Leaderboard

Shit, I'll come on Sportsound if you want. Can't do any worse than some of the numpties that have been on

Ha ha, not on this occasion! It was aimed at the article writers, who are essentially putting out unquestioned PR, I suspect leaked from one of the two cheeks. However, I would absolutely include the number one broadcaster in my criticism. Doncaster has appeared on radio Scotland numerous occasions and never been adequately questioned. It almost always concentrates on a single small issue rather than the bigger picture of Scottish football. To the extent that things like league construction become an abstract concept that focuses on a number. You might as well ask a group of fifty kids what their favourite number is out of 10, 12, 14 or 16 and just go with the most popular. The format of the league in and of itself is largely irrelevant. Given that this is the fortieth anniversary of two teams solely winning our league - the worst period in Scottish football, if measured by sport - maybe you could write an article discussing the problem? If you were critical enough, and direct enough, then it might start some discussion. Do you think it would, hypothetically? Or do you think it would simply be brushed off (it's just the way it is, look at countries X, Y and Z) for tedious discussion about VAR or the Huns new manager? I think the latter. The point I was originally making is that fairness doesn't even seem to be a consideration by those that are paid to regularly discuss our game on the BBC (radio. Other broadcasters are exempt from criticism as they actively pursue the inequality as their business model). They don't see it as integral, when it should be the number one consideration. They should be discussing it every single week, and planning how to reduce the staggering inequality. Yet, it isn't even acknowledged as a problem. It's like some natural phenomenon that just happens, controlled by the gods. We can't even name the problem. Numerous discussions go by about the state of the game, or the state of the national side, but inequality has not once been pinpointed as the single greatest problem that underpins the rest. Which it undeniably is. Does it not seem ridiculous to you as someone who writes about the game that league reconstruction is being mooted without recourse to fairness? I think the answer is that it doesn't seem ridiculous, because fairness is so far removed from discourse that it would actually seem weird to hear it being discussed. My preference would be a 16 team league, so that we reduce the number of scum games per season and so that can never again be used as to strong arm clubs that apparently require the blue/green pound. It would also prevent TV companies from holding us to ransom in a similar vein. Thus, it would be targeting fairness first. I think 30 games is perfect, we could ditch three shitey midweek fixtures. However, if clubs require it, then create playoffs for European and relegation places. Second to fifth play off for European spots, and eleventh to fourteenth for third relegation. Teams in sixth to tenth have a set of playoffs designed to give young players a chance, with four youth players required in each starting eleven and two on the bench. Give it a promotional name like the youth presentation cup and get a sponsor. Fairness would come from the European spots being shared, with several teams given the opportunity to play champions league qualifying if Scotland has that route, and others given the opportunity to play Europa or conference. League winners could be given the opportunity for a lucrative fixture elsewhere, or bask in their glory for a few weeks. There should be no monetary prizes for league placing, as these exacerbate inequality (and no player is playing, or trying harder, so that their club can win X amount more money). European prize money should be declared a product of the league itself - because it is - and captured by the SPFL and apportioned equally. Again, this would negate the unearned compounding effect of European qualification that ruins every league in Europe (bar the English, who have discovered that the difference between having £200M and £100M in spending has a lessening effect). The steps towards something like the above begin with those paid to represent our game actually discussing fairness. Every time Brendan Rogers is interviewed, don't say "Brendan, how was that for you today?", say "Brendan, you have eight fold the budget of your opponent today, do you think a three goal margin is enough at home?". Celtic are one goal off of a three goals per game average over an entire season. That is horrific and something to be ashamed of. It's not sport. That should be the default position of anyone paid to discuss the game in our country. If they're not interested in sport, not interested in fairness, then they shouldn't be on our national broadcaster. That shouldn't even be remotely controversial.

Exactly. They could actually just sell one of their stands to the Tims and show live coverage on a big screen every week, for those Tim fans that can't get tickets. Or perhaps bring their children up as Tims, because in twenty years time they might be able to offer them four stands and then they could buy another two or three players. It's amazing what you can spend your money on when you swallow all your principles.