PHIL Gartside still remains hopeful that his proposals for change will shape the future of the Premier League.

The Wanderers chairman submitted his eagerly anticipated discussion paper to yesterday’s meeting of Premier League chairmen, including suggestions to spread television revenue more evenly between two restructured top divisions.

Although one of its more controversial aspects, the inclusion of the Glasgow Old Firm, was rejected out of hand the rest of his proposals will be considered as part of a wider strategic review.

A Premier League statement read: “The clubs welcomed the additional input into an ongoing process, and the ideas contained within Bolton’s paper will now be taken forward as part of the wider strategic review being undertaken by the Premier League since November 2008 with the aim of providing recommendations before December 2010.”

Having been asked to come up with a paper to promote debate among the game’s elite, the fact that only one of his proposals was rejected out of hand should please the long-serving Whites chairman.

The majority of his ideas were focused on overhauling the current top two divisions, closing the expanding financial gap between the Big Four and the rest of the Premier League, and the burden placed on clubs who drop into the Championship.

And it would seem that they are the matters that will now be addressed over the next 12 months as the world’s most successful league looks how best to take the next step.

Gartside said he hoped his proposals would act as a catalyst for debate.

“I am not a visionary, the ideas I am putting to the clubs are something that has been put up by many, many people, not just by me,” he said.

“I am just interested in the game and how I can help make it better.

“I am not suggesting that anything I put forward is set in stone, absolutely not. It is designed to generate debate and to help the game.

“It is not about whether a few Scottish clubs should join us, it is not about trying to force through a closed shop without promotion and relegation, that is nonsense, nothing I am suggesting is set in stone, it's not even new, it’s an age-old proposal but there are more people in favour of it than you might imagine.

“If you ask me if there will be changes, I would say ‘I hope so’, I really do hope there will be because the game needs it. There are more than just a few clubs in financial difficulties and we need to help them.

“I am a long-standing member of the game, I have been serving the game for some time, and I am absolutely gutted that some people are attacking me for just trying to open up a debate about the game, the way forward, and the financial situation of smaller clubs who are fighting for survival.”