Scotland, the cow that milks itself

Article today in the Herald, sports guru Ken Schofield reaching out to the SFA offering his help - http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/...tish_football/
Nothing really insightful in the article itself other than the usual need for a bigger top league and more indoor facilities. He does mention 'closed minds' however, touching upon why Brian McClair felt he had to quit as performance director.
We know something is critically wrong with the way the game is run here and that any of the minor changes implemented in recent years has had little to no effect - is it closed minds? Are teams only interested in the next quick buck? Maybe the chairmen of our clubs are only interested in taking what they can get now and to hell with the future?
Would a guy like this be able to make a difference? THe SFA only cares about the OF, the OF only care about the OF and no one cares about our national team - is Ken Schofield the answer?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Raymond Weil

Article today in the Herald, sports guru Ken Schofield reaching out to the SFA offering his help - http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/...tish_football/
Nothing really insightful in the article itself other than the usual need for a bigger top league and more indoor facilities. He does mention 'closed minds' however, touching upon why Brian McClair felt he had to quit as performance director.
We know something is critically wrong with the way the game is run here and that any of the minor changes implemented in recent years has had little to no effect - is it closed minds? Are teams only interested in the next quick buck? Maybe the chairmen of our clubs are only interested in taking what they can get now and to hell with the future?
Would a guy like this be able to make a difference? THe SFA only cares about the OF, the OF only care about the OF and no one cares about our national team - is Ken Schofield the answer?

---

Probably another closet masonic whose only interest is getting Sellick and the rangers to join a richer (money wise) league while placing their 'colt' teams in.

Would far rather have someone like Murdo MacCleod or Pat Nevin.

'Closed minds' sounds about right.

Scottish football is failing, yet vested interests are reluctant to change. Why is that?

Doncaster and Reagan should have been emptied after 'Armageddon' - the disaster that increased attendances and enabled new names to claim some silverware.

Bigger reform is needed, but you have to start somewhere.

Henry McLeish knows we need change.
Barry Hearn knows we need change.
John Collins and countless others know we need change, as do many supporters.

When will it happen?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomo

'Closed minds' sounds about right.

Scottish football is failing, yet vested interests are reluctant to change. Why is that?

Doncaster and Reagan should have been emptied after 'Armageddon' - the disaster that increased attendances and enabled new names to claim some silverware.

Bigger reform is needed, but you have to start somewhere.

Henry McLeish knows we need change.
Barry Hearn knows we need change.
John Collins and countless others know we need change, as do many supporters.

When will it happen?

---

Agree there should be some kind of change that is appropriate for most clubs however Barry Hearn is a flash harry style money man type.

Whoever is going to take on such a role should have some experience of the scottish game - Pat Nevin would be ideal.

I wish we knew what it was that McClair wanted to change and what the resistance was but as usual with Scottish football everything is clouded in secrecy.
They often ask that everyone should be pulling in the same direction but nobody knows what direction to pull.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where is the evidence that Pat Nevin has the experience required to run the game?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northstandhibby

Agree there should be some kind of change that is appropriate for most clubs however Barry Hearn is a flash harry style money man type and as for Henry McLeish he's an ex failed politician who faked his expenses and as far as I can make out was an armageddon establishment type.

Whoever is going to take on such a role should have some experience of the scottish game - Pat Nevin would be ideal.

---

McLeish got to the top job in scottish politics - you have a harsh threshold for failure.

He also (i believe) played for east fife in his younger years, so i wouldnt be so quick to dismiss his input.

You cant rail against the establishment but also dismiss anyone without experience of said establishment.

Its quite simple though - the interests of the clubs isnt the Scottish national team, it is themselves and the reality is that for most professional clubs means little nore than just surviving.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Where is the evidence that Pat Nevin has the experience required to run the game?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Basing it on his wealth of experience in playing football at a high level, listening to his often expert opinions on tv and radio and he has a persona of sounding both diplomatic and being vocal.

He is also well respected in football circles.

Doesn't have to be Pat but someone who knows the Scottish game and is respected because they have to be both charismatic and a leader. Bring in someone who doesn't know the Scottish game and they will soon learn the hard way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SouthsideHarp_Bhoy

McLeish got to the top job in scottish politics - you have a harsh threshold for failure.

He also (i believe) played for east fife in his younger years, so i wouldnt be so quick to dismiss his input.

You cant rail against the establishment but also dismiss anyone without experience of said establishment.

Its quite simple though - the interests of the clubs isnt the Scottish national team, it is themselves and the reality is that for most professional clubs means little nore than just surviving.

---

Willing to concede to your point about Henry McLeish. You seem to have an opinion of him which resonates with me about him not being able to rail against the establishment without learning of them firstly.

It may be I am wrong to have said what I did if your point is indeed a correct one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Where is the evidence that Pat Nevin has the experience required to run the game?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

Where is the evidence that Doncaster, Reagan etc have experience to run the game?

He will be ignored just as Barry Hearn was ............. The two of them have worked miracles with wildly different sports so far as Golf and Darts go, but the big difference is that perhaps they had a few more open minds to work with, not something the SFA or SPFL are known for.

There has been a call for a 16 team premier league for years now ... this guy says its a good idea, Gordon Strachan ( the national team boss ) says its a good idea and its hard to find a supporter who would be against it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

He will be ignored just as Barry Hearn was ............. The two of them have worked miracles with wildly different sports so far as Golf and Darts go, but the big difference is that perhaps they had a few more open minds to work with, not something the SFA or SPFL are known for.

There has been a call for a 16 team premier league for years now ... this guy says its a good idea, Gordon Strachan ( the national team boss ) says its a good idea and its hard to find a supporter who would be against it.

---

I'm going to go against the grain then and say a 16 team league is a disastrous one. Crowds will decrease as umpteen teams with absolutely nothing to play for are stuck in the middle of it with the new firm sellick and the rangers dominating winning it.

Mind you if they were to join another league as is their public desire to then an expanded league would offer up a chance for many more clubs to win the thing.

In the meantime I think what we have in a 12 team league with splits and play offs for relegation is not a bad one once we get back there of course.

Any new expanded league would have to try to make it interesting for the multitudes of teams with nothing at all to play for until Sellick and the rangers depart for richer coin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

I wish we knew what it was that McClair wanted to change and what the resistance was but as usual with Scottish football everything is clouded in secrecy.
They often ask that everyone should be pulling in the same direction but nobody knows what direction to pull.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

McClair wanted to slim down the academies-far too many taking on kids to keep the numbers up rather than ones with a genuine chance.The clubs refused to co operate so he packed it in.

As far as a 16 team league is concerned it would be a disaster with a host of meaningless games.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ancient hibee

McClair wanted to slim down the academies-far too many taking on kids to keep the numbers up rather than ones with a genuine chance.The clubs refused to co operate so he packed it in.

As far as a 16 team league is concerned it would be a disaster with a host of meaningless games.

---

How do other leagues survive with 16+ teams?

Nothing will happen until the SFA (in reality,the GFA) is closed-down completely, lock, stock and all the empty barrels within it. An entirely new governing-body to be set up (preferably located outside of Glasgow) with positions filled by NO-ONE previously employed in the SFA or even acquainted with anyone in the SFA. A mix of ex-pro's, business-people, club-chairmen AND fans-reps !. Above all, NO preference given to applicants simply because they played for either of the OF. In other words, until the governing-body's love-in with the OF is stopped (even watered-down) Scottish Football will continue to go down-hill !!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Deansy

Nothing will happen until the SFA (in reality,the GFA) is closed-down completely, lock, stock and all the empty barrels within it. An entirely new governing-body to be set up (preferably located outside of Glasgow) with positions filled by NO-ONE previously employed in the SFA or even acquainted with anyone in the SFA. A mix of ex-pro's, business-people, club-chairmen AND fans-reps !. Above all, NO preference given to applicants simply because they played for either of the OF. In other words, until the governing-body's love-in with the OF is stopped (even watered-down) Scottish Football will continue to go down-hill !!

---

While I agree that it would be a good idea for the SFA to be located outside Glasgow, the old firm love in stuff is nonsense. The SFA is a membership organisation, made up of all the clubs in Scotland.
If we want change then it's up to the fans to put pressure on their clubs.
At Hibs just now it's difficult because all the focus of everyone at the club including the fans is on promotion but I would like to see a bit more transparency regarding the clubs position on the many issues facing the game. We are part owners of the club now and are financing the club as well. We deserve a say in the direction the club is going.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northstandhibby

I'm going to go against the grain then and say a 16 team league is a disastrous one. Crowds will decrease as umpteen teams with absolutely nothing to play for are stuck in the middle of it with the new firm sellick and the rangers dominating winning it.

Mind you if they were to join another league as is their public desire to then an expanded league would offer up a chance for many more clubs to win the thing.

In the meantime I think what we have in a 12 team league with splits and play offs for relegation is not a bad one once we get back there of course.

Any new expanded league would have to try to make it interesting for the multitudes of teams with nothing at all to play for until Sellick and the rangers depart for richer coin.

---

I'm not against having a split in principle, but the league before that point can have one team playing at Parkhead, Ibrox and Tynecastle twice and another team only going there once and having two home games v Celtic, Sevco and Hertz .... that isn't fair .... what about a compromise with a 14 team league. You could have 26 games 13 home and 13 away and then an 8 / 6 split ..... that gives the top half a total of 36 games and the bottom half a total of 40 games.

We hardly have any Wednesday night games any more .... if we scheduled something like 4 rounds in the first round of fixtures and two in the second for midweek that would stop the league fixtures affecting anybody in the bottom half who made it to the Scottish cup final. Celtic might moan about having European fixtures as well, but tough titty, that's the price you pay for having the financial muscle to ensure you are always in Europe. The bottom club goes down automatically and the two above them go into the playoffs.

I always think of Germany here .... a country of 80,000.000 people with only 18 teams in its top flight, 14 would be a decent compromise for us.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

I'm not against having a split in principle, but the league before that point can have one team playing at Parkhead, Ibrox and Tynecastle twice and another team only going there once and having two home games v Celtic, Sevco and Hertz .... that isn't fair .... what about a compromise with a 14 team league. You could have 26 games 13 home and 13 away and then an 8 / 6 split ..... that gives the top half a total of 36 games and the bottom half a total of 40 games.

We hardly have any Wednesday night games any more .... if we scheduled something like 4 rounds in the first round of fixtures and two in the second for midweek that would stop the league fixtures affecting anybody in the bottom half who made it to the Scottish cup final. Celtic might moan about having European fixtures as well, but tough titty, that's the price you pay for having the financial muscle to ensure you are always in Europe. The bottom club goes down automatically and the two above them go into the playoffs.

I always think of Germany here .... a country of 80,000.000 people with only 18 teams in its top flight, 14 would be a decent compromise for us.

---

Good points intelligently made.

Your 14 team league structure looks good with interesting ideas to maintain interest throughout the season for the majority of clubs and fans.

:aok:

Petrie just got door stepped by STV outside Hampden. It's on Twitter if anyone is interested.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

I'm not against having a split in principle, but the league before that point can have one team playing at Parkhead, Ibrox and Tynecastle twice and another team only going there once and having two home games v Celtic, Sevco and Hertz .... that isn't fair .... what about a compromise with a 14 team league. You could have 26 games 13 home and 13 away and then an 8 / 6 split ..... that gives the top half a total of 36 games and the bottom half a total of 40 games.

We hardly have any Wednesday night games any more .... if we scheduled something like 4 rounds in the first round of fixtures and two in the second for midweek that would stop the league fixtures affecting anybody in the bottom half who made it to the Scottish cup final. Celtic might moan about having European fixtures as well, but tough titty, that's the price you pay for having the financial muscle to ensure you are always in Europe. The bottom club goes down automatically and the two above them go into the playoffs.

I always think of Germany here .... a country of 80,000.000 people with only 18 teams in its top flight, 14 would be a decent compromise for us.

---

Take me it you mean a 6/8 split? In that case I would think there could be two demoted and no playoffs given the number of games required.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northstandhibby

I'm going to go against the grain then and say a 16 team league is a disastrous one. Crowds will decrease as umpteen teams with absolutely nothing to play for are stuck in the middle of it with the new firm sellick and the rangers dominating winning it.

Mind you if they were to join another league as is their public desire to then an expanded league would offer up a chance for many more clubs to win the thing.

In the meantime I think what we have in a 12 team league with splits and play offs for relegation is not a bad one once we get back there of course.

Any new expanded league would have to try to make it interesting for the multitudes of teams with nothing at all to play for until Sellick and the rangers depart for richer coin.

---

Well 12 teams isn't working out that great. Nobody but Celtc has won it for a long time, at least since RFC died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

Where is the evidence that Pat Nevin has the experience required to run the game?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I think Pat is far too clever to get involved in trying to sort out what is wrong at SFA headquarters, because that is where it has been pear shaped for a long time, since Ernie Walker.

The value of Schofield is that he has turned around other failing sports organisations and has no axe to grind. However SFA blazers would rather commission lots of reviews then have the chance to quietly ignore the lot!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ancient hibee

Take me it you mean a 6/8 split? In that case I would think there could be two demoted and no playoffs given the number of games required.

---

Bottom club goes down automatically 12th & 13th play each other home and away to see who plays the winner of 2nd and 3rd playoff from the championship in a one off winner takes all at a neutral venue ... that's only 3 more games. That's why I was wanting more midweek games, so that there is room at the end of the season to fit playoff games in before the cup final.

If you want to be brutal about it the bottom 2 could go down automatically and 11th and 12th play off to see who plays 3rd in the championship in a playoff final. Depending who was involved I could see a game like that filling the likes of Easter Road if it was Dundee and Dunfermline involved for example.

FWIW I don't think McLeish went far enough, probably because he was trying to stick to a set of proposals that 'the chairmen that matter' would accept, IIRC it would have been a return to a 10 team league. Personally, I can't see why a 2 division set up (16 and 20+ teams) with the league cup picking up the lost fixture slack can't work. As mentioned in the article, that is an extra 100 players playing at the top with the majority able to play for Scotland.
Maybe the problem is the SPFL doesn't think there is a problem. There is money coming in, their jobs are under no immediate threat and the customers are still paying their money. Football fans are the best kind of customer after all, if they don't like your product they aren't going to go out and find a replacement, they will keep coming back.
I think of our leagues as being like a shopping centre on a boat, as long as our kiosk is fine we are happy, unfortunately the guy driving the boat is drunk at the wheel and it only a matter of time before we all crash. Maybe a better analogy for the game as a whole is of the fat ex-player in his 50s/60s who played in world cups and European finals, some player in his day but now way past his best and lives on past glories. In the not too distant future he will pass away and it will just be the old yins who remember his name that will have anything to mourn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geo_1875

Well 12 teams isn't working out that great. Nobody but Celtc has won it for a long time, at least since RFC died.

---

Fair point. Can you imagine how much more uninteresting the league would have been without the split and the play offs?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenPJ

Where is the evidence that Doncaster, Reagan etc have experience to run the game?

---

There's plenty evidence for the contrary. :coffee:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northstandhibby

I'm going to go against the grain then and say a 16 team league is a disastrous one. Crowds will decrease as umpteen teams with absolutely nothing to play for are stuck in the middle of it with the new firm sellick and the rangers dominating winning it.

Mind you if they were to join another league as is their public desire to then an expanded league would offer up a chance for many more clubs to win the thing.

In the meantime I think what we have in a 12 team league with splits and play offs for relegation is not a bad one once we get back there of course.

Any new expanded league would have to try to make it interesting for the multitudes of teams with nothing at all to play for until Sellick and the rangers depart for richer coin.

---

The 12 team format favours Celtc because it's so much harder for a smaller team to beat them over 4 league fixtures a season.

If teams only played each other twice a season, there is more opportunity for upsets IMO.

Also, the 12 team format may discourage enterprising football, because up to half the teams can be involved in the relegation battle.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jacomo

The 12 team format favours Celtc because it's so much harder for a smaller team to beat them over 4 league fixtures a season.

If teams only played each other twice a season, there is more opportunity for upsets IMO.

Also, the 12 team format may discourage enterprising football, because up to half the teams can be involved in the relegation battle.

---

There is no doubt the 12 team format has its inequalities and faults. The 10 team league is too small with familiarity a major issue.

I liked your idea of a 14 team league if it can incorporate split/splits with play offs of some kind or another to keep a level of competition and interest throughout the season. Also if it could iron out the anomalies of teams playing more games against one team than another does then that too would be a big bonus compared to the 12 team league.

Any expansion must incorporate split/splits and play offs to maintain interest.

I see it looks like Strachan might just keep his job. Petrie quoted in the Meto saying Strachan has done a "good job".

It doesn't really surprise that Scottish football is amateur top to bottom when the likes of Petrie are involved. He runs Hibs into the ground in a football sense while simultaneously greasing the right palms to move up the SFA gravy train.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Right Said Frank

I see it looks like Strachan might just keep his job. Petrie quoted in the Meto saying Strachan has done a "good job".

It doesn't really surprise that Scottish football is amateur top to bottom when the likes of Petrie are involved. He runs Hibs into the ground in a football sense while simultaneously greasing the right palms to move up the SFA gravy train.

---

Rod knows how to play SFA politics but the rest of what you say is wrong.

He has not run Hibs into the ground.
Hibs are comfortable financially and in control of what is spent. Our last wages to turnover ratio was 54%.

Whilst Rod has made bad managerial appointments he didn't do anything the fans were not asking for at the time (appointing Hughes, Butcher). Also we play in a fully completed, top class stadium and own our own training facilities. We're not having to do cake bakes to build our new stand or stiff the local University for renting their pitches to train on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Right Said Frank

I see it looks like Strachan might just keep his job. Petrie quoted in the Meto saying Strachan has done a "good job".

---

What do you expect him to say?

Quote:

---

It doesn't really surprise that Scottish football is amateur top to bottom when the likes of Petrie are involved. He runs Hibs into the ground in a football sense while simultaneously greasing the right palms to move up the SFA gravy train.

---

Pish! Have you ever considered that he may simply be looking out for Hibs interests?

And Leann Dempster is on the SPFL board - is she on the "gravy train" too?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Peevemor

What do you expect him to say?



Pish! Have you ever considered that he may simply be looking out for Hibs interests?

And Leann Dempster is on the SPFL board - is she on the "gravy train" too?

---

I'd prefer he had nothing to do with either Hibs or Scotland, but tell it like it is. I like Strachan, and was optimistic when he came in and thought he did well at first. However since the Ireland win at home we have only won 3 competitive games. Those were against Gibraltar twice and Malta. "We haven't been good enough, Gordon knows that himself, but he is working hard to turn our campaign around", that would have been better than his usual generic statement.

In any case, It wasn't the statement that got my back up, but the fact it was from Petrie. Who I have long suspected is angling for the top job at the SFA. God help us if Petrie has any influence whatsoever in the running of Scottish football or the national team. We're still trying to rectify his mess at Hibs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NAE NOOKIE

Bottom club goes down automatically 12th & 13th play each other home and away to see who plays the winner of 2nd and 3rd playoff from the championship in a one off winner takes all at a neutral venue ... that's only 3 more games. That's why I was wanting more midweek games, so that there is room at the end of the season to fit playoff games in before the cup final.

If you want to be brutal about it the bottom 2 could go down automatically and 11th and 12th play off to see who plays 3rd in the championship in a playoff final. Depending who was involved I could see a game like that filling the likes of Easter Road if it was Dundee and Dunfermline involved for example.

---

Why have playoffs? 2 down, 2 up.

Playoffs are a load of **** anyway.

J

Listened to an interesting debate on sportsound last night with Off the Radar KJ, Spiers and Tom English.

Radar was all for outing the SFA but keeping Strachan while English wanted him to name who he would replace Regan and oor Rod Petrie with.

Radar wouldn't really say as English pushed him.

i think English knew who Radar would name such as Walter Smith and other hun lickspittles.

Seems to be a push from the huns to get rid of Regan and Petrie. Radar is of is course their mouthpiece.

Very suspicious indeed.

While I'm for some kind of change the last thing we need is for a hun takeover to take place. It could be because Regan favors strict liability which would hurt the huns more than most or is there more to this than meets the eye such as pressure being applied over the Lord Nimmo fiasco?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by northstandhibby

Listened to an interesting debate on sportsound last night with Off the Radar KJ, Spiers and Tom English.

Radar was all for outing the SFA but keeping Strachan while English wanted him to name who he would replace Regan and oor Rod Petrie with.

Radar wouldn't really say as English pushed him.

i think English knew who Radar would name such as Walter Smith and other hun lickspittles.

Seems to be a push from the huns to get rid of Regan and Petrie. Radar is of is course their mouthpiece.

Very suspicious indeed.

While I'm for some kind of change the last thing we need is for a hun takeover to take place. It could be because Regan favors strict liability which would hurt the huns more than most or is there more to this than meets the eye such as pressure being applied over the Lord Nimmo fiasco?

---

I listened to that as well and Jackson was talking pie in the sky nonsense about getting Sir Alex Ferguson in to run the SFA and keeping Strachan (whose recent record is dreadful).
Was all the usual sound of an empty tin rattling.

Tom English as usual made the most sense. Asking for actual solutions rather than emotional knee jerk nonsense.
Could another manager get more out of these limited players than Strachan? Absolutely. See Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland for your examples. He also noted the problems in Scottish football are deeper than who the SFA Head Coach is. Ask why Brian McClair left the Technical Director position? The answer is because of the attitude of the clubs who refuse to co-operate with the Directives regarding Player Development. Perhaps we should also be focusing on the member clubs as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndyM_1875

I listened to that as well and Jackson was talking pie in the sky nonsense about getting Sir Alex Ferguson in to run the SFA and keeping Strachan (whose recent record is dreadful).
Was all the usual sound of an empty tin rattling.

Tom English as usual made the most sense. Asking for actual solutions rather than emotional knee jerk nonsense.
Could another manager get more out of these limited players than Strachan? Absolutely. See Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland for your examples. He also noted the problems in Scottish football are deeper than who the SFA Head Coach is. Ask why Brian McClair left the Technical Director position? The answer is because of the attitude of the clubs who refuse to co-operate with the Directives regarding Player Development. Perhaps we should also be focusing on the member clubs as well.

---

:top marks

It certainly appears the huns and their media puppets are using the national team's failure to attack Regan and oor Rod.

The ridiculous Kris with a K Boyd rant, an Alistair McCoist recent drivel and Radar Jackson all vocally attacking the SFA. With in addition the BBC sportsound and print media all in unison attacking the SFA.

Ferguson was quoted but in reality Radar really meant the likes of Walter Smith and other hun lickspittles to take over the running of Scottish Football again. An attempted coup by the huns and using Strachan to get at them.

One thing they don't want is oor Rod taking over as President when his time comes.

Tin hat time on at the SFA

.:tin hat: