Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Sat, 16 Jan 1993 18:43:40


        Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up
for next season with all 9 "Super" Leagues voting no.  The best hope
of a solution would be a compromise between the league and the SSL.  One must
wonder though at the attitude of the Scottish Football Association who
have just sat back and done nothing through the whole dispute.  They are
supposed to be responsible for football in this country but sadly they
don't seem to give a damn.  One change which should come about is the formation
of a single governing body and the abolition of the the SFA/Scottish League.
Why have 2 bodies ruling such a small country.  Maybe we would see the end
to the endless commitee meetings and free trips abroad for all SFA council
members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
game but are sadly lacking.  

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                                       +
Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

Glasgow,                               +
Scotland.                              +  
                                       +
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"I'm glad to be back at one of the biggest clubs in Europe"
-Frank McAvennie on rejoining Celtic.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by clg.. » Sat, 16 Jan 1993 23:09:24

Quote:

>    Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
> interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up

Not ALL clubs voted against the League proposals, the majority of clubs voted
for the proposals.( Majority of CLUBS, not VOTES)

Quote:
> for next season with all 9 "Super" Leagues voting no.  The best hope
> of a solution would be a compromise between the league and the SSL.  One must
> wonder though at the attitude of the Scottish Football Association who
> have just sat back and done nothing through the whole dispute.  They are
> supposed to be responsible for football in this country but sadly they
> don't seem to give a damn.  One change which should come about is the formation
> of a single governing body and the abolition of the the SFA/Scottish League.
> Why have 2 bodies ruling such a small country.  Maybe we would see the end
> to the endless commitee meetings and free trips abroad for all SFA council

I totally agree, the sooner we get rid of the freeloaders the better !!!!

Quote:
> members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
> game but are sadly lacking.  

C'mon Sandy, just once make a posting without making reference to that mob !!!!

-: In The End :-

A.

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Sun, 17 Jan 1993 00:33:57

Quote:


>>        Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
>> interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up

> Not ALL clubs voted against the League proposals, the majority of clubs voted
> for the proposals.( Majority of CLUBS, not VOTES)

My apologies.  I meant to say it was  a majority vote by the clubs.

Quote:
>> members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
>> game but are sadly lacking.  

> C'mon Sandy, just once make a posting without making reference to that mob !!!!

        Well, when managers of our top clubs starting making comment about the
SFA, surely they should be listened to.  I'm sure Liam Brady must have the
same thoughts.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                                       +
Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

Glasgow,                               +
Scotland.                              +  
                                       +
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
"I'm glad to be back at one of the biggest clubs in Europe"
-Frank McAvennie on rejoining Celtic.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by mcsse.. » Sun, 17 Jan 1993 00:51:15

Quote:

>    Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
> interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up
> for next season with all 9 "Super" Leagues voting no.  The best hope
> of a solution would be a compromise between the league and the SSL.  One must
> wonder though at the attitude of the Scottish Football Association who
> have just sat back and done nothing through the whole dispute.  They are
> supposed to be responsible for football in this country but sadly they
> don't seem to give a damn.  One change which should come about is the formation
> of a single governing body and the abolition of the the SFA/Scottish League.
> Why have 2 bodies ruling such a small country.  Maybe we would see the end
> to the endless commitee meetings and free trips abroad for all SFA council
> members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
> game but are sadly lacking.  

> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>                                        +
> Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
> At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

> Glasgow,                               +
> Scotland.                              +  
>                                   +
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> "I'm glad to be back at one of the biggest clubs in Europe"
> -Frank McAvennie on rejoining Celtic.
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Absolutely spot on about the SFA. IMHO I think everybody is sick to
the back teeth of the SFA telling punters and clubs alike what games
they can see on TV, what friendlies and charity matches are allowed
to take place and what dates clubs must play postponed games, and then
proceed to do absolutely nothing to negotiate for the future of
Scottish football. Where has all the cash generated from the
Scottish game been spent on (5 WCFinals and Euro-Champs)?
Certainly not on Hampden. Put back at Youth level. A recent
documentary on BBC highlighted the lack of confidence in
the Scottish game for the future, indicating radical change
at top and youth level. Here's hoping for a better future.

Colin G.Milne
DIT
                        "Up the Hammers!!"

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by Scott Jacks » Tue, 19 Jan 1993 20:14:05

Quote:

>    Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
>interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up
>for next season with all 9 "Super" Leagues voting no.  The best hope
>of a solution would be a compromise between the league and the SSL.  One must
>wonder though at the attitude of the Scottish Football Association who
>have just sat back and done nothing through the whole dispute.  They are
>supposed to be responsible for football in this country but sadly they
>don't seem to give a damn.  One change which should come about is the formation
>of a single governing body and the abolition of the the SFA/Scottish League.
>Why have 2 bodies ruling such a small country.  Maybe we would see the end
>to the endless commitee meetings and free trips abroad for all SFA council
>members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
>game but are sadly lacking.  

More developments on the SSL/SFL debate over the weekend. A club has reported
the Chairmen of Rangers, Aberdeen and Partick Thistle FC to the SFA for
remarks that they made about Celtic and their withdrawal of support for the
SSL in last weeks vote (the club in question is not Celtic). The SFA of
course will hold an inquiry.

However, had it been clubs slagging the SSL and their motives then I doubt
very much if the SFA would investigate that. After all, it was okay for the
then supremo Ernie "Ayatolla" Walker to call Uruguay "the scum of world
football" in Mexico in 1986.

There was also a cracker from former League President, Jack Steedman, who
runs Clydebank, who suggested an eigh*** team Premier League. This is the
problem with the Scottish game with the small clubs trying to muscle in on
the gates of Rangers and Aberdeen. The tail has wagged the dug for too long.

Surely a return to the ten team Premier with one-up, one-down is preferable
as it means less games and also less meaningless fixtures (Celtic take note).

--

 Spider Systems Limited     "...but Joe was to belie comparisons to all these
 Edinburry                   men and introduce a new concept to Scottish
 Scotland                    fitba' - a striker who could score a goal!!"

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by clg.. » Tue, 19 Jan 1993 23:32:18

Quote:



>>>    Scottish League Reconstruction --   For anyone still remotely
>>> interested all 38 league clubs voted against changing to a 14-12-12 set up

>> Not ALL clubs voted against the League proposals, the majority of clubs voted
>> for the proposals.( Majority of CLUBS, not VOTES)

> My apologies.  I meant to say it was  a majority vote by the clubs.

>>> members.  As Walter Smith said recently, the SFA are responsible for the
>>> game but are sadly lacking.  

>> C'mon Sandy, just once make a posting without making reference to that mob !!!!

>    Well, when managers of our top clubs starting making comment about the
> SFA, surely they should be listened to.  I'm sure Liam Brady must have the
> same thoughts.

I think you misunderstood me here !!! I was refering to the SFA when I said
that mob !!! Maybe you're a little paranoid ????

A.

- Show quoted text -

Quote:

> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>                                        +
> Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
> At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

> Glasgow,                               +
> Scotland.                              +  
>                                   +
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> "I'm glad to be back at one of the biggest clubs in Europe"
> -Frank McAvennie on rejoining Celtic.
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Wed, 20 Jan 1993 18:35:29

Quote:


> More developments on the SSL/SFL debate over the weekend. A club has reported
> the Chairmen of Rangers, Aberdeen and Partick Thistle FC to the SFA for
> remarks that they made about Celtic and their withdrawal of support for the
> SSL in last weeks vote (the club in question is not Celtic). The SFA of
> course will hold an inquiry.
> There was also a cracker from former League President, Jack Steedman, who
> runs Clydebank, who suggested an eigh*** team Premier League. This is the
> problem with the Scottish game with the small clubs trying to muscle in on
> the gates of Rangers and Aberdeen. The tail has wagged the dug for too long.

Chances are that it was Jack Steedman who reported the chairmen to the SFA.
Typical that the SFA dodge the main issues such as the welfare of the game
but concentrate on pulling up people for making a few comments which let's
face it, are true !!  The only reason Clydebank want an 18 team league is
to get into a Premier Division, make a few quid (which never gets reinvested
in stadium facilities) and end up with loads of meaningless games.

Quote:
> Surely a return to the ten team Premier with one-up, one-down is preferable
> as it means less games and also less meaningless fixtures (Celtic take note).

        Be careful what you say about Celtic, Scott. You might get Jim Farry
trying to sue you !!

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
                                       +
Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

Glasgow,                               +
Scotland.                              +  
                                       +
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by john be » Thu, 21 Jan 1993 22:51:40

Quote:



>> More developments on the SSL/SFL debate over the weekend. A club has reported
>> the Chairmen of Rangers, Aberdeen and Partick Thistle FC to the SFA for
>> remarks that they made about Celtic and their withdrawal of support for the
>> SSL in last weeks vote (the club in question is not Celtic). The SFA of
>> course will hold an inquiry.
>> There was also a cracker from former League President, Jack Steedman, who
>> runs Clydebank, who suggested an eigh*** team Premier League. This is the
>> problem with the Scottish game with the small clubs trying to muscle in on
>> the gates of Rangers and Aberdeen. The tail has wagged the dug for too long.

> Chances are that it was Jack Steedman who reported the chairmen to the SFA.
> Typical that the SFA dodge the main issues such as the welfare of the game
> but concentrate on pulling up people for making a few comments which let's
> face it, are true !!  The only reason Clydebank want an 18 team league is
> to get into a Premier Division, make a few quid

  ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

 (which never gets reinvested

Quote:
> in stadium facilities) and end up with loads of meaningless games.

>> Surely a return to the ten team Premier with one-up, one-down is preferable

   THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES. IF YOU WANT
TO MAKE THE LOWER REACHES OF THE TABLE MORE COMPETITIVE, HAVE A 4 UP 4 DOWN
SYSTEM, THIS WILL SCARE THE LIKES OF AIRDRIE, FALKIRK ETC SHITLESS. IT SHOULD
ALSO ENCOURAGE TEAMS IN DIV ONE TO A BIT OF AMBITION TO TRY FOR THE PREMIER AS
THEY HAVE MORE CHANCE OF GETTING UP TO THE TOP DIVISION. I WOULD GET RID OF THE
SKOL CUP AS WELL, IT'S A BIT OF A JOKE, ALMOST TO THE EXTENT THAT THE B&Q CUP
IS. INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP
SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.
THE 30 GAME SEASON ALSO ALLOWS THE SENSIBLE IDEA OF A WINTER BREAK. THERE
SHOULD ALSO BE A LOOK IN FOR THE NON LEAGUE SIDES AS WELL.

Quote:
>> as it means less games and also less meaningless fixtures (Celtic take note).

   CELTIC'S SEASON TENDS TO END IN JANUARY THESE DAYS, SO THEY HAVE LOTS OF
MEANINGLESS GAMES....

Quote:

>    Be careful what you say about Celtic, Scott. You might get Jim Farry
> trying to sue you !!

  AT THIS POINT, I WOULD TRY AND PUT SOMETHING ARGUMENTATIVE, BUT I DOUBT IF
ANYONE CAN ARGUE WITH THE FACT THAT JIM FARRY IS AN INCOMPETENT WEE TOSSER

Quote:

> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>                                        +
> Sandy Mackinnon,                       +
> At the Cutting Edge of Fuel Science,   +

> Glasgow,                               +
> Scotland.                              +  
>                                   +
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

  --- JOHN ---
 ----- DIT -----
 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Thu, 21 Jan 1993 23:46:23

Quote:




>   ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

        The idea of the Super League was to improve the overall
standard of play in this country.  There are too many hangers on in the game,
just waiting for the occasional pay day when the Old Firm visit them.  They
have no ambition and hold back the progress of the top clubs.

Quote:

>>> Surely a return to the ten team Premier with one-up, one-down is preferable
>    THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
> ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES.  INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP
> SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.
> THE 30 GAME SEASON ALSO ALLOWS THE SENSIBLE IDEA OF A WINTER BREAK. THERE
> SHOULD ALSO BE A LOOK IN FOR THE NON LEAGUE SIDES AS WELL.

Doubt if a summer cup would work.  This season the League started on
1st August, earlier than usual, and the crowds for the first few weeks were
lower than usual.  The first Rangers game only had an attendance of 37 000.
There are too many other distractions during the summer and it would also
interfere with summer holidays for both players and supporters.  A 10 team
league seems the best option as quite simply we don't have enough good
clubs to make a competitive 16 team league.

Sandy Mackinnon
University of Strathclyde
Glasgow

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:13:42

Quote:

>    THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
> ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES.

Dan, I ask myself, why has this sage not been invited to conduct the talks for
said league reconstruction.  A 16 team league will have thirty games, therefore
their will be less meaning less matches - oh aye.

Consider 10 teams playing each other 4 times giving a total of 36 matches.
Assuming 5 of these teams start the season with at least half of a title
aspiration (or indeed can present a threat to each other) this means a total
of 40 meaningful, i.e top of the table encounters out of a total of 180 games.
Similarly assuming the bottom 5 teams are all capable of beating each other
thhis makes for the fact that 45% of all matches will be (i) competitive and
(ii) bearing in mind competition for Euro places and avoiding relegation
(I suggest two places) meaningful.

Consider 16 teams playing each other twice a season making a total of 240
games a year.  Now applying the same ideas that the only meaningful matches
are those affectin promotion and relegation  it means that only 80 matches
from 240 (33%, save yir calculator batteries) will be meaningful.  

This may seem like a simplification but methinks that over the season it
might no be far from the truth, perhaps the situation would be made
worse by the fact that gulf between team 16 and the rest is more likely
to be such that they're on the path to trelegation by   the time Santa
comes therefore, assuming only 5 teams are going for the honours, ten
are avooiding relegation.  Hardly likely.

Quote:
>IF YOU WANT
> TO MAKE THE LOWER REACHES OF THE TABLE MORE COMPETITIVE, HAVE A 4 UP 4 DOWN
> SYSTEM, THIS WILL SCARE THE LIKES OF AIRDRIE, FALKIRK ETC SHITLESS. IT SHOULD
> ALSO ENCOURAGE TEAMS IN DIV ONE TO A BIT OF AMBITION TO TRY FOR THE PREMIER AS
> THEY HAVE MORE CHANCE OF GETTING UP TO THE TOP DIVISION.

Listen, it's bad enough getting certain teams to agree to change.  Can you
honestly imagine Motherwell agreeing to a set up which virtually guarantees
relegation?  Also, what chance do minor teams, such as dundee, have of staying
up and becoming established if four wee teams go down each year. It would take
a minor miracle or a Jack Walker for them to survive.

I WOULD GET RID OF THE

Quote:
> SKOL CUP AS WELL, IT'S A BIT OF A JOKE,

Bollocks, the Skol Cup provides a bit of e***ment for the fans early on
in the season.  Would you want the first trophy decided in May, 10 (ten)
months after the season starts, or 9 if you play 16 teams in the league.

 ALMOST TO THE EXTENT THAT THE B&Q CUP

Quote:
> IS.

Try telling that to the thousands who were out at Love St. for the final.

INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP

Quote:
> SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.

So that's it is it.  Some players will have still played, with your plan,
50 games a season.  Can you imagine their delight at getting the Fair
Fortnight fir their holidays and then being told to get back for the MFI
Invitation Crystal Vase.  What of World Cups and Euro  Championships
(in the unlikely events)?

Quote:
>    CELTIC'S SEASON TENDS TO END IN JANUARY THESE DAYS, SO THEY HAVE LOTS OF
> MEANINGLESS GAMES....

Wag.

Quote:
>   --- JOHN ---
>  ----- DIT -----

Spelling?

DAN

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by J.M.Ro » Fri, 22 Jan 1993 01:10:28


writes:

Quote:
>> Chances are that it was Jack Steedman who reported the chairmen to the SFA.
>> Typical that the SFA dodge the main issues such as the welfare of the game
>> but concentrate on pulling up people for making a few comments which let's
>> face it, are true !!  The only reason Clydebank want an 18 team league is
>> to get into a Premier Division, make a few quid
>  ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

Yup, it's all about diverting as much cash as they can into their own
pockets and sod the rest. All this stuff about raising standards is a
red herring.

Quote:
>   THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
>ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES. IF YOU WANT
>TO MAKE THE LOWER REACHES OF THE TABLE MORE COMPETITIVE, HAVE A 4 UP 4 DOWN
>SYSTEM, THIS WILL SCARE THE LIKES OF AIRDRIE, FALKIRK ETC SHITLESS. IT SHOULD
>ALSO ENCOURAGE TEAMS IN DIV ONE TO A BIT OF AMBITION TO TRY FOR THE PREMIER AS
>THEY HAVE MORE CHANCE OF GETTING UP TO THE TOP DIVISION.

Excellent idea. More chance of being relegated, but more chance of coming back
up. I think the defensive attitudes employed to try and retain Premier League
status stem from a fear of not being able to gain promotion if relegated. If
it was four up, then teams might be more willing to be a bit more positive,
knowing that if they did get relegated it would be easy to get back.

Quote:
> I WOULD GET RID OF THE
>SKOL CUP AS WELL, IT'S A BIT OF A JOKE, ALMOST TO THE EXTENT THAT THE B&Q CUP
>IS. INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP
>SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.

The Skol Cup has been a lot better since it was made a one-off knock-out with
more chances of shock results. I'd vote to keep it. Two legged cup ties are
OK for evenly matched teams, but how many do think would turn out to see the
second leg of ties if there was more than a couple of goals in it?

A Summer Cup competition was tried for two seasons in the mid-sixties, run
along the lines of the League Cup (i.e. sectional games, then knock-out). I
think the winners were Motherwell and Hibs. It was quickly dropped because
attendances were abysmal, also it didn't receive the support of all clubs
e.g. Rangers refused take part, I don't think Celtic played in it either.

Quote:
>THE 30 GAME SEASON ALSO ALLOWS THE SENSIBLE IDEA OF A WINTER BREAK. THERE
>SHOULD ALSO BE A LOOK IN FOR THE NON LEAGUE SIDES AS WELL.

Winter breaks are all very well, provide winter happens when you choose to
have the break. This year winter is in January - others years it might be
December or February.

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
!  James M. Ross                            ! ICL Computers Ltd   !
+-------------------------------------------+ Wenlock Way         !
!  Tel:   061 223 1301 x2661                ! West Gorton         !


+-----------------------------------------------------------------+

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by john be » Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:25:49

Quote:





>>   ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

>    The idea of the Super League was to improve the overall
> standard of play in this country.  There are too many hangers on in the game,
> just waiting for the occasional pay day when the Old Firm visit them.  They
> have no ambition and hold back the progress of the top clubs.

Bandy man murray and mercer are only in it for the money, don't try to convince
anyone otherwise, cos it's pure crap. These people don't give a s**t for the
supporters, only their balance sheets. As for screwing the small clubs, having
been chairman of hearts when they were in div one, broke, and had a transfer
ban, mercer should know what the superleague will do to the smaller clubs.

Can you give me one good reason as to why Dundee were excluded at the expense
of those giants of scottish football, Partick ,Motherwell and Dunfermline

i doubt it somehow

Quote:

>>>> Surely a return to the ten team Premier with one-up, one-down is preferable

>>    THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
>> ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES.  INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP
>> SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.
>> THE 30 GAME SEASON ALSO ALLOWS THE SENSIBLE IDEA OF A WINTER BREAK. THERE
>> SHOULD ALSO BE A LOOK IN FOR THE NON LEAGUE SIDES AS WELL.

> Doubt if a summer cup would work.  This season the League started on
> 1st August, earlier than usual, and the crowds for the first few weeks were
> lower than usual.  The first Rangers game only had an attendance of 37 000.
> There are too many other distractions during the summer and it would also
> interfere with summer holidays for both players and supporters.  A 10 team
> league seems the best option as quite simply we don't have enough good
> clubs to make a competitive 16 team league.

ok

i was wrong with this one, but we could do without ***like the 'tennents
sixes' though, and we DO need a winter break, and also allow some nonleague
sides in as well

Quote:

> Sandy Mackinnon
> University of Strathclyde
> Glasgow


--

   -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
  | F  O  R  Z  A                                    ++ John B at the DIT |
  |                                                  ++ 102 Roods         |
  |                   M  I  L  A  N ! ! ! ! ! !      ++ Kirriemuir        |
  |                                                  ++ Tayside           |
  | F  O  R  Z  A                                    ++ Scotland          |
  |                                                                       |
  |                   D  U  N  D  E  E  ! ! ! !                           |
  |                                                                       |

   =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by cba.. » Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:03:02

Quote:
> i was wrong with this one, but we could do without ***like the 'tennents
> sixes' though, and we DO need a winter break, and also allow some nonleague
> sides in as well

>    =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

But the fans love the sixes, as do the sponsors, TV and the players.  Unless
they have another gripe then the only thing keeping MIM FC out of the
competition is their fixture load and the stress that puts on the squad.  A
restructured league set-up with fewer games would allow all the invited teams
 to take part in the sixes without over-burdening the clubs.  A winter break
would be the ideal time to play the tournament.  Although the Scottish winteris
unpredictable, a break over the festive season may be desirable from a
financial point of view (fans, not clubs).  Again, if the fans and the players
enjoy the tournament, then that is the best reason to stage it.  Football is
not just about puting money in chairmens' pockets.

Chris
aka Sean Tennentcaledonian

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by john be » Sat, 23 Jan 1993 05:16:36

Quote:


> writes:

>>> Chances are that it was Jack Steedman who reported the chairmen to the SFA.
>>> Typical that the SFA dodge the main issues such as the welfare of the game
>>> but concentrate on pulling up people for making a few comments which let's
>>> face it, are true !!  The only reason Clydebank want an 18 team league is
>>> to get into a Premier Division, make a few quid

>>  ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

> Yup, it's all about diverting as much cash as they can into their own
> pockets and sod the rest. All this stuff about raising standards is a
> red herring.

>>   THE 16 TEAM IDEA IS BETTER, WITH ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, AND IF THERE ARE
>>ONLY 30 GAMES A SEASON, THEN THERE WILL BE LESS MEANINGLESS GAMES. IF YOU WANT
>>TO MAKE THE LOWER REACHES OF THE TABLE MORE COMPETITIVE, HAVE A 4 UP 4 DOWN
>>SYSTEM, THIS WILL SCARE THE LIKES OF AIRDRIE, FALKIRK ETC SHITLESS. IT SHOULD
>>ALSO ENCOURAGE TEAMS IN DIV ONE TO A BIT OF AMBITION TO TRY FOR THE PREMIER AS
>>THEY HAVE MORE CHANCE OF GETTING UP TO THE TOP DIVISION.

> Excellent idea. More chance of being relegated, but more chance of coming back
> up. I think the defensive attitudes employed to try and retain Premier League
> status stem from a fear of not being able to gain promotion if relegated. If
> it was four up, then teams might be more willing to be a bit more positive,
> knowing that if they did get relegated it would be easy to get back.

>> I WOULD GET RID OF THE
>>SKOL CUP AS WELL, IT'S A BIT OF A JOKE, ALMOST TO THE EXTENT THAT THE B&Q CUP
>>IS. INSTEAD, EITHER MAKE SCOTTISH CUP TIES OVER 2 LEGS, OR HAVE A SUMMER CUP
>>SORT OF COMPETITION, THE CROWDS FOR THIS WOULD BE PRETTY GOOD I WOULD THINK.

> The Skol Cup has been a lot better since it was made a one-off knock-out with
> more chances of shock results. I'd vote to keep it. Two legged cup ties are
> OK for evenly matched teams, but how many do think would turn out to see the
> second leg of ties if there was more than a couple of goals in it?

> A Summer Cup competition was tried for two seasons in the mid-sixties, run
> along the lines of the League Cup (i.e. sectional games, then knock-out). I
> think the winners were Motherwell and Hibs. It was quickly dropped because
> attendances were abysmal, also it didn't receive the support of all clubs
> e.g. Rangers refused take part, I don't think Celtic played in it either.

>>THE 30 GAME SEASON ALSO ALLOWS THE SENSIBLE IDEA OF A WINTER BREAK. THERE
>>SHOULD ALSO BE A LOOK IN FOR THE NON LEAGUE SIDES AS WELL.

> Winter breaks are all very well, provide winter happens when you choose to
> have the break. This year winter is in January - others years it might be
> December or February.

WELL, OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS, THE WEATHER HASN'T BEEN SERIOUSLY BAD UNTIL
JANUARY, SO AFTER THE TRADITIONAL DERBIES ON THE 1/2 JANUARY HAVE A MONTHS
WINTER BREAK, FROM WHAT I REMEMBER, MOST GAMES POSTPONED ARE DONE SO IN
JANUARY.

Quote:

> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+
> !  James M. Ross                            ! ICL Computers Ltd   !
> +-------------------------------------------+ Wenlock Way         !
> !  Tel:   061 223 1301 x2661                ! West Gorton         !


> +-----------------------------------------------------------------+

--

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
John B at the DIT

FORZA MILAN!!!   FORZA DUNDEE!!!   FORZA SAO PAULO!!!
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

 
 
 

Scottish League/Scottish Super League

Post by Stuart Wils » Sat, 23 Jan 1993 22:23:05

Quote:

>>   ISN'T THAT WHAT THE SUPERLEAGUERS ARE DOING?

>    The idea of the Super League was to improve the overall
>standard of play in this country.

How? By returning to 10 clubs facing each other 4 times. The small clubs let
the big guns have this before and all we got was moaning that teams were too
familiar with each other and the lower clubs were too scared of relegation to
play football. Even worse, this time it will not be the 10 best sides in the
country but the 10 richest.

The Super League is all about the top clubs wanting more money and power.

Quote:
>There are too many hangers on in the game,
>just waiting for the occasional pay day when the Old Firm visit them.  They
>have no ambition and hold back the progress of the top clubs.

These "hangers on" have let the big clubs change the league twice within the
last twenty years and we are still no further forward. The second time had
apsolutely nothing to do with football, the top half of the premier league
wanted more power and the bottom half were scared of relegation. They forced it
through by  threatening a breakaway and totally ignored the needs of the smaller
clubs. As a result the smaller clubs decided to take care of themselves and
forced the, admittedly far from perfect, current setup.

Top clubs recently criticised the league's proposlas for change because of
the loss of points half way through the season. I didn't aggree with this but
found it hard to understand Aberdeen and Rangers objections. After all this was
exactly what they had proposed for the smaller clubs the previous season. Of
course when the smaller clubs rejected this they were accused of only thinking
about themselves etc...

If all the clubs got together they might find a working solution but while
the big clubs have a "we'll go our way and you can do what you like" attitude,
which they have had since before the current setup, the small clubs will be
forced to put their own future before anything else.

Stuart Wilson