blonde poker forum

Have a look at the table the team who finnish 4th place have 56 points the team that finnish in 6th has 58 points.

I know this is is not the first time this has happened due to the split but surely after the split has been paid out then the league should finnish in order of points?

Given that the higher you finnish the more cash you get paid from the SPL. 

The SPL have not got a clue!!

Not true - because the team who finishes 7th when the league is split always has a huge advantage over the team that finishes 6th as they only play the teams below them on the run in - the team who is in 6th has to play all the leaders.

Saying that its the Scottish FA who want shooting - why on earth do they split it in the first place????

I like the split.

Gives Aberdeen summit to shoot for.

What? They aint ever going to be relegated and they aint going to qualify for europe. Doesnt leave much else!!

I don't have a problem with the split, its there to make the end of season fixtures more entertaining however at the end of the season the league placings should be given in order of points.

i wonder how long it will be before a team qualifies for europe in 4th place with less points than the team who finishes in 7th place, it is kind of stupid!

Thats another point.  I never even considered that one.

So we agree then the SPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE L have to get this sorted.

Finishing within a stone throw from 4th place. That's nae bad.

This time last week, a European place was still mathematically possible for Aberdeen. We ceratinly had something to shoot for.


The split makes relegation, title and European races grittier and more entertaining. (Slightly rude of celtic to win all their games this year, but that can't be helped)


Yes, Caley have mare points, but won against donkey teams.


It's not stupid, the other way would be. You'd get teams delibrately throwing games prior to the split to finish in the bottom half and get 5 easier games.

The league was split, end of.

No  8)

Nothing wrong with the status quo. If things had turned out the other way, and Aberdeen were 7th, I'd be happy with that.

Everyone knows the rules at the beginning of the season, we all knew the split was coming.

I noticed on Final Score yesterday that someone hadn't told the dimwits in the BBC Sport department about the split - when they showed the SPL table they had Inverness Caley in 4th.

It's not stupid, the other way would be. You'd get teams delibrately throwing games prior to the split to finish in the bottom half and get 5 easier games.

The league was split, end of.
[/quote] i didnt say they should do it another way! that would be really really stupid, but the way it is now is imho still stupid, if it was up to me the split would be scrapped!

Please explain "The Split"

So long as that's sorted.

I'm not too bothered if they have a split, or don't have a split.

However, if they do have a split, I think they're doing things the right way.

The split makes no sense whatsoever but funnily enough the winter break was a great thing & the muppets got rid of it  >:?

Just prior to the end of the season, the top 6 teams play each other and the bottom six play each other. If you are in the bottom half at the time of the split, you can finish no better than 7th. If you are in the top half, you can finish no worse than 6th.

Cheers Tank .... Errrr why do they do this?

i agree, not just for the players but the fans as well, i looked forward to going to the game after the break, but now its a bit of a grind

Forgoet about the split!! What about...


The 1st/2nd division play offs !!!!

What a FANTASTIC idea!

Arguments for it would include that the split makes relegation, title and European races grittier and more entertaining.

You're more likely to be playing against the teams that are vying for the same things you are. A win over a relegation rival means you're 6 points better of in respect to their position than if you had lost. It's there to try to make all teams have something to play for in the final games.

I like it, it leaves teams more in charge of their own destiny.

For instance,  Rangers needed to be 2nd for 4th spot to get a UEFA place (Hearts playing in the cup final next weekend)

Aberdeen played Hearts midweek. A win would have put Rangers 2nd, and Aberdeen 4th. Aberdeen would've clinched a UEFA cup spot.

If instead, Hearts played Falkirk and Aberdeen played Dundee united, both teams could've won and no difference been made at all. We still had European football to shoot for in the last week of the season, and probably wouldn't have if their was no split.

When all is said and done though, the better team (Hearts) still pumped us 1-0 and thoroughly deserve their 2nd. From a TV ratings/crowd attendances point of view, it's important to have as many teams as possibly with something to play for at the end of a season.

I have to agree with you Steeley.  I thought this was the most stupid fooking idea I had heard of when you tried explaining it to me half way through the season.  And they you totally confused me by declaring you wante dto finnish 4th.

But well you have Peterhead over two legs I hope your boys get a result and it was quite a good way to end the season definatelys omething that should be introduced in the top flight at elast 2 up and two down!

The other reason is that when there was only 10 teams in the league each team played every other time home and away twice so 36 games a season.

When they changed it to 12 teams if they had kept the same format each team would need to play 44 games amd that was seen as too many..

The spilt happens once every team have played each other 3 times and then you play the  five other teams in your section once. A problem with this is that you can end up playing more away games than home games.

It sounds like a shadow league, soon there will be a top division with just 4 teams in it!!!
You couldn't make it up.
I'm curious, how do the teams who need the cash feel about the lost revenue?
Surely they would lose out if they had to switch fixtures from Celtic at home to Falkirk away?

A system which benefits the top 6 clubs is far superior to a system that benfits the top 2.

Take a look at home attendances for Kilmarnock, Aberdeen and Hibernian this season and compare them with seasons before the split came to be.

Sure it doesn't benefit all 12 clubs, but there's always going to be winners and losers in sport. For me, it's the football equivalent of a flatter payout.

The split is far from ideal but I can think of no feasible alternative

Increase the top league to 18 teams have two one ofther division of 18/16 make the rules more stringent for teams that want to play senior football.  Scotland doesn't have a population to sustain 4 leagues of senior football.

Force some of the smaller clubs who are from the same area to share facilities.  In the long term its the only way to better the league, as a result this will benefit not only our senior clubs but also our national teams.

Within the top senior league, the 4 European spots should go only to these teams we should have a minimum of 3 teams relegated from this league each year with new blood coming from the B league.

A whole restructuring of the Scottish game is required if we are to move on.  However this will not happen while we have chairman of many of the smaller clubs holding positions of power.

Definitely Steeley, the 1st division isnt the same without you lot ....


....always nice to have an easy game against a wee team .... ;goodvevil;

Nah don't subscribe to the 16/18 team league will be better view.  Theres enough dross in the league as it is, and it will never happen as the other clubs won't want to give up the extra revenue they get from playing the old firm 3/4 times a season.

There rae definately weak teams in the league but on their day some of the smaller teams are capable of getting a result over any team and perhaps this could strengthen the league.  Its about time someone made a serious decision and completeley restructured our game.

 
Well thats tough but in order that we can increase the level of competitionw e need some massive restructuring and I don't see any other suggestions.

I would go a whole lot further and that includes making provsions tighter to play senior football and if teams don't meet the criteria then I would expel them from the league.  I would also look at moving to summer football, a new format for cup football and even looking at a voluntary system to freeze out the number of foreign players who now earn a living here.  I would consider allowing Celtic and Rangers (and any other club who could sustain this over a season)  reserve outfits  to play in the B leauge.

 

This year another club broke up the old firms stranglehold of the top two spots. When was the last time that happened?

Massive change ain't going to happen overnight. Surely this year is a step in the right direction as far as increasing the level of competiton goes. I don't see the need for massive restructuring.

I also disagree with everything else you've said.

And I bet it doesn't happen again for another few years.  The issue here is consistency had Rangers done the proper thinga nd got rid ofBig Eck in January they would have over hauled Hearts, sure we can talk about Romanov and they way he ran Hearts affairs but I bet you and anyone on here a £100 cash that Hearts don't finnish 2nd next year.

The reason Hearts finished second was the amount of money they had to speand along with the deals to bring in a lot of good players not due to the set up helping smaller teams come more competitive.

To be honest I  dont know what should be done with Scottish football. I agree with you that massive changes can not be done in the short period. The old firm will always been stronger than other teams and I dont see other teams ever going to change. Even in the English league I think there is the same issue where you have the top 4 or 5 teams above the rest and will be for some time.

we need to move to a 16 team league for the good of scottish football but it wont happen as too many chairmen look at the games via the old firm for money and want more not less of them

a 16 team league will allow for a break after christmas which the players need
will also allow managers to take risks and let them blood young scottish players instead of going downt the cheap experianced forgein player route
it will close the gap in points between the old firm and the best of the rest as instead of having 24pts up for grabs in old firm games (which over the course of a season is somewhere round the 19-5 to 24-0 range against most teams they will only have to play for 12pts against the old firm so it will noarrow the gap and make the league seem a little more competitive which will bring fans back as teams will look like there are in with a shout more often

UEFA are pushing to have all leagues as 16 team so it will come eventaully just hope for scotlands sake its sooner rather than later

Best argument I've heard for a 16 team league, well done Ironside.

Fair point, I shall concede that. Although I don't remember directly suggesting that it did, (although it may have appeared that way)

Surely you'd have to agree that Hearts doing so well this year is a good thing for the SPL. I see a lot of doom and gloom talk, and just want to highlight the positive things going on in Scottish football.

So to increase the level of competition, you're kicking the smaller teams out on their arse, and letting the Old Firm have two professional sides. Does anyone else see the contradiction.

You want to move to summer football? You must have less optimism than me for qualification into future European Championships and World Cups.

Life is a battle of the fittest tank.  There is no reason for areas in Scotland like Fife to have 6 senior football teams.  There is no demand in Dundee to have two professional clubs within a stone throw.  There is no need to have teams like Dumbarton and East Stirling playing senior football.  Queens Parkw ant to keep the atonomy of Amateur footbal but play in the senior leagues there is no need for this.

I personally reckon that if we allow the Old Firm and other teams with a healthy reserve squad to beeth up a second division, but denying them promotion it would make for decent attendancies at lower league matches it would also allow many of the decent young players the opportunity of playing regular senior football and hopefully this would allow them to develop into decent players for the sake of the national set-up.

[/quote]You want to move to summer football? You must have less optimism than me for qualification into future European Championships and World Cups.
[/quote]

Well lets be honest what are our chances of qualifying for the next Euro Championships with the group we have got?

I reckon we should use this as a springboard to bring through the young lads who are going to be the core of the team for 2010 and let them get experience at the highest level and build for that we have many decent young players coming through not only at the Old Firm clubs but also at Hibs, Hearts and Aberdeen. 

The summer league would benefit us more in terms of our weather and it works well in other countries such as Norway who seem to be doing better than Scotland in international comps.

I'm sure you missed our travelling support this season, and will miss it even more if we don't get up and with the Paisley 'Buddies' going up to get hum... er beaten by the big boys.

It was the easy points for us that we missed ...... ;goodvevil;   :D