario Celtic and Rangers would have scored enough points to make the top 6 half way through December so both would have had 15+ matches that were non events. We've got a bad enough TV deal as it is but in that situation, which would happen just about every season, we wouldn't get anyone at all wanting to pay for the TV broadcast rights.

We were 13 points ahead of Dundee at the split, imagine if the points were reset to nil and we then got relegated on goal difference as a result. Hardly fair.

Should follow the example of Belgium. Recently increased top league from 16 to 18. Regular season of 34 games. Regular season champion is guaranteed European football. Then Top 4 Championship play off for title and 3 or 4 Euro places including 2 Champions league places. Points from regular season are halved and rounded up to reduce deficits. Play each other twice again, so 6 extra games. 1st 3 in Europe, 4th goes into final play off games with winner of the European play off group. That group is regular season clubs ranked 5-8, points halved and rounded up, play each twice, another 6 games. Winner plays off for Euro place with 4th in Championship play off group.
18th club is relegated directly. 17th plays off with 2nd in 2nd tier. Teams 9-16 season ends after regular season no play offs

[ancient hibee]

It certainly knocks on the head any talk of easy fixtures in a title race.

[Daily Hibs]

Please don't take this personally as you're not the only person I've seen making this point but I think we need to try and get into the mindset of thinking that after 33 games it's effectively two separate leagues and the team in 7th is playing worse teams for that last 5 games than the teams in 5th or 6th.
Well said. Been in place for 21 years now. We have been in bottom six far too many times now.

[SHODAN]

Of the 18 seasons we have been in the top division with the split in place, we've finished in the top half ten times and the bottom half eight times.

That isn't good enough tbh.

[Daily Hibs]

Of the 18 seasons we have been in the top division with the split in place, we've finished in the top half ten times and the bottom half eight times.

That isn't good enough tbh.
It's a shocking record. We have players who have been in the team for years currently who don't even have a 50% record of finishing in the top six out of the years they've been playing for us (untouchables).

[007]

Should follow the example of Belgium. Recently increased top league from 16 to 18. Regular season of 34 games. Regular season champion is guaranteed European football. Then Top 4 Championship play off for title and 3 or 4 Euro places including 2 Champions league places. Points from regular season are halved and rounded up to reduce deficits. Play each other twice again, so 6 extra games. 1st 3 in Europe, 4th goes into final play off games with winner of the European play off group. That group is regular season clubs ranked 5-8, points halved and rounded up, play each twice, another 6 games. Winner plays off for Euro place with 4th in Championship play off group.
18th club is relegated directly. 17th plays off with 2nd in 2nd tier. Teams 9-16 season ends after regular season no play offs

It's one way of reducing the number of meaningless games towards the end of the season however it is an additional 2 games for the top 8 teams plus a further 1 (or is it 2?) for 2 of them in an already crowded fixture schedule. Looks like the Belgians only have 1 cup competition so would you be happy to scrap the League Cup?

I'm not against a larger league if there's a decent format to go with it and the Belgian format would slightly increase the chances of a team other than Celtic or Rangers winning. However, the problem we also have is the voting system requiring 11 out of 12 top flight teams needing to vote for a change and Rangers and Celtic aren't going to vote for a change that would improve the chances of other clubs competing for the title. Plus, the smaller top flight clubs want their guaranteed 3 home matches v Celtic/Rangers. Aberdeen f***ed the chance to change things.

[IberianHibernian]

Of the 18 seasons we have been in the top division with the split in place, we've finished in the top half ten times and the bottom half eight times.

That isn't good enough tbh.I agree but most years and especially this year there`s little difference between 6th and 7th ( or 10th ) .

[Daily Hibs]

I agree but most years and especially this year there`s little difference between 6th and 7th ( or 10th ) .
The record books will show that we finished bottom six.

The record books will also show Lewy has finished in top six 7 times (06-07 onwards) and Hanlon 6 times (07-08 onwards).

[leithsansiro]

I think the concept of a split only really works and makes sense in smaller nations such as Scotland. Bigger nations such as England, Spain, etc don't need it because they generally have a wider range of strong teams.

Personally, I quite like it but I think it could be tweaked a bit to make things a bit more exciting and keep the competitive edge for all teams from the start to the end of the season. I'm of the belief that we only should be sustaining national leagues across 2 flights and things are regional below that.

SPL 1 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)
SPL 2 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)

There's then a 3 way split over the top two divisions, 8/8/8

Top 8 - points reset to 0, teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for the Championship/European places
Middle 8 - (4 weakest from SPL 1 and 4 top from SPL 2), points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for a place in the following season's top flight
Bottom 8 - points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) with the bottom two being relegated to regional lowland/highland league

Never going to happen obviously but it would give us a 36 games league season, with much more variety and opportunity on offer

[Hibernia&Alba]

The purpose of it is so the season is 38 games long. With no split there would be 44 league games.

Exactly. In a twelve team league 38 games doesn't fit; it's either 33 games or 44.

[offshorehibby]

I think the concept of a split only really works and makes sense in smaller nations such as Scotland. Bigger nations such as England, Spain, etc don't need it because they generally have a wider range of strong teams.

Personally, I quite like it but I think it could be tweaked a bit to make things a bit more exciting and keep the competitive edge for all teams from the start to the end of the season. I'm of the belief that we only should be sustaining national leagues across 2 flights and things are regional below that.

SPL 1 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)
SPL 2 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)

There's then a 3 way split over the top two divisions, 8/8/8

Top 8 - points reset to 0, teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for the Championship/European places
Middle 8 - (4 weakest from SPL 1 and 4 top from SPL 2), points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for a place in the following season's top flight
Bottom 8 - points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) with the bottom two being relegated to regional lowland/highland league

Never going to happen obviously but it would give us a 36 games league season, with much more variety and opportunity on offer

I always liked this system when it was talked about a few seasons back but as you say, probably never happen.

[007]

I think the concept of a split only really works and makes sense in smaller nations such as Scotland. Bigger nations such as England, Spain, etc don't need it because they generally have a wider range of strong teams.

Personally, I quite like it but I think it could be tweaked a bit to make things a bit more exciting and keep the competitive edge for all teams from the start to the end of the season. I'm of the belief that we only should be sustaining national leagues across 2 flights and things are regional below that.

SPL 1 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)
SPL 2 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)

There's then a 3 way split over the top two divisions, 8/8/8

Top 8 - points reset to 0, teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for the Championship/European places
Middle 8 - (4 weakest from SPL 1 and 4 top from SPL 2), points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for a place in the following season's top flight
Bottom 8 - points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) with the bottom two being relegated to regional lowland/highland league

Never going to happen obviously but it would give us a 36 games league season, with much more variety and opportunity on offer

Terrible idea. Imagine Hibs were leading the league after 22 matches and Hearts were about 25 points behind in 8th. Would you be happy to lose that advantage and restart on the same points as them for the remaining matches? What about teams getting off to a great start for the 1st 10 or so games and in no danger of not being in the top 8? They've then got about 10 meaningless games until the split. Not exactly keeping it exciting or competitive for them.

[leithsansiro]

Terrible idea. Imagine Hibs were leading the league after 22 matches and Hearts were about 25 points behind in 8th. Would you be happy to lose that advantage and restart on the same points as them for the remaining matches? What about teams getting off to a great start for the 1st 10 or so games and in no danger of not being in the top 8? They've then got about 10 meaningless games until the split. Not exactly keeping it exciting or competitive for them.


Uhm, yeah. Quite frankly, if we were 25 points above them and leading the table after 22 matches, I doubt we'd be fearing playing the mighty Hearts... :wink:
In all seriousness, and I totally get that an 8/8/8 split is very unlikely to ever happen, there would be far less meaningless games than there are either at present or under a straight 10 or 12 team top flight.

[Alex Trager]

Farcical

In a tight season like this year hibs Livingston would still be within a shout of fourth

More exciting that an old firm could be playing a team nearly winning the league an one fighting to survive

Where as clubs stuck in the middle have nothing to play for against at least 3 other games/ teams.

Hate the split

To solve the issue

I’d make top league 14 with each team playing each other 3 x

Problem solved

2 automatically relegated with 3rd bottom into a play off match versus winner of 3rd v 4th championship one off game

How would you determine where the third game is played? They sould never go for that. It needs to be even games

[Clarence]

Who’d have thought that a split would be so divisive🤷🏻*♂️

[hibee1875]

The split is a nonsense and the fact we're now level with Dun U and equal 4th makes it a mockery, we could finish with enough points for Europe but still be in the bottom 6. It's time to expand the league and play a normal season again.

We’re not now equal with Utd. The top 6 and bottom 6 are two separate entities. It’s the bbcs fault for showing the league as one which makes it look like a mockery.

Everyone’s just pissed off we “should be playing for Europe but we’re not”. No we shouldn’t. Beat Utd at ER 4 weeks ago and we’d be playing for Europe. We’ve been ***** so we’re not.

At the start of the split every single team in the bottom 6 could have finished in the play off place. The fact we all have to play each other makes it more interesting.

The Neil Lennon season where with the 5-5 rangers game we were all fighting out for 2nd/3rd. Going into that game against rangers knowing a 3-0 win and then going 3-0 was great entertainment.

The *****ness of it this season has been completely our own doing.

[Nicho87]

How would you determine where the third game is played? They sould never go for that. It needs to be even games

Hot ball cold ball draw

Like they use on the cup draws :)

[Crunchie]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.
To help the OF and no one else.

[Moulin Yarns]

It was to keep the number of fixtures down if i remember (whilst also guarenteeing four old firm fixtures of you think like that)

That's the way I remember it.

Now here's an idea, why not have the top 6 playing the bottom 6 post split? Possible bigger crowds and revenue for the bottom 6 as a bonus.

[OldEast]

So many people saying it's our own fault we're in the bottom 6. Surely this thread is about why it's even a thing and possible alternatives. Nothing to do with the fact we're in it, unless you're one of these people who read what they think is there as opposed to what's actually there. The op doesn't mention us.

[hibee1875]

So many people saying it's our own fault we're in the bottom 6. Surely this thread is about why it's even a thing and possible alternatives. Nothing to do with the fact we're in it, unless you're one of these people who read what they think is there as opposed to what's actually there. The op doesn't mention us.

Because if we were in the top 6 playing for Europe there would be no such thread questioning the point of it.

Instead you’d maybe find it on a Motherwell fans forum

[WestCoastHibby]

Split is good. We aren't.
This; the same thing is trotted out every year.
Most teams have no chance of winning anything in this league so the carrot is European football or league place ( higher you go the more money you receive )
We’ve been guff so we deserve to be in the mire with the also guffs. We just need to get a grip next time: same story for Aberdeen.
Been an absolute shambles this season and I just want it all over but doesn’t mean there aren’t more twists and turns to come

[Bertie Wooster]

I remember reading a few theories about this and there was a consensus that from a playing point of view , it benefitted teams wishing to challenge the Old Firm for the league title to play them less during a season (2 each) so a bigger league was beneficial. However , the majority of clubs want their 3/4 home games against the Old Firm for gate receipts and potential TV money so there are more games versus the Old Firm.

I dont think the splits benefit Scottish football and would rather see three top divisions of 16 teams playing each other home and away and that's it.

Simplifies promotion, European places and relegation. Third tier would allow the B teams of clubs that could afford it and who have earned there way up the pyramid. This would be their highest level and like the Germans you would have to have a division between the Parent team and B team , so if the parent team is relegated from the top tier , the B team is subsequently relegated as well. Regional leagues below that forming the pyramid

To compliment the number of league games I would scrap the league cup and have a cup competiton played during the season where there were 8 groups of 5. Based upon the league position of the previous year , you would have 1 from the Top league position 1-8 , and one from postion 9-16 , repeated for the second tier. The fifth position in each group would be decided with a qualifying competition and B teams cannot enter.
Top 2 from each group goes into the knockout stages for the last 16 and then on as per a standard cup competition.

This gives clubs in the top 2 tiers minimum 38 games with 19 home and away games each.

[Hibbyradge]

If la motta hadnt mentioned those leagues would you have known without googling it?

I did know because I'd previously researched it. I can't remember exactly, but I think the majority of European leagues split. If not the majority, it's definitely a significant proportion.

There are a number of different formats. Some leagues split after playing each other only twice, Denmark has a 14 team league which splits into top 6, bottom 8, and the Belgian system mentioned above is utterly bonkers and beyond my comprehension.

We can't afford to have an 18/20 team league because, frankly, we don't have enough big clubs. There's also the question of meaningless games.

In the 72/73 season, for example, there were about 12 out of the 18 teams with nothing but pride to play for from around new year. Only Celtic and Rangers had an eye on the championship and only one of the 2 relegation relegation places had to be avoided because Airdrie were toast months before the season's end.

[LustForLeith]

Loving the chat of ‘meaningless games’

Sorry, but no game is meaningless. If that’s you’re mentality, along with those who think that certain games are bigger than others, then I don’t agree with that. No matter where you are in the league you want to win that game that you’re playing. Every game has a purpose and a meaning

[Danderhall Hibs]

How would you determine where the third game is played? They sould never go for that. It needs to be even games

It’s not even just now - we’re going to Dundee for the 3rd time this season in a couple of weeks time.

[Hibbyradge]

I remember reading a few theories about this and there was a consensus that from a playing point of view , it benefitted teams wishing to challenge the Old Firm for the league title to play them less during a season (2 each) so a bigger league was beneficial. However , the majority of clubs want their 3/4 home games against the Old Firm for gate receipts and potential TV money so there are more games versus the Old Firm.

I dont think the splits benefit Scottish football and would rather see three top divisions of 16 teams playing each other home and away and that's it.

Simplifies promotion, European places and relegation. Third tier would allow the B teams of clubs that could afford it and who have earned there way up the pyramid. This would be their highest level and like the Germans you would have to have a division between the Parent team and B team , so if the parent team is relegated from the top tier , the B team is subsequently relegated as well. Regional leagues below that forming the pyramid

To compliment the number of league games I would scrap the league cup and have a cup competiton played during the season where there were 8 groups of 5. Based upon the league position of the previous year , you would have 1 from the Top league position 1-8 , and one from postion 9-16 , repeated for the second tier. The fifth position in each group would be decided with a qualifying competition and B teams cannot enter.
Top 2 from each group goes into the knockout stages for the last 16 and then on as per a standard cup competition.

This gives clubs in the top 2 tiers minimum 38 games with 19 home and away games each.

I don't understand that cup system.

Firstly, wouldn't 3 leagues of 16 be a challenge given the there are currently only 42 teams in the 4 leagues?

Who would be in the qualifying competition? Highland and Lowland league teams?

Also, I doubt many premiership teams would want to replace games against each other for games against the likes of Cowdenbeath, Albion Rovers and East Fife.

Or have I misunderstood?

[Eyrie]

I think the concept of a split only really works and makes sense in smaller nations such as Scotland. Bigger nations such as England, Spain, etc don't need it because they generally have a wider range of strong teams.

Personally, I quite like it but I think it could be tweaked a bit to make things a bit more exciting and keep the competitive edge for all teams from the start to the end of the season. I'm of the belief that we only should be sustaining national leagues across 2 flights and things are regional below that.

SPL 1 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)
SPL 2 - 12 teams (each play each other twice, 22 matches)

There's then a 3 way split over the top two divisions, 8/8/8

Top 8 - points reset to 0, teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for the Championship/European places
Middle 8 - (4 weakest from SPL 1 and 4 top from SPL 2), points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) for a place in the following season's top flight
Bottom 8 - points reset to 0 and teams play each other home and away (14 matches) with the bottom two being relegated to regional lowland/highland league

Never going to happen obviously but it would give us a 36 games league season, with much more variety and opportunity on offer

I've been in favour of that for over thirty years, but the top 8 and bottom eight can retain their points from the first two rounds of fixtures as they'd have played exactly the same opponents home and away. Only the middle 8 would reset to zero. That means it would be much easier to recover from "relegation", which would be good for Scottish football as we have a lot of clubs of the size where they aren't big enough to challenge for Europe but are large enough to add variety to the top flight which is what the advocates of an 18 team league are seeking.

It would then allow the other two leagues to be regionalised, reducing travel costs for those in the current Division One and Two. Promote the two winners and have the two second placed teams in a mini-tournament with positions 6 and 7 in the bottom eight.

Every game would be meaningful - top eight going for the title and five European places, middle eight for four promotion places and bottom eight to avoid the drop.


Terrible idea. Imagine Hibs were leading the league after 22 matches and Hearts were about 25 points behind in 8th. Would you be happy to lose that advantage and restart on the same points as them for the remaining matches? What about teams getting off to a great start for the 1st 10 or so games and in no danger of not being in the top 8? They've then got about 10 meaningless games until the split. Not exactly keeping it exciting or competitive for them.

See above, or as an alternative to spice up the second half of the season, reset the points totals so that each club starts with one point for each win in the first 22 games which would encourage attacking football.

[Stevie Reid]

The split is really good. Not perfect due to how the home/away fixtures work out, but I’d much rather have it than not.

[Hibbyradge]

Loving the chat of ‘meaningless games’

Sorry, but no game is meaningless. If that’s you’re mentality, along with those who think that certain games are bigger than others, then I don’t agree with that. No matter where you are in the league you want to win that game that you’re playing. Every game has a purpose and a meaning

Ok, you're right.

Meaningless is possibly a lazy term.

"Much less important with nothing tangible at stake" is a better and more accurate phrase.

Those games are less exciting than games where something is at stake. They attract less people and the atmosphere is dull. If you think it's been boring recently, you should have been at the games when we had no chance of being relegated or winning the league.

[Eyrie]

Loving the chat of ‘meaningless games’

Sorry, but no game is meaningless. If that’s you’re mentality, along with those who think that certain games are bigger than others, then I don’t agree with that. No matter where you are in the league you want to win that game that you’re playing. Every game has a purpose and a meaning

You didn't see yesterday's game then. I'm sure both teams wanted to win, but at times it felt like both sides were just playing out time to get to the end of the season because we were almost safe from relegation and St Mirren still have a buffer despite losing.

[chippy]

It's one way of reducing the number of meaningless games towards the end of the season however it is an additional 2 games for the top 8 teams plus a further 1 (or is it 2?) for 2 of them in an already crowded fixture schedule. Looks like the Belgians only have 1 cup competition so would you be happy to scrap the League Cup?

I'm not against a larger league if there's a decent format to go with it and the Belgian format would slightly increase the chances of a team other than Celtic or Rangers winning. However, the problem we also have is the voting system requiring 11 out of 12 top flight teams needing to vote for a change and Rangers and Celtic aren't going to vote for a change that would improve the chances of other clubs competing for the title. Plus, the smaller top flight clubs want their guaranteed 3 home matches v Celtic/Rangers. Aberdeen f***ed the chance to change things.

Probably right re Celtic /Sevco, so probably would have to just accept full points carry over. Could also make the league 16 and reduce the No of games to 36 for the top 8.My understanding is that smaller clubs have in the past been ok with something like this. Gives them some security, decent chance to get in top 8 and box office matches. Not battling relegation every year like 9 clubs have been doing for this season

[BegbieHSC]

It consolidates Old Firm power. It stops a ‘best of the rest’ team sneaking a title by having each team making the top six play the old firm a whopping 8 times. 24 points at stake.

[LeithMike]

Ok, you're right.

Meaningless is possibly a lazy term.

"Much less important with nothing tangible at stake" is a better and more accurate phrase.

Those games are less exciting than games where something is at stake. They attract less people and the atmosphere is dull. If you think it's been boring recently, you should have been at the games when we had no chance of being relegated or winning the league.I wonder if we had more meaningless games whether it would be a lot better for the development of our players and managers? Without the spectre of relegation, I'm sure Maloney would have got a bit more time to implement his ideas.

The gap between 3rd and 11th in the Premiership is really small and it makes bloodong young players and coaches very difficult.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

I wonder if we had more meaningless games whether it would be a lot better for the development of our players and managers? Without the spectre of relegation, I'm sure Maloney would have got a bit more time to implement his ideas.

The gap between 3rd and 11th in the Premiership is really small and it makes bloodong young players and coaches very difficult.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk

Playing games which are fundamentally friendlies might have some development use, but not worth the loss of income that would result.

Also, players start thinking about their holidays etc when there's nothing at stake and, unless they were against Rantic or THEM, the games at the end of the old first division were usually horrible to watch.

[chippy]

I wonder if we had more meaningless games whether it would be a lot better for the development of our players and managers? Without the spectre of relegation, I'm sure Maloney would have got a bit more time to implement his ideas.

The gap between 3rd and 11th in the Premiership is really small and it makes bloodong young players and coaches very difficult.

Sent from my SM-N960F using Tapatalk
It’s what Eddie Turnbull always said. The small league here has a top and bottom with no middle.

[Not So Young]

There is no positive reason for having a split.

I think we are one of only two countries in Europe that have one. If it is so good why doesn't every league have one.

It allows the SFA to fiddle the final few fixutres so that the last OF game will not be a league decider. They admit that that is one of the criteria they use when deciding the final few games.

That means that we all get treated as less important than the OF every season

I hate the split

[greenlex]

Who’d have thought that a split would be so divisive🤷🏻*♂️
:agree: Split on the split.

[NAE NOOKIE]

First things first. Using the fact that the team in 7th can have more points than the team in 5th for example when the season ends as a reason to say the split is stupid is ridiculous logic for obvious reasons.

What is ridiculous about the split is the way fixtures are arranged before it happens, it is just silly to have one team play at, for example, Celtic twice and another team only once, that is not a level playing field.

With Europe now a bit more accessible for group stage football I doubt top clubs would go for a 16 team league, but a 14 team league could work. A 26 game regular season playing home and away splitting into a top 6 and bottom 8 also playing each other home and away. That gives the top 6 a 36 game season and the bottom 8 a 40 game season. A problem for season tickets if you finish bottom 8, but simply have a rule that the final two home games of the season for clubs in the bottom 8 are pay at the gate with priority given to ST holders.

Two relegated automatically with 3rd bottom in a neutral venue one off game against 3rd top in a 14 team championship. With 3 out of the bottom 8 to possibly go down even the team finishing the regular season in 7th might still be in danger of being in the playoff with 14 games still to play keeping the excitement ( fear :greengrin ) going for most clubs.

[Hibbyradge]

There is no positive reason for having a split.

I think we are one of only two countries in Europe that have one. If it is so good why doesn't every league have one.

It allows the SFA to fiddle the final few fixutres so that the last OF game will not be a league decider. They admit that that is one of the criteria they use when deciding the final few games.

That means that we all get treated as less important than the OF every season

I hate the split

I think most European leagues split, certainly a large number do.

[Hibbyradge]

First things first. Using the fact that the team in 7th can have more points than the team in 5th for example when the season ends as a reason to say the split is stupid is ridiculous logic for obvious reasons.

What is ridiculous about the split is the way fixtures are arranged before it happens, it is just silly to have one team play at, for example, Celtic twice and another team only once, that is not a level playing field.

With Europe now a bit more accessible for group stage football I doubt top clubs would go for a 16 team league, but a 14 team league could work. A 26 game regular season playing home and away splitting into a top 6 and bottom 8 also playing each other home and away. That gives the top 6 a 36 game season and the bottom 8 a 40 game season. A problem for season tickets if you finish bottom 8, but simply have a rule that the final two home games of the season for clubs in the bottom 8 are pay at the gate with priority given to ST holders.

Two relegated automatically with 3rd bottom in a neutral venue one off game against 3rd top in a 14 team championship. With 3 out of the bottom 8 to possibly go down even the team finishing the regular season in 7th might still be in danger of being in the playoff with 14 games still to play keeping the excitement ( fear :greengrin ) going for most clubs.

That's exactly the system in Denmark and it's what I'd like to see too.

[bigwheel]

First things first. Using the fact that the team in 7th can have more points than the team in 5th for example when the season ends as a reason to say the split is stupid is ridiculous logic for obvious reasons.

What is ridiculous about the split is the way fixtures are arranged before it happens, it is just silly to have one team play at, for example, Celtic twice and another team only once, that is not a level playing field.

With Europe now a bit more accessible for group stage football I doubt top clubs would go for a 16 team league, but a 14 team league could work. A 26 game regular season playing home and away splitting into a top 6 and bottom 8 also playing each other home and away. That gives the top 6 a 36 game season and the bottom 8 a 40 game season. A problem for season tickets if you finish bottom 8, but simply have a rule that the final two home games of the season for clubs in the bottom 8 are pay at the gate with priority given to ST holders.

Two relegated automatically with 3rd bottom in a neutral venue one off game against 3rd top in a 14 team championship. With 3 out of the bottom 8 to possibly go down even the team finishing the regular season in 7th might still be in danger of being in the playoff with 14 games still to play keeping the excitement ( fear :greengrin ) going for most clubs.

The only credible suggestion on change I’ve read ….

[Eyrie]

It consolidates Old Firm power. It stops a ‘best of the rest’ team sneaking a title by having each team making the top six play the old firm a whopping 8 times. 24 points at stake.

The "best of the rest" usually drop plenty more points to other teams than they do to the Ugly Sisters - look at how far behind second we were last year.

If you're good enough to challenge for the league then you're good enough to take more points from the Ugly Sisters than you drop.

Anything else is the equivalent of the playoffs in the URC or the NFL.

[Eyrie]

The only credible suggestion on change I’ve read ….

Not for me.

Rather than five meaningless games after the split, we could have fourteen.

Anyone who thinks that is a good idea should have to predict the crowd against St Johnstone on May 15th.

[Sir David Gray]

Well said. Been in place for 21 years now. We have been in bottom six far too many times now.

This is the number of times each team has been in the bottom six since it was implemented in 2000/01 season. I have included the abandoned 2019/20 season which was decided on a points per game basis.

Celtic 0/22 0%
Rangers 0/18 0%
Hearts 4/20 20%
Aberdeen 8/22 36%
Dundee Utd 8/18 44%
Hibs 9/19 47%
St Johnstone 7/15 47%
Motherwell 11/22 50%
Kilmarnock 13/21 62%
Livingston 6/9 67%
Ross County 6/9 67%
Dunfermline 6/8 75%
Dundee 9/12 75%
Inverness 9/12 75%
Partick Thistle 6/7 86%
Gretna 1/1 100%
Falkirk 5/5 100%
Hamilton 10/10 100%
St Mirren 14/14 100%

[hibee1875]

Not for me.

Rather than five meaningless games after the split, we could have fourteen.

Anyone who thinks that is a good idea should have to predict the crowd against St Johnstone on May 15th.

Surely with 42 points to play for in that scenario not all 14 games would be meaningless.

[hibstag]

Surely with 42 points to play for in that scenario not all 14 games would be meaningless.

Yep I don't get the meaningless game angle on a bigger league. I think your either needing points for a better finish and of your safe the team you are playing possibly pushing for something.

[007]

First things first. Using the fact that the team in 7th can have more points than the team in 5th for example when the season ends as a reason to say the split is stupid is ridiculous logic for obvious reasons.

What is ridiculous about the split is the way fixtures are arranged before it happens, it is just silly to have one team play at, for example, Celtic twice and another team only once, that is not a level playing field.

With Europe now a bit more accessible for group stage football I doubt top clubs would go for a 16 team league, but a 14 team league could work. A 26 game regular season playing home and away splitting into a top 6 and bottom 8 also playing each other home and away. That gives the top 6 a 36 game season and the bottom 8 a 40 game season. A problem for season tickets if you finish bottom 8, but simply have a rule that the final two home games of the season for clubs in the bottom 8 are pay at the gate with priority given to ST holders.

Two relegated automatically with 3rd bottom in a neutral venue one off game against 3rd top in a 14 team championship. With 3 out of the bottom 8 to possibly go down even the team finishing the regular season in 7th might still be in danger of being in the playoff with 14 games still to play keeping the excitement ( fear :greengrin ) going for most clubs.

Having 2 extra home games in the bottom 8 section isn't the issue with season tickets. The issue would be that halfway through February and if we just missed out on top 6 we'd then have 14 games in the riveting battle for 7th place to look forward to. Not going to sell many season tickets knowing our league season could be effectively over with 3 months to go.

Yes the team in 7th place might still not be safe from relegation at the time of the split, however quite frequently they would be comfortably safe with a lot of the post split games remaining (as could 2 or 3 of the other teams) so wouldn't keep the "excitement" going for long. Teams ending up in that situation would have severely impacted season ticket sales and probably not just for the following season. Knowing us we'd do that every few seasons.

[007]

Surely with 42 points to play for in that scenario not all 14 games would be meaningless.

Not all of them would but 10 of them could easily be.

[hibee1875]

Not all of them would but 10 of them could easily be.

10 games, 30 points? In this hypothetical situation that could still be a massive swing.

The best leagues in the world don’t have a split. Are we saying all of their games are “meaningful”?

Villa, Southampton, palace, Brighton, Newcastle, Leicester are all currently just playing out the season. I’ve not looked at the other big 4 but likely to have similar teams in similar situations.

Split or no split if your not battling relegation or pushing for Europe the last handful of games mean the same.

[Hibbyradge]

Not for me.

Rather than five meaningless games after the split, we could have fourteen.

Anyone who thinks that is a good idea should have to predict the crowd against St Johnstone on May 15th.

With 3 relegation spots (2 automatic and 1 play off) there wouldn't be many bottom 8 teams with meaningless games.

[007]

10 games, 30 points? In this hypothetical situation that could still be a massive swing.

The best leagues in the world don’t have a split. Are we saying all of their games are “meaningful”?

Villa, Southampton, palace, Brighton, Newcastle, Leicester are all currently just playing out the season. I’ve not looked at the other big 4 but likely to have similar teams in similar situations.

Split or no split if your not battling relegation or pushing for Europe the last handful of games mean the same.

No, I never suggested other leagues' games are all meaningful. I'm saying splitting the league with 14 matches to go would be ridiculous. Doing it that early takes Europe out of the equation far too early for the bottom 8 and would likely render a lot of the remaining matches meaningless because, more often than not, 1 or more teams would get clear of the relegation battle well before the last game.

[007]

With 3 relegation spots (2 automatic and 1 play off) there wouldn't be many bottom 8 teams with meaningless games.

Yes there would and it would kill future season ticket sales.

Either 14 games trying to get 7th or if we're lucky we'd be sh¡te and have meaningful games in a relegation battle.

[NAE NOOKIE]

Not for me.

Rather than five meaningless games after the split, we could have fourteen.

Anyone who thinks that is a good idea should have to predict the crowd against St Johnstone on May 15th.

Yes we could have 14 meaningless games. But on the other hand perhaps we wouldn't and it could be nip tuck right down to the wire for 6 or 7 of the 8 teams in the bottom 8. The 5 games we had left this season only became meaningless after we won on Saturday, if we had lost with St Johnstone winning at Dundee the last 4 games would have been far from meaningless.

In all honesty no system is going to guarantee that every game will be meaningful, but surely a pre split season where every team plays their opponent home and away is better than the imbalance we have just now, which also leads to a post split season where some teams have 3 home games and others only two.

We have had piles of folk calling for an 18 team league over the last few years, that would lead to an absolute pile of meaningless games half way through the season.

[Moulin Yarns]

What was wrong with 18 teams back in the day?


PS. Why not have the current split with an extra 2 games with the top 6 playing the bottom six away from home giving the bottom 6 bumper crowds as a bonus for missing out on the chance of Europe?

Just a thought?

[Eyrie]

I note that none of the replies to my post have taken up my offer to predict the actual attendance against St Johnstone. A couple of replies have though already been covered, so I'll respond to NN.


Yes we could have 14 meaningless games. But on the other hand perhaps we wouldn't and it could be nip tuck right down to the wire for 6 or 7 of the 8 teams in the bottom 8. The 5 games we had left this season only became meaningless after we won on Saturday, if we had lost with St Johnstone winning at Dundee the last 4 games would have been far from meaningless.

In all honesty no system is going to guarantee that every game will be meaningful, but surely a pre split season where every team plays their opponent home and away is better than the imbalance we have just now, which also leads to a post split season where some teams have 3 home games and others only two.

We have had piles of folk calling for an 18 team league over the last few years, that would lead to an absolute pile of meaningless games half way through the season.

I agree that any split has to be after the first two rounds of fixtures, so that each team has played all the others once at home and once away.

I also agree that an 18 team league will have far too many meaningless games, but so will the bottom eight in a 14 team league.

So I'd prefer two leagues of twelve splitting into three leagues of eight as I posted earlier in the thread. The split takes place after 22 games and is a natural opportunity to take a two week break.

[Hibbyradge]

Yes there would and it would kill future season ticket sales.

Either 14 games trying to get 7th or if we're lucky we'd be sh¡te and have meaningful games in a relegation battle.

It's the system they used to have in Denmark.

It's now a 12 team league which splits after 22 games. The team that finishes 7th plays off against the team that finished third with the winner getting the final European spot.

It sounds bonkers and unfair, but it would definitely remove most of the meaningless games.

[danhibees1875]

It's the system they used to have in Denmark.

It's now a 12 team league which splits after 22 games. The team that finishes 7th plays off against the team that finished third with the winner getting the final European spot.

It sounds bonkers and unfair, but it would definitely remove most of the meaningless games.

I think they would need to incentivise 7th like that for it to work. Without wanting to use phrases like "meaningless games" I would generally rather any split occurred as far through the season as possible though.

On balance, that solution Vs the current set-up both have relatively minor flaws but either would work quite well.

I'm quite happy with the current set up, I think it's just too engrained in our psyche to assume that Scotland/SFA must be doing something wrong that we can't just be happy that we've nailed a league system that suits the structure of clubs that we have in the country.

[jacomo]

The purpose of it is so the season is 38 games long. With no split there would be 44 league games.


This is the, pragmatic reason for it.

[Juniper Greens]

If we are likely to have these European places for a while, why not make 7th v 5th playoff for the final euro spot, maybe at the home of 5th place to give them an advantage. This season is a perfect example of the issues, 1 game post split and we are 7th (or 4th). Get that penalty against Dundee United on game 32 and we are top 6 and they are bottom 6, it's just too cut and dry

[AgentDaleCooper]

The main purpose as far as i can see is to have a league bigger than 10 teams whilst maintaining 4 OF games a season. 18 teams, 2 rounds of fixtures would be the best IMO.

[NAE NOOKIE]

The main purpose as far as i can see is to have a league bigger than 10 teams whilst maintaining 4 OF games a season. 18 teams, 2 rounds of fixtures would be the best IMO.

You are correct and that is never going to change .... hells bells, even Germany only has an 18 team top flight and that's a country of 80 million people with absolutely piles of massive clubs.

The other reason and why I would prefer 16 teams, though in all honesty 14 is probably the highest any club would go for now, is that we give more clubs a shot at premiership football and a slightly higher chance of survival after promotion. The current premiership has Livingston and Ross County in it, one a club with a home support numbered in the hundreds and the other a very well run club, but with little or no chance of being any bigger than it currently is attendance wise.

I am certainly not making a case for excluding clubs due to their size, but I would like to see the likes of Dunfermline have a chance to make it back and Dundee have a chance not to be just a yoyo club all the time .... both clubs who if given the chance to stick around for a bit in the premiership might just have the potential to average a home support of 5,000 or so excluding away fans, something the likes of Hamilton and ICT both seem incapable of.

The number of full time clubs still in existence in this tiny country is nothing short of miraculous and a bigger league would give some of those who teeter on the brink of going part time season after season a better chance of staying full time.

[basehibby]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.

The split is all about making a league structure of 12-10-10-10 work without having an overload (44) of matches in the top flight.

We used to have a 10 team top league and everyone agreed that was too tight - so it was changed to 12 teams but that gave us too many games. Much talk was had about enlarging the league but, the truth is in Scoland we are restricted in our options by the number of and size of available clubs to take part.

16 team league would mean a different kind of split with it's own set of problems.

18 team league would actually be pretty good IMO - but only 34 games would deprive clubs of much needed revenue.

20 team league probably makes the most sense in terms of fixture list - but we have barely enough realistic full time clubs to fill it - meaning it would inevitably include some real minnows some seasons with a lot of unappealing fixtures.

.... so after chewing over all of the above the clubs agreed on what we have now. It's not ideal but has it's twists and turns. FWIW I reckon that top of the bottom 6 should win some kind of shield - sure it's not something the bigger clubs would really crave for their cabinet but would maybe add a little bit of meaning to the end of season mid table fixtures which is just not there at the moment.

[Wakeyhibee]

Not for me, this year its killed 3 teams season early with 5 euro places.

Understand why its done though.

[lyonhibs]

We finish top six there's absolutely no chance this is a thread after the first round of games. We're looking forward to games against the old firm and an Edinburgh derby.

We've been pish. Accept that and move on. The split isn't the issue the quality of our team is.

Is the correct answer

[justlikebrazil]

The only point of the split is so the spl get 4 old firm games!!

[WeeRussell]

The only point of the split is so the spl get 4 old firm games!!

They would be guaranteed that without the split though?

In fact without league reconstruction (or one of them getting relegated) only the split, in theory, could stop that.

[Hibbyradge]

They would be guaranteed that without the split though?

In fact without league reconstruction (or one of them getting relegated) only the split, in theory, could stop that.

They'd need to go to a 10 team league again or there would be too many games.

Previously, that really was as dull as as a mix of ditch and dish water!

[Ringothedog]

Another reason that the league will not be expanded is because any prize money would be diluted. Clubs will not vote for that.

[WeeRussell]

They'd need to go to a 10 team league again or there would be too many games.

Previously, that really was as dull as as a mix of ditch and dish water!

I was wondering about the amount of games. Did the split come in at the exact same time as we went to 12 teams I’m guessing?

[Stanton Spence]

I was wondering about the amount of games. Did the split come in at the exact same time as we went to 12 teams I’m guessing?No I think we may have played a couple of seasons with 44 league games mate but I could be wrong?

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

No I think we may have played a couple of seasons with 44 league games mate but I could be wrong?

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

I don't remember that.

I'll check

[Stanton Spence]

I don't remember that.

I'll checkCheers I couldn't be ersed [emoji1303]

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

I can't find any evidence of us playing 44 games.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we went to 12 teams in 2000 and we've played 38 games ever since.

[Stanton Spence]

I don't remember that.

I'll checkYour right Hibbyradge for some reason I thought we played a season with the 44 league games but a lot of time has passed and it was my 20s the era we are talking about [emoji23]

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[Hibbyradge]

Your right Hibbyradge for some reason I thought we played a season with the 44 league games but a lot of time has passed and it was my 20s the era we are talking about [emoji23]

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

Whippersnapper!

Mind you, some seasons it's felt a lot longer than 44 games!

[Chorley Hibee]

I can't find any evidence of us playing 44 games.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we went to 12 teams in 2000 and we've played 38 games ever since.

We used to play 44 games a season in the 90's under the 12 team league version.

That was pre the introduction of the split though.

[Hibbyradge]

We used to play 44 games a season in the 90's under the 12 team league version.

That was pre the introduction of the split though.

You're right. 3 seasons from 91.

[WeeRussell]

We used to play 44 games a season in the 90's under the 12 team league version.

That was pre the introduction of the split though.

And most importantly, I suppose, pre the introduction of mental amount of European and cup games with so many group formats etc

[brownkg]

because the (s)GFA don't have the balls to create a proper league of 16/18 and to allow the 4 derbies Dumbcaster said are vital for the commercial viability of the sky deal.

Whole lot should be emptied

[heretoday]

It means we can get the beach balls out early.

[JamesHFC]

Majority of clubs voted against reconstruction when Hearts got themselves relegated again. I really can’t see it being brought up again anytime soon. I actually don’t mind the split, it’s ***** when you finish in the bottom six though.

[Crunchie]

because the (s)GFA don't have the balls to create a proper league of 16/18 and to allow the 4 derbies Dumbcaster said are vital for the commercial viability of the sky deal.

Whole lot should be emptied
Spot on.

[Keith_M]

I actually didn't mind the 10 team league with no split and 36 games.

I'd be happy to go back to that.

[bigwheel]

because the (s)GFA don't have the balls to create a proper league of 16/18 and to allow the 4 derbies Dumbcaster said are vital for the commercial viability of the sky deal.

Whole lot should be emptied

Those of us who recall the bigger leagues ..remember how uninspiring it was …a league of 18 would be dreadful - there will be so many meaningless games . We have a system just now that makes most games mean something for almost the whole of the season - be careful what you wish for - we may just have the best set up right now ..

[Eyrie]

I actually didn't mind the 10 team league with no split and 36 games.

I'd be happy to go back to that.

I think a lot of clubs would be opposed to it because of the difficulty in balancing promotion and relegation. Teams in the second tier wouldn't be happy if only one could be promoted, but those in the top flight wouldn't want the risk of two from ten (in reality, two from eight) going down, even if one is through a playoff.

That's why I favour the 12/12 splitting into 8/8/8 because the middle eight offers four promotion spots to next season's top twelve. It creates a much more fluid situation where it's much easier to get promoted so relegation is less of a concern. It suits Scottish football, where we don't have the quality for a league of 18-20 but do have a lot of clubs in the "Championship" and lower Premiership of a similar quality.

It also solves the problems of meaningless games, because every club in the top 8 is battling for the title or Europe until the last couple of games, every team in the middle eight has promotion to aim for and every team in the bottom eight is trying to avoid relegation to the regional league below. And it preserves the four Ugly Sisters bigot-fests that Sky are paying for.

[chippy]

Those of us who recall the bigger leagues ..remember how uninspiring it was …a league of 18 would be dreadful - there will be so many meaningless games . We have a system just now that makes most games mean something for almost the whole of the season - be careful what you wish for - we may just have the best set up right now ..

Would that be the uninspiring 16/18 club league that Hibs have won 4 times and were runners up in at least twice in the 1970s. Not forgetting other winners like Killie , Dundee in the 60s

[Mcbizz1998]

Only thing attracts me to a bigger league is playing the same teams over and over less. It makes the Derby’s more special as well as the erse cheeks games.

[Danderhall Hibs]

Only thing attracts me to a bigger league is playing the same teams over and over less. It makes the Derby’s more special as well as the erse cheeks games.

It would. No doubt we’d go on a long winning run against Hearts and hardly make a dent into the games win v them column.

[WestStandWillie]

Doesn’t really serve a purpose. And isn’t it denying the chance for a bit of drama if the last game of the season the team needing a win for the title was playing the side at the bottom needing a win to stay up?

I remember hearing that there was plans after each split teams would all start on zero points. So in theory a team could finish sixth, win their five games and win the league.

It’ll never happen but would make the non event they have now a bit more exciting.

It was brought in to placate the Old Firm so there wouldnae be any "aw they only played Dundee and we had to play Hibs" woe is me nonsense.

I don't mind it tbh. We're just raw because we didn't finish top 6 and will most likely have more points than Motherwell come season end - c'est la vie

[loanheadhibby]

The only point of the split is so the spl get 4 old firm games!!

44 games too many and they must have 4 old firm games.
You are spot on.