Feeno Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I despair for Scottish football. It really doesnt stand a chance with OF lickspittles like Topping in positions of power and rapid OF monkeys reporting on it. All this shit a day after Frankenfringe had stressed to Alex Thomson there's no favoritism in the SPL to certain clubs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dirty Deeds Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Although not on purpose, has Topping not just shown the Old Firm's bluff? They need us more that we need them. There will be slightly reduced revenue for the 10 without the Uglies, but potential for more. There is zilch on the table for the OF without the 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hot since 86 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Topping is probably worried that rangers supporters will boycott Willie Hills if he doesn't side with them, conflict of interests perhaps. Maybe we should all boycott his bookies? Its crap anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysthereinspirit Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Maybe someone could help me here. I was trying to find an anology along the same lines as these topping remarks and I cant. Looking for something that when you read it, it is obvious that it is wrong and therefore unbelievable that it would ever be said or written. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seymour M Hersh Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Maybe someone could help me here. I was trying to find an anology along the same lines as these topping remarks and I cant. Looking for something that when you read it, it is obvious that it is wrong and therefore unbelievable that it would ever be said or written. Thanks. He wants the Turkeys' (the ten rebellious swine) to vote for Christmas (with extra lashings of gravy! Simples. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Maybe someone could help me here. I was trying to find an anology along the same lines as these topping remarks and I cant. Looking for something that when you read it, it is obvious that it is wrong and therefore unbelievable that it would ever be said or written. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts Machine Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Surely if (as has been mentioned) a couple of the "Rebel" 10 capitulate to the panderings of the Fuglies, then the other 8 or 9 should tender their resignation toot-sweet. I don`t see Sky much interested in a 3 or 4 team product. And it would get this corruption all over the front pages, for what it really is. As for the "2 years notice of resignation" tell them to spin, as we would be showing our own form of diplomacy and disgust. I`m more than sure a minimum of 8 would agree to resign. Over to them, then. Why did you resign Mr. Romanov, Mr. Petrie etc.? "Well you see, this was their terms....the above quotes are for your perusal, as merely an example. We were simply left with no choice." It`s now or never EVER again, "Rebel" 10. Last chance EVER to change this bent, corrupt and woeful "Institution". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adi Dassler Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 At a time when Scottish Football has never been more desperately in need of a change i am starting to get a sense that it's just not going to happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Can the 10 call for a vote of confidence on Topping remaining as Chairman? Clearly demonstrated he only has the interests of 2 of the member clubs at heart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marvin Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 On luch at work so not got time to review the thread.... I saw this this morning and it just goes to show that OF bias is not Jambo paranoia. Does this not prove that bias excists in the Scottish game. The SPL is more corrupt than the recent Russian Parliamentary elections and Seria A put together. In short, if they get away with this I may just turn my back on football altogether (its only Hearts that keeps me interested at the moment). OFGTF SPLGTF SFAGTF (and of course FTH ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
csh Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 At a time when Scottish Football has never been more desperately in need of a change i am starting to get a sense that it's just not going to happen. Agree with this. The only way real change can come about is for fans of the 10 to unite under 1 banner. Surely the supporters clubs can get together, organise a committee and put something into action. If the 10 clubs really want change they could fork out for SC flags etc that have an extra slogan on them supporting the need for change. Maybe even run a blog along the RTC lines dispelling the myth and rumour perpetuated by the media on a now daily basis. There is no real way for us to reply to the scaremongering peddled by the redtops. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FWJ Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Surely if (as has been mentioned) a couple of the "Rebel" 10 capitulate to the panderings of the Fuglies, then the other 8 or 9 should tender their resignation toot-sweet. I don`t see Sky much interested in a 3 or 4 team product. And it would get this corruption all over the front pages, for what it really is. As for the "2 years notice of resignation" tell them to spin, as we would be showing our own form of diplomacy and disgust. I`m more than sure a minimum of 8 would agree to resign. Over to them, then. Why did you resign Mr. Romanov, Mr. Petrie etc.? "Well you see, this was their terms....the above quotes are for your perusal, as merely an example. We were simply left with no choice." It`s now or never EVER again, "Rebel" 10. Last chance EVER to change this bent, corrupt and woeful "Institution". This is what concerns me - I don't think you will get all ten resigning en masse, I reckon at least a couple will take fright and shelter under the coat-tails of the OF (they will be, of course, "heroes making the correct decision"). This might frighten other clubs into capitulation. Or what if the OF plus 3 or 4 hangers-on then invited the Particks, Hamiltons, Mortons etc to join them? Would they - in order to get the cash (never mind the bother) the Uglies provide a few times a season. Or would they rather join the other SPL teams where the money might be a bit less but more of a chance of a decent showing in the league? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge21 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I worry that the rebel ten have had meetings,but have made no firm statements. But when you then see comments like the clown from St Johnstone and the Kilmarnock chairman moving his own fans so that the Celtic supporters can take over his stadium and enjoy themselves. Bet the Kilmarnock supporters when they go to Parkhead get the restricted view crappy seats like the rest of us with the stewards and police treating them like filth. I get the feeling the rebel ten might soon be as low as the rebel 3 or 4. Doncaster,Topping and Regan are all for Rangers and Celtic and no one else. Out game is totally fecked and rotten to the core with these buffoons in charge. This is all going to end in a win win situation for the old firm manufactured by Doncaster,Topping and Regan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcw1874 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Ralph Topping = Ineffectual ****. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hearts Machine Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 This is what concerns me - I don't think you will get all ten resigning en masse, I reckon at least a couple will take fright and shelter under the coat-tails of the OF (they will be, of course, "heroes making the correct decision"). This might frighten other clubs into capitulation. Or what if the OF plus 3 or 4 hangers-on then invited the Particks, Hamiltons, Mortons etc to join them? Would they - in order to get the cash (never mind the bother) the Uglies provide a few times a season. Or would they rather join the other SPL teams where the money might be a bit less but more of a chance of a decent showing in the league? I think we know a couple will crumble. More fool them, of course, however if say 8 were to resign en masse, and make it massively public through demonstrations and indeed court cases alleging corruption and preferential treatment of a "Criminal" Organisation, allowed to simply carry on un-punished, then I think the GFA will be the ones in fear. We have the power now, to embarrass Scottish football on a worldwide stage, not only European, and highlight the bais corruption that is there for all to see. If exposed. We simply cannot allow this to be carried through. And it will if we remain silent. Let us ALL join together and demonstrate. Not only with grumblings on web-sites, but with mass demonstrations at games, boycotts, and visits to GFA central. Letters to FIFA/EUFA/Westminster etc. And make it loud. Or do nothing. And forever be nothing. 75% of a European league resign. People will want to know why. Big people. Bigger than Liewell and D+D. People will start to ask questions. We, collectively have honest answers and reasons to give. The GFA simply don`t. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hawaii Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Anyone heard how the talks are going between the SFL & SPL at Hampden? The McLeish report suggested one body run league football in Scotland and so the SFL & SPL are having meetings to try and thrash out an agreement. Now if 10 SPL clubs were to move from the SPL to the SFL then surely that would give the SFL a huge boost during the talks - no? Hopefully something will happen along these lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ross21 Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 One person damaging the SPL is that clown Doncaster. Sadly doesn't have the back bone to stick up to the Old Firm & make a significant change Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Anyone heard how the talks are going between the SFL & SPL at Hampden? The McLeish report suggested one body run league football in Scotland and so the SFL & SPL are having meetings to try and thrash out an agreement. Now if 10 SPL clubs were to move from the SPL to the SFL then surely that would give the SFL a huge boost during the talks - no? Hopefully something will happen along these lines. I've heard that Doncaster spilled port on his trousers while Regan got some food stuck in his teeth but didn't notice. Much hilarity ensued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lovecraft Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 When Rangers go into liquidation, there will be a short period of time when neither they, or the administrators will be able to vote. This is when the changes will be able to go through. It will be a short period of maybe 3-4 days while they all hastily arrange meetings etc to try and get everyone to agree to letting them back in, and all it takes is a couple of clubs to put up resistance to allowing them to waltz straight back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fordy Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Can't we just all rejoin the SFL and let Celtic and Rangers (if they still even exist) come if they want or stay in the SPL if that's their wish? The SPL has run its course now for me, the events of the last few months have made it clearer than ever that its only purpose is to maximise the income of the OF, at the expense of everybody else. 100% with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay B-8) Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Hmm how can teh majority be rebels? cause the old firm owns 99% of Scotlands plastic fans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IMA MAROON Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Can't we just all rejoin the SFL and let Celtic and Rangers (if they still even exist) come if they want or stay in the SPL if that's their wish? The SPL has run its course now for me, the events of the last few months have made it clearer than ever that its only purpose is to maximise the income of the OF, at the expense of everybody else. SPL fans can keep playing the wee innocent card all they want but it does not change the truth. All the clubs left the SFL to line their own pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmaroon Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I despair for Scottish football. It really doesnt stand a chance with OF lickspittles like Topping in positions of power and rapid OF monkeys reporting on it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i wish jj was my dad Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 I'm not sure if anyone else mentioned it but I was unfortunate enough to be shown an 'opinion' by Andy McInnes who leads in the Express. He actually described the Non-Uglies as vultures picking at the carcass of Rangers. I know it's just the latest in the Weegia propaganda war and maybe it shows how desperate they are becoming but surely there are some Scottish journos or media outlets who are free to speak out about this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Herbertson Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 100% spot on for me GC Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flimsy Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 SPL fans can keep playing the wee innocent card all they want but it does not change the truth. All the clubs left the SFL to line their own pockets. There are no greater 'Old Firm lickspittles' on Kickback than you, IMA MAROON, however, I agree with you on this. Many of the rebel 10 were part of the SPL breakaway and were part of the decision to instil a 11-1 vote. When it comes to the crunch, I wouldn't trust any of this lot to act in the best interests of Scottish football. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarissa Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Resign from the SPL. simple strategy, if enough teams do it (4 or 5 would do) then they would have to reconsider. Its time someone had the minerals to stand up to this cartel. According to the SPL articles of association, the Group of Ten (sounds better thab 'gang of rebels') need to give two clear seasons notice before they can leave, otherwise they would be liable for any lost TV or sponsorshp deals. Once lodged, AFAIK the quit notices can only be revoked and torn up by an SPL vote of... you've guessed it - 11-1, so the OF have a veto on that as well. You really couldn't make up a more restrictive arrangement short of slavery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 SPL fans can keep playing the wee innocent card all they want but it does not change the truth. All the clubs left the SFL to line their own pockets. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 According to the SPL articles of association, the Group of Ten (sounds better thab 'gang of rebels') need to give two clear seasons notice before they can leave, otherwise they would be liable for any lost TV or sponsorshp deals. Once lodged, AFAIK the quit notices can only be revoked and torn up by an SPL vote of... you've guessed it - 11-1, so the OF have a veto on that as well. You really couldn't make up a more restrictive arrangement short of slavery. So the (say) 10 hand in quit notices. These go through unless 11 clubs vote to rip them up? But the OF would only have 1, maximum 2 votes, leaving 10? Would your scanario not only benefit the OF if it was the OF leaving (as in for England, again)? As in they resign, and the other 10 clubs don't have enough votes to rip the resignations up? Or am I reading your comment wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toxteth O'Grady Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 Ralph Topping = Ineffectual ****. Yep. A Chairman that represents the minority. His coat would be on a shoogly peg in most organisations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sarissa Posted April 4, 2012 Share Posted April 4, 2012 So the (say) 10 hand in quit notices. These go through unless 11 clubs vote to rip them up? But the OF would only have 1, maximum 2 votes, leaving 10? Would your scanario not only benefit the OF if it was the OF leaving (as in for England, again)? As in they resign, and the other 10 clubs don't have enough votes to rip the resignations up? Or am I reading your comment wrong? I was assuming this is all part of this article: C12.3 Subject to the provisions of Article 37 of the Articles of Association, the Company in General Meeting may from time to time, and upon such terms and conditions as it may think fit, expel or accept the retirement or resignation of any Club from the League. and, as expulsion needs an 11-1 vote 37 A Qualified Resolution (90%), shall be required for the passing of a resolution in respect of the following Reserved Matters:- (i) the expulsion of a Club from the League ; I assumed revoking it would be the same - but if not it may instead be an Ordinary Resolution needing only an 8-4 vote. Can anybody with more knowledge of the rules confirm this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdl2002 Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 i applaud Yorkston on this article, stunned the RECORD are reporting it mind. I am also surprised that he is the only chairman so far to bite backat the dinosaur that is Ralph Topping the article Dunfermline chairman John Yorkston has hit back at Ralph Topping after the SPL chairman accused the ?gang of 10? of sabotaging future sponsorship deals. Topping claimed the clubs outwith the Old Firm were damaging the top flight?s appeal with their campaign to end a perceived Celtic and Rangers duopoly. In a letter to the 10 clubs he said: ?I?m aware of two firms attracted to sponsoring the SPL in 2013. But they have withdrawn their interest in the light of recent developments in the SPL.? It went on to urge an end to the rebellion. The letter has left Yorkston irate because he sees the Old Firm?s threats to quit Scottish football as far more damaging to the SPL?s value ? yet they haven?t been given such strong warnings. Yorkston said: ?This letter was inappropriate. I don?t know of any precedence for such a partisan warning. ?There?s no consistency because I?m not aware of Mr Topping criticising those clubs which go on the radio and TV and talk about moving to pastures new.? The East End Park chief will demand an explanation when the SPL board meets on April 12, with questions raised over Topping?s impartiality on this matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 I was assuming this is all part of this article: C12.3 Subject to the provisions of Article 37 of the Articles of Association, the Company in General Meeting may from time to time, and upon such terms and conditions as it may think fit, expel or accept the retirement or resignation of any Club from the League. and, as expulsion needs an 11-1 vote 37 A Qualified Resolution (90%), shall be required for the passing of a resolution in respect of the following Reserved Matters:- (i) the expulsion of a Club from the League ; I assumed revoking it would be the same - but if not it may instead be an Ordinary Resolution needing only an 8-4 vote. Can anybody with more knowledge of the rules confirm this? Revoking means ripping up basically. I don't think expulsion is intended as anything like resigning. So there would have to be 11 clubs voting to rip up 10 resignations, so the clubs resigning would basically be ripping up their own resignations? Different from expulsion certainly. Rangers should be expelled (with an 11-0 or 10-1 vote (excluding them obviously), or the 10 non-OF clubs should resign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Imeantasong Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Yorkston said: ?This letter was inappropriate. I don?t know of any precedence for such a partisan warning. ?There?s no consistency because I?m not aware of Mr Topping criticising those clubs which go on the radio and TV and talk about moving to pastures new.? The East End Park chief will demand an explanation when the SPL board meets on April 12, with questions raised over Topping?s impartiality on this matter. A representative of all the clubs (the SPL) being impartial, and he has a vote in the 6? Has to be sacked or excluded from any vote then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bilel Mohsni Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 i applaud Yorkston on this article, stunned the RECORD are reporting it mind. I am also surprised that he is the only chairman so far to bite backat the dinosaur that is Ralph Topping the article Dunfermline chairman John Yorkston has hit back at Ralph Topping after the SPL chairman accused the ?gang of 10? of sabotaging future sponsorship deals. Topping claimed the clubs outwith the Old Firm were damaging the top flight?s appeal with their campaign to end a perceived Celtic and Rangers duopoly. In a letter to the 10 clubs he said: ?I?m aware of two firms attracted to sponsoring the SPL in 2013. But they have withdrawn their interest in the light of recent developments in the SPL.? It went on to urge an end to the rebellion. The letter has left Yorkston irate because he sees the Old Firm?s threats to quit Scottish football as far more damaging to the SPL?s value ? yet they haven?t been given such strong warnings. Yorkston said: ?This letter was inappropriate. I don?t know of any precedence for such a partisan warning. ?There?s no consistency because I?m not aware of Mr Topping criticising those clubs which go on the radio and TV and talk about moving to pastures new.? The East End Park chief will demand an explanation when the SPL board meets on April 12, with questions raised over Topping?s impartiality on this matter. Quite ******* right annaw! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skivingatwork Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Good to see Yorskton standing up against this blatant bias towards the ugly sisters. Just hope all other clubs are of a similar mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N User Posted April 6, 2012 Share Posted April 6, 2012 Would Yorkston be as bold if his team were not in the bottom position? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.