Rangers

SFA, SPL and SFL confirm talks have taken place over league restructure

Talks were held at Hampden on Friday to consider a shake-up of the current league model.

The governing bodies of Scottish football have announced that they have held further talks about radical change to the league system.

The Scottish Football Association, Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football League are in discussions to create a single league system with a new financial distribution system.

In a joint statement, the SFA, SPL and SFL said:

"All three parties have been involved in productive discussions for some time on the subject of league reconstruction.

"This culminated in a positive meeting last night, out of which the two league bodies will now engage in a wider consultation with their member clubs.

"The discussions are based on the key principles for reconstruction outlined in the Henry McLeish Review of Scottish football:

One league body in the senior game
Promotion/relegation play-off between SPL and SFL First Division
Single financial distribution model
Pyramid system, with the potential for relegation from and promotion to the fourth tier

"Further consultation will take place in the near future, with the aim of reaching a positive outcome on a new model to take Scottish football forward."

More About Focus on Rangers

People who read this story also read

Comments

There are 13 comments

The SPL, the SFA, and the SFL are about to attempt to conspire to create 2 SPL leagues of 10 teams each.

They are going to attempt to place Charles Green FC in the 2nd tier of Scottish football, meaning that they could be back in the top league in season 2013/14.

Fans of all Scottish football clubs must unite to tell those who run Scottish football that we will not accept this blatant attempt at a stitch up of Scottish football in order to accommodate the rotting carcass of a club which has cheated the public purse, other clubs, and tainted the competition with its presence.

No to Charles Green FC in SPL2!

Declan Murphy 23/06/2012 Report this place
How much more punishment would you suggest Mr M?

martingcairns 23/06/2012 Report this place
More?

Wanted the rules to be adhered to is all I, and 99% of other Scottish football fans, want.

Declan Murphy 23/06/2012 Report this place
@ martingcairns

It has nothing whatsoever to do with 'more punishment'. Leaving the current rules in place is simply adhering to the status quo. On the other hand voting 'yes' or changing the entire league structure is a very direct concession to Newco.

I make this point in all sincerety and not out of any spite to Rangers fan but the distinction is an important one.

A lot of the Scottish media seem to equate a 'no' vote as being 'additional punishment' and this simply isn't the case. A 'no' vote (or abstention from any vote or league restructre) is simply saying they see no good reason to change the laws of the game. If Newco don't gain access to the SPL then the blame lies entirely at the feet of those who brought financial ruin to Rangers and NOT to the other SPL teams who shouldn't even be asked to vote on such a daft motion.

Paccamac 23/06/2012 Report this place
A "no" vote is not voting to leave current rules in place. A "no" vote or indeed a "yes" vote is just voting according to the rules that have long been in place, with the slight alteration they all agreed to that all clubs get a vote rather than just the two or three that are represented on the management committee. My club are not on it but this affects us in a big way so we deserve a vote.

This is an opportunity, an opportunity to get the league reconstruction we should have got before now and an opportunity to get voting structure and financial distribution more fairly dealt with. There should be no price to pay for this as it should have been voted in before now but if the price is one year without Rangers in the top league rather than three years then for a lot of smaller clubs in the current SPL and bigger clubs in the SFL it's not that bad a deal. I couldn't care less how long we go without Rangers in the top division, not in comparison with my club getting a fairer deal and Scotland getting a league structure that aids youth development. If we can swing it that the reconstruction goes through regardless of where Rangers end up then great.

HonestFan 24/06/2012 Report this place
@HonestFan

You'll be going forever without 'Rangers' in any league, they don't exist any longer.

There is no reason why the league should be carved up to support a football club formed just two weeks ago.

Declan Murphy 24/06/2012 Report this place
I'm sure the Rush to push these measures through have nothing to do with the newly formed club, Charles Green FC, being unable to satisfy the currently existing requirements for admission into the SFL...

Declan Murphy 24/06/2012 Report this place
Yeah yeah yeah!! whatever you're comfortable calling them. It's not that big an issue for me, I could'nt care less what we call them I'm more concerned with my own team and if this gives us a chance to sort out Scottish football then good.
Like I said if we can sort out restructuring without Rangers in the second tier then great. Can I take it you're a Celtic fan and quite happy with the unfair voting and financial structure that's currently in place?

HonestFan 25/06/2012 Report this place
@HonestFan

As I stated previously, there will be no 'Rangers' in any league, ever again, they don't exist.

Celtic FC, like the other 10 teams in the SPL, have agreed to be part of the structure when they accepted membership.

If Celtic FC, or any of the other 10 teams in the SPL, object to this, then they are perfectly welcome to ask the SPL to change the voting structure, and let the members decide.

I'm not entirely sure what this has to do with the current idea being promulgated in the media that allowing a newly formed club to skip 2 divisions is a punishment. It's not, it's cheating.

Declan Murphy 25/06/2012 Report this place
Well dodged.

Harping on about the name a team goes by that neither of us support is irrelevant and confirms the theory I'm coming to, having read your posts on practically every story concerning the team formerly known as Rangers (that suit you better?), that you have little interest on the affects of this whole saga other than a bitter fixation on seeing your rival team/club/newco/whatever exterminated.

It might have passed by your attention, but I doubt that, but the other clubs have long wanted the voting structure changed and a fairer distribution of money. Simply asking the SPL to change this and letting the members decide is pointless when an 11-1 vote is required to do both and that is clearly what I was asking you about. All that is about to change. Re-structuring to a larger league is the next logical step and is also what a high percentage of fans want.

You don't come across as a stupid man so I can only guess you are being deliberately obtuse.

HonestFan 25/06/2012 Report this place
@HonestFan

It's not semantics here, Rangers FC (In Liquidation) are gone, they are no more, and they will never play again.

The voting structure was put in place at the time of the formation of the SPL, and every club agreed to it at the time. That's democracy.

No-one is disputing that the game in Scotland would be better served with more money coming in at the bottom of the game, however you seem to see it as being the duty of teams such as Celtic FC to 'give away' money which is rightfully theirs.

If you really want fairness, then let clubs negotiate their own TV deals, and let teams keep the money from their travelling away supporters.

It all depends upon your definition of fair, but let there be no mistake, this is a Neil Doncaster inspired plot to try to ignore the rules of the game for the benefit of one club formed two weeks ago, which isn't a member of the SFA, and which would fail the criteria for an SFL licence.

As I said, skipping two leagues isn't a punishment, it's cheating.

Declan Murphy 26/06/2012 Report this place
Thank you for your answer.

We'll have to agree to disagree on our definition of fairness.
The initial vote was indeed democratic but it was also a bad decision borne of greed and a fear of being left out, "We know you're currently in the top league but if you want to stay there this is the deal you sign!", democratic vote yes but there was also a bit of a gun at the head mentality. I don't see it as Celtics "duty to give away money that's rightfully theirs" I see it as Celtic taking a fairer slice of the money generated by the competition, Celtic may have a bigger support but without the other teams to play against that support goes where? Generates what income? In your model if they kept every penny from their own support regardless of where they played and negotiated their own tv deal the gulf would be even bigger and competition would be nil, how long will you remain interested in a treble you win during pre-season and weekly 5 nil wins? A season, two? three before boredom eventually sets in?... our game would die. Since Celtic could not generate any of that income without other teams to play against do you not feel that the other teams deserve to be recognised for playing their part in helping your club generate this wealth? Would it not be fairer to have a much more even split of TV money?... after all there are two teams playing in each game. Would it be fair to hold a percentage of the gate for the home team as a hosting fee and split the rest as again it takes two teams to play a match. Even every team keeping 100% of its home gate is fairer than the model you suggest.

The teams have known for years they signed up for a raw deal and been unable to do anything about it but with the loss of Rangers the voting structure is no longer tenable, Celtics power of negotiation is much weaker without the other half of the cabal and a fairer deal is on the cards. I guess we'll see the most common definition of fairer at that point.

HonestFan 26/06/2012 Report this place
"Celtic may have a bigger support but without the other teams to play against that support goes where?"

Nowhere, it stays at Celtic Park. Celtic Fc have sold around 40,000 season books for the season 2012/13. Celtic Fc, and their 125 years of unbroken history this season, are going nowhere.

"Since Celtic could not generate any of that income without other teams to play against do you not feel that the other teams deserve to be recognised for playing their part in helping your club generate this wealth? "

Absolutely. Whatever wealth they generate, they can keep, not a problem. Why would Celtic FC wish to steal from the clubs they rely upon? Unlike a certain recently deceased club, Celtic don't steal money or players from their rivals.

"Would it be fair to hold a percentage of the gate for the home team as a hosting fee and split the rest as again it takes two teams to play a match."

It would probably be fairer if the home team kept the sales of home tickets, and the away team kept the sales of away tickets, but w/e.

"Even every team keeping 100% of its home gate is fairer than the model you suggest."

Up until my last response, I hadn't suggested any model. There's no rush to change any set up, unless you are a fan of a recently formed club which wishes to cheat its way into the league.

"Celtics power of negotiation is much weaker"

Celtic have always had one vote, same as any other club. Has that changed and I missed it?

Declan Murphy 27/06/2012 Report this place

sport

Rangers

SFA, SPL and SFL confirm talks have taken place over league restructure

More About Focus on Rangers

Related articles

People who read this story also read

Comments

There are 13 comments

Rangers

SFA, SPL and SFL confirm talks have taken place over league restructure

More About Focus on Rangers

Related articles

People who read this story also read

Comments

There are 13 comments

Report comment

LATEST: James McPake takes pain-killing injection in race to be fit for cup final

LATEST: Cammy Bell hopeful he can play for Rangers as a trialist before September

LATEST: Mario Götze ruled out of the Champions League final with hamstring injury

LATEST: Power Rankings: Who has created the most at your club this season?

LATEST: Josh Magennis agrees contract extension with Aberdeen

LATEST: Athlete Lee McConnell's Glasgow 2014 place in doubt after pregnancy

LATEST: Hibernian's latest cup run a result of 'pure grit and determination'

LATEST: Rangers confirm signing of goalkeeper Cammy Bell for next season

LATEST: Kris Commons puts family and Celtic first as he quits Scotland duty

LATEST: Football Talk: Celtic want Algerian striker, bye Commons, new St Mirren kit