The SPL's Blue Monday: 10 Plus 12 Equals The Future

Blue Monday. The most depressing day of the year.

Fitting that it was today we heard another version of the SPL’s grand new plan for Scottish football.

Forget the two ten team leagues idea of a couple of weeks ago. The head honchos have listened to the near universal condemnation of that plan.

And come up with a top league of ten teams and an SPL 2 of twelve teams. A magnificent response to the weight of public opinion:

The Scottish Premier League (SPL) clubs today reaffirmed their commitment to the work of the Strategic Review Group to develop a structure for the whole of Scottish football.

Broad support was given to progressing a 10-team Premiership and a 12-team Championship at the top of a pyramid for Scottish football as the preferred option.

The SPL clubs have asked the executive team to further develop aspects of these proposals and to update the Strategic Review Group's report.

The SPL will now consult with the Scottish FA and the Scottish Football League and its clubs before a final decision by the SPL clubs.

STV report that Inverness, Hearts and Kilmarnock were the only clubs to vote for the 14 club compromise model.

So there we have it.

To listen to Neil Doncaster, SPL chief executive, this is the model that will have stadiums full to bursting, TV companies locked in a multi-million pound bidding war and the quality of football reawakening thoughts of a Scottish football golden age. And no doubt a number of postponements causes by blue snow.

It’s unclear how he expects this to happen. Nor does he seem to be able to adequately address the fears of the sheer boredom of watching your team play against the same nine clubs four times each season.

Doncaster says a new relegation model will keep the league refreshed. He ignores concerns that it will lead to clubs playing a dismal, safety first brand of football, petrified by the fear of relegation.

The only benefit of a 12 team “championship” would seem to be to deliver the SPL a majority of Scotland’s professional sides. That will make it much harder for the SFL to prevent a “merger” with the SPL.

If the 12 “championship” sides are also going to be playing each four times a season the idea of relegation/promotion play offs to keep the top flight refreshed seems disingenuous. Surely those extra eight games will favour the top flight teams going into the play-offs.

The SFA would seem pretty powerless to do anything about all this after the review they commissioned backed a ten team league. Henry McLeish has been utterly discredited by the way in which he allowed the SPL to hijack his report. Trusting a man who couldn’t run his own office expenses to save the national game was a mistake.

What will a pyramid system involve? Surely that's not just been tagged on to the proposals because it's something that a lot of people have been calling for. How is it going to work? What financial assurances will be in place for those clubs that don't make the final cut of 22?

Do we even know if this is the model that teams in, for example, in the current Third Division or in the non-professional leagues will see as the best for them to secure their futures.

And the SPL clubs?

Rod Petrie backs a ten team SPL even as he watches his Hibs side implode. It would break my heart but deliver some form of justice to this most non-footballing of men if Hibs were to start this brave new dawn in the lower division.

Peter Lawwell backs a return to the dark days of a ten team top league even as Celtic wage a war of modernisation against the SFA.

Martin Bain backs a ten team SPL even as Rangers continue to wade through a financial mire that may or may not include tax evasion.

These are just some of the people of influence who are prepared to ignore the views of the fans to chase a short term financial gain that nobody can be sure will materialise. The usual suspects with their usual blend of arrogance, self preservation and blind optimism in a get-rich-quick scheme.

I rather suspect that these men reply to emails that offer money transfers from bank accounts in Nigeria.

As someone pointed out to me today it is unusual to have such a widespread appetite for change in Scottish football. And yet somehow the SPL come up with a scheme that seems to appeal to nobody except Neil Doncaster, Ralph Topping, Henry McLeish and eight or nine SPL chairmen and chief executives.

They are prepared to fly in the face of public opinion to pursue a course of action that they are either unable or unwilling to properly explain to the fans.

We shouldn't be surprised that we are ignored. Football chairmen have being doing it for decades. But the idea that our opinions are forged in ignorance, that none of the counter proposals were championed out of a love for the game and a desire to see Scottish football improve is sickeningly arrogant and stubborn.

I don't believe fans should stop supporting their teams. I don't believe a boycott of clubs over league restructuring is necessarily a good idea.

But prices won't drop in the SPL's new era. The kick off times will still be awkward. The pressures of life will continue to crowd in on the football going habit. And I am concerned that the prospect of repetitive Premiership with tactics borne out of fear will see fans continue to drift away.

Standing at the crossroads Scottish football has, I suspect, chosen to travel up a dead end. Extricating ourselves from that folly might be beyond us.

The Scottish Football Blog News Feed

SPL Play-Offs: What If...

In one of the more predictable developments of this Scottish football December, perennial third placers Hearts have backed calls for the top four SPL teams to be involved in a championship play off competition.

I can't figure out the appeal for third placed Hearts at all.

Again, I don't think Dundee United's Stephen Thomspon was being genuine with his proposal. He was using it to get the message across about how unhappy certain clubs are with the SPL/McLeish Report stitch-up of last week.

But, just for fun, I thought I'd see which teams would have benefited from a top four play off over the 12 years of the SPL. Unsurprisingly Hearts come out on top.

I've estimated earnings based on an equitable four way split of crowd attendances from the three games totalling four million pounds. I still award all championships to either Celtic or Rangers as no team has beaten either side of the Old Firm in a Scottish Cup semi final in the same year that they have finished third or fourth in the SPL.

The most risible reaction to Thompson's plan is that it would result in more teams winning the championship. It almost certainly wouldn't, given the Old Firms dominance of all three of our national trophies.

Only Hearts and Dundee United have finished in the top four of the SPL and won the Scottish Cup in the same year, neither of them playing the Old Firm in the semi finals or final. So it's not a great leap to imagine that play offs over the last 12 years would have resulted in the same two sides winning the championship.

Here's the list:
Hearts 6 top 4 finishes = £6 million
Aberdeen 5 top 4 finishes = £5 million
Hibs 4 top 4 finishes = £4 million
Kilmarnock 3 top 4 finishes = £3 million
Motherwell 2 top 4 finishes = £2 million
Dunfermline, St Johnstone, Dundee United, Livingston 1 top 4 finish = £1 million each

Now, again, this is all hypothetical. But what a difference this money - even based on my simpleton accounting - would have made to these clubs.

Interesting to see that Thompson's Dundee United would only have benefited once in the 12 years of SPL football.

As for a gap closing device to reel in the Old Firm? Doesn't work as both would have earned at least twice what any other had managed.

* Quick bit of research after a question on Twitter. I think I've checked right back to the Second World War and the only time another side has won the Scottish Cup after the Old Firm have been kept apart in the semi-finals is Aberdeen in 1983.

The Scottish Football Blog On Facebook

Play Off, Play Off And Play The Game

Walter Smith and Neil Lennon appear to have spent much of yesterday singing from the same hymn sheet.

Not Christmas carols at an ecumenical festive service.

More songs of condemnation aimed at Dundee United chairman Stephen Thompson.

Thompson has suggested that the SPL should look at play-offs. Not the oft mentioned relegation play offs. No, he's after championship deciding play offs between the top four sides at the end of each season.

Which has induced a certain hysteria among the Old Firm management. "Nonsense," "ludicrous" and "bollocks" sum up the tone of their responses.

Smith and Lennon have probably missed the point. Thompson would probably expect to see blue snow falling on Christmas Day before he sees his plan become a reality.

His aim, I think, is to convey his disappointment at the plans put forward by the SPL and to show that other systems are available. And maybe have some preprandial fun along the way.

He will also have known that he'd be criticised for cooking up a system that damages the integrity of the season long league championship. But he might argue that works at both ends of the table.

If clubs are expected to rubber stamp a play off system that includes play off for the teams finishing second and third bottom, why should the two dominant clubs not also be asked to jeapordise their duopoly at the top?

A valid enough argument, one that I suspect some non-Old Firm fans might be drawn to and a fairly intriguing way for Thompson to make his point.

Certainly it appears that the proposals put forward by the SPL and backed by Henry McLeish look to have no chance of carrying the 11 to 1 majority of SPL clubs that they require.

Back to the drawing board?

Play Off Thoughts

Do I agree with a four team play off at the top of the SPL? No. Because I'm an old fashioned kind of guy and you either win the league or you don't. Simples.

But maybe Thompson is on to something.

In 12 SPL campaigns Rangers and Celtic have finished in top two places 11 times with Rangers finishing third in the 2005/2006 season.

In those 12 seasons they have won 32 of the 36 trophies on offer in Scotland.

So even with a play off system they would still be expected to dominate, with seedings at the semi final stage giving a big chance of an extra, hugely meaningful, Old Firm game at Hampden each season. I've a feeling the broadcasters might like that.

But it is hard to make the argument that the third and fourth placed teams would deserve to be involved.

In the 12 SPL seasons the closest the third placed team has finished behind the second placed team is one point. That was in 2005/2006 when Rangers were breathing down Hearts' backs.

In every other season the Old Firm have filled the top two spots. The closest any side has come to them is the seven point gap achieved by Aberdeen in 2006/2007. That same year Hearts in fourth place were only nine points behind.

In the other ten seasons no team has come closer than 13 points behind whichever Old Firm side has occupied second. In seven seasons the gap has been 15 points or more. In 2002/2003 Hearts in third place finished 35 points behind and fourth placed Kilmarnock were 40 points behind.

The SPL's history suggests that third and fourth placed teams simply don't deserve a play off for the championship.

Can the same argument be made for teams at the other end of the table?

The gap between bottom and second and third bottom tends to be much closer.

In 2001/02 bottom club St Johnstone finished 19 points behind Motherwell, three years later Livingston were 15 points adrift of Motherwell and Dunfermline and Gretna's fairytale ended some 17 points behind Kilmarnock.

In no other season has there been more than ten points between the bottom club and the second bottom club and only twice has the gap between bottom and third bottom been ten points or more.

The SPL is tighter at the bottom than it as at the top. That, rightly or wrongly, makes a relegation play off easier to justify than a championship play off.

The teams in second and third bottom are likely to have spent the season looking more like relegation candidates than the teams in third and fourth place have looked like champions.

> In 2001/02 Celtic won the SPL with 103 points. Rangers in second had 85 points. Livingston were third with 58 points, Aberdeen fourth with 55.

It is difficult not to accept Lennon and Smith's arguments that league tables like that are so conclusive that giving Livingston and Aberdeen and even second placed Rangers the chance to take the title after two extra games is a bit odd.

Odd. But probably also quite amusing if you don't happen to be a Celtic fan.

The Scottish Football Blog On Facebook

Perfect play-off

If there's one thing the English Premier League enjoys, then it is spreading the influence of the "Best League In The World." Like a benign corporate John Terry, this is a business concept willing to spread the seed of happiness around the globe.

From cheap polyester shirts to the cult of Beckham, from a football model based on nothing but hard cash to the, literally, unmissable charisma of Jamie Redknapp.

The world wants English football and English football is happy to give of itself with the generosity of a text message from Ashley Cole.

We can but look on in awe as the English behemoth bestrides the globe. English football is the global currency, a lingua franca with the vocabulary provided by Andy Gray. Those of us condemned to follow Scottish football can only eke an existence in the shadows, a nation of Wayne Bridges in a world of Hugh Hefners.

Thankfully the men in charge of English football are no strangers to self awareness. They know their worth, the power of their every utterance. They realise that a meeting of the powerbrokers in the English game has taken on the global significance of a modern day Yalta Conference.

So it is that we are given the privilege of sharing in their every discourse on how to do the charitable thing and spread themselves even more thickly upon the global consciousnes. The 39th game? The entry of Rangers and Celtic? Mere philanthropy. Like the British imperialists of old spreading civilisation across the planet, they are but doing their moral duty. Any money made in the process is a necessary evil of allowing a billion Chinese the chance to watch Bolton play Stoke.

When we are lucky enough an idea will occasionally spring from this crucible of humanity that, with the humility of the tenant famer accepting scraps from the squire's table, we might adopt to bring sustenance to our own, malnourished game.

Yesterday was one of those red letter days. Still hurt that few of the disciples were willing to accept the self sacrificing missionary work that would have spread the gospel in the form of the blessed 39th game, a new hymn was sung.

The light of democracy would shine throughout English football in the form of play offs for the fourth Champion's League spot. The 39th game would be replaced by a series of games with the ultimate prize of a place in the qualifying rounds of the continental behemoth. Thus the quad-opoly of the Big Four could be broken and the unique excitement of the "Best League In The World" could be stretched over an extra few weeks. Any money made in the process would, of course, be a necessary evil of allowing English football to give yet more of itself to the global village.

Now, is it just me, or is this not a blueprint for our own future? There are surely only benefits.

Old Firm complaints that the lack of competition at home renders them impotent abroad? Sorted. Win the league or risk losing the Champion's League place. That should offer the higher stakes of real competition.

Ten teams fighting it out for nothing more than third? Sorted. Finish third or fourth and you could be but two or three games away from taking the prize of second place anyway.

Too many meaningless games? Sorted. There would still be a lot of meaningless games. But Hibs and Hearts playing off for the right to play Rangers at Hampden with the Champion's League at stake? That's got to be marketable.

There's too many games already? Sorted. Listen to what our English cousins are saying. The English Premier League has already found the answer. Not too many games, not enough games. If there is a risk of people losing interest in a product simply give them more of the product. It's a no brainer.

Other teams would struggle in the Champion's League? Well, really? Who are we comparing them to? The all conquering Old Firm? And it's only by exposure to the top level that our "provincial" clubs can truly aspire to greatness.

It would be unfair on the team finishing second? No, it wouldn't. Look at the existing cup competitions. Rangers and Celtic would most likely take the majority of the play off titles. But every so often they would lose. And that would be as refershing for our game as a dose of Shake 'N' Vac on a musty shagpile.

And it need not stop at the top. A four way play off at the bottom. The second placed team in the First Division and the teams finishing 9th, 10th and 11th in the SPL. Those meaningless fixtures are disappearing over the horizon.

Let's get this done. English football sneezes and we get a cold? Good, let's get swine 'flu. This English proposal gives us the chance to stand on the shoulder of giants. This is our chance to march into the sunlight.

Scottish football will be reborn thanks to the TV evangelists of the south.