Debate: Should there be a two-tier Premier League with no relegation?

Click here to read Martin Samuel's column in its entirety

Phil Gartside, the Bolton Wanderers chairman, wants a two-tier Premier League of 36 clubs with no relegation to the Football League. I think the meritocratic pyramid is the heart of football, and to lose it would be ruinous. “It is time for a debate,” Gartside said. So have one. Although you’ll be talking among yourselves for a while as I am on holiday next week. I’ll get involved on my return.

Two-tier Premier League with no relegation? Discuss.

Comments

[Ged]

What a load of tosh. What is actually required is measures to prevent the richest clubs buying their way to the top. If it wasn't for russian money Ken Bates would have had Chelsea in the 3rd division like Leeds by now, spot the connection?

Up to the end of the seventies any one from 12 to 15 clubs started the season with a sporting chance of winning it, and up to 10 could go down. Then the big city clubs started keeping the home gate money, and when that didn't take the championship to North London or Manchester on a regular basis, they grabbed the Sky shilling and came up with the Premier league. Then just to make sure that they creamed more money out of the game they changed the European Championship Trophy to the also-rans league. How else would Manchester United, who hadn't won the league for 30 years, get a look in, and even Newcastle who hadn't got a fan alive who had seen a league title won, dipped their bread in. Oh and by the way they started the nineties hanging on by their finger tips to the second division with an average gate in the low 20,000s.

Two tier premier, no promotion? Ask the Derby, Nottingham, Sheffield, Leeds, Wolverhampton, Birmingham, Manchester, Blackburn, Fulham, Leicester, Hull and yes even Bolton fans who have 3rd division in recent history, how they would feel if the door had been closed behind them.

I remember laughing at Wimbledon turning up on a wet Wednesday night with 50 odd fans for a 1st division game, and I take no pleasure in remembering it given the way things turned out for them. Long may the "little" teams have their chance.

The clubs belong to the fans and the communities not here today, gone tomorrow ego mad chairmen like this prat.

[Dan Pettinger]

There are two issues here, no relegation and a two tier Premier League. The no relegation idea would be terribly damaging for the sport, with any number of consequences. You could end up with teams being thrashed by everyone else for consecutive seasons with no-where to regroup themselves as the Championship does now. Teams with a rich history (like for example Leeds Utd) would never be able to return to the top flight, although some would say this wouldn't be a bad thing, I would disagree entirely. The reverse will be true as well, no more wonderful league runs that Hull City are currently putting on. The Championship would fall by the wayside and it would be impossible to return to the current system after a few seasons, because the gap between the new system and the Championship would be too great. Phil Gartside has probably been plotting this in a darkened room in front of a large blazing fireplace for thirty years, "Now my Bolton are in the top flight, and they will stay here... Forever!..... Mwa ha ha ha ha..."

The two tier system would make the league a little less competitive I think, giving an additional 16 teams for the big four to thrash, but it could be workable with the right financial support. There is no real reason to change the structure of the Premier League anyway, If the dominance of the big four is seen as a problem, then there are better ways of dealing with it.

[Josh Dickson]

Can't really see much reason for a debate here mate. You simply can't take Relegation away; not as a conservative reaction but as a fair one. It makes the league competitive. Mind you, if it did go, who would wanna be stuck with Bolton permanently?!

[Rob]

What purpose, other than the financial protection of clubs like, well, Bolton, would a two-tier Premiership serve?

None, clearly, and, as with the 39th game, there is little or no pretence that the intention of the plan is to make money for the chosen few.

But Gartside is missing something; the millions around the world who watch the Premier League, who pour money into the pockets of Gartside's club and others, they all choose to do so. No-one is forced to watch English football, and it's not as though there's a lack of choice.

Consumers will always lean towards a product they appreciate above all rival products, for whatever reason. But just because a consumer has chosen a product, the producer cannot presume they will stick to that choice indefinitely. The product has to maintain all of its initial qualities to continue to attract custom.

By changing the nature of the Premier League, Gartside would make it profoundly less interesting, less competitive, and, with many clubs having no fear to motivate improvement, even less equitable than it is now. If there is far less for a club like Bolton to play for, why should they continue to provide a real contest for the bigger clubs?

And thus English football becomes dull, shallow, and ever less competitive. Why then would viewer not turn over? How could the Premier League maintain their £1.7bn TV income if they cannot maintain the viewing figures?

Ultimately, it would be the smaller clubs amongst the 36 who suffer - clubs like Bolton, caught in a never ending procession of meaningless matches whilst the money, and eventually the crowds, fade away to nothing.

[Denzil]

The sooner we have a European league, the better. Then the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool, Madrid, Milan, Lyon and all the other clubs that have hoovered up all of the games money can go off and share it amongst themselves.

That's ultimately want the TV networks want and it will eventually happen.

The remaining domestic leagues will probably far weaker to begin with but eventually things will settle down and it will be more competitive.

It might spell the end of international football though but hey, what do Sky care about that?

[Roger]

The top of the PL is enough of a closed shop already, prolonged higher income being the prime determining factor of current evolution in football. There has to be relegation of I would say 2 clubs in Gartside's two tier idea.

If not two then at least one going out at the bottom, with two changing places between the two divisions, with perhaps a mixed play-off including the lowest top tier teams, this would also help to boost the number of games for teams possibly not in Europe.

Two divisions of 18 clubs each? Maybe the top division should be less, but with European games spread more widely to make up the difference, and maybe a larger lower tier, that would not be involved in Europe.

[Kien]

oh dear.

While we are at it, we should scrap the FA Cup because we can't have big teams losing to the their smaller counterparts.

[Stephen]

I think the idea is worth at least considering. It's silly to suggest the current system is perfect or could never be improved upon.
To me, the obvious question to Phil Gartside is: more details please. Such as: detail the selection criteria for choosing clubs, detail how you would accommodate the other clubs (eg could a player move between a Premier League club and a non Premier League club on a weekly basis, according to form, injury etc), detail how the season would work (do all 36 play each other once, do you have American style conference etc).

To my way of thinking, there would need to be distinct and meaningful eligiblity criteria -it could not just be based on a team's current standing (though this wouldn't be disregarded either) but would have to take account of long term playing strength and player/training facilities, club finances and financial viability, membership/spectator support, geographical location (so clubs are spread around England/Wales), stadium size and spectator facilities, community links and links/agreements with other "lower" clubs [for want of a better term].

I suggest any such system, if implemented, should be designed so as to enable regular player movement between the Premier League and non Premier League clubs. In one sense, this would make the non PL team effectively the reserves for the PL team. But on the other hand, it would mean those players, who miss out on the PL starting squad in any given week, would still get to play in meaningful competitions, before passionate spectators. It would also enable the non PL club to have access to better players, and the fans of the non PL teams would get to regularly see those better players (presumably at a less expensive entry price). Such a system exists in the AFL, for example.

So more details, please, Mr Gartside, so everyone can know how it might work (or not) for their club.

[Jonny]

Stupid, stupid idea. The last thing we need is some retarded US-style franchise system that has already ruined F1 and will no doubt do the same to Rugby League in this country.

The football league pyramid works, simple as that. And it always has worked.

"If it aint broke, don't fix it" - for a practical demonstration of that famous saying, watch F1 implode by the end of 2009/start of 2010. I'd hate to see football go the same way!

[Dan Waltham]

Utterly ridiculous idea from Gartside.

Stinks of self preservation from the chairman of a team who only 20 years ago were in the bottom tier. You'd think a club with a recent-ish history like that would appreciate what promotion gives to both the club and the fans.

This is the sort of thing that doddering old fool, Dave Whelan, comes up with.

[rogorn moradan]

In regard to Mike's comments to my comments:

When I said that the closed system in the USA works, I meant that they've been using it for years, and it's still the way they do things. Players play, fans watch, and there's lot of money being spent and earned, so there must be a reason for that. Are there any debates there too regarding a different way of organising their leagues, maybe the 'European soccer' way? Does anyone really want that, or do they rant against these fundamental changes like we do?

A closed system doesn't have to have a draft system attached to it, and I don't think it would be implemented in the English case. Each club would just buy and sell whom they can when they can, as now, and try to achieve the best they can. And even if there was a draft system, and a club gets a 'free' brilliant player (say, erm, Everton gets Rooney), how long would it be before he moves to a so-called 'better' club (say, erm, Man U). Isn't that exactly what the Maple Leafs in your example did? At least Everton fans got some mileage out of Rooney.

So the top clubs will always get the best players, whichever way you do it.

Anyway, I have said I wouldn't like a closed system. I only say: if it's decided that's the way the clubs want to organise themselves, it will work. Football will still be played, and people will watch it.

[Yaw]

Don't be silly. Without the threat of relegation it becomes purely about the money. If you know that no matter how badly you play, you're guaranteed the Premier League bonanza then you have no motivation to improve. Why? Because there are no recriminations if you don't.
And then what of the teams that don't make it onto the gravy train? I was actually happy last season when Stoke and Hull got promoted. It makes a change from seeing the usual suspects yo-yoing between the Championship and the Premiership.

There was a comment above about Spurs and Newcastle having ideas above their station. Thats your opinion. But without relegation they'd have no need to improve their performances. Spurs went 8 games with only 2 points. They were rock bottom with a 4 point gap between them and the team above. They knew if they didn't stop the rot it would be bye bye gravy train. so they took measures
You only need to look at American sports to see my point. During my teenage years the LA Clippers were probably the worst team in the league year in, year out. And they're not the only ones. Teams constantly produce crap for their fans once it becomes obvious that they're not going to make the post season play-offs. And this could last 40 games if your franchise is one of the really poor ones. They know that they can try to get it right next year because they'll still be here.

[Keith Watson]

Who would want to have to play Bolton twice a season for the rest of eternity?

[will]

in one breath he says the meritocratic football pyramid is a great thing, then in the next he says, we should have a two tier premier league with no relegation. whats meritocratic about that?

straight away you remove two of the bigger clubs in england from the table, in leeds and leicester, never mind removing the point of the existence of all the smaller clubs? why should people support the likes of grimsby town (who where in the championship 5 or 6 years ago) if they are not allowed to be promoted?

i sense a slight amount of self preservation in mr gartsides request. he knows bolton will do well to stay in the premier league and wants to turn it into a franchise operation so he cant lose his clubs place. would he honestly have called for this if bolton had been relegated from the premiership last season and where performing like charlton are now? would he my bottom!

or does he want a pure franchise system so the likes of mk franchise can buy a place in the premier league to follow up his belief in the "meritocratic football pyramid"?

[peter]

This has been creeping in surepticiously for a few years with the creation of the 'championship' and the leagues one and two. This format is not far removed from that which gartside is proposing all that would be required would be to reduce the number of championship teams to 18 and then prevent relegation, this could realisically (although not neccessarily should) be done in a few years. However, this would eliminate the likes of wimbledon and hull from repeating their amazing feats of the past couple of decades.

[Bob Greenaway]

Of course we all like the romance of the smaller clubs having a "spell in the sun"
History shows they eventually slip back.
Under this scheme turgid clubs like Bolton will be there forever.
Good luck to Pompey & Hull,but you can guarantee that being smaller clubs like Ipswich & Norwich they will soon slip back down.
The point is the Premier has been all the better for them mixing with with the big boys.
Why deny others the opportunity?

[Mark]

Is it a good idea? No, absolutely not. I mean I just don't understand the current trend amoung the higher-ups in football at the minute to constantly try and change everything. How would 2 leagues with no relegation be any sort of improvement? In what possible way would that make anything any better? What is wrong with people. Platini is the worst for it. Just leave football alone, it is fine. In fact some might say it is better than ever before.....stop coming up with these ridiculous ideas to try and mess everything up!!

[Lee]

If it means relegating Gartside and Bolton to the outskirts then I'm all for it. (kidding)

He may as well have suggested that each Premier League chairman should be entitled to a night with Angelina Jolie every season. An equally transparent and self serving suggestion...

Bottom line; would he agree to it if Bolton were not to be included? I think not.

[CHRIS]

Its funny how this is coming from Phil Gartside- chairman of Bolton. Obviously clubs at the foot of the table may support this proposal as it prevents them from the massive losses associated with relagation to the football championship. However i think that they should keep the system as it should. The relegation/promotion system is what brings excitement to a new season. Three new teams testing their skills out against bigger clubs. Mid-table clubs trying to break into the top 7, Low-Clubs trying to break into the top 10. I mean look at the Australian A-League, with no relegation, teams have little incentive to progress.

[Steve]

Just a crazy thought here, but why can't we just KEEP THE LEAGUE HOW IT IS?? Surely money is not that tight in the top level of English football that Richard Scudamore and the fat cats at the Premier League should feel the need to re-structure, re-brand and utlimately sell off everything that makes this the best league in the world. Game 39?? Doesn't that completely disregard the whole concept of a league? It makes me sick. And the age old debate of limiting foreign players, why? What difference could it possibly make? Will it improve the future of the national team? No. What will is investment in grass roots football. The FA should have enough money to do so, fining clubs and players at the drop of a hat.

[Danielle Blake]

This makes having a 39th game overseas look sensible by comparison. I think supporters of teams from League 1 down might have a slight problem with the no relegation (ergo no promotion) aspect, not to mention those of the 8 Championship teams who would for some reason be cut out of this two tiered league. And who hasn't enjoyed Hull's amazing rise this season? Fairy tales like that wouldn't be possible under such a crackpot system. Gartside's assertion that the 3 that go down are usually the 3 that come back up is also completely wrong - only 3 of the last 15 relegated teams have bounced straight back. Ill thought out, unjustified and self-serving - which sadly seems to describe a lot of what goes on in football these days.

[Bryan]

The American system works because it is two tier. College teams on Saturday with the best players being drafted into the NFL pro ranks. Meanwhile the 'Beckhams' drop off at the other end. No promotion, no relegation, just play ball. Soccer in the UK has the extra fantasy dream that any team over time can migrate from the lowest league in the land to the top of the Premiership. OK, it is fairyland, but it is also part of football! Gartside is offside.

[John]

The reason this appears to work in the USA is because every few years, a city with out a team builds a new stadium, and moves in an existing team, riding roughshod over the supporters. Obviously, with the meritocracy currently in place in British football, this could never happen over here.........

[Adam]

Interestingly enough, with a closed shop that this idea would create, the concept of a "draft" could actually be mooted, for the distribution of young talent. This would help the national teams of the UK no end. however, salary caps etc would have to be introduced to ensure fairness and we would have turned the English Football League into the NFL.

[iandel]

It's easy to be cynical about Gartside making these comments as his self interest is clear. However, if a two tier premier league improved the competitiveness, enabled the TV money to be split more evenly between a greater number of teams & closed the gap in quality between level 1 and 2, I don't think that would be a bad thing. There must still be promotion/relegation though - you cannot take away that incentive for teams in the lower leagues.