Can Someone Other Than Celtic Win The Title?

[AberdeenAngus]

All of which is irrelevant to the argument that the clubs should decide their future and not let the Old Firm (+Aberdeen) say what goes.

Do you have any proof that this is the case? What have Aberdeen and Celtic voted to block which all the other 10 wanted? I would be much more inclined to see this as a big issue if there was something to argue about rather than the structure itself.

You have a personal shopping list for gate sharing and playing each other twice but that won't necessarily be the view of quite a few clubs on top of the 3 you mention which goes back to the issue that there is no one size fits all solution which would get backed by a majority of clubs.

If those 3 clubs are the only problem why don't the 39 resign and kick the 3 out and start their own set up?

We have just got everyone back under 1 league structure which is a start of sorts. Still plenty to do including ensuring that the voting structure is a fair as it can be for all clubs. Push the bigger clubs too far and they'll resign and take others with them and we'll keep going round in circles.

I actually think things have moved on a bit in the last year with plays offs, parachute payments and the top clubs getting a smaller slice of the cake which shows that the clubs did all work together to get there. Hopefully there will be further positive changes but it is likely to be piecemeal.

Of course there was the somewhat strange proposal to go for an 8-8-8 split which the 11/1 voting rule stopped due to Ross County and St Mirren being against so it can work against bigger clubs too.

[Redz]

Wasting your breath AA.

They (not necessarily Adam) desperately want to believe AFC fuked it up for everybody.

I'd just let them.......

[adamntg]

I have no axe to grind with Aberdeen. I just don't see any rational argument for persisting with 11-1 with all these what-if positions AA is putting forward.

[AberdeenAngus]

Wasting your breath AA.

They (not necessarily Adam) desperately want to believe AFC fuked it up for everybody.

I'd just let them.......

Aye true.

[Redz]

I have no axe to grind with Aberdeen. I just don't see any rational argument for persisting with 11-1 with all these what-if positions AA is putting forward.

I don't think we're (Gus, you, me) disagreeing. It's perception, or in some cases wanting 'it' to be.

The point I am trying (poorly) to make is that if it was that cut and dried the West Coast media would have had an all out assault on everything AFC. (don't you think?)

At the moment (wanton) perception and speculation suits a number of individuals who really know fuk all........

[ShedTA]

Wasting your breath AA.

They (not necessarily Adam) desperately want to believe AFC fuked it up for everybody.

I'd just let them.......

I don't think afc fuked us up, remains to be seen if Milne did by voting with Celtic.

[adamntg]

Can we turn it round? What is a good argument for allowing two clubs to be able to veto change? How can that be good for all or democratic?

[Redz]

Can we turn it round? What is a good argument for allowing two clubs to be able to veto change? How can that be good for all or democratic?

Morning - It's a valid point, if it is indeed that simple. I guess (and I can see why) AFC (and Celtic) wanted weighting applied to the level of change and others didn't. We can call that self interest all day long but it works both ways.

Not sure what the answer is Adam. There is a lack of trust (with good reason) when big decisions are to be made however.

Gus has made some valid points, in fact most dandies on here have over time.

At the end of the day its fashionable to blame AFC. Unfortunately there is very little we (AFC) can do about that.

Merry Christmas, have a good one!

[Redz]

I don't think afc fuked us up, remains to be seen if Milne did by voting with Celtic.

My point with regards to the media and our fans going tonto still stands, Shed.

Neither did, and to be fair it's only raised on here (mostly) for a reaction.

I really do not know all the facts, or what the answer is. I'm not aware of anyone on the tamb who actually does.

Have a good one!

[dipped flake]

Can we turn it round? What is a good argument for allowing two clubs to be able to veto change? How can that be good for all or democratic?

it would actually be 3 clubs that would have to veto change with a 10-2 voting structure. The whole idea of changing it is to stop celtic and the rangers being able to veto something they don't like. Every fan I know wants the vote changed but the big clubs, not just celtic/rangers are worried they could be made to share gates and lose out

[ShedTA]

Morning - It's a valid point, if it is indeed that simple. I guess (and I can see why) AFC (and Celtic) wanted weighting applied to the level of change and others didn't. We can call that self interest all day long but it works both ways.

Not sure what the answer is Adam. There is a lack of trust (with good reason) when big decisions are to be made however.

Gus has made some valid points, in fact most dandies on here have over time.

At the end of the day its fashionable to blame AFC. Unfortunately there is very little we (AFC) can do about that.

Merry Christmas, have a good one!

Fashionable to blame AFC? Makes a change from utd and Stephen Thomson I guess!!

You too merry christmas.

[deecie]

it would actually be 3 clubs that would have to veto change with a 10-2 voting structure. The whole idea of changing it is to stop celtic and the rangers being able to veto something they don't like. Every fan I know wants the vote changed but the big clubs, not just celtic/rangers are worried they could be made to share gates and lose out

I can understand why AFC would be 100% against gate sharing.

Our last 4 home games (Celtic aside) the away crowd has been:

142, 115, 178 and 113. That's 548 fans in total.

The crowd for each of those games was around 11,000.

At £24 a ticket, they'd be giving away the best part of £100k per game. It's just never going to happen.

[AberdeenAngus]

I can understand why AFC would be 100% against gate sharing.

Our last 4 home games (Celtic aside) the away crowd has been:

142, 115, 178 and 113. That's 548 fans in total.

The crowd for each of those games was around 11,000.

At £24 a ticket, they'd be giving away the best part of £100k per game. It's just never going to happen.

Of course it won't.

Doesn't happen anywhere else.

[min]

I can understand why AFC would be 100% against gate sharing.

Our last 4 home games (Celtic aside) the away crowd has been:

142, 115, 178 and 113. That's 548 fans in total.

The crowd for each of those games was around 11,000.

At £24 a ticket, they'd be giving away the best part of £100k per game. It's just never going to happen.

Last season, 2013-14, was the first time this century that the average crowd at Pittodrie was higher than the average for the top flight as a whole. AFC would almost always benefit (slightly) from splitting the gate - most other teams would benefit to a greater extent... although there would be one (or two) obvious exceptions.

Splitting the gate would be a great leveller that's bound to create a more competitive league.

[scoobydoo]

I can understand why AFC would be 100% against gate sharing.

Our last 4 home games (Celtic aside) the away crowd has been:

142, 115, 178 and 113. That's 548 fans in total.

The crowd for each of those games was around 11,000.

At £24 a ticket, they'd be giving away the best part of £100k per game. It's just never going to happen.

Putting aside the fact that no one in their right mind would want to go to aberdeen you have to look at the fact that aberdonians are so desperate to get away from their shithole of a city and it's ugly wimmen that they go to away games and the club would actually get money back, if gate sharig was in effect.

Typical aberdonian no voting tory only thinking about himself.

Edited December 24, 2014 by scoobydoo

[adamntg]

Without something done to allow competition Celtic will win the Scottish league forever. If Aberdeen and others are more interested in small differences in their own little pot of money then the game will eventually die of boredom.

Gate pooling and sharing happens in North American sports for the single reason that the yanks recognise that nobody wants to watch a sport with competition.

[deecie]

(abuse)

they go to away games and the club would actually get money back, if gate sharig was in effect.

(abuse)

So....why not let the away team keep the away ticket money then?

Hamilton can get the £3,000 they sell at Pittodrie and then Aberdeen can get £100k whenever we're down in Dundee

[adamntg]

So....why not let the away team keep the away ticket money then?

Hamilton can get the £3,000 they sell at Pittodrie and then Aberdeen can get £100k whenever we're down in Dundee

Sigh. Seems this kind of attitude is not reserved for the Old Firm after all.

[scoobydoo]

So....why not let the away team keep the away ticket money then?

Hamilton can get the £3,000 they sell at Pittodrie and then Aberdeen can get £100k whenever we're down in Dundee

The dense is strong with this one.

There are obvious costs to putting on a game in your home stadium which need to be borne by both sides, although exception should be made to the rule by the more neanderthal among the population. Maybe the money aberdeen get can be put to the reparations required to be done to dundee every time the tories visit.

[scoobydoo]

for Deecie.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reparation

[rep-uh-rey-shuh n]

• Synonyms
• Examples
• Word Origin

noun

1.

the making of amends for wrong or injury done:

reparation for an injustice.

2.

Usually, reparations. compensation in money, material, labor, etc., payable by a defeated country to another country or to an individual for loss suffered during or as a result of war.

3.

restoration to good condition.

4.

repair¹(def 7).

[deecie]

Sigh. Seems this kind of attitude is not reserved for the Old Firm after all.

Not really.

Aberdeen have put a lot of effort into getting more people through the door, why shouldn't we get the "benefit" from it?

In the last 20 years we've just about broken even while being 'best of the rest' only once and picking up a single trophy, yet somehow Scottish Football can be improved by halfing our biggest income stream.

Aye, alright.

[scoobydoo]

who said 50-50?

[ShedTA]

Not really.

Aberdeen have put a lot of effort into getting more people through the door, why shouldn't we get the "benefit" from it?

In the last 20 years we've just about broken even while being 'best of the rest' only once and picking up a single trophy, yet somehow Scottish Football can be improved by halfing our biggest income stream.

Aye, alright.

I know but we need a mind set change mate. The league needs to be evened up for all clubs so that we can breed some sort of real competition. Ed need to be thinking as a league, not as a club. But you are right, will never happen sadly.

[deecie]

I know but we need a mind set change mate. The league needs to be evened up for all clubs so that we can breed some sort of real competition. Ed need to be thinking as a league, not as a club. But you are right, will never happen sadly.

This x10000.

I just can't see any way in which sharing gates is workable. It took 20 years for the Dons to finally pay off the debt racked up building the corporate facilities, for Ross County and their Lego Stadium to then be welcome to any portion of it is completely unacceptable.

Anyway, i'm off for Christmas now. I'll be back and unreasonable come the 28th.

Hope you have a good one

[ShedTA]

This x10000.

I just can't see any way in which sharing gates is workable. It took 20 years for the Dons to finally pay off the debt racked up building the corporate facilities, for Ross County and their Lego Stadium to then be welcome to any portion of it is completely unacceptable.

Anyway, i'm off for Christmas now. I'll be back and unreasonable come the 28th.

Hope you have a good one

and you deecie.