Fans In Call For Fairer Spl Cash Split

[The Boofon]

Scotsman

 

"

[RUL]

So frustrating, sometimes football shouldn't be about the money, the fans have said competitive football would bring them back and it's dismissed out of hand

[a don in oz]

Those guys at the top are only doing the bidding of many of the teams in the SPL including ours.

 

 

[V for Vendetta]

Doncaster is both an utter bellend and also nothing more than a stooge for the clubs.

 

There is a disasterous lack of leadership, confidence to speak out against the crowd and innovative thinking amongst the clubs outside the OF.

 

The quote in the original post however makes no sense. If the fans have demanded fairer distribution of wealth where is the SPL response to that? Why has it been confused with the leaguer size debate?

 

It seems to me the SPL response is always to avoid valid questions by answering a totally different hypothetical situation where we play the OF less often and the end of the world follows shortly after.

[Westhill Red]

The obvious way to resolve this is to have a greater distribution of TV money by reducing the OF's percentage but that would upset the OFA and SPL. The media spin doctors would come out with some shit response saying it would damage the scottish teams in europe if they didn't get the majority of revenue. Increasing the league size would make things worse!

[The Boofon]

Doncaster is both an utter bellend and also nothing more than a stooge for the clubs.

 

There is a disasterous lack of leadership, confidence to speak out against the crowd and innovative thinking amongst the clubs outside the OF.

 

The quote in the original post however makes no sense. If the fans have demanded fairer distribution of wealth where is the SPL response to that? Why has it been confused with the leaguer size debate?

 

It seems to me the SPL response is always to avoid valid questions by answering a totally different hypothetical situation where we play the OF less often and the end of the world follows shortly after.

 

In the real world just how much extra money do the orcs bring in for a game against them?

 

I'd guess they get about 4500 tickets?

 

1 game with an increase attendance of 5000 at roughly 25 quid a pop is 125k.

 

Double that for the other half of the scum.

 

Not too shabby but if they were not in the league and we were now challenging for the title we'd get a gate increase of at least 1000 a game regardless of who we played so it'd only take 10 games of an increased attendance of 1000 to cover the Glasgow Rovers and Glasgow United games.

 

Seems like they wouldn't be the loss everyone thinks they'd be.

[K-9]

In the real world just how much extra money do the orcs bring in for a game against them?

 

I'd guess they get about 4500 tickets?

 

1 game with an increase attendance of 5000 at roughly 25 quid a pop is 125k.

 

Double that for the other half of the scum.

 

Not too shabby but if they were not in the league and we were now challenging for the title we'd get a gate increase of at least 1000 a game regardless of who we played so it'd only take 10 games of an increased attendance of 1000 to cover the Glasgow Rovers and Glasgow United games.

 

Seems like they wouldn't be the loss everyone thinks they'd be.

Plus the 5k plus Dons fans who would be there against Rangers and Celtic but not against Queen of the South and Morton.

 

Plus 16 team league is 4 home games less at average of 10k crowds would be at 20 quid a head another 800k

[Ke1t]

Time to form a strong East Coast Cartel... all the non Weegie clubs break away and form their own league and refuse entry to any team who isn't voted in by a unanimous vote.

 

Aberdeen

Hibs

Hearts

Dundee

Dundee United

Inverness

St Johnstone

Falkirk

Dunfermline

Amalgamate Fraserburgh and Peterheid

 

Boom, ten team league, any one of which has a chance of winning a cup or a title.

 

Probably no TV money, but increased crowds should easily cover any scraps the OF currently throw to the clubs.

 

Between those clubs they could probably come up with some kind of streaming radio and video service, the revenue from which is split EXACTLY between the clubs.

 

Put entry to clubs like Motherwell and Killie to the Vote.

 

Lifetime, non-negotiable ban on the OF.

[RUL]

Plus the 5k plus Dons fans who would be there against Rangers and Celtic but not against Queen of the South and Morton.

 

Plus 16 team league is 4 home games less at average of 10k crowds would be at 20 quid a head another 800k

 

The 5k stopped going to

Old firm games about 5 years ago

[K-9]

The 5k stopped going to

Old firm games about 5 years ago

Nae sure - 15468 earlier in season against Huns (11.5k home fans). If Morton at home we would be lucky to hit 6k.

[V for Vendetta]

Interesting how even non OF fans can't see the difference between arguing for fairer distribution of the income and arguing for a larger league!

 

Two totally seperate things which should be looked at on their own merits first.

 

I think the first, ie fairer distribution of the league income is incredibly obvious, fair and can only be for the benefit of the game. I've never seen the SPL or the any of the SPL clubs suggest any reason why it shouldn't be distributed more evenly. They simply scoff then muddy the waters with talk about how bad expanding the league would be etc etc.

 

The second is more complicated. Requires far more to work out than Boofon or K9's attempts here and the end result would be somewhere in between the 2. I don't really buy the we'd be dead without them argument.

 

For example to take K9's point on a 16 team league losing x amounf of income.... This is the EXACTLY the sort of argument the SPL use. It goes like this:

The SPL are asked why not expand the league? A basic question which might see alot of useful discussion, debate and consideration before anyone can say for sure if that is a good idea.

 

Before anyone can have that discussion and give any consideration to the pros and cons, before any suggestion is made what that expanded league would look like the SPL want to answer the question and close down the debate. They do this by creating a scenario before anyone works out what the best proposal would be. So they pick a specific number of teams, a specific league format, use particular attendance figures and so on and so forth to come up a nice clear example of why it couldn't work.

 

Anyone with half a brain can see what a load of drivel it is and how paper thin the argument is. For a real discussion to occur they have to be willing to come to it with an open mind. That means putting the agenda aside and not creating this made up worst case scenario as if it is what was suggested or asked for and actually saying ok what would be the BEST way to expand the league rather than the WORST way to do it. Then lets make a decision based on that.

 

Another point I think has to be made here - we are already financially so far behind for example the EPL that we really need to grow a pair of balls and realise that making all decisions based on financial face value alone is not the way to go. We should actually seriously consider just puttng football first and money second. If this makes clubs poorer financially so be it. What we lose in cash we can gain in entertainment.

 

Anyway all of that is a distraction really because the original post was a believe nothing to do with league expansion etc and everything to do with fairer distribution of league income. Anyone actually got an argument against the money being distributed more evenly than at present?

[RUL]

I think it was the newspaper that linked the two issues together, rather than the fans

[The Boofon]

Plus the 5k plus Dons fans who would be there against Rangers and Celtic but not against Queen of the South and Morton.

 

Plus 16 team league is 4 home games less at average of 10k crowds would be at 20 quid a head another 800k

 

Fair point about our extra fans for Glasgow team's games but I'd say it's not 5000 extra Dons fans these days.

 

I never mentioned a 16 team league though.

 

Also if we finish in the bottom 6 we only get one home game against one of them a season anyway.

 

This season it will be the Huns. We'd need a top 6 finish to get a second stab at them at Pittodrie.

 

Not debating anything just putting a point up there.

 

If it was a 16 team league the shortfall in games could be compensated by changing the League Cup back to a group stage tournament like years gone by. :thumbs:

[dj_bollocks]

Not interested in a 16 team league... However the OF shouldn't have all the SPL cash and European money - the European money should be the reward not the SPL money... I know that's not the most conventional thinking but to benefit twice just seems a bit ridiculous if you ask me...

 

I won't wank on about it - nothing will change... Hun cunts going out of business will still be funny though...

[V for Vendetta]

Fair point about our extra fans for Glasgow team's games but I'd say it's not 5000 extra Dons fans these days.

 

I never mentioned a 16 team league though.

 

Also if we finish in the bottom 6 we only get one home game against one of them a season anyway.

 

This season it will be the Huns. We'd need a top 6 finish to get a second stab at them at Pittodrie.

 

Not debating anything just putting a point up there.

 

If it was a 16 team league the shortfall in games could be compensated by changing the League Cup back to a group stage tournament like years gone by. :thumbs:

 

There are loads of different ways a bigger league could be structured hence my prattling on before, bascially if the willingness was there a fairly good proposal could be pulled together i think.

 

Feels a bit like we have a once in a lifetime opportunity to rethink all of this with Rangers about to go bust and most likely reform in Div 3 or play return to SPL with multiple season penalties.

[Scarface]

http://www.change.org/petitions/all-directors-of-all-scottish-premier-league-football-clubs-create-a-fair-and-competitive-league

 

In the event that Rangers Football Club go into liquidation, there will arise an opportunity to change the voting structure and other aspects of the Scottish Premier League (SPL). The aim should be to create a more equal league, leading to greater competition and therefore entertainment, to the long term benefit of all. As fans and customers of Scottish Football teams we would collectively like to see this opportunity taken by all directors to implement the following changes:

 

1.The current voting system for matters debated by the SPL member clubs requires an 11-1 majority to vote for change. This is undemocratic, a burden to change and leads to a slow evolution of the league. This must be changed to a fairer majority vote: An 8-4 majority is suggested.

 

2.All funding of the SPL from external sources, (eg

[spamspamspam]

http://www.change.org/petitions/all-directors-of-all-scottish-premier-league-football-clubs-create-a-fair-and-competitive-league

 

In the event that Rangers Football Club go into liquidation, there will arise an opportunity to change the voting structure and other aspects of the Scottish Premier League (SPL). The aim should be to create a more equal league, leading to greater competition and therefore entertainment, to the long term benefit of all. As fans and customers of Scottish Football teams we would collectively like to see this opportunity taken by all directors to implement the following changes:

 

1.The current voting system for matters debated by the SPL member clubs requires an 11-1 majority to vote for change. This is undemocratic, a burden to change and leads to a slow evolution of the league. This must be changed to a fairer majority vote: An 8-4 majority is suggested.

 

2.All funding of the SPL from external sources, (eg

[Dandyesque]

This bit cant happen, whats the point? Why should 12th place get the same prize money as 3rd?

 

It should be split the same way as the EPL with a set rise per place sand not as a percentage like it is now.

 

Alternatively, stand it on it's head, with the bottom placed team getting more than the rest, with the winners (who clearly need it the least) getting the least.

[Crossbow]

This bit cant happen, whats the point? Why should 12th place get the same prize money as 3rd?

 

It should be split the same way as the EPL with a set rise per place sand not as a percentage like it is now.

 

I think the point is about external sources of funding - but actually why shouldn't 12th or 11th get the same as 3rd or 1st - it will make things more even rather than gradually returning us to the state we are now in, it's not prize money - its sponsorship - it's for the league which needs all the teams to make sense so why should someone be penalised for not being 5th but only 8th. The teams at the top will inevitably get some extra money from Europe but by evening out the rest we reduce the risk of returning us instantly to an unbalanced league. It is a sport - the glory should be in the winning not the wonga.

[vanderark14]

This bit cant happen, whats the point? Why should 12th place get the same prize money as 3rd?

 

It should be split the same way as the EPL with a set rise per place sand not as a percentage like it is now.

 

everything should be split evenly and it should not even be classed as prize money. The prize is the trophy and the honour of being champions.

[V for Vendetta]

http://www.change.org/petitions/all-directors-of-all-scottish-premier-league-football-clubs-create-a-fair-and-competitive-league

 

In the event that Rangers Football Club go into liquidation, there will arise an opportunity to change the voting structure and other aspects of the Scottish Premier League (SPL). The aim should be to create a more equal league, leading to greater competition and therefore entertainment, to the long term benefit of all. As fans and customers of Scottish Football teams we would collectively like to see this opportunity taken by all directors to implement the following changes:

 

1.The current voting system for matters debated by the SPL member clubs requires an 11-1 majority to vote for change. This is undemocratic, a burden to change and leads to a slow evolution of the league. This must be changed to a fairer majority vote: An 8-4 majority is suggested.

 

2.All funding of the SPL from external sources, (eg

[spamspamspam]

They didn't go far enough. Missed 2 vital things:

 

1) the selection of OF away games only is to the detriment of the clubs.

2) some share of gates must be split - you cant have a game with 1 team, not even OF fans would pay to see celtic play against nobody

 

 

 

Yes and No. I can see your point and I'd be happy with an evenly increasing distrubution as you go up the positions - bit like the EPL. Currently we have this corrupt nonsense where the top 2 get 35% or whatever. If it was steadily increasing as you go up then ok.

 

However I can also see the argument for an equal split - this is about genuine competition then why not? Under what principle do we want to run our league? The purist form of competition would be an equal share of all income. Just a thought.

 

Then lets go further and stick all the ticket money into 1 big pot and split that between all the clubs evenly... oh but wait, then AFC would be disadvantaged, I aint having that

 

The way the EPL split their money is about the fairest way out there. Reward for participating, higher reward for winning. I'd be more inclined to have it so it went up in smaller stages than the EPL (something like, 100K for 3rd, 120K for 2nd, 130K for 1st obviously with higher money but was the easiest for an example) but dont see the point or incentive for clubs (not players but clubs) when 10th gets the same as 4th.

[vanderark14]

Then lets go further and stick all the ticket money into 1 big pot and split that between all the clubs evenly... oh but wait, then AFC would be disadvantaged, I aint having that ;)

 

The way the EPL split their money is about the fairest way out there. Reward for participating, higher reward for winning. I'd be more inclined to have it so it went up in smaller stages than the EPL (something like, 100K for 3rd, 120K for 2nd, 130K for 1st obviously with higher money but was the easiest for an example) but dont see the point or incentive for clubs (not players but clubs) when 10th gets the same as 4th.

 

this is exactly why nothing can ever change, there is zero unity among us.

[V for Vendetta]

Then lets go further and stick all the ticket money into 1 big pot and split that between all the clubs evenly... oh but wait, then AFC would be disadvantaged, I aint having that

 

The way the EPL split their money is about the fairest way out there. Reward for participating, higher reward for winning. I'd be more inclined to have it so it went up in smaller stages than the EPL (something like, 100K for 3rd, 120K for 2nd, 130K for 1st obviously with higher money but was the easiest for an example) but dont see the point or incentive for clubs (not players but clubs) when 10th gets the same as 4th.

 

Qualification for Europe.

Pride?

 

oh and btw why would we be disadvantaged? Are you saying we have a right to an advantage that you wouldn't extend to Rangers or Celtic? (just playing devils advocate here a bit)

 

Don't get me wrong I'd be happy with as I said a steady distribution from top to bottom rather than the lopsided one we have.

 

But I thinks its interesting that the debate for an altruistically principled set up would never even be allowed to take place in this country and really there is no reason why it couldn't be consider and weighed up for its merits or otherwise.

 

There is no actual reason or principle by which a genuine competition couldn't have such altruistic principles if the competitors so chose.

The media and hired OF gobs would spew at even slightly improving the share of the money but i've actually yet to here any real reason why we couldn't do whatever the consensus was with it? They seem to suggest it is somehow a metaphysical impossibiltiy for them to get less of the money.

[StandFree1982]

everything should be split evenly and it should not even be classed as prize money. The prize is the trophy and the honour of being champions.

Why should it be split evenly? If you are 2nd, you deserve more than a club who finishes in 11th. A lot of sports work this way without issues.

 

If they split it evenly then you'd find that there were a lot more meaningless games in the SPL. The thought being "why bother getting 8th and paying win bonuses when we get the same amount of money being 9th"

[vanderark14]

Why should it be split evenly? If you are 2nd, you deserve more than a club who finishes in 11th. A lot of sports work this way without issues.

 

If they split it evenly then you'd find that there were a lot more meaningless games in the SPL. The thought being "why bother getting 8th and paying win bonuses when we get the same amount of money being 9th"

 

money should not be the prize, winning the trophy and qualifying for Europe is the goal

 

why would the games be meaningless? do you think the player play to get more tv money for the club

[StandFree1982]

money should not be the prize, winning the trophy and qualifying for Europe is the goal

 

why would the games be meaningless? do you think the player play to get more tv money for the club

Money is the prize in Tennis, Golf, Darts and football to name a few. Why should we be any different?

 

Why would the games be meaningless? They already ARE meaningless mid table games when there is maybe one league position to play for, imagine how much more meaningless games there would be if you won NOTHING for coming 2 places higher than another team.

[Coopy100]

I'd go further. I would introduce a salary cap as well. Yes we will get the pish about not being able to compete in Europe but lets face facts at the present time we don't do that anyway.

[beer gut]

Why should it be split evenly? If you are 2nd, you deserve more than a club who finishes in 11th. A lot of sports work this way without issues.

 

If they split it evenly then you'd find that there were a lot more meaningless games in the SPL. The thought being "why bother getting 8th and paying win bonuses when we get the same amount of money being 9th"

 

because it is supposed to be a competition.

 

you can't treat a league of clubs as a business because it isnt. like it or not every club needs the other clubs to exist. as soon as they start trying fuck the other clubs over by looking after numero uno then the whole league suffers,. . this is what has happened in the spl. everyone goes on about the spl needing the OF but the fact is they need the other clubs more than we need them. They should be helping the league that enables them to to business but instead the bleed it dry and leave the rest of the clubs to fight over the scraps then expect us to be grateful for it. Well they can fuck off. starting with the huns.

[vanderark14]

because it is supposed to be a competition.

you can't treat a league of clubs as a business because it isnt. like it or not every club needs the other clubs to exist. as soon as they start trying fuck the other clubs over by looking after numero uno then the whole league suffers,. . this is what has happened in the spl. everyone goes on about the spl needing the OF but the fact is they need the other clubs more than we need them. They should be helping the league that enables them to to business but instead the bleed it dry and leave the rest of the clubs to fight over the scraps then expect us to be grateful for it. Well they can fuck off. starting with the huns.

 

BINGO if you give top dog more money they become more powerful and we end up back where we are right now