|
|
Post by Heed the baw on Mar 9, 2013 10:54:59 GMT 1
'Scotsman'
By STEPHEN HALLIDAY
Published on Saturday 9 March 2013 00:00
The first draft of rules for the new body, which would incorporate all 42 current senior clubs and be called The Scottish Professional Football League, also reveals there will be no championship trophy up for grabs for clubs in the middle tier of the new structure.
The initial copy of the combined rules document, which was distributed to clubs this week and is subject to revision, has been obtained by The Scotsman.
It formalises the composition of the controversial set-up, devised by the board of the Scottish Premier League and backed by the senior management of the Scottish Football League and Scottish Football Association.
The unified SPFL, which would see the clubs in one league body again for the first time since the SPL breakaway in 1998, is intended to be put in place for the start of next season. It will require an 11-1 vote in
favour from the current SPL clubs and then 75 per cent backing from the 29 SFL clubs eligible to vote – Rangers are ineligible due to their status as associate members of the SFA following their liquidation – if it is to go ahead.
The rule book states that the 12 clubs in the top division for the 2013-14 campaign will be the first 11 clubs in the current SPL and the champions of this season’s SFL First Division.
The second division of 12 clubs next season will be made up of the club relegated from the current SPL, the eight clubs finishing from second to ninth place in the current First Division, the champions of the current Second Division and the winners of two play-off ties.
The draft document states the club who finish second bottom of the current First Division would go into the play-offs, but that is a clerical error. Those play-off ties would therefore be between the club who finish bottom of the current First Division and the fourth-placed club in the Second Division; and the second and third-placed clubs in the Second Division.
This season’s Third Division play-offs will not take place if the proposal is approved. The new 18-team third tier will be comprised of the losers of the two Second Division play-off ties, the bottom six clubs in the Second Division and all ten clubs in the Third Division. That means Rangers, as Third Division champions, will remain
in the bottom tier of league football next season. Details of promotion and relegation in future seasons under 12-12-18 are also detailed. The top two divisions will split into three groups of eight clubs after 22 matches of the campaign. The top eight clubs will play each other twice more, home and away, to determine who are Scottish champions and who earn European places.
The middle eight, or play-off eight as described in the document, will have their points reset to zero and play each other home and away. The top four clubs will be in the top division the following season, the bottom four in the second division.
No trophy will be awarded to the club finishing top of the play-off eight, with the document declaring: “Given the split at Game 22 it is difficult to have a Div 2 champion”.
The bottom two clubs in the third group of eight will be automatically relegated to the bottom tier of 18 clubs for the following season. The top two clubs in the bottom tier will be automatically promoted to the second tier of 12 clubs for the following season.
There will be a play-off competition involving the third and fourth bottom clubs in the third group of eight and the third, fourth, fifth and sixth-placed clubs in the bottom tier to determine two more relegation-promotion places.
There will also be a pyramid play-off competition between the two clubs who finish at the bottom of the 18-club third tier and two candidate non-league clubs identified by the SFA from a national competition
approved by the SPFL board.
Under the combined rules, there would also be a standard 15-point penalty for any club which experiences an insolvency event. Ten points would be deducted immediately, with the further five-point deduction applied at a stage of the season when the SPFL board determined it would have the most meaningful impact.
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Mar 9, 2013 11:56:09 GMT 1
I don't see why they can't award a 2nd division championship trophy to the team top of that division at the end of 22 games OR the team which started in that division & finish highest in the "play-off 8".
I like the fact that "non-league" sides have an opportunity to get in.
However, it still comes across as a convoluted tinkering at the top end which could end with a stagnation at the top & while I think it would be hilarious for the-club-formerly-&-yet-magically-still-known-as-Rangers to be rewarded for winning the current 3rd division by still being in the bottom tier next season, it is hardly fair play.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Villager on Mar 9, 2013 20:47:44 GMT 1
I don't see it as an ideal solution for Scottish football but in many ways it's better than what we've got and maybe a step in the right direction to the kind of league we all want to see - bigger top division etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Mar 10, 2013 1:13:58 GMT 1
I just don't see it as a step in the right direction given its a system that has been shown to fail in Austria & Switzerland.
If you had a buckled wheel on your bike would you replace it with another buckled wheel?
|
|
Pedro
Administrator 
Posts: 1,172 
|
Post by Pedro on Mar 10, 2013 14:49:24 GMT 1
I'm not sure what the best way forward should be but it seems clear to everybody that the current set-up isn't working.
I think this proposed changes are worth a try.
To have only one team able to benefit from promotion from the 1st, as is the situation right now, has always been an utter disgrace. The opportunities for more teams to get a sniff of elevation in this new set-up will surely encourage further competition between teams and entice crowds.
Unless the price is too steep and then it's all a waste of time.
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Mar 11, 2013 0:35:21 GMT 1
I agree with regard to the current situation but I'm not convinced that the proposed set up will be any better; yes t has the potential to see 4 teams down & 4 teams up but it also has the potential to have 0 teams down & 0 teams up....and given the top tier teams get more money than the second tier then the odds are loaded in their favour....and I refer again to the fact that this system has failed in two countries already.
I would prefer the "powers that be" to take a longer more considered approach to how the league should be structured rather than throwing this together at short notice, on the evidence of Austria & Switzerland they are simply exchanging one buckled wheel for another.
|
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 9:52:13 GMT 1
I'm not sure what the best way forward should be but it seems clear to everybody that the current set-up isn't working. I think this proposed changes are worth a try. To have only one team able to benefit from promotion from the 1st, as is the situation right now, has always been an utter disgrace. The opportunities for more teams to get a sniff of elevation in this new set-up will surely encourage further competition between teams and entice crowds. Unless the price is too steep and then it's all a waste of time. I believe the most important part of your statement came towards the end of your post. We are asking for supporters to pay for a product they do not want. The fan survey from last year made it clear, that over 80% of respondents wanted a top tier of at least 18 teams. So if the new organization wants the supporters to be a part of something they don't want they will need to price it to match. That will not happen, fans will have to endure watching repeat fixtures as they do now, so the outcome will be the same in the end. |
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 9:54:21 GMT 1
I don't see why they can't award a 2nd division championship trophy to the team top of that division at the end of 22 games OR the team which started in that division & finish highest in the "play-off 8". I like the fact that "non-league" sides have an opportunity to get in. However, it still comes across as a convoluted tinkering at the top end which could end with a stagnation at the top & while I think it would be hilarious for the-club-formerly-&-yet-magically-still-known-as-Rangers to be rewarded for winning the current 3rd division by still being in the bottom tier next season, it is hardly fair play. They cannot issue a trophy for that section as they will be seen as rewarding failure. Remember half of that eight will be teams that have performed the worse over 22 previous games. As the money support is in favour of such teams they will most likely succeed, so the trophy will go to a loser!!! |
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 9:57:07 GMT 1
The opinion on this thread seems to be significantly diverse to the majority of chat forums I attend.
Those forums tend to be against 12 12 18 in favor of two larger divisions.
Why are the posters on here so convinced it is the right way to go?
Just wondering in case there is a vital part of the evidence I have missed.
|
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 12:01:11 GMT 1
I do not think that i contain a business brain more capable that the collective might of the football chairmen but I see the outcome of their proposal as being totally different to them.
If we look at the current make up of our division there is a significant number of teams that do not maintain full time teams and the ratio of that grows the further down the league we go.
In effect we now have three "divisions" part-time, full time SFL and full time SPL.
So the question has to be do we want to change that ratio and in what direction?
The way they propose to finance teams after the change, it appears that they wish to re-enforce this differentiation.
My concern with that is some teams at the bottom end will not survive.
If the blazers desire this outcome, would it not best be handled by being open and honest and giving those teams threatened with such a strangulated death a chance to amalgamate/ combine or find investment to avoid it?
I believe there was a film staring Tom Cruise that had a repeated line.."show me the money" Is it not for the leaders of the 12 12 18 project to do just that so that supporters of at least 50% of our league teams can make a choice or at least be informed about the expected life of their clubs?
|
|
Pedro
Administrator
Posts: 1,172
|
Post by Pedro on Mar 11, 2013 13:15:34 GMT 1
I might be wrong but I believe that the majority of the extra cash sums that will be filtering down through the leagues is to come at the expense of the teams higher up the league.
So in effect the larger, full time, teams have at long last realised that sharing the pot wider will benefit the smaller full time/part time teams.
|
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 13:23:49 GMT 1
Yes Pedro they are filtering down some more money. But as Auldnik indicates, those at the bottom of the "SPL" part of the middle 8, will still have 10 times more cash handed to them than the "SFL" part of the 8. But I think you knew yourself that people are struggling to justify the arrangement because you did use the term filtering. As the Oxford dictionary says, a filter is something that "holds back solid particles while allowing gas to pass through". Says it all really  |
|
Pedro
Administrator
Posts: 1,172
|
Post by Pedro on Mar 11, 2013 13:43:56 GMT 1
Yep, I agree that the cash prize difference between the top teams and those even just a little lower down will still be huge but it won't be as high as it has been and is still going to be this season.
There's been a realisation, of sorts, that everyone needs to help each other and whilst possibly not the nirvana that many hoped for the new set-up is a clear indication that teams are at least willing to try something different. And who's to say things won't change again in future?
|
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 11, 2013 15:17:14 GMT 1
My concern with that Pedro is that we may not have enough time.
They will not introduce 12 12 18 to make changes a short while later. So we are looking at a minimum of 5 years before the change in the future can happen.
Do we have that amount of time to save Scottish football?
If we do we should be informed.
I would still like everyone to remember that the fans are clear about an enlarged top division as they are bored with repeated fixtures and the split.
Its like an old style chip shop being asked by 80% of its customers to start selling kebabs. the owner then issues a statement:
"After much consultation the owner has taken on-board what has been requested and will now sell fish cakes as well as fish".
|
|
|
|
Post by Inch Lion on Mar 11, 2013 22:21:55 GMT 1
15th April is the crucial voting day for the Ess Peee Hell!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Mar 11, 2013 23:52:35 GMT 1
I don't see why they can't award a 2nd division championship trophy to the team top of that division at the end of 22 games OR the team which started in that division & finish highest in the "play-off 8". I like the fact that "non-league" sides have an opportunity to get in. However, it still comes across as a convoluted tinkering at the top end which could end with a stagnation at the top & while I think it would be hilarious for the-club-formerly-&-yet-magically-still-known-as-Rangers to be rewarded for winning the current 3rd division by still being in the bottom tier next season, it is hardly fair play. They cannot issue a trophy for that section as they will be seen as rewarding failure. Remember half of that eight will be teams that have performed the worse over 22 previous games. As the money support is in favour of such teams they will most likely succeed, so the trophy will go to a loser!!! Yeah, but my suggestion is to award the highest placed team from the original 12 team second tier as they will have ended up as the best team from the start of the season for that group of 12. If there is no trophy for being the best of the 2nd tier, why have a 2nd tier? They may as well go with the full size top tier....oh wait, that's what the fans want....nah, it'll never happen! |
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 12, 2013 9:51:20 GMT 1
They cannot issue a trophy for that section as they will be seen as rewarding failure. Remember half of that eight will be teams that have performed the worse over 22 previous games. As the money support is in favour of such teams they will most likely succeed, so the trophy will go to a loser!!! Yeah, but my suggestion is to award the highest placed team from the original 12 team second tier as they will have ended up as the best team from the start of the season for that group of 12. If there is no trophy for being the best of the 2nd tier, why have a 2nd tier? They may as well go with the full size top tier....oh wait, that's what the fans want....nah, it'll never happen! The problem with any split is that teams finishing lower can have more points. The middle eight will have their points reset. It is possible that at the time of the reset, a team (A) could be a significant amount of points clear of B. Look at Celtic at the start of the month being 19 points clear. They then play the middle eight league. Team B finishes 1 point clear of A. So over the full season A will have gained 18 points more than B but B gets a trophy? In my opinion it is also wrong to give play off finals a trophy for the same reasons. A team in EC finishing second gets automatic promotion but no trophy. A team finishing 6th winning the play offs gets a trophy and additional gates from those extra three games. Its great for the telly but is it really fair play? |
|
|
|
Post by bunnetdeleving on Mar 12, 2013 18:18:06 GMT 1
'Scottish Football League clubs to decide on 18-team or 10-10 bottom tier' 'STV 12 March 2013 11:35 GMT' Quote, 'Scottish Football League clubs have been asked to indicate by the close of play on Tuesday their preference for the composition of proposed reconstructed divisions. With a format of two top tiers of 12 clubs, which split into three leagues of eight mid-season, on the table for the upper end, it has been left to SFL sides to determine the make-up of the lower end of the structure. Clubs have been asked to state whether they would prefer a third tier of 18 clubs, or the continuation of two bottom leagues of 10.' Full article here: sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/airdrie-united/217323-scottish-football-league-clubs-to-decide-on-18-team-or-10-10-bottom-tier/Also, 'By Alasdair Lamont BBC Scotland' 'SPL set date set for league plans, SFL reviewing proposals' Full article here: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21749499 |
|
|
|
Post by bunnetdeleving on Mar 12, 2013 20:06:13 GMT 1
'SFL clubs asked to consider 'colt teams' from Celtic and Rangers' By Chris McLaughlin Senior Football Reporter, BBC Scotland Quote, 'Scottish Football League clubs are being asked to consider allowing 'colt teams' from Celtic and Rangers to join a new four division set-up. Chief executive David Longmuir suggests in a document sent to all 30 SFL outfits that the colts would operate separately from the 'parent' clubs. He is influenced by the prospect of the Old Firm leaving Scotland behind. And he says "both clubs have intimated their desire to be considered as part of this strategy".' Full article here: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21763900 |
|
|
|
Post by Auldnick on Mar 12, 2013 22:28:36 GMT 1
Yeah, but my suggestion is to award the highest placed team from the original 12 team second tier as they will have ended up as the best team from the start of the season for that group of 12. If there is no trophy for being the best of the 2nd tier, why have a 2nd tier? They may as well go with the full size top tier....oh wait, that's what the fans want....nah, it'll never happen! The problem with any split is that teams finishing lower can have more points. The middle eight will have their points reset. It is possible that at the time of the reset, a team (A) could be a significant amount of points clear of B. Look at Celtic at the start of the month being 19 points clear. They then play the middle eight league. Team B finishes 1 point clear of A. So over the full season A will have gained 18 points more than B but B gets a trophy? In my opinion it is also wrong to give play off finals a trophy for the same reasons. A team in EC finishing second gets automatic promotion but no trophy. A team finishing 6th winning the play offs gets a trophy and additional gates from those extra three games. Its great for the telly but is it really fair play? Hence the suggestion of giving to whoever "wins" the 2nd tier before the split. They could then also provide a "mini-trophy" for whoever wins the middle 8 after the reset. Regardless, its all a daft idea anyway. I agree with regard to play offs in general; the normal season should determine promotion & relegation; or if you are having play offs have them for everything. |
|
|
|
Post by bunnetdeleving on Mar 13, 2013 9:06:15 GMT 1
|
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 13, 2013 9:38:42 GMT 1
The problem with any split is that teams finishing lower can have more points. The middle eight will have their points reset. It is possible that at the time of the reset, a team (A) could be a significant amount of points clear of B. Look at Celtic at the start of the month being 19 points clear. They then play the middle eight league. Team B finishes 1 point clear of A. So over the full season A will have gained 18 points more than B but B gets a trophy? In my opinion it is also wrong to give play off finals a trophy for the same reasons. A team in EC finishing second gets automatic promotion but no trophy. A team finishing 6th winning the play offs gets a trophy and additional gates from those extra three games. Its great for the telly but is it really fair play? Hence the suggestion of giving to whoever "wins" the 2nd tier before the split. They could then also provide a "mini-trophy" for whoever wins the middle 8 after the reset. Regardless, its all a daft idea anyway. I agree with regard to play offs in general; the normal season should determine promotion & relegation; or if you are having play offs have them for everything. Agreed wholeheartedly. A poor idea from a group of people who have proven they have run out of ideas in regard the development of the game and the wefare of all its clubs. |
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 13, 2013 9:48:03 GMT 1
Do us "diddy teams" need any more warning that the current SPL intend to look out for themselves and cast the rest onto the compost heap of decay. Yes reserve games of the OF attract more crowd than our home gate. But we are missing the point here, the non SPL sides are dying through lack of investment and there are better ways of solving the issue of poor fixtures, (which is what Longmuir is really saying) than allowing the OF to have multiple teams in the league. We seem to be deliberately ignoring the simplest of solutions to appease a small number of people. It is choice time, how many of the teams we currently play against or played against in recent season are we willing see die? I for one am too much of a coward to name any I want on a death list. But ladies and gentlemen, 12 12 18 without redistribution of wealth/ income is just that. |
|
|
|
Post by bunnetdeleving on Mar 13, 2013 11:44:10 GMT 1
'Colt teams proposal irresponsible, says Falkirk chairman' Quote, 'Falkirk chairman Martin Ritchie says the proposal for Celtic and Rangers 'colt teams' joining a new four division set-up is "irresponsible". All 30 Scottish Football League clubs were asked to consider it in a document sent by chief executive David Longmuir. "At this stage it's a total distraction from the key issue of reconstruction," Ritchie told BBC Radio Scotland.' Full article here: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21764124 |
|
|
|
Post by livimoaner on Mar 13, 2013 11:50:45 GMT 1
'Colt teams proposal irresponsible, says Falkirk chairman' Quote, 'Falkirk chairman Martin Ritchie says the proposal for Celtic and Rangers 'colt teams' joining a new four division set-up is "irresponsible". All 30 Scottish Football League clubs were asked to consider it in a document sent by chief executive David Longmuir. "At this stage it's a total distraction from the key issue of reconstruction," Ritchie told BBC Radio Scotland.' Full article here: www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/21764124It is for this very reason that I would recommend to the board that the restructuring proposals be resisted. I would also recommend that the chairmen of the Non OF clubs "grow some" and originate a plan that excludes them. Many of the Non OF SPL sides are too shortsighted to see what their sycophant behavior is achieving, so if they will not align it should be considered excluding them also. Get Control of the SFA, get a new plan, exclude from all competition all those that do not align. We now need men of vision not cowards. |
|
