Fans overwhelmingly favour bigger spl

[Zappa 0]

So how many games would we play in a 16 team league , we need to play everyone home and away , there's 30 games 8 less than at present so how do you make that up as the clubs couldn't lose that amount of revenue or are you prepared to pay the same for less games against inferior opposition.

 

Yes, 30 games which is 8 games less, but it's 15 home games and we often only play 18 home games, so it's only 3 SPL home games less than the club are used to atm. That 3 game difference could easily be made up with a slight change in the structure of the cup/s and how they're accounted for.

[Bluedell 5,376]

I just can't see that decreasing the number of attractive games (eg against Celtic, Hearts, Hibs, Dundee Utd, Aberdeen) and replacinng them with Falkirk, Raith, Dunfermline is going to do anything but decrease the playing quality, decrease the cash and decrease the crowds.

 

The product is more unattractive than it was 10 years ago and the idea of giving up my season ticket is no longer unthinkable. Make these changes and you push me much, much closer to that point.

[Guest Mac]

Thankfully Hearts, Dundee United, Killie and ICT are against a ten team top league.

 

This proposal has been shoved down our throats by Neil Doncaster and the lap dog media as "the only deal in town", it isn't and we all know it isn't our only option. There are many options worth discussing (some good/some not so good) but it is surely time to have an OPEN discussion to see what is best to improve Scottish football.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/9339466.stm

[BrahimHemdani 1]

[quote name=' I am not an expert at statistical methodology so I would stand to be corrected and I don't know if it would be statistically accurate to adjust the figures based on average attendances but I will find out!

 

QUOTE]

 

I have obtained the following response from Red Circle Communications who carried out the survey on behalf of Supporters Direct.

 

There are always arguments for and against weighting data based on various criteria. We took the decision not to weight the data and just present the raw numbers based on that fact that SPL supporters constituted the majority of the responses (59%) and' date=' more importantly, that there were good sized sample of both SPL and SFL fans (2,874 and 1,819 respectively). We sought to reflect the breakdowns between SPL and SFL opinion throughout the results for transparency and to enable conclusions to be drawn about SFL and SPL opinion and any differences between them (which do exist on issues like regionalisation and B teams in lower leagues).

 

 

 

There is an inherent difficulty in weighting against the total population of fans or attendance levels. The former brings difficulties of definition and the latter is unadvisable as nowhere in the survey did we ask fans exactly which team they supported or whether fans actually attended matches. Therefore weighting the data by attendance (based on attendance by division rather than team) could just as easily skew the data further rather than eliminate any existing skew.

 

 

 

In terms of representativeness and validity then I am confident that the findings accurately reflect fans opinions. The online method of data collection is regularly used to survey opinion (indeed the SPL used the exact same method in their own work) and we ran a series of checks on the data to ensure its validity. Also last year I conducted a fan survey for Raith Rovers using self completion questionnaire at a match and an online option. In the analysis there was no significant difference in findings between responses received online and those received via the self completion route.

 

 

 

In particular, I am very confident that this survey reflects fan opinion on the core questions which are being reported in the media of supporting/opposing a 10 team top league and whether fans feel consulted or not. Weighting the data in favour of SPL fans would not make a material difference on these issues as opinion on these two key measures was not impacted by the level at which their team played. Therefore any perceived over-representation of SFL fans views in the overall figure quoted becomes pretty much irrelevant. This was reinforced when analysing the additional comments where SPL fans ââ?¬â?? including many Rangers and Celtic fans - were as likely to use the additional comments section to express their opposition to a top league of 10 as supporters of SFL clubs.[/color']

 

RCC were assisted in the analysis by an academic who specialises in this field. One of the points he has made is that a football fan is a football fan no matter what club he supports ââ?¬â?? we were trying to present a collective Scottish fans view of the proposals. He rejects the assertion that SPL fans have a greater right to comment on matters concerning the SPL because their clubs are in the SPL wrong for a number of reasons

 

a. The sample including 59% of SPL club fans could be said to be representative (there are all kinds of problems with defining what a fan is, so lets not go there). If the SFL respondents are likewise representative then we might expect that the largest number of them support the teams most likely to be promoted to the SPL. So there is an interest there ââ?¬â?? for the majority there is a realistic prospect of getting to the SPL, maybe not this season but soon.

 

b. The issue of 10 team leagues is not only a matter only for the SPL ââ?¬â?? it applies just as much to the SFL ââ?¬â?? its not just that St Johnstone donââ?¬â?¢t want to play St Mirren four times, but that Annan donââ?¬â?¢t want to play East Stirling four times. I cant see any reason why the sense of boredom that has been identified from the comments left by respondents wont come from SFL just as much as SPL (just for the record, it would be possible to link specific comments to specific respondents and who they support, but it would be quite complex as well)

 

c. Reverting to my previous argument, if we consider the respondents as ââ?¬Å?fansââ?¬Â who support clubs who happen to be at particular levels at this time (e.g. 10 years ago, I would have registered as SFL, now its Junior, but thatââ?¬â?¢s football for you), then I really donââ?¬â?¢t see any argument for treating them differently.

 

I have obtained these comments to answer some of the issues raised but personally I am not qualified to comment further.

[rbr 1,247]

The issue of 10 team leagues is not only a matter only for the SPL – it applies just as much to the SFL – its not just that St Johnstone don’t want to play St Mirren four times, but that Annan don’t want to play East Stirling four times. I cant see any reason why the sense of boredom that has been identified from the comments left by respondents wont come from SFL just as much as SPL (just for the record, it would be possible to link specific comments to specific respondents and who they support, but it would be quite complex as well)

 

So there we have it the tail wagging the dog again , sorry but I dont give a 4x for Annan or East Stirling , you cannot please everyone , and by going to a 16 team league every team would be just over �£1million down , great start not , if this extended league get,s even a hint of approval we are as well just switching the lights off

[Zappa 0]

16 team leagues

 

Belgian

Greek

Portuguese

Russian

Ukrainian

Polish

Czech

Swedish

Hungarian

Croatian

Bosnian-Herzegovinian

Israeli

Bulgarian

Norwegian

Serbian

 

 

10 team leagues

 

Swiss

Georgian

Irish (ROI)

Faroese (Faroe Islands)

Estonian

Slovenia

Latvia

Malta

Lithuania

 

 

Q - Any visible pattern?

 

A - Most of the 16 team leagues are good while most of the 10 team leagues are shite.

[Super_Ally 0]

Interesting info their zappa. Personally (and I know we sort of touched on this before) would be to look at the populations of the various countries and see if there is any statistical significance there between the groups. I definitely think that a countries population must to some extent have a bearing on it's ability to sustain a larger number of top clubs.

[rbr 1,247]

Brilliant , move to 16 teams and before you know it Raith Rovers will be playing like Benfica , or Anderlecht , right on brother pass the spliff

[Zappa 0]

Brilliant , move to 16 teams and before you know it Raith Rovers will be playing like Benfica , or Anderlecht , right on brother pass the spliff

 

All of the 16 team leagues have teams who are relegation fodder rbr. I don't really see your point because nobody is saying the smaller clubs would be league title contenders.

[Stimpy 0]

What are the main objectives on changing the current format?

 

Is it to bring more money in or improve the standard of the game?

 

I don't see either dong that. I would agree change is required but I'd rather see all this effort put into getting kids back into the game. The SFA should be setting up a school of excellence, moving into schools to coax the kids out of their fancy computer chairs and play the game.