Chris Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Do clubs travelling to Parkhead/Ibrox get a fair old whack of the gate money as well? I can see that that would make a fair difference to the coffers if they got a couple of away trips to each of the old firm, and is that the only time when all the other teams' stadiums are full at home games??All gate money in the league is kept by the home club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Basically the argument from the guy Doncaster was this:Clubs currently play the OF four times a season = TV/gate moneyThere are currently more 'derby' games (OF derby, Edinburgh derby, NF derby, Lanarkshire derby) = TV/gate moneyThe frequency of these would be lost going to a, say, 16 team league and as a result the overall TV money would reduce yet be split between more clubs which ultimately means the pay packet for an individual club would be much reduced. Same goes for gate money.What about the extra derbies created by the mere fact that there are is a bigger league?Looking at the current top 6 in the First Division, there could be these derbies:Old Firm x 2Dundee x 2 (I know Dundee are probably fucked, but as it stands, they're in)Edinburgh x 2Lanarkshire x 2New Firm x 2North East x 2 (stretching it a bit...)Tayside Derby x 4 (stretching it even further... i.e. Dundee v St Johnstone / Dundee Utd v St Johnstone)If you go down the league a couple of places, you've also got Ross County and Morton who would be on the verge of an 18 team SPL and in the promotion places in the "SPL2" or whatever it was called and they could add a couple of Highland and Renfrewshire derbies to the mix.Are people outside Scotland actually interested in any of these derbies anyway? I can't even see that fans outside the old firm would enjoy an old firm derby that much anymore - they're not what they used to be at all. I know that I barely ever watch any Scottish games that don't involve Celtic. Sometimes I watch Rangers because they're the rivals and sometimes Aberdeen just because it's Aberdeen. But the fact that it's a derby match with other Scottish teams doesn't make me turn the TV on.EDIT: I just realised I'd missed one point. Playing the old firm more times a season gives the other teams more chances of being on the telly, and I'm guessing they get extra "appearance" money. How much though? Has anyone actually laid out what the figures are in detail somewhere? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Letters: Don't believe the hype - plan is all about the Old Firm, as usual - Scotsman.com SportSome interesting views in there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 I thought there was no 'appearance' money in the league and there was one figure split evenly between the 12 clubs? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 I thought there was no 'appearance' money in the league and there was one figure split evenly between the 12 clubs?I don't think it's split evenly, the often quoted figure seems to be around 30% of the money goes to Rangers and Celtic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsby Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 I thought there was no 'appearance' money in the league and there was one figure split evenly between the 12 clubs?I thought each team got a basic slice of the TV cash and then it was topped up depending on how often a team is featured in live games, thus ensuring that the OF get the lion's share. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 I thought there was no 'appearance' money in the league and there was one figure split evenly between the 12 clubs?I doubt that's the case. I remember seeing a list of how much TV money was "earned" by each club in England a couple of seasons ago, and it varied from about 25m to 32m between the clubs. I think the set-up there was that each team got an equal amount, but that was topped up depending on appearances.It might be different in Scotland, but if actual TV appearances make zero difference to the money each club earns, then part of the argument is defunct. Each of Rangers and Celtic would still play 34 league games in an 18 team league - just put all of their matches on every week, and the other clubs still get an 18th of the TV money.I'm pretty sure that the more interesting league, and the better football that would come from teams not being absolutely petrified of dropping any points (because in a 12 team (even worse if it's 10 teams) league the lower half are never far away from being relegated) would lead to increased gate money, plus the fact that your team is only on the TV a couple of times a season when they play against the old firm (but more people want to go to those games anyway), and the home team should benefit from a bigger away gate at most games because the game isn't on TV and for the arguments above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alphas Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 My understanding of the arguement is including 25%-50% extra teams in the league won't bring in the equivalent sum of money. Effectively, this means a smaller share of the available cash for each team. Some of the other points regarding less games against the OF will also contribute to less revenue as well.From a financial point of view, it makes sense cutting down on the number of teams so there are bigger shares of cash for each team. Most of our teams are in so much debt they don't seem to be able to sustain any large drops in revenue.From a footballing point of view, everyone wants a larger league and more variety in who we play. Doesn't seem likely to happen though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 BBC Sport - Football - Thierry Henry returns to Arsenal for training stint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorge Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 All gate money in the league is kept by the home club.Ever since this was pushed through by the Old Scum, any chance of them being toppled went straight down the toilet. And to think they then had the nerve to ask for a that 5% levy on away tickets aswell!This is just one of many, many reasons why they should fuck off..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Ever since this was pushed through by the Old Scum, any chance of them being toppled went straight down the toilet. And to think they then had the nerve to ask for a that 5% levy on away tickets aswell!This is just one of many, many reasons why they should fuck off.....Here's a serious question for you as a clear hater of the old firm:What would happen if they did fuck off?Seriously.The reason I ask is because all the arguments against expanding the league / for the 10 team SPL seem to come from the fact that the money clubs get from being in a league with the old firm keeps them afloat. I just don't think that can be true, but nobody seems to be able to come up with a plausible argument either way.I've said all along that I care more about Scottish football as a whole and the national team than I do about Celtic. If we could vastly improve Scottish football at the expense of the old firm's stranglehold on the title, I'd be all for it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 BBC Sport - Football - Fiorentina target Rangers striker Kenny MillerUh...The Italian club want him to replace Adrian Mutu, who has already left. LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 BBC Sport - Football - Fiorentina target Rangers striker Kenny MillerUh...LOLMiller is a chump but he's been awesome for Rangers this season (and for a lot of last season).If he leaves now, Rangers' title challenge is almost over. They'll have to rely on Kyle Lafferty...I did think it was funny that he'd be replacing Mutu though... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodsinho Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Miller is a chump but he's been awesome for Rangers this season (and for a lot of last season).If he leaves now, Rangers' title challenge is almost over. They'll have to rely on Kyle Lafferty...I did think it was funny that he'd be replacing Mutu though...If Miller does go it looks like Kris Boyd will be moving back up the road to take his place as part of the 'great boro exodus of 2011'. While David Wheater is likely to be the first fella on his way out in a 2.5million move to Bolton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorge Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Here's a serious question for you as a clear hater of the old firm:What would happen if they did fuck off?Ideally? 2 leagues of 16 (regional/feeder structure below this), two up two down, restructured League Cup played after the shorter season ends (top 8 in each league drawn against each other, knockout style), winter break, obligatory monitoring of club finances as per the German model to stop anyone trying to buy an advantage outwith their means, safe standing also as per Germany to get shot of the stupid x000 seats required rule, more realistic wages in line with more realistic TV money (which would take a hit initially no doubt, but might well go back up when the broadcasters realise the league isn't a two-horse race every year), cap on foreign signings, bin the diddy cup and make the Scottish Cup totally all-in like England.And best of all, no danger of any secterian, bigoted bullshit in the away stands every other week.I can dream. 8-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Miller is a chump but he's been awesome for Rangers this season (and for a lot of last season).If he leaves now, Rangers' title challenge is almost over. They'll have to rely on Kyle Lafferty...I did think it was funny that he'd be replacing Mutu though...Jelavic is back in training, think he'll take on the lone striker role. Yes, Miller has had a decent season but he'll struggle in Serie A for sure. I'm sure he's done his fair share of the white stuff though, so that should go some of the way to filling Mutu's boots anyway.If Miller does go it looks like Kris Boyd will be moving back up the road to take his place as part of the 'great boro exodus of 2011'. While David Wheater is likely to be the first fella on his way out in a 2.5million move to Bolton.Not seen much (any) of Boro this season, has Wheater improved much since he was playing in the Premier League?I can't imagine Rangers being able to afford to take Boyd back permanently unless this takeover goes through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodsinho Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Not seen much (any) of Boro this season, has Wheater improved much since he was playing in the Premier League?I can't imagine Rangers being able to afford to take Boyd back permanently unless this takeover goes through.He had a rough time of it last year while he was club captain - the responsibility didn't sit well with him and he had some concentration problems that led to bad mistakes. This season has seen a return to better form but he could do with having some good players around him to improve his game further. Apparently Everton are in for him too, I doubt he'd start many matches for them though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Ideally? 2 leagues of 16 (regional/feeder structure below this), two up two down, restructured League Cup played after the shorter season ends (top 8 in each league drawn against each other, knockout style), winter break, obligatory monitoring of club finances as per the German model to stop anyone trying to buy an advantage outwith their means, safe standing also as per Germany to get shot of the stupid x000 seats required rule, more realistic wages in line with more realistic TV money (which would take a hit initially no doubt, but might well go back up when the broadcasters realise the league isn't a two-horse race every year), cap on foreign signings, bin the diddy cup and make the Scottish Cup totally all-in like England.And best of all, no danger of any secterian, bigoted bullshit in the away stands every other week.I can dream. 8-)You see - that all sounds perfectly sensible to me.And it would work with the old firm as well (other than your bigoted bullshit comment of course, but start banning the fuckers / docking points, and it would stop eventually) - but both sides of the old firm would be taking a bigger financial hit than the rest initially, so the gap would be bridged. Rangers' days of buying the league title already seem to be over unless some crazy fucking benefactor takes over. If Celtic plays their cards right, they could put Rangers plight to their benefit and put some space between the clubs and bag (/buy) the league for years under the current system, but under a new system like the one you've suggested, they shouldn't be able to do so. Obviously they will always be at an advantage because of the larger fan base etc. but going back to sharing the gate money would spread the wealth somewhat.It's only in the past 20 years really that Rangers/Celtic have had this monopoly over the league title and in fact only the last 10 years that you could really include Celtic in that outside the one title with Wim Jansen. Reverting back to a 10 team SPL would just be swinging more power/money back to the old firm as far as I can see, and I think it's safe to say that nobody outside the old firm wants that. I don't fucking want that either. It's pretty fucking boring having a 2 horse race every year. I also don't want the old firm to leave the league but you know, if that was the only way the league would advance then fuck it. The major flaw in that plan is they will never leave - despite the endless grovelling to get into the EPL, they won't fucking have us, and with that in mind the old firm won't leave, but the rest of the clubs should use that to exercise a bit of power over them and force them to accept changes that benefit the whole of Scottish football and not just the two old firm clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Any vote that requires a 11 to 1 split will never happen unless it suits the OF because although they're 'bitter rivals', they love to get into bed together to milk as much cash from Scottish football as they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scorge Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 You see - that all sounds perfectly sensible to me.And it would work with the old firm as well (other than your bigoted bullshit comment of course, but start banning the fuckers / docking points, and it would stop eventually) - but both sides of the old firm would be taking a bigger financial hit than the rest initially, so the gap would be bridged. Rangers' days of buying the league title already seem to be over unless some crazy fucking benefactor takes over. If Celtic plays their cards right, they could put Rangers plight to their benefit and put some space between the clubs and bag (/buy) the league for years under the current system, but under a new system like the one you've suggested, they shouldn't be able to do so. Obviously they will always be at an advantage because of the larger fan base etc. but going back to sharing the gate money would spread the wealth somewhat.It's only in the past 20 years really that Rangers/Celtic have had this monopoly over the league title and in fact only the last 10 years that you could really include Celtic in that outside the one title with Wim Jansen. Reverting back to a 10 team SPL would just be swinging more power/money back to the old firm as far as I can see, and I think it's safe to say that nobody outside the old firm wants that. I don't fucking want that either. It's pretty fucking boring having a 2 horse race every year. I also don't want the old firm to leave the league but you know, if that was the only way the league would advance then fuck it. The major flaw in that plan is they will never leave - despite the endless grovelling to get into the EPL, they won't fucking have us, and with that in mind the old firm won't leave, but the rest of the clubs should use that to exercise a bit of power over them and force them to accept changes that benefit the whole of Scottish football and not just the two old firm clubs.Splitting OF gates would help fractionally, but it's a bit like the success-ballast formula in Touring Cars, you're just using outside-artifice to cut a significantly stronger opponent back, and I can't see the majority of OF fans swallowing that for the greater good (even if you personally would). And it would still give them enough money to buy any half-threatening opposition players and stick them on the bench.Better to just kick you out altogether than waste time/effort trying to dock points and so on, and you can have yer own league, Sicily Isles style. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Gladstone Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Any vote that requires a 11 to 1 split will never happen unless it suits the OF because although they're 'bitter rivals', they love to get into bed together to milk as much cash from Scottish football as they can.Yeah - I had thought of that as well. I can see the arguments of the respective old firm chairmen as well. Their responsibility is to their own clubs and their own clubs only, so if they vote for a proposal that will potentially weaken their financial position, they could be in direct breach of their duties.I'm guessing that we are going to be stuck with a 12 team league or somehow the rest of the clubs are going to be coerced/forced into voting in favour of the 10 team SPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest idol_wild Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 All gate money in the league is kept by the home club.Ever since this was pushed through by the Old Scum, any chance of them being toppled went straight down the toilet. And to think they then had the nerve to ask for a that 5% levy on away tickets aswell!This is just one of many, many reasons why they should fuck off.....To be honest, I think most SPL clubs actually benefit from the rule allowing all gate receipts to be kept by the home club. Wherever Rangers and Celtic play, they almost always double the average home crowd for that particular match, therefore lining the pockets of all the remaining SPL clubs.If each club kept the receipts of the tickets for their respective supporters, then Rangers and Celtic would be even more financially advanced than all the other clubs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adam Easy Wishes Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 To be honest, I think most SPL clubs actually benefit from the rule allowing all gate receipts to be kept by the home club. Wherever Rangers and Celtic play, they almost always double the average home crowd for that particular match, therefore lining the pockets of all the remaining SPL clubs.However if the gate from a full Ibrox was split the club in question rather than earning an extra 2000 seats or whatever from their home game would earn an extra 20,000 or so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigsby Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 To be honest, I think most SPL clubs actually benefit from the rule allowing all gate receipts to be kept by the home club. Wherever Rangers and Celtic play, they almost always double the average home crowd for that particular match, therefore lining the pockets of all the remaining SPL clubs.If each club kept the receipts of the tickets for their respective supporters, then Rangers and Celtic would be even more financially advanced than all the other clubs.Yeah, but they used to be split, although Fergie talks about how the OF would knock about 20,000 off their gate when it came to stumping up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lemonade Posted January 10, 2011 Report Share Posted January 10, 2011 Described by Gordon Smith on Open All Mics as a 'FIRE BOMB!!!' Cue lots of laughter from the studio and Richard Gordon clarifying that it was a flare and not a bomb.There was a great moment on Open All Mics on Saturday just as the second halves kicked off.Jim Spence - "AAOOOOOOOOFFFFFF!!!!!!!"Richard Gordon - "It sounds like there's been some early excitement at Easter Road, lets go to Jim Spence and find out what's happened!"Jim Spence - "Er no. Somebody made me coffee instead of tea and I just tasted it".Classic Radio Scotland. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.