Reconstruction From A Saints Perspective

[south inch]

I'm 100% behind Steve Brown on this.  It can be no joke trying to keep a club like Saints out of debt and running smoothly.  (And it does run smoothly look at the tribute from Muzz - never once did I have to worry about my pay and bonuses not being in my bank the day they were due.)

 

SB has to raise about £4 million a year to keep us going and only about 20% of that comes directly from us fans via season tickets and gate receipts.  He must have looked long and hard at this deal, because it does have flaws, before deciding to vote for it as I am sure did the other 9 who voted with him.

 

As for the other 2.  Gilmour? Judge a man by his friends they do say!  McGregor?  Honest enough I think, under pressure from his fans who have just got to the promised land.  I have it from two Dingwall friends that most RC fans like 2 home games against each of the big boys after years of playing Stenhousemuir  and Cowdenbeath and see the present set up as their best chance of keeping things like that for as long as possible.

[monkfish]

Have Saints made a public statement on this issue?

[stevensan]

Ok, so if the clubs (and Steve Brown) have more information, why haven't they presented this to the fans to bring them onside?

Interestingly, Gilmour claims he made the following proposal at the meeting:

---

"Our suggestion was that we looked at the following compromise;

- One League Body

- All Through Financial Distribution Model

- Introducing a Play Off Place

- A Voting Structure of 75% of the Top League Clubs having to agree.

(Subject to an agreement re home gates and the number of home live TV matches)

Some clubs were willing to discuss this and hopefully come to a compromise.

Regrettably this was rejected by a majority of clubs who wished to only stick to the all or nothing proposal.”

---

Why was this not acceptable. Isn't this the main points that the clubs wanted, other than the stupid league structure?

I go back to my questions. Why this year, why now, and why was is all or nothing?

If Steve Brown answers that then maybe then I will agree. Until then I'll continue asking the questions till someone gives an answer!

[stevensan]

I had to laugh at Gilmour and the Ross County Chairman saying that they listened to their fans.  So the fans of those clubs will be involved in every little decision?

EVERY LITTLE DECISION???? We are talking about changing the entire structure of the game for at least the next 3 years, with a 92% majority required to change it after that.

If that is little, what is a 'big decision'???

[john1962]

EVERY LITTLE DECISION???? We are talking about changing the entire structure of the game for at least the next 3 years, with a 92% majority required to change it after that.

If that is little, what is a 'big decision'???

You really do like to manipulate things. Where have I said that this is a little thing? You are that busy ranting you miss the point.

Also if you had read instead of ranting you would have noticed that there was an offer on the table to remove the three year restriction.

Lets not let anything spoil your agenda though.

[stevensan]

I haven't seen anything where the offer to remove the 3 year restriction was offered. Please show me otherwise.

You asked the question should fans be involved in every little decision, while talking about their views on reconstruction. This was a major decision to be taken and absolutely the fans should have been involved in the decision making process.

I have no agenda other than what is best for Scottish Football. Change is needed. Badly. But the proposed changes were not in the best interests of the fans and were not wanted by the fans. Just take a look at the season ticket thread to see the feeling on where Scottish Football is going.

Fans need:

1 league body

fair rules for all

Football at 3pm on a Saturday where possible

Transparency in details

How clubs distribute money and make decisions is upto the clubs - but they should start with the points above. None of those points will affect the clubs business, other than help the paying customer/supporter/fan/whatever. Then they can do whatever they feel is best for their business.

[Edstar101]

The bottom line for me is that the proposed reconstruction would NOT have got fans back in through the turnstiles, and that is what is needed. You do that, tv and sponsorship etc etc will come calling. You pander to tv and sponsorship, and although you may see short term financial gain in respect of clubs getting money in through these sources, you will lose the fan base and the game will die.

 

Scottish football is not of a standard that people will watch on telly, and it's made even worse when the grounds are empty and you can hear the players and management staff shouting instructions to each other. The attraction of our game was being there and feeling the gritty atmosphere, the travel to games, having a pint or two beforehand and/or afterwards, having a sing-song etc etc.....tv doesn't give you that.

 

We all know things are broken, but those trying to come up with the solutions are facing the wrong way

[blueheaven]

Personally I would have liked to see these changes go through (despite what I keep hearing "the fans want"). I think it would have brought about more exciting matches and far more opportunities for promotion/relegation, whilst getting rid of the unfairness of the top 6/bottom 6 split and giving Scottish football the pyramid structure and redistribution of wealth it desperately needs. The 12-12-18 format could have been great, or it could have been awful, but at least it represented a change and it didn't have to be forever. If it didn't work, the format could have been changed again a few years down the line - and that would have been easier to do with a a new voting structure and an end to the SPL's stranglehold.

 

As it is, I think the opportunity has now been missed and these clubs, with that voting structure, will never be able to agree on anything. Before we know it Sevco will be in the top flight and will join Celtic in using the 11-1 system to control everything, just as Rangers used to. Once this happens I think St Mirren and Ross County may regret their decision. As soon as the SPL was rid of Rangers, changing the voting system should have been the number one item on the SPL's agenda. Sadly, it looks like that opportunity will also be missed. As soon as Sevco are in the SPL, the whole thing's going to go back to being exactly the way it was before - which is absolutely sickening.

 

I cannot believe how big a mess our clubs are making of our national game, and even more so the fact that the SFA seem either unwilling or unable to step in and rescue it. The continued existence of the SPL is an absolute travesty. I would like to see the clubs resign from the SPL and form a joint national pyramid league with the clubs from the SFL, and everyone else all the way down who wants to be involved. Give every club a fair vote in every big decision, instead of letting a small minority of clubs at the top end attempt to dictate everything using their ridiculous and unworkable system.

[garydavidson]

I said I didnt like the set up.

 

So you wouldnt compromise on the set up to get all the good things?

 

Hell no.

[john1962]

Hell no.

I refer you to Blueheaven's post above who has put the case much better than me.

[Bridgendboy]

Don't really see what the problem with the proposed set up was. At least there was something to play for after the split, I was sitting at the United game when we were 1-0 down thinking that if we were in the bottom six the season was over. Another season of dwindling crowds and the same old teams doesn't appeal too much to me and not to the tv companies either I suspect.

[THE LARK SAINT]

The reset "8 "games would have been exciting i reckon, maybe this was the attraction to a potential sponsor!

[Cagey]

The reset "8 "games would have been exciting i reckon, maybe this was the attraction to a potential sponsor!

====== Which 8 games ?.SPL 1,2 or 3

[Real Madrid]

I get the impression from Steve Lomas's interview on Saints TV that he is not that bothered that this did not go through, but it could just be the way I am interpreting what he said!

 

The media briefing with Stewart Gilmour as broadcast on radio Scotland tonight was very interesting and some of what was said can be read here.

 

It's certainly not as clear cut as some would have had us believe on Monday afternoon.

 

I can see the positive and negative sides of both systems

 

Under 12-12-18 I do think season ticket sales would be down, but clubs could have sold 11 home game packages and then fans could have bought into the post split game on another 7 game package.

 

Gilmour certainly thought there would be some extra TV interest in the middle 8, but only in the latter stages. I have a feeling Doncaster and co were thinking a lot of middle 8 games would be of interest to TV.

 

 

 

 

 

[Plastered]

If major decisions are to be voted on, in which the voting system itself is in the mix, then the voting system must be agreed FIRST in isolation.

The idea of changing a voting system AFTER the vote has take place defies logic.

Unfortunately I think BLueheaven's fears will come to pass, in that the evil ones will be back in the pack before the stranglehold of 11-1 can be removed.

 

I get the impression that the clubs can't even agree on what they agree on.

[Edstar101]

What difference does 11-1 or 10-2 make if we are talking about THE Rangers being back in the top flight? They and Celtic have historically voted together to protect both their interests (that being their financial advantage over everbody else - something they are scared to lose and it might mean thay won't dominate the league year after year)

[john1962]

It was to change to 9-3

[Edstar101]

It was to change to 9-3

 

That would make much more sense

[Ronaldo]

What difference does 11-1 or 10-2 make if we are talking about THE Rangers being back in the top flight? They and Celtic have historically voted together to protect both their interests (that being their financial advantage over everbody else - something they are scared to lose and it might mean thay won't dominate the league year after year)

 

Under the current 11/1 voting system if the 10 believe that the TV money should be shared out differently or wanted to do X, Y, or Z then Rangers and Celtic can just vote together and the proposal fails/ends. 10/2 on the other hand means any proposal would go through as proposed even if the OF vote against change on their own, 9/3 is even better.

 

However the Conservative government are considering a major change to the constitution which will require a minimum of 11 votes out of every 12 votes cast in order for a new government to take office. There is also an equivalent part of this new Act of Parliament which requires a necessary similar vote ratio to achieve independence from Britain. This is known as the "Football Scot Model" of constitutional law.  

[Ronaldo]

If the fans and clubs put up with that system then I truly believe Roy MacGregor is correct when he says the proposed system was too complicated for the fans i.e. if you get into the top eight you're playing for Europe and more money, if you don't you're playing to be in the top 12 next season. (top four of eight).

 

Very complex.

[Ronaldo]

St. Mirren came up with three leagues of 14 whenever. This means 26 or 52 games a season if you want balanced even fixtures. If you want to play teams three times then you have 39 games but -

1. Who gets the chance to play Celtic twice at home i.e. if Celtic have 20 games at home and 19 away then over the season then six teams will get the honour of playing Celtic at home twice, but if Celtic have 19 games at home and 20 games away over the season then seven teams will have the honour of playing Celtic at home twice;

2. Who decides who plays Celtic once or twice above?;

3. OK le's get round the above with a split after 26 games, is it two groups of seven with each team missing a week's fixtures, or is it one group of six and one group of eight - unfair in terms of fixtures played and consequently income; 

4. Both methods in 3. above result in less games played i.e.  32 or 33 instead of 36 under the current and the proposed system.

 

That's a lot less complicated. Thank you St. Mrren.

 

A league of 16 results in 30 games only which is seemingly what fans want according to Sportsound. That is six games less and less income. In fact the proposed system gave a virtual league of 16 split into two leagues of eight with a chance of promotion in there too.

 

An 18 team league would be good but getting to that level would require the lower teams to build up their clubs to reasonable strength and that's what the proposed system would have done.

 

The current system in the end leaves us with 12 clubs in the top league, one relegation spot out of that 12 (2 out of 10 in the original Premier League 1975) and of course the 1st Division clubs struggling and only one promotion place to aim for. Meaningless games in abundance. 

[uphallsaint]

Am I being thick about the voting system? After the break there will be 8 teams in the top league. 9-3 does not work after the break unless the four who drop down have a vote. That sounds like a recipie for disaster. Or no voting after the break. There is too much about ALL the proposals that needs to be discussed. That's why I think this has been rushed and we should be discussing changes for season 2014-15 now not the upcoming season.

[Ronaldo]

Am I being thick about the voting system? After the break there will be 8 teams in the top league. 9-3 does not work after the break unless the four who drop down have a vote. That sounds like a recipie for disaster. Or no voting after the break. There is too much about ALL the proposals that needs to be discussed. That's why I think this has been rushed and we should be discussing changes for season 2014-15 now not the upcoming season.

 

I've been assuming that the 12 SPL clubs that start the season are the members since the four 1s Division teams have not been promoted, they're just attempting to be.

[Cagey]

Am I being thick about the voting system? After the break there will be 8 teams in the top league. 9-3 does not work after the break unless the four who drop down have a vote. That sounds like a recipie for disaster. Or no voting after the break. There is too much about ALL the proposals that needs to be discussed. That's why I think this has been rushed and we should be discussing changes for season 2014-15 now not the upcoming season.

==========

Nice one uphall.After the split the voting system will be up shit creek or does the same 12 that started the season still have the vote in the 11-1 system.

I just can`t understand why the 10 do not push for a more democratic sytem whilst they have the chance. I personally would accept 8.8.8 (reluctantly)if it was linked to a 9.3 voting system.

Edited April 18, 2013 by Cagey

[uphallsaint]

I've been assuming that the 12 SPL clubs that start the season are the members since the four 1s Division teams have not been promoted, they're just attempting to be.

That's what I started off thinking. But then you've got a league where 4 teams can vote for "old spl" matters and 4 for "old spl" matters. Will they vote for the good of Scottish football, as has been banded about the last couple of weeks, or for sel preservation. It would only work if there is a single governing body. Can't see the SFL teams voting for x- 1 or 2.