SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Koolkeith]

7 hours ago, OTT said:

If Dundee's vote changes I want Hearts to go ****ing nuts. 

 

Sue the SPFL. Sue Doncaster.. **** take his hoose. I want the lot. Specky shite haircut crooked prick. 

The problem is that they’ve officially never said no. Their statement suggests it, but doesn’t say it explicitly. We’re just going by speculation in the media. As dodgy as it is, they can persuade them to say yes and nothing we can do about it. Unless there’s proof they originally submitted a no vote.

[portobellojambo1]

6 minutes ago, ford donald said:

 

The whole set up is farcical,board members arguing amongst themselves,pleading with Dundee for a vote now.The whole system needs revamped.

 

If Dundee haven't voted (information online last night suggested they had but the SPFL were trying to nullify it) then their vote has to be classed as a no, based on actions the SPFL did take in counting the vote.

 

One SPL club abstained from voting, based on advice from their legal advisers, and it wasn't Rangers. However, their vote was classed as a no vote. By then refusing to treat Dundee's decision in the same manner the SPFL may well have shot themselves in the foot.

Edited April 11, 2020 by portobellojambo1

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, HEARTS FOREVER said:

Could it be that they voted afyer 5pm and the SPFL  are playing funny buggers? They certainly sound by the statment that they didnt go for the resolution?

They certainly didn't vote yes, but it doesn't look like they voted no. I think the key is that although a 5pm deadline was set it's not legally binding, company law dictates 28 days.

 

So with Dundee declining to vote it means they could still vote yes for another 27 days if they choose, potentially attracting all sorts of promises and inducements by the way - smart move if that's what's going on.

[Gmcjambo]

5 minutes ago, parwj said:

Dundee confirm SPFL resolution stance as Dens Park club decline to vote on season-ending measures and leave Scottish football in limbo
 

This is just a DR headline though.    Nothing from the club and even this only confirms they haven't voted.   Not if the have abstained or still want to vote. They are within their rights to take 28 days.   Dundee need to clear all of this up via a statement. 

[Boris5115]

3 minutes ago, HEARTS FOREVER said:

Could it be that they voted afyer 5pm and the SPFL  are playing funny buggers? They certainly sound by the statment that they didnt go for the resolution?

SPFL playing funny buggers. I thought that was their specialty. Only game they are playing is to find any which way possible to shaft us. Corruption of the highest order. 

[1971fozzy]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

They certainly didn't vote yes, but it doesn't look like they voted no. I think the key is that although a 5pm deadline was set it's not legally binding, company law dictates 28 days.

 

So with Dundee declining to vote it means they could still vote yes for another 27 days if they choose, potentially attracting all sorts of promises and inducements by the way - smart move if that's what's going on.

that’s the way I see it

[hughesie27]

3 minutes ago, portobellojambo1 said:

 

If Dundee haven't voted (information online last night suggested they had but the SPFL were trying to nullify it) then their vote has to be classed as a no, based on actions the SPFL did take in counting the vote.

 

One SPL club abstained from voting, based on advice from their legal advisers, and it wasn't Rangers. However, their vote was classed as a no vote. By then refusing to treat Dundee's decision in the same manner the SPFL may well have shot themselves in the foot.

Where are you seeing that these abstentions were classed as No?

 

[alicante jambo]

Who is on the spfl board? 

[HEARTS FOREVER]

2 minutes ago, Smithee said:

They certainly didn't vote yes, but it doesn't look like they voted no. I think the key is that although a 5pm deadline was set it's not legally binding, company law dictates 28 days.

 

So with Dundee declining to vote it means they could still vote yes for another 27 days if they choose, potentially attracting all sorts of promises and inducements by the way - smart move if that's what's going on.

Its a smart move if they get what they want and it favours Hearts in all this.. but its a smart move that shouldn't be allowed. They have seen the results ffs and been privy to info on the vote that no other club has had. The SPFL have really ****ed up posting the results of this before any actual conclusion is made. Its corupt to the core.

[gjcc]

1 minute ago, alicante jambo said:

Who is on the spfl board? 

Potentially the Dundee chairman very soon.  

[Forever Hearts]

Why are the papers reporting that only ONE Premiership club voted against the proposals? 

[HEARTS FOREVER]

4 minutes ago, Boris5115 said:

SPFL playing funny buggers. I thought that was their specialty. Only game they are playing is to find any which way possible to shaft us. Corruption of the highest order. 

Correct

[parwj]

Hopefully sportsound has Tom English on this afternoon and he rips these doughnuts in charge 

[Unknown user]

1 minute ago, HEARTS FOREVER said:

Its a smart move if they get what they want and it favours Hearts in all this.. but its a smart move that shouldn't be allowed. They have seen the results ffs and been privy to info on the vote that no other club has had. The SPFL have really ****ed up posting the results of this before any actual conclusion is made. Its corupt to the core.

Maybe, but if it's an open vote maybe not

[portobellojambo1]

1 minute ago, hughesie27 said:

Where are you seeing that these abstentions were classed as No?

 

 

I know which SPL club abstained from voting and that it was then classed as a No vote. If Dundee have responded to the SPFL and said they are declinig the option to vote then that has to be treated in the same manner and treated as a no vote.

[hughesie27]

2 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

Why are the papers reporting that only ONE Premiership club voted against the proposals? 

Because 1 either abstained or has not yet voted.

[portobellojambo1]

2 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

Why are the papers reporting that only ONE Premiership club voted against the proposals? 

 

1 minute ago, hughesie27 said:

Because 1 either abstained or has not yet voted.

 

Correct, and it isn't difficult to then work out which club abstained, based on legal advice. The club who actually voted no were Rangers.

[gowestjambo]

47 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Vote count released before everyone has voted?
 

The whole process needs to be rerun, surely?

 

The whole process has been undermined by releasing vital details before all the votes were received. It is a farce that any club be allowed to change their voting intentions, due to leaked information.

 

So Dundee who apparently voted based upon their principles of fair play, are now in the position of King Maker? It is yet another embarrassing mess from the people who are supposedly in charge of our game.

 

Release the money to Clubs on the basis they accept it is against the SPFL rules. We are in uncharted territory in the entire world, if that is not enough to alter the rules in the SPFL, I dont know what is!

[alicante jambo]

1 hour ago, gjcc said:

Potentially the Dundee chairman very soon.  

We are laughing too but dinnae be surprised if it did happen this is scottish football.

[David McCaig]

Trying to work out what Dundee have to gain by voting Yes or No.

 

Apparently they are one of 6 clubs fully insured so not under financial pressure.

 

Yes

Dundee United promoted 

No League reconstruction 

Hearts relegated so much diminished chance of automatic promotion 

 

No

Null/void (won't happen)

16 team league (won't happen)

Financial pay-off (illegal)

Reopen play offs (would this turn Yes's to No's)

14 team league (promotes United, but gives Dundee a clear run to promotion next year)

 

So surely it's in Dundee's interest to hold.out for reconstruction, as let's face it, if it doesn't happen in these circumstances it never will.

[Forever Hearts]

3 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Because 1 either abstained or has not yet voted.

And that is Hearts? 

[Gmcjambo]

1 minute ago, portobellojambo1 said:

 

I know which SPL club abstained from voting and that it was then classed as a No vote. If Dundee have responded to the SPFL and said they are declinig the option to vote then that has to be treated in the same manner and treated as a no vote.

That's a massif 'if'..... Have Dundee confirmed their intention to abstain? No one seems to know.    Its not that abstentions are classed as 'no' votes though,  but it means they are not 'yes' votes.     Its the number of 'yes' voted that matter for the motion to pass.

[hughesie27]

Just now, Forever Hearts said:

And that is Hearts? 

According to PJ yes.

 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, Forever Hearts said:

And that is Hearts? 

Yes. Which is good. It means we have our hands clean if it goes to court, which it should.

[Shanks]

1 minute ago, Gmcjambo said:

That's a massif 'if'..... Have Dundee confirmed their intention to abstain? No one seems to know.    Its not that abstentions are classed as 'no' votes though,  but it means they are not 'yes' votes.     Its the number of 'yes' voted that matter for the motion to pass.

 

Correct, from the SPFL statement three clubs 'haven't voted yet' the only one that matters to them now is the remaining championship vote. 

 

What would Dundee have to gain from abstaining? Surely they would just vote no if they are against the proposal, to me it looks like they are waiting on a reason to vote yes ... 💰

[David McCaig]

2 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Yes. Which is good. It means we have our hands clean if it goes to court, which it should.

Apparently we voted at 12:30pm but something went awry!!!

[hearts151]

14 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Where are you seeing that these abstentions were classed as No?

 

Because for the resolution to pass it needs 75% of members (not voters) to agree. So if you don't say yes then abstaining is as good as voting no. 

[Ronald Villiers]

I knew our game was corrupt to the core and is getting worse.  Even the media are fuelling this.  I thought when you voted for something it was based on your decision and what you deemed to be the best option.  Nearly spat my coffee oot when I saw this on the Daily Ranger website -

 

But, after the late U-turn, SPFL top brass are hopeful that Dundee could yet be talked around into posting the one vote which is required for the plans to be implemented, bringing an immediate end to the Championship campaign as well as those in League One and League Two.

 

Hopefully Budge follows this up if there's a shred of truth and an investigation gets carried out.

 

[HEARTS FOREVER]

This is what they want also.....the old 11 to 1 vote on reconstuction once they push their own agenda through it seems.

Edited April 11, 2020 by HEARTS FOREVER

[David McCaig]

3 minutes ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Yes. Which is good. It means we have our hands clean if it goes to court, which it should.

Given the SPFLs behaviour, I'm starting to wonder if there is a case for a criminal investigation here as well.  Surely it is fraudulent to misrepresent what votes have and haven't arrived and when.

[Shanks]

Just now, hearts151 said:

Because for the resolution to pass it needs 75% of members (not voters) to agree. So if you don't say yes then abstaining is as good as voting no. 

 

The question is why would a club like Dundee abstain? What is the point?  It is understandable for us to do it based on legal advice but I can't see why Dundee wouldn't just vote no if that is their intention.

[Mikey1874]

18 minutes ago, Gmcjambo said:

This is just a DR headline though.    Nothing from the club and even this only confirms they haven't voted.   Not if the have abstained or still want to vote. They are within their rights to take 28 days.   Dundee need to clear all of this up via a statement. 

 

Someone quoted The Sun yesterday as saying we won't hear again from Dundee until Tuesday.

 

It is the Easter Holiday weekend.

[Mikey1874]

19 minutes ago, alicante jambo said:

Who is on the spfl board? 

 

https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-board-elected-for-201920

[David McCaig]

1 minute ago, HEARTS FOREVER said:

This is what they want also.....the old 11 to 1 vote on reconstuction once the push their own agenda through it seems.

Why is the consultation dependent on the vote?

 

Vote through reconstruction now and the season ending proposal will pass.

 

Only Rangers would vote against, Celtic will do anything for their tainted title and other clubs desperate for fast cash.

 

If reconstruction not approved in these circumstances, how the hell.would it be passed at any other time.

[Gmcjambo]

5 minutes ago, Shanks said:

 

Correct, from the SPFL statement three clubs 'haven't voted yet' the only one that matters to them now is the remaining championship vote. 

 

What would Dundee have to gain from abstaining? Surely they would just vote no if they are against the proposal, to me it looks like they are waiting on a reason to vote yes ... 💰

Clubs would have their own reasons to abstain rather than vote......could be Dundee don't want a no recorded against them but don't want it to pass.    Maybe they feel the press will focus on the small number of teams that voted no and they will get less negative PR.   Who knows?   They could clear this nonsense up very quickly though. 

 

I certainly hope they're not 'at it' though!

[portobellojambo1]

11 minutes ago, Gmcjambo said:

That's a massif 'if'..... Have Dundee confirmed their intention to abstain? No one seems to know.    Its not that abstentions are classed as 'no' votes though,  but it means they are not 'yes' votes.     Its the number of 'yes' voted that matter for the motion to pass.

 

There is something further up this page which clarifies Dundee's position, in as much as they have declined to vote, which is effectively a form of abstention. And I was using simplication in terms of yes or no votes, but you are right in as much as it all depends on the number who vote with an outright yes.

[David McCaig]

2 minutes ago, Gmcjambo said:

Clubs would have their own reasons to abstain rather than vote......could be Dundee don't want a no recorded against them but don't want it to pass.    Maybe they feel the press will focus on the small number of teams that voted no and they will get less negative PR.   Who knows?   They could clear this nonsense up very quickly though. 

 

I certainly hope they're not 'at it' though!

Of course the 28 day rule gives them huge leverage.  Presumably the SPFL can't table an amendment until voting this window closes. 

 

By which time hopefully some clubs may have fallen by the wayside. Dundee are insured so they can afford to wait this out.

 

The ball is surely in the SPL court now to vote through a 14 team league.

[TyphoonJambo]

If we go to 14 teams, with a 7-7 split what do the OF have to lose? 

[Mikey1874]

5 minutes ago, portobellojambo1 said:

 

There is something further up this page which clarifies Dundee's position, in as much as they have declined to vote, which is effectively a form of abstention. And I was using simplication in terms of yes or no votes, but you are right in as much as it all depends on the number who vote with an outright yes.

 

No one from Dundee FC has said that. You are quoting a newspaper headline. 

 

Dundee have said NOTHING since their 5pm statement. This statement.

 

Edited April 11, 2020 by Mikey1874

[David McCaig]

3 minutes ago, portobellojambo1 said:

 

There is something further up this page which clarifies Dundee's position, in as much as they have declined to vote, which is effectively a form of abstention. And I was using simplication in terms of yes or no votes, but you are right in as much as it all depends on the number who vote with an outright yes.

Voting Yes would actually be an act of self harm by Dundee, it promotes their rivals and relegates a much bigger club.

 

And if Dundee vote Yes - that it was one ground I would hope we would be totally united in boycotting.

[David McCaig]

2 minutes ago, TypoonJambo said:

If we go to 14 teams, with a 7-7 split what do the OF have to lose? 

The 14 team league has no impact on the OF whatsoever. Other than everyone including TV knows their fixture list for the rest of the season from game 23 onwards as opposed to game 33. It also guarantees a balanced home and away fixture list.

 

TV money is allocated on league positions 1-42, so no reason why that needs to change either.

[Seymour M Hersh]

14 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

Given the SPFLs behaviour, I'm starting to wonder if there is a case for a criminal investigation here as well.  Surely it is fraudulent to misrepresent what votes have and haven't arrived and when.

 

It's almost as if they (Dngcaster & Co) have been pressed into making statements by the media but have not been able to get in touch with their lord & master Lawell to get the script. They've then blurted out pish that's getting them into all sorts of bother. They really are utterly hopeless and utterly corrupt. 

[TyphoonJambo]

1 minute ago, David McCaig said:

The 14 team league has no impact on the OF whatsoever. Other than everyone including TV knows their fixture list for the rest of the season from game 23 onwards as opposed to game 33. It also guarantees a balanced home and away fixture list.

 

TV money is allocated on league positions 1-42, so no reason why that needs to change either.

So, whats difficult? Apart from the SPFL that is. 

[David McCaig]

1 minute ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

It's almost as if they (Dngcaster & Co) have been pressed into making statements by the media but have not been able to get in touch with their lord & master Lawell to get the script. They've then blurted out pish that's getting them into all sorts of bother. They really are utterly hopeless and utterly corrupt. 

It would be interesting to see Police Scotland seizing their computers and forensically going through the email traffic.

[David McCaig]

1 minute ago, TypoonJambo said:

So, whats difficult? Apart from the SPFL that is. 

Absolutely and as I say if they won't do it now, who has any faith that they would do it after the vote is delivered and cash distributed.

 

The SPL has already shown that clubs only look out for themselves. 

[Horatio Caine]

1 minute ago, David McCaig said:

It would be interesting to see Police Scotland seizing their computers and forensically going through the email traffic.

Yeah, pity they're kept busy just now enforcing social distancing

[David McCaig]

1 minute ago, Horatio Caine said:

Yeah, pity they're kept busy just now enforcing social distancing

I'd be very surprised if that's what their analysts are doing.

 

And all they need to do is seize the equipment, they can analyse at their leisure.

[flecktimus]

For such a highly educated country, we cant halve make an arse of stuff.

[hughesie27]

So the current situ is that The SPFL are trying to bring into question the validity of abstaining. They don't really care about the other 2 abstainees because their votes won't impact the outcome.

 

However Dundee and King makers and releasing the vkting stats it let's everybody else know that.

 

They want to pressure Dundee into making a clear decision. 

[Fozzyonthefence]

17 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

Of course the 28 day rule gives them huge leverage.  Presumably the SPFL can't table an amendment until voting this window closes. 

 

By which time hopefully some clubs may have fallen by the wayside. Dundee are insured so they can afford to wait this out.

 

The ball is surely in the SPL court now to vote through a 14 team league.

The ball is firmly in the court of the SPFL to talk Dundee round into voting yes.  Everyone knows this is what is happening now.  Dundee could clear this up in 2 minutes if they wanted to.  The fact that they haven’t doesn’t only not look good for us but also the integrity of Scottish football.  If Dundee are coerced into voting yes I really think I’ll be done with Scottish football completely.  There really doesn’t seem any point anymore.