or to join or start a new Discussion

Articles/all comments
These 19 comments are related to an article called:

The dominance of the Old Firm

Page 1 of 1

posted on 8/6/11

Curry pies are best heated in the oven, in the microwave the go soggy.

posted on 8/6/11

Curry pies are best heated in the oven, in the microwave the go soggy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

There was me thinking this place could be different

posted on 8/6/11

This is a funny one to did Kilmarnock not beat Real Madrid in either the 50s or 60s? Thought I herd that on the football years a while back not sure though?

posted on 8/6/11

In order to close the financial gap the old firm would need to be prepared to accept a change in the distribution of income amongst spl clubs. That would be like turkeys voting for xmas.

posted on 8/6/11

Teams like Hearts/Hibs and Dundee/Dundee Utd need to merge. Neither of those cities have a big enough fan base to support two clubs.

posted on 8/6/11

Over the last couple of weeks I have been talking with a couple of friends, both big Man Utd fans about the Champions League final. Both worried about Barca's dominance and if Man Utd would win the thing again soon.

It must be a terrible worry...

I reminded them that the team I support has played in two European Cup finals, both before I was born and unless there was a major change in the way football is run and governed then it was very unlikely I would ever get see my team in the Champions League final.

For better or worse football has changed dramatically over the years, even since the early-mid eighties when Dundee Utd and Aberdeen had great runs in Europe (and less not forget, good as they were they were giant killing runs and not to be expected).

Such is way football has changed some of those Aberdeen and Dundee Utd European games were not even shown live. Amazing to think, isn't it?

Anyway, we all want live football now on our TV. I have the full Sky Sports HD package and watch at least five live games a week during the season (and if I'm honest this can be a lot more) and I would hate to have this reduced or taken away. However the TV money which now washes over football has changed it forever.

Football used to go in cycles, teams would dominate for a while and then wouldn't but the way the finance of football now works this is less likely to happen or at least to the same amount it used to.

So while I have a chuckle at the Man Utd fans worried they may not win the Champions League again for a few years I am sure there are many Scottish Football non Old Firm fans having a chuckle at us Celtic fans bemoaning that haven’t won the league for three years.

But what are we to do? A dip in form at the Old Firm means a dip in attendances and the longer this goes on the lower they go and more our boards get worried. We have financial clout over all of the other teams in the league by some distance so unless some Arabian prince realises he has always been a Motherwell fan then I cannot see it changing anytime soon.

posted on 8/6/11

In order to close the financial gap the old firm would need to be prepared to accept a change in the distribution of income amongst spl clubs. That would be like turkeys voting for xmas.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
100% Agree so here is a slightly different idea:

Instead of clubs rearing their own talent why don't we have a national training centre for all elite promising young footballers where they can go from 13 to 18. Here they would receive good education as well as specialised intensive football training. The costs would be met by the SFA and agreed percentage of turnover contributed by each member club of the SPL.

We then have a draft system in place in that the bottom club gets the best young player as first pick, 2nd bottom the second best player etc. They would go to the club with a fixed contract but could be sold after 12 months if that member club chooses to do so.

On its own it would not make a significant difference but it could be a step in the right direction.

posted on 8/6/11

Merge?!? You having a laugh. Admittedly crowds at United aren't great but how can you expect 2 rival teams to merge??

The problem with the fan base of clubs outwith the old firm is that too many people in towns and cities outwith of Glasgow support one of the old firm. I know some will support a club because of family connections etc but others will do so based on the fact that they are successful. Look at the amount of people you see walking round wearing Chelsea tops compared to a decade ago as another example of this!!

comment by polloks (U2971)

posted on 8/6/11

From the war until celtic started 9 a row in 1966 was the most competetive time

although Rangers dominated winning 10 titles and lifting the treble twice



Rangers won it in 1947,1949,1950,1953,1956,19571959,1961,1963,1964
Hibis won it in 1948,1951,1952
Celtic in 1954
Aberdeen in 1955
Hearts in 1958,1960
Dundee 1962
Kilmarnock 1965


nothing like that will happen ever again though no matter what the plan is

posted on 8/6/11

If competitiveness does not come back into our game then domestic competition will die to be replaced with some sort of european super league. TV will rule the playing of fixtures and the set up of any such competition.

Whilst in other leagues teams dominate it is not to the same level as it is in Scotland. Comparisons with the Dutch, Swedish, Norwegian and Portugese leagues show whilst titles are evenly spread between 2 or 3 big clubs it is not the same level of dominance as in Scotland.

I also think this continued dominance only heightens the rivalry between the OF which in some way perpetuates the sectarian problem that clearly exists.

posted on 8/6/11

There might be a case for the Dundee teams merging ( they almost did a few years back: Would have been called Dundee United City and would have worn Orange and Black - some 'merger'!) but surely Edinburgh is big enough to support 2 teams as it has a bigger population than Liverpool or Sheffield?

BrotherYoung 84, Kilmarnock beat Eintracht in the 60s, Real's opponents at the 1960 Hampden European Cup Final.

If we go back to a 10 team league we'll never do anything in Europe again. Better to have a 14 team top division so that young players can be 'blooded' in so-called 'meaningless games.

posted on 8/6/11

"nothing like that will happen ever again though no matter what the plan is"

Why not?

In comparison with Norway, we hold up quite well. I think Rosenburg have won the title 13 out of the last 14 seasons. At least we have two teams competing.

I still don't see what the difference between a 12-team league and a 14-team league is, unless there is going to be two relegation spots.

OP - as you point out, this has always been the way in Scottish football. So why do you think this on-going trend will destroy Scottish football if it continues?

posted on 8/6/11

West coast don

It is the scale of the domination now that concerns me, it hasn't always been at this level at the top of the league. Look at the following stats:

1890 -1904

5 non OF champions and on 4 occasions a non OF runners up.

1904-1931 - The longest period of dominance.

No non OF champions obviously but on 14 occasions the runner up was a non-OF team.

1931-1965

9 non OF Champions and 17 non OF runners up.

1965-1985

4 non OF champions and 7 non OF runners up.

1985-1998

Again no non OF Champions but 9 non OF runners up.

1998 to present

Again no non OF Champions and 1!!!!!!!! non OF runners up.

On top of that if you look at two of the periods, 1931 - 1965 and 1965-1986 you will see an amazing stat. In the first period Celtic were only champions on 3 occasions. In the second period Rangers were only champions on 3 occasions. That is a whole generation growing up only seeing there team win on a limited basis.

Whilst one of the OF have invariably been in the top 3 at least there has never been the concerted domination of the top two positions by the OF at any point and that continuation can not be healthy for the game.

comment by (U6568)

posted on 8/6/11

Hate to tell you this mate, but Elvis is dead.

comment by (U6568)

posted on 8/6/11

The size of the league won't make a difference to who wins the league.

Rangers or Celtic would win the league wether it was a 10, 12, 14, 16 or 18 team league.

The only difference would be how far ahead they would be of the rest of the teams.

posted on 8/6/11

Hate to tell you this mate, but Elvis is dead.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Elvis has left the building!!!!!! Permanently??

Just trying to engage in constructive debate, that is all

comment by jobby (U1454)

posted on 8/6/11

Change doesn't happen quickly enough in football IMO

I'd love to see an end to seeded draws for the Champions league and Europa league .It's even happening in world cup draws now ie.(Ireland v France play off).
Stick all the teams in a pot and draw them out.Surely this is the fairest way.

It's almost impossible for a team with a small buget to progress in European compitition these days.The rich get richer and the ever widening gulf in finances grows.

I'd also love to see a world wide football Salary cap to stop the big teams buying all the talent.This would make it a more of a level playing field and breed loyalty to your club.Instead of players chasing the ££££££s at the end of every season.

None of this will happen though.Unfortunately money talks and SKY has all the money.

comment by db (U5527)

posted on 8/6/11

In order to close the financial gap the old firm would need to be prepared to accept a change in the distribution of income amongst spl clubs.
-------------------------
People keep saying this and although every little helps, equal TV rights and ticket sales would not make a huge difference. Certainly not to a level that would make Kilmarnock or Hibs title challengers.

The fact is Rangers and Celtic sell 10 of thousands of season tickets and have wealthy owners who can spend millions at a time on players. Redistribution of TV rights would not really change this. Besides Rangers or Celtic feature on TV EVERY week, the others feature maybe once every 6 or 7 weeks if they're lucky, why therefore should they get the same money as Rangers and Celtic. The OF are the attraction for TV companies, they are the reason the SPL gets the (little) money it gets.

posted on 23/6/11

Howsabout, hibs and hearts, lower the price of their season tickets a bit, then fill their stadiums. The 2 clubs have a big enough support to do this, their respective chairmen spend a bit more money on their sqauds, and their managers believe they can win in glasgow. That last comment was espescially for JIM JEFFRIES, his teams are beat before they come to Celtic park or Ibrox.

Page 1 of 1

Sign in if you want to comment