- This topic has 23 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 10 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You will probably find that rangers fans have behaved like a certain section of chubbies fans in the last 20 years lording it over the other fans.
Some fans would appreciate getting their own back, like it or lump it this is a ground breaking decision to liquidate Rangers and is an opportunity for the rest of Scottish Football to change the monopoly.
I can’t be bothered cuting & pastign quotes as it always ends up a reet mess when I try, so:
1) I took you saying “clubs … revelling in their demise” as meaning the people who run them as opposed to the supporters who you mentioned separately. As I said, the fans I can understand despite them probably being more aware than you or me of the financial consequences to their clubs
2) The competitive period I was referring to was the bit I can remember after being born up until shortly after Souness took over as manager of Rangers. Also, your stats don’t really tell the whole story of that perios – In those 11 years before Souness’s first full season 5 of the title winner were non-old firm. furthermore, up until Celtic got their act together (presumably when the satellite TV money deal first kicked in) between 1976-1995 in 16 of those 20 years either Rangers or Celtic finished outside of the top 2. The gap between the winners & those below was always far lower than it is now even if you make it the current 3 points for a win instead of the 2 they used for ages. The point being it was a more competitive league & teams other than Rangers or celtic could go into it without aiming for 3rd at best
3) You missed my point about the hardcore fans. The point being that those going regularly to games other than the old firm fixtures at the moment are their clubs hardcore fans. It is these who are threatening to walk away if Rangers are allowed back in & these are more vital to their clubs than 1 or 2 visits from a few thousand rangers/celtic fans & the small increase in home attendances their visits bring. And the increase is small – look on the telly the next time a club plays an old firm team. The home stands are still half full just like Latics don’t get massively larger number of home fans turning up for games against United, City, Chelsea & co coz most people expect a 1 sided kicking. Those extra that do turn up are the ones who will go if their club starts doing better or has the chance of winning somet. They will get more regularly turning up if they have more of a chance of winning somet than the increase for those old firm games. You do still have the celtic problem but I guess the theory is that some of the players who would have previously been at Rangers will stay within the Scottish game & raise the quality of the other teams. Not saying I agree with that like. And isn’t aiming to come 2nd better than aiming to come 3rd especially up there where that’s the difference between Europe league & champions league & the differing financial rewards available just for qualifying never mind progressing
4) If the club has been liquidated then my own opinion is that they should have to start at the bottom. Just like Newport, Aldershot, Chester etc.. have had to do (although I believe Middlesbrough & Charlton didn’t when they were in s similar situation). if the old club cannot continue to trade then that is that IMO. I don’t see therefore how any punishment other than starting next season in the 3rd div is appropriate whatever the size of the club may be & what the financial repercussions might be2) The competitive period I was referring to was the bit I can remember after being born up until shortly after Souness took over as manager of Rangers. Also, your stats don’t really tell the whole story of that perios – In those 11 years before Souness’s first full season 5 of the title winner were non-old firm.That’s not correct. Souness took over in ’86, Between ’75 and ’86 the league was won four times by non-OF teams. Even then it wasn’t exactly wide open as the winners were Aberdeen three times, and Dundee once.
Here’s an extract from a table of Scottish ‘Top’ League Winners since its conception:
Club……….Winners…Runners-up..Third
Rangers…….54………..30…………18
Celtic………..43………..31…………16
Hearts……….4…………14…………17
Aberdeen……4…………13…………8
Hibernian……4…………6………….13
(Five other teams have won the league)No matter how it’s dressed up Tyldesley, the SPL or whatever it’s been called over the years has been dominated by the Old Firm and has been a case of the other team aiming for runners up or third place throughout its 120 year history.
3) You missed my point about the hardcore fans. The point being that those going regularly to games other than the old firm fixtures at the moment are their clubs hardcore fans. It is these who are threatening to walk away if Rangers are allowed back
in & these are more vital to their clubs than 1 or 2 visits from a few thousand rangers/celtic fans & the small increase in home attendances their visits bring.Rangers retaining their SPL status and fans boycotting isn’t the issue. Rangers will not play in the SPL, and nor should they be allowed to. The issue is lower crowds in an SPL without Rangers.
I’m commenting on this as someone who has regularly watched the SPL over the years, and I’ve attended matches at six of last season’s SPL grounds – I don’t need to look out for it on the telly.
I used to work for a company who had hospitality at one of the non-OF grounds. We couldn’t find takers for the hospitality places for a majority of the season, but had no trouble when Rangers or Celtic were in town.
So yes, we’re talking small numbers on the gate, but when you have such low home crowds, you’re looking at a 20-25% increase twice a season that they will now be missing out on. When you are as broke as many of the SPL clubs are, that makes a big difference.
I guess the theory is that some of the players who would have previously been at Rangers will stay within the Scottish game & raise the quality of the other teams.But they won’t. Rangers could offer salaries to the better players that were comparable with the lower Premier League or Championship; none of the other clubs can. How many of the best Welsh or Irish players choose to stay in their own domestic leagues?
4) If the club has been liquidated then my own opinion is that they should have to start at the bottom. Just like Newport, Aldershot, Chester etc.. have had to doI agree, and that’s what is happening with Rangers.
I’m sure supporters of these other clubs do have a better idea of their finances than I do, so the question is why laugh, when unless Celtic are also held back, the league will be more unbalanced than it has ever been, and only one team totally dominates – unchallenged?
Again apologies for not doing this quote within a quote lark but:
1) You’re either missing the point or being selective with what I’m saying in regards the previous competitiveness of the Scottish top flight. I acknowledge that Rangers or Celtic have won it the majority of times & you can’t get away from that fact. But a point I made & which you missed or ignored was that in 16 of the 20 years leading up to 1996 one of the old firm finished outside the top 2 & quite regularly finished 4th or 5th. Since that period & since the old firm have syphoned off the majority of the TV cash & been able to bank the champions league riches on offer they are 1st & 2nd every time & the other ckubs are getting further & further away. When was it more competitive 1976-1996 or 1996-2012? In that latter period the other clubs knew they had no chance of coming above either old firm side. In the 20 years before it was a realistic aim & was achieved by many
2) I had a very quick scan at Motherwells attendances for last season in wikipedia. Their average attendance for games not including the old firm was 4975. Their games against Rangers got attendances of 10,092 & 9,063 & against Celtic were 10,440 & 8,760. The away end there holds 5,000 so assuming they were full the increase in home fans attending those games were 490 for the celtic 10,440 game (9.8%) & 142 for the rangers 10,092 game (2.9%). The games later in the season against the pair (again assuming the away ends were full & I accept they may not have been as celtic had the title sealed & rangers challenge died) show a fall in the home attendance of 24% for Celtic & 18% for Rangers. I’ve no doubt they can sell more hospitality from firms looking to impress clients but it appears the average punter is less eager to watch the walkovers that often occur. Yes the increase in attendance for Motherwell in playing Rangers was like playing an extra 2 games against Dunfermline, Kilmarnock & co but that loss in income is insignificant compared to the clubs losing 50& of their support over the course of a whole season. And yes I’m sure the clubs should prefer to have the money than not have the money but its about 8% of their total income for the season & if they are able to be more successful this season then their average attendance for other games will increase & much of that lose will be offset (it needs an average attendance increase of under 500 a game to completely offset it)
3) using the welsh & irish players staying in their domestic leagues isn’t an adequate comparison. Both leagues are in the main part-time, the SPL isn’t. I did say though that I didn’t agree that would happen but I don’t think as many as you think will come down here as i don’t think that many “attractive” clubs will want them & the ymay choose to stay nearer to home
4) you say in your fist point that 1 team has always dominated at one time or another & then you say what the fans are wanting will just make 1 team dominant rather than 2?? :S1) You’re either missing the point or being selective with what I’m sayingI’m being or doing neither. I didn’t say the OF finished 1st and 2nd every year, but, 80% of the time one of them have won the league, meaning the best the other teams can hope for is 2nd or 3rd (maybe you are being selective in ignoring this salient point as this I have posted it a couple of times on his thread). Over recent years the OF have been 1st and 2nd for a majority of the time, which means with the demise of Rangers the other clubs can return to the happy times and dizzy heights of finishing 2nd rather than 3rd.
2) I had a very quick scan at Motherwells attendances for last season in wikipedia….I’ll give you this one because I can’t be arsed going over attendances. The home tickets sales may have only gone up 10% for OF games, but the total attendance increased by 100% for those games. Whatever the figure, the clubs will lose out on revenue – be it a million quid or ten bob. They’re skint and will be more skint in the forthcoming years. They need this money – especially as nobody south of Gretna will be interested in watching or investing in the league without an Old Firm game.
Yes (eg) Motherwell can make up that deficit with an extra 500 ticket sales per game – but will they do that? They’ll be playing in a diluted league – winning the games they’ve always won, but losing two less games than they’ve always lost – finishing a place higher than they did last season.
3) using the welsh & irish players staying in their domestic leagues isn’t an adequate comparison. Both leagues are in the main part-time, the SPL isn’t. I did say though that I didn’t agree that would happen but I don’t think as many as you think will come down here as i don’t think that many “attractive” clubs will want them & the ymay choose to stay nearer to homeIt doesn’t have to be an ‘attractive club’. The average wage of SPL’s players is on a par with those playing in the English League 2.
Yes, maybe the Irish and Welsh leagues scenario was a bad example, however, if the sponsorship is removed from the SPL, it won’t be a million miles away from the truth. At present in Scotland, League 1 is not far off a semi-pro league.
4) you say in your fist point that 1 team has always dominated at one time or another & then you say what the fans are wanting will just make 1 team dominant rather than 2?? :SAlmost correct (I didn’t actually say that). Over recent years both teams have been dominant. In the past the two OF teams have taken it in turns to be dominant, but there was always the possibility of non-dominant team coming through to challenge. Now it will just be Celtic and they will have first refusal on any half-decent player – turning it into a ridiculous situation whereby it’d be more competitive if Celtic fielded a reserve side to play against on a weekly basis.
Eventually the league could even itself out if there is a sufficient drain on talent, but why celebrate the fact that the league has had to have one arm tied behind its back to make it competitive?
It isn’t the 80s. Players in Scotland have tasted or seen the riches to be had elsewhere, and the Scottish football league will suffer – no two ways about it.
Bottom line is that Rangers owe the tax man circa £110m. Which means they owe each person in the UK £2, and I want it back !
Bottom line is that Rangers owe the tax man circa £110m. Which means they owe each person in the UK £2, and I want it back !Exactly – that could pay for my euro millions ticket toneet. If my numbers come up & they’ve not given the cash for a ticket I’m suing em
Bottom line is that Rangers owe the tax man circa £110m. Which means they owe each person in the UK £2, and I want it back !And just think what you could buy with that two quid (in Edinburgh,fook all, that’s what – even a coffee starts at a fiver.)
Bottom line is that Rangers owe the tax man circa £110m. Which means they owe each person in the UK £2, and I want it back !
And just think what you could buy with that two quid (in Edinburgh,fook all, that’s what – even a coffee starts at a fiver.)[/quote]
To be fair you could probably buy Hearts given their poor financial status.
Besides, I have now departed edinburgh…. So my name does betray
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
