Talk:British Football League

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Northern Ireland This article is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the assessment scale.If you are a member of the project, please rate the article and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

The 'English' league system was originally meant to be a British-wide system.

It was also supposed to be amateur. This is a pretty poor argument for. The Football League wasnt even the only league in England for a while in the 1800s.

The smaller Welsh, Scottish and Northern Irish league systems are not financially viable as independent bodies.

Im not an economist but they have managed to last for about a dozen decades so far.

unsigned comment by 82.41.85.237.

Yes, but they are arguments, not facts, both points can be argued for or against. That's the entire point Grunners 10:39, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] References?

Are there any references to back this article up? Who can the arguments be attributed to? If there is no attribution it looks like original work or a POV. I had a brief look on the web for "British Football League" and found nothing useful. Is the name commonly used or is it just a British football league that the article is about? Also, I wouldn't say Australia and New Zealand have a 'joint league system', it's more a case of New Zealand having a franchise in the top Australian league. --ThirdEdition 05:52, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

I have to say this looks to me 100% like original research. I have never heard of any serious proposals to merge the Scottish and Welsh leagues into the English league. Everything in this article seems like pure speculation and the thoughts of the original writer..... ChrisTheDude 10:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
100% agree. In fact this looks like an AfD candidate. Anyone else any thoughts? - fchd 12:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
All of the proposals mentioned (pan-UK league, pan-British Isles league, merged League Cups, end-of-season mini-competition, etc) have been proposed in all seriousness, hence the sources cited. That it is proposed justifies an article, even if it doesn't explain the list of arguments.
On the arguments, I also disagree. The debate is fully in the public arena (particularly in Scotland) and the pros and cons are all well-rehearsed. If the only problem is the lack of sources for the individual arguments for or against, that can easily be remedied. An unsuitable 'remedy' is to delete an article because one doesn't like a few lines of it. Bastin8 17:27, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
The first three references look at merged League Cups and the like, and the fourth doesn't seem to make any reference to any Anglo-Scottish-Welsh-Irish competition at all. I say at best a proposed British league is worth one sentence on the Premiership/SPL/LoW pages. - fchd 17:36, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I didn't check to see which references I used; now that I have, I agree that they don't refer directly to a British league. Nonetheless, only someone living under a rock could claim that there have been no proposals for a British league, hence it is ridiculous to claim that it is OR. One minute on Google gave me these two results: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/1385062.stm http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/sport.cfm?id=307202004. Bastin8 17:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)


I don't think there has ever been a serious proposal to merge the home nations' leagues - the only proposals have come from the Old Firm pairing wanting a bigger slice of the cake and putting pressure on the other Scottish clubs before any tv deal negotiations. One of the two links you provide are exactly that and the other is a chairman spouting for a British Cup. Hardly conclusive proof there. Blogdroed 21:39, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Football League reference

I'm going to remove the bit about the Football League originally intended to be U.K.-wide. In "The Story of the Football League" from 1938, there is a passage from a letter sent from William McGregor of 2nd March 1888 to the prominent clubs of the day, where the proposal includes the quote "ten or twelve of the most prominent clubs in England combine to arrange home and away fixtures each season". If anyone comes up with any evidence that the league was originally intended to be U.K.-wide, please speak up. - fchd 08:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ireland

"A single football league for the whole of the British Isles, including the Republic of Ireland, has also been proposed; for example, in the 1990s, Wimbledon F.C. almost moved to Dublin, whilst remaining in the Football League." - this action wouldn't have created a single league for the whole of the British Isles, it would have just meant there was one team in the English league who happened to be based in Ireland. I suspect the Scottish, Northern Irish and Irish leagues would have continued quite happily and unaffected by this move, if it had happened.... ChrisTheDude 13:07, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

also ... I take issue with the line Wimbledon F.C. almost moved to Dublin - that is nonsense - it was mooted by the Wimbledon chaiman, Sam Hamman, but was never a serious proposal and never a serious possibility. Blogdroed 21:41, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
For all the above reasons I have removed the paragraph completely from the article ChrisTheDude 10:38, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] TNS

You are wrong to state that The New Saints F.C. was formed by a merger between a Welsh club and an English club as Oswestry Town, despite being based in England, have always been members of the Football Associatio of Wales . —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blogdroed (talkcontribs)

Even overlooking that fact the statement is completely factually incorrect, as TNS only "absorbed" Oswestry Town in 2003 but had been in existence since the 1950s and called TNS since 1997!!!! ChrisTheDude 08:06, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Nonsense

Is it me or is this whole article nonsense. There has never been a serious proposal to create a single "British" Football League, so why is there an article devoted to it?—Preceding unsigned comment added by Drc79 (talkcontribs)

Because it's interesting? Because people unfamiliar with football might wonder why there isn't a British football league? I'm sure there are more good reasons. - MTC 06:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
It's POV at its very worst MTC - if there are more reasons why couldn't you think of any? The article is riddled with errors and by correcting the erors the whole article falls apart. Blogdroed 10:44, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Actually, the 'English' league was originally set up to be British, hence the inclusion of several Welsh tems. Only disapproval of 'cross-border' leagues from FIFA/UEFA stopped it. Grunners 17:41, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

No it wasn't - see my message above which quotes from William McGregor's original aims of the Football League. FIFA & UEFA weren't formed until decades later. - fchd 17:55, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Also "the 'English' league was originally set up to be British, hence the inclusion of several Welsh tems" makes it sound as if Welsh teams were in it from the start, when in fact no Welsh teams joined until 1920, nearly 40 years after the league was formed..... ChrisTheDude 20:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
You're only counting the Football League, rather than the entire English system. Cardiff City, Newport County, and Swansea City were in the Southern League, which fed into the Football League (and became the Third Division South in 1920). Those three afore-mentioned clubs have taken part in the English league system since they were founded. Hence, the objection to them being in the Football League wasn't that they were Welsh (and therefore ineligible until the Football League changed its minds in 1920), but because they weren't good enough (and therefore had to wait until the Football League expanded). Bastin 20:52, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Travel costs

This isn't listed among the arguments against but for me it would be the biggest one. What if Aberdeen and Plymouth were to end up in the same division? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jodamu (talkcontribs) 15:14, 25 December 2006 (UTC).

Well, using that example, they have to travel 618 Miles. Compare to the 1,606 Miles the Kansas City Chiefs of the NFL travel to play the San Diego Chargers in their division. - MichiganCharms 00:26, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
The most extreme example is almost certainly FC Luch-Energia Vladivostok, who play in the same division (the Russian Premier League) as FC Zenit Saint Petersburg. That's over 4,000 miles. Each way. In fact, their 'local derby' is against FC Tom Tomsk - a staggering 2,233 miles away. Chiefs and Pilgrim fans can thank their lucky stars they don't support Vladivostok. Bastin 01:00, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
To use another North American sport as an example... this years Stanley Cup final pitted the Anaheim Ducks against the Ottawa Senators, exactly 2790 miles. Add to that potential matchups of as much as 3495 miles (Vancouver and Miami) with at least 3 other 3,000 mile plus matchups. That's the norm in American sports... for a long time Atlanta was in a division with Seattle in a couple major sports here. -MichiganCharms 17:56, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Even in a small country like Portugal, CS Marítimo (from Funchal in Madeira) and SC Braga have to travel more than 700 miles to play each other in the BWINLIGA. The distance is even greater for Azores teams playing in the lower levels. Jcmo 10:08, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Anyway, coming back to the original issue raised by Jodamu, just because one WP user thinks that distance/travel costs would be the biggest issue doesn't mean it should go in the article. Only if a reliable source states that travel costs would be the biggest barrier to a British league can it be included in the article as an "argument against". This would apply irrespective of whether other leagues endure greater distances between teams without issue.... ChrisTheDude 10:23, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

True, Chris. But none of the other arguments against seem to have any "reliable sources" backing them up either. To be honest, I think the whole article is a bit silly. Jodamu 22:41, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

  • I agree wholeheartedly, I've been an opponent of this article for ages but have never gotten round to nominating it for deletion as I can't decide what the most significant problem with it is upon which to base the nomination.... ChrisTheDude 07:04, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] European Superleague

Should there not be an article on a potential European League. For some years this has been a very real prospect, and seems more likely to happen now than any sort of British League. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lord Cornwallis (talkcontribs) 21:18, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

If you can source any concrete information to at least two Reliable Sources, feel free to come up with such an article. All I've heard is speculation that "It may happen one day". - fchd (talk) 21:54, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Format

The format looks a bit strange at the moment, with the two sections on Arguments For and Arguments Against, which make it sound more like a debate rather than an encycopedic article, perhaps they could be merged into one section called 'Merits' or something where the respective cases are discusses in paragraph format rather than as a series of bullet points Lord Cornwallis (talk) 18:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)