OI WEBMASTER NOOOOOOOOOOO!

Originally posted by ShugZV (NOOL Militant Commando) United, Liverpool and Arsenal, LeedsThat's only 4 Mr MonsterJust a quick example, Wolves and Sheffield Wednesday would class themselves as big teams or sleeping giants, as would Villa, Chelsea, Spurs.....hope you understand this point in the way it was intendedThere might be bigger teams and more competition doon here, but other than the 3 teams above, who else is gonna be challenging fer the league?Ours is a 2 team league, and yours is 3....there's not that much difference is there?Shug speaking fer the Michael Mouse Federation:D

Scottish football is a poorer standard than English.

The evidence ??? read the FIFA rankings and who has the higher UEFA Co-efficient ???

Originally posted by The Hacienda must be (re)Built > Originally posted by ShugZV (NOOL Militant Commando)> United, Liverpool and Arsenal, Leeds> > That's only 4 Mr Monster> > Just a quick example, Wolves and Sheffield Wednesday would class themselves as big teams or sleeping giants, as would Villa, Chelsea, Spurs.....hope you understand this point in the way it was intended> > There might be bigger teams and more competition doon here, but other than the 3 teams above, who else is gonna be challenging fer the league?> > Ours is a 2 team league, and yours is 3....there's not that much difference is there?> > Shug speaking fer the Michael Mouse Federation:D

Scottish football is a poorer standard than English.

The evidence ??? read the FIFA rankings and who has the higher UEFA Co-efficient ???

While I wouldn't disagree with your point, your evidence is crap. The UEFA co-efficients might have some merit, but we all know the FIFA world rankings are a load of shite. According to them, the United States are as good as Italy. And above Scotland are the United Arab Emirates, Georgia (who've never qualified for anything, I mean come on, they hardly ever even supplied a decent player for the Soviet Union), Iceland (last in a major tournament when?) and New Zealand (!). And we're level with Iraq! You're not seriously telling us we're that bad??! Are you? Oh, God!

Have mercy on us, Faeroe Islanders!

OK then, if scottish football is so damn good, how come their ONLY two decent teams want to join the english premier league huh?

Originally posted by Hooky Monster OK then, if scottish football is so damn good, how come their ONLY two decent teams want to join the english premier league huh?

Increased television revenue. Pure and simple.

Nobody is saying that the SPL is a a great example of the beautiful game at it's prettiest. The point I was trying to put over at the start of this thread is that in the context of British football as a whole Celtic are a quality side, despite what happened in Basel. In the past twelve months they've played and beaten Man United (4-3 at O.T. in Gigss' testimonial)Leeds, Leicster, Fulham and Sunderland and they've drawn with Spurs.

This chat of "obscure teams" and sweeping generalisations about the quality of Celtic and Scottish teams in general does piss me off though cos more often than not it comes from English fans with an over-inflated opinion of their own game. The same fans who probably bought into the completely bizarre belief that the national side could actually be contenders at the last World Cup.

The same world cup Germany finished second in?

the same World Cup that Scotland didn't even qualify for?

In any case, apart from Man U those teams that you mentioned Grahame are crap anyways, AND they were only friendlies.

Geeezus man, wind your neck in

Originally posted by Hooky Monster the same World Cup that Scotland didn't even qualify for?In any case, apart from Man U those teams that you mentioned Grahame are crap anyways, AND they were only friendlies.Geeezus man, wind your neck in

"keep yer knickers on"

"wind yer neck in"

Why do you feel the need to end your quite interesting posts with a semi-wide remark? I'm enjoying the debate fella but if yer gonna act the cunt and get all personal then I aint interested.

Fair does then Grahame, i apologise for those slightly snide comments at the end of my posts. I aint here to fall out with people, just to stoke the pot that is debate

Fair play.

hahahah Johnny - I meant the likes of Leicester, Fulham etc are crap, whilst the likes of leeds and manure plc will both no doubt be in the top 6... and if you watched the leeds v man city game you would have seen that city played them off the park for most of the game, but made 3 defensive errors which amounted to goals. city also missed quite a number of half decent chances (stand up darren huckerby), so the scoreline was a little unfair to say the least..... having said that, its goals which win matches innit..... as for shug thinking bertie vogts will turn scotland around :D hahaha nice one

Shug, earlier in the thread you said that the English Premiership is a three team league. It is true that Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool have been the most consistently successful clubs in English league football in the last ten seasons. However, if you compare the number of teams that have finished in the top 4 of the English Premiership in those seasons with the number of teams that have finished in the top 2 of the Scottish Premier League (which I think is a fair comparison given that it is roughly half the size of the English Premiership) you will find that the English Premiership is a more competitive league than the Scottish Premier League.

In the last ten seasons 10 clubs have finished in the top 4 of the English Premiership: Man U (winners 7 times, runners-up twice, third once), Arsenal (winners twice, runners-up 3 times, third once, fourth once), Liverpool (runners-up once, third 3 times, fourth 3 times), Newcastle (runners-up twice, third once, fourth once), Blackburn (winners once, runners-up once, fourth once), Leeds (third once, fourth twice), Aston Villa (runners-up once, fourth once), Chelsea (third once, fourth once), Nottm Forest (third once), Norwich (third once). Furthermore, in that decade three of the clubs that have finished in the top 4 have also been relegated (Norwich, Nottm Forest and Blackburn).

In the last ten seasons four clubs have finished in the top two of the Scottish Premier League: Rangers (winners 7 times, runners-up 3 times), Celtic (winners 3 times, runners-up 4 times), Aberdeen (runners-up twice) and Motherwell (runners-up once). Furthermore, the last time a team other than Rangers or Celtic finished in the top two was in the 1994-95 season (when Motherwell were runners-up to Rangers).

There is a danger that the English Premiership may become a three-horse race between Man U, Arsenal and Liverpool but even if Newcastle fall by the wayside like Chelsea and Leeds have done the big three are still beatable. Man U's defeats to lesser teams last season received a lot of coverage but Arsenal lost a few home games and they won the title because their post-Christmas form was as awesome as Leeds United's form was awful. The Scottish Premier League has become a two-horse race and it isn't even a good two-horse race because one of the runners usually wins by a good distance. To change the metaphor, Celtic and Rangers are the biggest fish in a very small pond but England is a much bigger pond and its top teams are bigger fish and that is why they regularly reach the later rounds of the European club competitions whilst Celtic and Rangers get knocked out.

Whoops, the last post somehow appeared twice. Mind you, I did try to post it whilst Nic was changing the software last night.

Ooh a bit of interesting debate. Fair to say the opportunity to play down here would give the old firm sides the chance to flourish. Just given the fact that the standard of players they could then attract by virtue of playing down here. Thing is what message does it send out for the game as a whole? Should Benfica and Porto be able to compete in La Liga? If it comes to down to EC legislation on restriction of trade then we could end up in a right mess. Possible scenarios could be Moscow teams playing in Germany or Italy. I don't see much benefit for the big premier league teams and imagine they would be keen to keep them out to protect their own interests.

Shug, I'm not a trainspotter. I just searched for football statistics using Google and found a website http://www.soccerbase.com/footballlive containing the relevant information. You're right that only three teams have won the Premiership in the last ten years but it hasn't always been a three horse race. As for how the Old Firm would do if they joined the English Premiership, I suspect that it would become a five or six horse race (depending on whether or not Newcastle repeat or improve upon last season's performance) with Leeds and Chelsea losing out in the race for Champions League and UEFA Cup qualification. In the long run Celtic and Rangers would benefit from the increased level of competition and could become significant forces in European club football again.

Sorry Shug, I was so busy trying to remember how to post a link that I forgot to add a smilie (although I rarely use them because there are so many that I can't remember what they mean). Besides, where I live trainspotters have a very very low social standing, somewhere below paedophile but above the lowest form of life in my area which is people who ring the bell on buses. You are allowed to ring the bell if your mobility is limited by age or disability or if you are carrying a small child or a very large or very fragile object but if you ring the bell simply because you have mistimed your move to the front of the bus or because you won't say "Next stop please" to the driver you are beneath contempt. If you smoke heroin on buses round here no-one bats an eyelid but if you ring the bell you're asking for trouble.

You're absolutely right about the Champions League (sorry, the Games Console Beer Vehicle Credit Card UEFA Large Country Top Three Or Four And Small Country Champions If They're Lucky In The Qualifiers League And Cup Compromise For TV). Man U fans may crow about winning the Champions League but if it had been a genuine Champions League they would have been playing in the UEFA Cup that season. Even if they win it again (which I can't see - I can't see anyone other than Real Madrid winning it in the next few years) they won't get anywhere near Liverpool's feat of winning the proper European Cup four times in eight seasons. The European Cup should be changed back to its pre-Champions League format, if only because it will make teams more likely to go all out to win their national leagues because finishing second, third and fourth won't be a ticket to ride on the big gravy train. Whilst we're putting the football world to rights let's get rid of the promotion play-offs too: if three teams are relegated from a division at the end of the season they should be replaced by the top three teams in the division below and not first, second and fourth, fifth or sixth.

The question of whether or not Celtic and Rangers play in the English league or any future Atlantic League (which I doubt will ever become reality and even if it does I doubt it will ever become a significant competition) depends upon whether the EU concludes that football is just a form of business or is a cultural activity that should have special status under EU law. If the EU decides that it is a form of business the Old Firm could join another league but that may turn out to be a jump from a frying pan to a fire because the EU may also decide that TV rights should be sold on a match-by-match basis. If the EU decides that football should have special status and gives UEFA the right to make its own rules (such as one stopping teams playing in leagues based in other countries) Celtic and Rangers would be stuck in a Scottish Premier League that will continue to decline if Celtic and/or Rangers continue to dominate it. Shug, if I were you I'd ask my MEP to lobby against giving football special status because that would at least give Celtic a choice.

This brings me (finally, you'll be pleased to read) to another issue. I've heard a bit about how Celtic and Rangers have fallen out with the other Scottish Premier League teams over TV rights and that the other clubs have threatened to form their own Old Firm-free league but I don't know the full story. What is going on? Is the problem that the boards of Celtic and Rangers can't see that it's in their own long-term interest to have a healthy Scottish League in case all their other plans fall through or that the smaller clubs are sick of being beaten by the big boys and are threatening not to play with them any more?

Faroe Islands

Population: 45,661 (July 2001 est.)
Age structure: 0-14 years: 22.62% (male 5,193; female 5,136)

15-64 years: 63.64% (male 15,463; female 13,596)

Thanks for the compliments and the info, Shug :). I think my new name for the Champions League should be adopted officially, if only to give Des Lynam (who I wish would along with "Big" Ron Atkinson, presumably called "Big" because you can't call him "Big Wanker" Ron Atkinson on prime-time TV) less time in which to make other cock-ups during ITV's coverage.

I did a little search for info about the row over televising Scottish league football and from what I've read it is even more serious than I thought it was. I knew the clubs were talking about launching their own pay-TV channel SPL TV but I didn't know they were talking about it because at the time no one had bid to buy the TV rights, especially given that Celtic and Rangers were looking into joining the English league (although I believe a buyer was found after the start of the season). It wasn't a repeat of the ITV Digital collapse when money that was owed wasn't paid but it was and still is a crisis.

I take your point about games involving Celtic or Rangers drawing the biggest attendances and TV audiences but even though the other teams in the SPL don't give them hard enough games to help turn them into potential European champions they can't join any other league in the near future. They should have made some sort of short-term deal with the other SPL clubs, even if that meant accepted a smaller share of the deal than, before because one-twelfth of something is better than 100% of nothing. If in a few years time a move to the English league or a new Atlantic League or European Super League were to become a real probability rather than a theoretical possibility Celtic and Rangers may be able to dictate terms to the rest of the SPL (where it seems that some decisions, such as the plan to launch SPL TV, require a 11-1 majority) but at the moment they are not.

If the other SPL clubs carry out their threat to form a new Old Firm-free league things will get even worse for the Old Firm (who may have huge fan bases but also have huge wage bills and, in Celtic's case, debts) and the rest (and I don't doubt you when you say that without the money from home games against Celtic and Rangers they would go bust). I suspect Celtic and Rangers will have to kiss and make up with the other SPL clubs, even if it involves kissing them where the sun doesn't shine, because they don't have any other options. They may have other choices in a few years time and if they do they may be able to kiss the SPL goodbye but at the moment they don't.

Here's an idea: given that Celtic and Rangers have many many more fans than the other clubs in Scotland wouldn't it be in the best interest of the smaller clubs to play their home games against the Old Firm in the biggest grounds they can find? Is it possible that small clubs with small grounds could groundshare other small clubs with big grounds or play their home games against the Old Firm in a large neutral ground such as Hampden Park (am I right in thinking that it's neutral?)? It may not be the solution to all their problems but is it possible and would it make any difference?