Playing teams 4 times + cup games is shite.  Folk go on about meaningless games if the league was bigger, but the reality is that most teams play meaningless games all season anyway, because if you can’t win it and won’t go down what’s really the point.  Battling to get in the top 6 is not what football should be about.
I can’t see reconstruction voted through though.

TheShed wrote:

Playing teams 4 times + cup games is shite.  Folk go on about meaningless games if the league was bigger, but the reality is that most teams play meaningless games all season anyway, because if you can’t win it and won’t go down what’s really the point.  Battling to get in the top 6 is not what football should be about.
I can’t see reconstruction voted through though.

 
Every time United step onto the pitch I want them to win, don't care who they are playing or what for, nothing is ever meaningless when it comes to united for me.

Arabdownsouth wrote:

TheShed wrote:

Playing teams 4 times + cup games is shite.  Folk go on about meaningless games if the league was bigger, but the reality is that most teams play meaningless games all season anyway, because if you can’t win it and won’t go down what’s really the point.  Battling to get in the top 6 is not what football should be about.
I can’t see reconstruction voted through though.

 
Every time United step onto the pitch I want them to win, don't care who they are playing or what for, nothing is ever meaningless when it comes to united for me.

 
Of course footballs about winning, but 10 teams enter a competition every year they can’t win, that is meaningless, that’s what needs changed, there needs to be a fair fight.

TheShed wrote:

Arabdownsouth wrote:

TheShed wrote:

Playing teams 4 times + cup games is shite.  Folk go on about meaningless games if the league was bigger, but the reality is that most teams play meaningless games all season anyway, because if you can’t win it and won’t go down what’s really the point.  Battling to get in the top 6 is not what football should be about.
I can’t see reconstruction voted through though.

 
Every time United step onto the pitch I want them to win, don't care who they are playing or what for, nothing is ever meaningless when it comes to united for me.

 
Of course footballs about winning, but 10 teams enter a competition every year they can’t win, that is meaningless, that’s what needs changed, there needs to be a fair fight.

 
League reconstruction won't make it a fair fight. There's no chance of there ever being a level playing field in Scotland whatever happens so I'm not interested in league reconstruction just to save clubs from being relegated for being bottom, or to get clubs promoted who haven't yet earned it. None of these clubs have given us a sideways glance since our demise so pardon me for my lack of charity, but fuck them!

The whole thing is a waste of time as others have said.  Under the current financial structure, placing money, TV money & gate receipts  it matters not a jot how many teams are in the league only two can win it.

It's 35yrs now since any one else won the league what should be getting debated is how much longer is the rest of Scottish football prepared to put up with that

Is it 11-1 across the board or different margins for different kinds of votes?

MockChop wrote:

Is it 11-1 across the board or different margins for different kinds of votes?

If I'm understanding you, a reconstruction proposal needs 11-1 from the top league but 75% (?) from the other three.

A wee comment on more sides having a chance of winning the top league if each team plays each other only twice: both ourselves and the Dons won the league in the 'eighties when only ten were involved. 

Not that I enjoy watching us play the same teams on several occasions over a season, and would prefer more games against different sides. 6-8 games against the two cheeks is not appealing to me, and I'd possibly give most, if not all of these, a swerve.
 

It's not the playing each other 4x that stifles competition it's all down to finance.
when we won the league the top utd players were roughly £200 pw  with £100 Per point. At this time The original Rangers were about £500 pw.  On average about twice as much .

  Now  its about 7-8x as much a completely unbridgeable gap and modern players cannot turn that down.

All leagues in different countries have dominant teams but the Scottish situation is getting ridiculous.
We need Chairmen with backbone to say no more.

Tangy wrote:

As much as the of two ruin the competition they also ensure we get the money I to the league through tv deals and visiting fans - no matter how horrendous they are.

Without them, sky/bt would offer the rest a pittance.

What we need is a revolutionary revamp of the system which gives the tv companies what they want without rangers and celtic in it.

What we need is to pay barry hearn a lot of money to revamp our game. He has revitalised both darts and snooker into  profitable sports.

He did give a speech to scottish football authorities which appears to have been roundly ignored.

 
He'd sell sand to the Arabs ( not us) and make them fucking wonder where it all came from! Good shout

Tangy wrote:

As much as the of two ruin the competition they also ensure we get the money I to the league through tv deals and visiting fans - no matter how horrendous they are.

Without them, sky/bt would offer the rest a pittance.

What we need is a revolutionary revamp of the system which gives the tv companies what they want without rangers and celtic in it.

What we need is to pay barry hearn a lot of money to revamp our game. He has revitalised both darts and snooker into profitable sports.

He did give a speech to scottish football authorities which appears to have been roundly ignored.

Agree with the substance there. Barry Hearn though, wouldn't be welcomed back by the authorities, as he called them out for their laziness in settling for an easy life. And I feel the tv companies are conning Scottish football into thinking the big asset is the four Glasgow derbies.

Companies like Sky operate a world market, where the customers often don't care too much for which game is being played, they just want matches on which to place bets. Or at an extreme, to watch: see how the Belarus League, still being played, has attracted viewers in the last few weeks. The Asian market has being placing huge gambling sums on these games recently. The truth is, the vast majority of worldwide football viewers don't give a single fuck about Glasgow football.

And of course, teams from Parkhead and Ibrox don't play in the likes of the Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Greece or Poland, yet they all have better deals than us from tv companies.


Source: BBC "2018 Revenues from TV"

More up to date figures can be found here: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country

We are being ripped off, both when we are told that tv deals depend on 4 Glasgow derbies, and by the situation that the two of them must play four league games, thus must finish in the same section (ie the top half) of the table. Unfortunately, we've got a deal in place to run for the next five seasons.

It's no wonder Barry Hearn told the administrators at Hampden if they worked for him, they'd be sacked.

 

PatReilly wrote:

Tangy wrote:

As much as the of two ruin the competition they also ensure we get the money I to the league through tv deals and visiting fans - no matter how horrendous they are.

Without them, sky/bt would offer the rest a pittance.

What we need is a revolutionary revamp of the system which gives the tv companies what they want without rangers and celtic in it.

What we need is to pay barry hearn a lot of money to revamp our game. He has revitalised both darts and snooker into profitable sports.

He did give a speech to scottish football authorities which appears to have been roundly ignored.

Agree with the substance there. Barry Hearn though, wouldn't be welcomed back by the authorities, as he called them out for their laziness in settling for an easy life. And I feel the tv companies are conning Scottish football into thinking the big asset is the four Glasgow derbies.

Companies like Sky operate a world market, where the customers often don't care too much for which game is being played, they just want matches on which to place bets. Or at an extreme, to watch: see how the Belarus League, still being played, has attracted viewers in the last few weeks. The Asian market has being placing huge gambling sums on these games recently. The truth is, the vast majority of worldwide football viewers don't give a single fuck about Glasgow football.

And of course, teams from Parkhead and Ibrox don't play in the likes of the Belgium, Norway, Denmark, Greece or Poland, yet they all have better deals than us from tv companies.


Source: BBC "2018 Revenues from TV"

More up to date figures can be found here: 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_domestic_football_league_broadcast_deals_by_country

We are being ripped off, both when we are told that tv deals depend on 4 Glasgow derbies, and by the situation that the two of them must play four league games, thus must finish in the same section (ie the top half) of the table. Unfortunately, we've got a deal in place to run for the next five seasons.

It's no wonder Barry Hearn told the administrators at Hampden if they worked for him, they'd be sacked.

 

 
Great post Pat! It's no wonder Scottish football is ridiculed down here. Imagine the whole future of a club hanging in the balance for the sake of 17 fucking grand!

What's that in terms of Lionel Messi's wage packet? About 30 seconds?

Last edited by Arabdownsouth (21/4/2020 8:59 pm)

Beharder wrote:

The gap is only going to get bigger , when not if we get to 50 yrs with only the same 2 winners will we still shrug our shoulders.

Time for action, I'm ready

 
This.  100%

We're digging our own graves with the status quo. 

If we think we're going to get there with committees/reconstruction whatever, guess what - as long as the Ugly Sisters are there, it ain't gonna happen.

- How ?    Stuffed if I know.  Hope we'll still no talking about it in 20 yrs cos I'll be
lang deid.