Clubs divided over future LOI format?

[bluemovie]

Waterford Utd were kept up in the Premier Division for a number of years due to other clubs issues, until they finally went down in 2007.

On a point of order, that happened once. In 2006, we came 11th in the Premier, but were deemed less worthy of a position the following season than Galway who finished 3rd in the first division, had a swish DVD and were seen as a model of sustainability run by, at the time, the world's most famous white collar criminal. Then the Shelegation saw us reprieved with a fortnight's notice for 2007.

[bluemovie]

I've never in the past been in favour of one division (even in the years we've been in the First), but I have to agree with others here that it looks like if it doesn't happen by design, it will happen by default. We will go bust pretty soon. I don't think it's mismanagement. We're just not viable in the current set-up and though I wouldn't be familiar with their accounts, I presume Athlone, Harps, Wexford and Longford aren't really viable either. I think the likes of Bray and Dundalk would understand that they wouldn't be viable in the current First Division either.

Just speaking for myself, I can't bear this season (not saying this is a reason for change, but it might show how difficult it is to spark interest in the Graveyard). We ended up with 28 games - eight of which are against Galway junior league teams. I've given up trying to persuade people to go to matches. I can barely motivate myself even though our players are trying their best, winning games and playing decent football which is probably as much as you could ask. Basically, this season is being fought out between the 4th, 5th and 6th best teams from last season and there isn't so much as the novelty of a new team or a team relegated from the Premier. Next season, we could well be in the same division except without Limerick. Not sure would we then have 24 games or 30 (playing each team 5 times). In that scenario, we would definitely have to pull out of the league or face going bust.

As regards clubs being in the First because they are badly-run, I can't agree. We'd be out of it years ago if we were badly-run! The closest we came was finishing three points behind Derry in 2010 when our chairman did decide to put in a lot of his own money to get the likes of Liam Kearney, but Derry with McClean et al were just too strong for us. We've come up against some very strong promotion rivals - Dundalk after years down, Cork and Derry were always Premier Division-quality, now it's Limerick's (long overdue) turn to splash the cash. Remember, there was also a little club called Sporting Fingal who spent loads, took a promotion spot and went bust. Having experienced both relegation battles and pushes in the recent past, I think it's an awful lot easier to stay in the Premier than it is to get into it.

I've a feeling there won't be any change until a few more teams go bust and the surviving 14 or 16 teams will gave to be amalgamated into one division. Now we still have a shot at promotion (Harps, Athlone don't unfortunately for them) so, yes, we can earn promotion and leave the rest to rot in the First, but I genuinely think one division would be the best thing for the sustainability of most clubs.

[Dodge]

As regards clubs being in the First because they are badly-run, I can't agree

Clubs are struggling because they're badly run. Clubs are in the first division because the teams they put on the pitch weren't good enough to gain promotion.

[bluemovie]

Clubs are struggling because they're badly run. Clubs are in the first division because the teams they put on the pitch weren't good enough to gain promotion.

Not as good as teams like Sporting Fingal?

[ltfc_2004]

Its tough as each clubs interests are totally at odds with each other. Premier Division clubs do not and will not want a single division as there is more money from a second game against Rovers,Pats, Bohs than playing Longford, Athlone or Harps.

First Division clubs think its a panacea playing the big clubs as it will increase gate receipts, TV exposure etc but I imagine with a single division some players at smaller clubs would be looking for pay increases and would probably nullify any increase in gate money or prize money.

Its time all the clubs were honest enough to set out their financial positions in public as to exactly what debts they currently hold and what plans they have to repay it or extend it. The league is a joke at this stage every few months another club is due to hit the wall and go bust. Who is next after Monaghan ? Maybe three years of a joint division might allow clubs some breathing space to get their books in some kind of order and pay off historical debt. At the end of the three years 12 teams are placed in the Premier Division and the rest in the First along with what ever number of teams will be needed to make up another 10 or 12. The clubs would be judged fairly in advance on both financial criteria and average placings over three years and all teams signing up to partake in a single division would know the rules in advance as would fans and tough **** if you don't make the 12, you knew the rules when you signed up. I know people want things decided on the field of play but its in the leagues long term interest to have 12 sustainable teams in its premier division.

on a personal note and being selfish as I live in Dublin, it would be great as a Longford Town fan if there was one Division as I would get to a lot more games .................

[mypost]

Well, that's your view, and I doubt any amount of discussion will convince you otherwise. Just to reiterate though, while you continue to see this as clubs trying to shortcut their way to the PD, and effectively tell them to "earn it", they will go out of business. If you're a hardline free marketeer, you may well think, "good". But this isn't a free market. A FD with seven clubs is structurally hamstrung so that no club with a senior infrastructure could survive.

It is LOI football, it is a free market. If Waterford fold*, somebody else will take their place. That's what has happened every year since 1922.

For two rounds of games to be viable the FD would need to be expanded to sixteen clubs. I don't think this requires a line by line rebuttal to show that it is impossible and undesirable.

And as for taking July and August off, well, the FD clubs have already said it is the exact opposite they need. They don't even want the current short mid-season break as it is, as they lose income.

There is no point imo, of forcing clubs like Waterford to travel to Finn Harps in the middle of July. There is no point in forcing Finn Harps to travel to Wexford at the same time of year. They cover more kilometres than spectators. Attendances at lower league games in summer are never in 4 figures, some of them barely make it 3 figures. No club in the league has to play in Europe, so what are they playing in the holiday season for?

On a point of order, that happened once. In 2006, we came 11th in the Premier, but were deemed less worthy of a position the following season than Galway who finished 3rd in the first division, had a swish DVD and were seen as a model of sustainability run by, at the time, the world's most famous white collar criminal. Then the Shelegation saw us reprieved with a fortnight's notice for 2007.

We were deducted 8 points in 2005, and finished 11th. Waterford stayed up for 2006 as a result.

We've come up against some very strong promotion rivals - Dundalk after years down, Cork and Derry were always Premier Division-quality, now it's Limerick's (long overdue) turn to splash the cash.

Dundalk had to face the lower division for 6 years. Shels 5, Cork 2, Limerick for 10+. And the last two had to form new clubs over the years. If they can do it the hard way, so can Waterford.

on a personal note and being selfish, it would be great as I would get to a lot more games .................

.....and that is the whole argument here in a nutshell.

*I don't think they will. It's just the latest in a long line of "Waterford are going bust" claims made over the years. They're still here, and they will be next year.

[bluemovie]

We were deducted 8 points in 2005, and finished 11th. Waterford stayed up for 2006 as a result.

Again, check your facts! Waterford finished 8th out of 12 that season. If it hadn't been for Rovers' points deduction, Pats would've been in the play-off - although I'm sure they probably would have beaten Dublin City over two legs.

New teams will replace those who go bust? We've gone from 22 to 19 clubs in recent years and the newest entrants (Salthill and Mervue) are rumoured to be rethinking their position. If a seven team First Division gets the go-ahead, that would mean 12 home games per season. Either that or playing the Galway junior teams FIVE times each. There is no way that is sustainable for Waterford, Harps, Athlone, Longford or a relegated Dundalk. If you think Tralee, Cobh, Carlow, Fanad will replace them one-by-one, why have none of them been able to match the licensing criteria of even a Salthill or a Mervue yet?

[jinxy lilywhite]

Personally i think the 10 team league and a switch to 12 team then a switch back to 10 has been done to its death. with the amount of clubs remaining the only logical short term solution to a this problem is for a one division league for 3 season. In the interim the FAI, the clubs and supporters groups along with TV stakeholders thrash out the best possible course for the league to take for clubs to enter the league under licensing criteria, clubs forced to develop medium to long term viable strategy in areas of community development, ground developments, addressing debt issues and each club dedicated to improving the image of the league.

I find it laughable that some supporters are giving out about the likes of the lowers coming up and playing in the one division but i feel that actually in this day and age we all need each others support to survive. Some clubs claim they will lose gates, i disagree, i think that the current structure has saturated the market of dublin derby after dublin derby and i think if there are only 2 league one, it may infact increase those attended games. all clubs attendences are **** and anything diffferent would be more than welcome in my unqualified opinion but i think the likes of dundalk, pats, bohs, derry, cork, both rovers need the athlones, longfords, ucds, drogheda, harps, wexford and waterford as much as they need us

The magic bullet solution of course would be for all our county councils to develop our grounds and put us into untapped areas like rovers found themselves in.

[placid casual]

The magic bullet solution of course would be for all our county councils to develop our grounds and put us into untapped areas like rovers found themselves in.

congratulations on stumbling(no doubt accidentally) on the real reason why the league of ireland will never flourish.
Bitterness, Jealousy and me fein-ism.

god forbid anyone should see the bigger picture

[El-Pietro]

personally I would love if we had a 16 or 18 team division. One home and away against every team? yes please! magnifies those games. Only one trip to Dalymount a year? suddenly becomes a huge game that I won't want to miss. As things stand if I miss one I only have to wait a couple of months for the next trip.

Same for Tallaght, Tolka, Inchicore, the Brandywell, not so much the Showgrounds as I always have a miserable time there...

plus the one thing i miss from the first division is the away trips to places like Longford and Athlone. While I have no interest in going to Salthill or Mervue ever again, I'd love an annual trip to Galway to play at Terryland, Ballybofey, I wouldn't even mind going back to Gortakeegan so long as its only once a season. We got sick of playing them in the league cup on top of two league trips.

When we were last in the Premier it was a ten team league and we played Drogheda and Sligo something like 15 times combined between league cup and Setanta. It was insane. You get sick and tired of seeing the same clubs every month and a half.


edit: saying that - a situation without relegation can't be allowed to develop. Not for more than few years. Clubs need something to play for.

[Macy]

I still think some people are completely missing the context of the current situation. The argument for a single division has been floating around for 5 or 6 years, and there were pros and cons to that argument. However, we currently faced with the prospect of a 7 team division, with arguably only 5 sustainable clubs (arguable from the pov that 5 might too high!). Yes, I'd love to be playing the big teams, and have plenty of handy (for me) away games, but that is genuinely a side issue. I would rather earn promotion than be parachuted in.

[Dodge]

I still think some people are completely missing the context of the current situation.

To be fair, its just a debating shop. The argument wanders from 12/7 v 10/9 v 19 in a broader sense. The idea that clubs could die is, in my opnion, completely seperate as that can happen regardless of structure. fair enough you think its more closely linked than I do, but that doesn't mean all aras can't be discussed

Not as good as teams like Sporting Fingal?

Another example of a team dying in the premier division. As Monaghan, Dublin City, Cork and Derry have shown. (Shut up Derry and Cork fans, we all kow what happened)

[peadar1987]

Just throwing this out there, can anyone think of a way to give mid- to lower-table clubs something to fight for in the absence of relegation, without compromising the sporting integrity of the league (playoffs and the like?)

One thing I was thinking of is the American culture of awarding cups and prizes for individual games, sort of like the Calcutta Cup. Perhaps even if Athlone and Longford were out of the title race towards the end of the season, they might still fancy the chance to win the El Classico aggregate trophy (catchier name needed).

Edit: I've just realised that with 19 teams, there are (19*18)/2 potential two-legged ties, or 171 head-to-head cups to compete for. Probably so many that they'd lose all meaning.

[Real ale Madrid]

The fundamental issue of how much teams play players is ignored on most debates surrounding the Loi.
We pay players too much for what is essentally supposed to be an amateur league.

Another thing that always amazed me was the notion that you make more money on 18 home games a season rather than 15. Ignoring the fact that the importance of the games determines attendance in most cases. Personally I think the following might be a little off the wall - but might be worth a try. (similar to a previous thread)

2 x 10 team leagues
2 rounds of fixtures - meaning just 9 home games, 18 league games in Total.

Then the end of season play-off's :

1. Teams 1-4 play in the premier playoff for the Title of league champions - round robin, home and away. (the 18 league games could be carried forward in some way - In belgium they half the total number of points and round upwards e.g 34.5 = 35)

2. Teams 5-8 play for a chance to win a Europa league spot - round robin, home and away. The winner of this round robin group play's the 3rd place team in the championship play-off for the last remaining europa cup spot. ( home and away )

3.The teams placed 9 and 10 in the Premier play the 1st and 2nd team in the First division - round robin, home and away. Top 2 in this mini league earn promotion / stay in the premier.

4.Teams placed 3-6 in the first division playoff for a place in the Setanta Cup - this could be given here to incentivise the end of season.

5.Teams placed 7-10 playoff - round robin, home and away - the bottom team is relegated from the league. (An obvious problem is finding a way to feed into this division)

The big advantage I see in the system is that every single game is of vital importance. Every last one. Marketed correctly I think that 12 home games where every game is vital has the potential to make more money than if you play 18 home games and the last 5 - 8 games are dead rubbers.

A preseason type league cup league format would be a way of increasing the number of guarenteed home games - add in expanded Setanta cup and a 1st divison trophy ( like the old shield) and the season wouldn't even be all that short really.

Not everyone will agree, traditionalists will cower at the prospect of playoffs. But I think everyone agrees something radical needs to be done and quick.

[Dodge]

For the record I'd very much pro-play offs.

[pineapple stu]

We pay players too much for what is essentally supposed to be an amateur league.

The LoI isn't supposed to be an amateur league.

I don't know what anyone proposing a play-off system thinks it'll achieve. It's easy to say that we're a Big Occasion sporting nation, but if everything's a Big Occasion, that kind of falls in on itself. The problems with clubs is idiots running them, budgeting on income without it being confirmed. That's what needs to change for clubs to stop going broke, not play-offs.

I think years of seemingly random format tinkering has shown there isn't a magic solution to the public interest issue.

[El-Pietro]

the team that comes 5th potentially has a much easier shot of getting into europe than the team in 4th - and thats my problem with this layout

Say we take this season as an example, we'll assume the top 4 remains as Sligo, Pats, Drogs and Shamrock.

5th to 8th ends up as Derry City, Shelbourne, Cork City and Bohemian F.C.

If we take the current points totals and extrapolate them to a full (30 games) season then we get the following

1. Sligo Rovers - 64
2. Drogheda United - 51
3. St. Patricks Athletic - 51
4. Shamrock Rovers - 51
------------------------------
5. Derry City - 39
6. Bohemian FC - 36
7. Shelbourne - 35
8. Cork City - 34

Now in theory you have two very interesting play off stages between two sets of evenly matched teams. But the LOI gets 3 Europa League spots, and one of those is currently awarded to the FAI Cup winners.
So you would end up with Sligo as Champions, and one from St. Pats, Drogheda and Shamrock taking one Europa league spot with a second on offer to the highest placed team from the second set. Now the lowest of the top 4 finished 12 points clear of the highest of the second 4 in our example.

If you were in Shamrocks position around now, wouldn't you be better served by trying to drop into the second 4 to have in theory a better chance of getting into Europe? Even if you take the Europa league spot from the cup and give it to the top 4 teams you still end up with one team missing out.

What happens in a season where say Derry City have a total much closer to Shamrocks. Say they end of 49 points instead of 39. In the last few weeks of the season you have two teams on similar points totals in a situation where losing a game or two gives them a much better chance of getting into Europe as they would be playing off against much weaker opponents.

Of course this playoff system would work better if there were enough European spots for the top 4 plus the winner of the playoff for the second 4 without devaluing the FAI cup.

Perhaps you could resolve this by replacing Europe with the Setanta cup but right now it would appear that the Setanta just doesn't have the appeal (read: prize money)

[Real ale Madrid]

The LoI isn't supposed to be an amateur league.
.

Should the first division not be an amateur league though ?

I don't know what anyone proposing a play-off system thinks it'll achieve. It's easy to say that we're a Big Occasion sporting nation, but if everything's a Big Occasion, that kind of falls in on itself. The problems with clubs is idiots running them, budgeting on income without it being confirmed. That's what needs to change for clubs to stop going broke, not play-offs.

I think years of seemingly random format tinkering has shown there isn't a magic solution to the public interest issue.

There has been tinkering with the numbers of clubs - but nothing else really. Tinkering isn't what's needed anyway - the play-off systems I propose above, added to the major reduction in games is a completely new format, which has never been tried here before ( the spliting of the league in the mid 90's is completly different imo )

I'm not saying it will achieve anything - just postulating that it MIGHT bring in more revenue and it MIGHT reinvigorate the league. I think something like this is certainly worth a try and would be no worse than bundling in all 19 teams into 1 league.

Not every clubs have idiots running them - changes should be proposed to benefit those who are making a proper go of it.

Another point I forgot to mention earlier is I think it is easier to sell season tickets if the amount of games are reduced. Might be a more attractive to people.

[marinobohs]

the team that comes 5th potentially has a much easier shot of getting into europe than the team in 4th - and thats my problem with this layout

Say we take this season as an example, we'll assume the top 4 remains as Sligo, Pats, Drogs and Shamrock.

5th to 8th ends up as Derry City, Shelbourne, Cork City and Bohemian F.C.

If we take the current points totals and extrapolate them to a full (30 games) season then we get the following

1. Sligo Rovers - 64
2. Drogheda United - 51
3. St. Patricks Athletic - 51
4. Shamrock Rovers - 51
------------------------------
5. Derry City - 39
6. Bohemian FC - 36
7. Shelbourne - 35
8. Cork City - 34

Now in theory you have two very interesting play off stages between two sets of evenly matched teams. But the LOI gets 3 Europa League spots, and one of those is currently awarded to the FAI Cup winners.
So you would end up with Sligo as Champions, and one from St. Pats, Drogheda and Shamrock taking one Europa league spot with a second on offer to the highest placed team from the second set. Now the lowest of the top 4 finished 12 points clear of the highest of the second 4 in our example.

If you were in Shamrocks position around now, wouldn't you be better served by trying to drop into the second 4 to have in theory a better chance of getting into Europe? Even if you take the Europa league spot from the cup and give it to the top 4 teams you still end up with one team missing out.

What happens in a season where say Derry City have a total much closer to Shamrocks. Say they end of 49 points instead of 39. In the last few weeks of the season you have two teams on similar points totals in a situation where losing a game or two gives them a much better chance of getting into Europe as they would be playing off against much weaker opponents.

Of course this playoff system would work better if there were enough European spots for the top 4 plus the winner of the playoff for the second 4 without devaluing the FAI cup.

Perhaps you could resolve this by replacing Europe with the Setanta cup but right now it would appear that the Setanta just doesn't have the appeal (read: prize money)

.......... yep, thats what we need to heighten public interest - make it so complicated no one can understand it

Anyone remember the 5,4,3,2,1 points system one season ? Early 80's I think.

[Real ale Madrid]

the team that comes 5th potentially has a much easier shot of getting into europe than the team in 4th - and thats my problem with this layout

Say we take this season as an example, we'll assume the top 4 remains as Sligo, Pats, Drogs and Shamrock.

5th to 8th ends up as Derry City, Shelbourne, Cork City and Bohemian F.C.

If we take the current points totals and extrapolate them to a full (30 games) season then we get the following

1. Sligo Rovers - 64
2. Drogheda United - 51
3. St. Patricks Athletic - 51
4. Shamrock Rovers - 51
------------------------------
5. Derry City - 39
6. Bohemian FC - 36
7. Shelbourne - 35
8. Cork City - 34

Now in theory you have two very interesting play off stages between two sets of evenly matched teams. But the LOI gets 3 Europa League spots, and one of those is currently awarded to the FAI Cup winners.
So you would end up with Sligo as Champions, and one from St. Pats, Drogheda and Shamrock taking one Europa league spot with a second on offer to the highest placed team from the second set. Now the lowest of the top 4 finished 12 points clear of the highest of the second 4 in our example.

If you were in Shamrocks position around now, wouldn't you be better served by trying to drop into the second 4 to have in theory a better chance of getting into Europe? Even if you take the Europa league spot from the cup and give it to the top 4 teams you still end up with one team missing out.

What happens in a season where say Derry City have a total much closer to Shamrocks. Say they end of 49 points instead of 39. In the last few weeks of the season you have two teams on similar points totals in a situation where losing a game or two gives them a much better chance of getting into Europe as they would be playing off against much weaker opponents.
Of course this playoff system would work better if there were enough European spots for the top 4 plus the winner of the playoff for the second 4 without devaluing the FAI cup.

Perhaps you could resolve this by replacing Europe with the Setanta cup but right now it would appear that the Setanta just doesn't have the appeal (read: prize money)

The thing about the proposal above is the fact that there are only 18 league games in total which gives a lot less leeway for teams to open up big gaps on each other.

As for the notion that a team may wish to drop from 4th to 5th - well is it easier to finish 3rd in the top 4 playoff or win the 5 to 8 playoff - thats a matter of opinion - but I know which I'd rather have a crack off anyway.

Agreed about the euro spots but you could take the euro spot away from the FAI cup for example. There would be plenty of other tweaks as well id imagine.