SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Mikey1874]

 

[wavydavy]

9 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

THE SPFL IS STILL TRYING TO GERRYMANDER THE RESULT THEY WANT BY EXTENDING THE VOTING DEADLINE

 

Apologies for the "shouting" but it's deserved.

 

Accprding to the SPFL they have 28 days to respond but they requested the votes by 5pm today.

[Fozzyonthefence]

7 minutes ago, Squirt said:

Daily Record are claiming that due to the rules stating member clubs have 28 days to respond to any vote requested by the SPFL that 3 clubs have simply refused to vote and don't plan on voting.

 

Make of that what you will.

But 2 of those votes are irrelevant.  Only the missing Championship one matters because if that’s a yes then all 3 votes are in favour. 

[hughesie27]

2 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I still don’t get the abstentions.

 

If those that didn’t vote against it had just voted against it then it would have failed

 

there must be something more to this than meets the eye

You obviously don't understand what abstaining is then.

[Gambo]

9 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

I still don’t get the abstentions.

 

If those that didn’t vote against it had just voted against it then it would have failed

 

there must be something more to this than meets the eye

Helps in any legal arguement if you did not agree/take part in vote?

[pettigrewsstylist]

6 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

Friday 10th April 2020

 

BOARD UPDATE ON RANGERS RESOLUTION

SPFL STATEMENT

The SPFL Board received a requisition from Rangers, supported by two other clubs, that the Board must issue a further resolution to members.  This resolution sought to compel the SPFL to lend money to all 42 Clubs.

The Board took legal advice from a leading QC on the proposed resolution.  By law, the members of a private company can require their Board to circulate a resolution, unless such resolution would be ineffective if passed. 

The clear and unequivocal legal advice received by the SPFL is that the resolution received from Rangers is ineffective in terms of company law. As a result, the Board determined this morning that it cannot be circulated to members.

We have seen a statement from Rangers that they “sought comment from the SPFL Executive on several occasions yesterday, to ensure [their] resolution was deemed competent”.  For the avoidance of doubt, only at 10.18pm yesterday did the SPFL’s lawyer receive an email from Rangers seeking advice on the content of their resolution, which was put before the SPFL Board first thing this morning.

Rangers have expressed a desire to submit a further resolution.  The SPFL’s lawyers will work with Rangers, as they will with any other member club, who wishes to put forward a resolution.  The offer to help clubs with the drafting of their resolutions was made during the divisional conference calls on Wednesday.  Rangers chose to proceed without seeking that help, with the result that their resolution was ineffective.

A spokesman said: “These are extremely difficult times for the people of Scotland and for every club in the land.

“The SPFL Board has worked hard to propose a clear way of quickly delivering much-needed fee payments to the 30 clubs in the Ladbrokes Championship, League 1 and League 2. 

“The alternative is further weeks, and possibly months, of uncertainty and financial hardship for dozens of clubs which are desperately looking for a way to survive.”

Have Rangers disclosed this "resolution proposal"?

[Thomaso]

3 minutes ago, luckydug said:

Any chance Hearts or Rangers have abstained so as to provide a stronger case for legal action ?

If a club doesn't vote it can't be assumed to have accepted the process. 

Good point!

[hughesie27]

1 Championship club is currently aware that it is in complete control of the future of Scottish Football. 

 

 

[Squirt]

Just now, The Merse said:

My heid is burst.

 

 

 

So is the ball mate. Aww I'm so sick of the shambles we're constantly having to put up with,

[Hectormasson]

3 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

This

Ditto f...k them ,,,,,

[Back to 2005]

Maybe the pigeon hasn't arrived yet from dingwall?

[Ibrahim Tall]

3 minutes ago, David McCaig said:

League reconstruction doesn’t affect Rangers either way.

League reconstruction is only a solution for Hearts finishing last/Dundee United 1st etc without having to relegate or deny promotion,

By ‘accepting’ that is the case your also accepting Celtic finished 1st. Reconstruction isn’t in Rangers favour for that very reason.

 

Getting the whole season declared void is in their interest.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Ibrahim Tall

[Hungry hippo]

Completely improper to release the votes midway through a vote even if it is allowed to extend the deadline.

[Brown1982]

If it’s true what we are hearing then 3 clubs have pulled a masterstroke by abstaining from voting.  If this has scuppered the whole thing then that is absolutely fantastic news.  No doubt the corrupt clowns will be scarpering about looking for ways to pass it nonetheless but very well done to the 3 clubs.  Obviously us Rangers and Inverness??  Would have guessed Partick but think they already voted no but not voting at all was definitely the way forward.  Here’s hoping this sticks 👍👍👍👍👍👍

[stevie1874]

14 minutes ago, OTT said:

If Hearts and Rangers aren't tabling a motion of no confidence in Doncaster after this shit show I'll be raging. 

 

The mans existence brings Scottish football into disrepute. 

Exactly this and he gets payed an absolute fortune as well. So far out of his depth but has managed to cling on to his job for years. An absolute puppet. 

[StevenNaismith]

I’m trying to get it confirmed but I don’t think Hearts voted. If this is indeed the case then AB has played a blinder.

Edited April 10, 2020 by StevenNaismith

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

2 minutes ago, luckydug said:

If clubs haven't voted by 5.00pm their vote is void surely. 

It's like arriving at the polling station at a minute past ten imo. 

Not when the success of the vote depends on a set percentage of total members voting in favour.

[stan]

7 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

They are saying 3 clubs found a loophole and did not vote, meaning that further discussion goes on for a further 28 days. 

 

**** knows what's happening. 

That would be a glorious shambles   if that's where we end iup😂

 

28 days later...zombie clubs everywhere!

[Jamboelite]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

But 2 of those votes are irrelevant.  Only the missing Championship one matters because if that’s a yes then all 3 votes are in favour. 

Unless all votes are required regardless of what the other votes note.

[David McCaig]

Just now, Ibrahim Tall said:

League reconstruction is only a solution for Hearts finishing last/Dundee United 1st etc without having to relegate or deny promotion,

By ‘accepting’ that is the case your also accepting Celtic finished 1st. Reconstruction isn’t in Rangers favour for that very reason.

true, but Rangers would be isolated in this situation, with other clubs desperate for cash and Celtic desperate for the title.

[CJGJ]

Just now, hughesie27 said:

1 Championship club is currently aware that it is in complete control of the future of Scottish Football. 

 

 

Well if the vote was too late it should fall and cannot be counted

 

Championship needs 8 votes and only received 7

[R08813]

Well, whatever happens now, whoever advised the SPFL to release the statement of how clubs voted is getting the sack. This is clear evidence of the board trying to coerce clubs into voting a certain way and gives an avenue to challenge any decision at a later juncture. For now hopefully the clock keeps ticking until all these useless clubs that rely on old firm tickets go to the wall. We can start all over again, hopefully with a new league that isn’t run by the corrupt old boys in Glasgow.

[Squirt]

Just now, Hungry hippo said:

Completely improper to release the votes midway through a vote even if it is allowed to extend the deadline.

 

How can they justify putting the championship club who are still to vote into such a situation, and actually make sure that they know they gold all the cards. We know why they're doing it, but how can this be allowed to happen.

 

Really boiling my piss this.

 

3 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

But 2 of those votes are irrelevant.  Only the missing Championship one matters because if that’s a yes then all 3 votes are in favour. 

 

Correct as I understand it yeah.

[Thomaso]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

But 2 of those votes are irrelevant.  Only the missing Championship one matters because if that’s a yes then all 3 votes are in favour. 

If a vote isn’t lodged by a deadline it is assumed to be an abstention!

Not in the corrupt world of Scottish football it would seem!

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

Just now, CJGJ said:

Well if the vote was too late it should fall and cannot be counted

 

Championship needs 8 votes and only received 7

Correct I think

[OTT]

7 minutes ago, StevenNaismith said:

All sorts of nonsense going on behind the scenes. Neil Doncaster needs frogmarched out of our game. Corruption of the highest order!

 

Should be published and him run out of Scotland shortly after. 

 

An odious cretin of a man. He is to Scottish football what Michael Jackson is to childminding. 

[karipidis]

Is it possible it’s Hearts and Partick who have abstained for legal reasons? Or have Partick confirmed they are voting no?

[Ribble]

6 minutes ago, Squirt said:

 

Surely, SURELY, if the SPFL try to come round in an hour or two and say the motion has passed. Budge just needs to show the SPFL statement saying the deadline was 5pm. At the time of the deadline the motion had failed. 

 

The SPFL's only argument is that they make up and change the rules as they please. We all already know that, but they'd be forced to admit it.

Correct the deadline is either at 5pm and didn’t  pass or the spfl board didn’t have the right to reduce the deadline from 28 days and therefor it cannot be a valid vote

[busby1985]

2 minutes ago, StevenNaismith said:

I’m trying to get it confirmed but I don’t think Hearts voted. If this is indeed the case then AB has played a blinder.

What makes you think both points? 

[merrymac]

2 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

1 Championship club is currently aware that it is in complete control of the future of Scottish Football. 

 

 

So the SPFL hold a SECRET ballot and then after the deadline print the results and allow one more team extra time  to vote , knowing what effect their vote will have on the outcome.

That seems perfectly moral and legal 

[David McCaig]

Just now, karipidis said:

Is it possible it’s Hearts and Partick who have abstained for legal reasons? Or have Partick confirmed they are voting no?

Hopefully it’s Partick in which case its an abstention in place of a cast iron no.

[OTT]

Just now, karipidis said:

Is it possible it’s Hearts and Partick who have abstained for legal reasons? Or have Partick confirmed they are voting no?

 

Not a lawyer but if you plan legal action and then participate in the vote does that not nullify any potential legal claim because you have consented to the vote? Like our participation would validate it...

[Thomaso]

3 minutes ago, StevenNaismith said:

I’m trying to get it confirmed but I don’t think Hearts voted. If this is indeed the case then AB has played a blinder.

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

[Mikey1874]

3 minutes ago, CJGJ said:

Well if the vote was too late it should fall and cannot be counted

 

Championship needs 8 votes and only received 7

 

 

[Victorian]

Just now, merrymac said:

So the SPFL hold a SECRET ballot and then after the deadline print the results and allow one more team extra time  to vote , knowing what effect their vote will have on the outcome.

That seems perfectly moral and legal 

 

Yep.

 

 

The thing that could not be made up.

 

[busby1985]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

But that makes nonsense according to the statement released by the SPFL. 

[Last Laff]

See Aberdeen voted it too.  If ten of the 12 want it through in the top league it looks dreadful.

[David McCaig]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

That’s 13 teams as 10 voted YES

[merrymac]

2 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

If a vote isn’t lodged by a deadline it is assumed to be an abstention!

Not in the corrupt world of Scottish football it would seem!

Absolutely, the two who dont matter are abstentions but the one that wins them the day can have more time.

Ludicrous beyond belief

[Jamboelite]

6 minutes ago, Tom Hardy’s Dug said:

Not when the success of the vote depends on a set percentage of total members voting in favour.

And a legal entitlement to 28days regardless of what the SPFL have asked for.

 

Dont get me wrong there is no way clubs are going to vote for league reconstruction if we shaft everyone and hold out for 28days.

 

We might get a guarantee of some extra cash mind you.

 

If AB has got lawyers to look at it and has found a way of ****ing Doncaster even if we do go down thats a big 👍🏼 for me.

Edited April 10, 2020 by Jamboelite

[Mikey1874]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

 

Can't be

 

10 voted in favour

[Walter Bishop]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

There were 11 votes cast. 

[milky_26]

Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

Just heard from a good source that Hearts and Rangers abstained and Aberdeen voted no.

that cant be right as the numbers show 10 voted yes and 1 voted no

[Squirt]

1 minute ago, merrymac said:

So the SPFL hold a SECRET ballot and then after the deadline print the results and allow one more team extra time  to vote , knowing what effect their vote will have on the outcome.

That seems perfectly moral and legal 

 

If I was the running whatever club that is, I'd be calling all the other directors and saying what are you going to give us to vote the way you want, and I'd sell to the highest bidder. 

[Gmcjambo]

1 minute ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

If a vote isn’t lodged by a deadline it is assumed to be an abstention!

Not in the corrupt world of Scottish football it would seem!

They could request a vote by any date and time they wish but its only a request and means nothing If the 28 days rule is true.  

[Tom Hardy’s Dug]

1 minute ago, BarneyBattles said:

This 28 day thing, if that’s the case why were clubs given 2 days rather than take 28 days to consider it?

To push it through quickly with the carrot that money would get released quickly

[DETTY29]

4 minutes ago, CJGJ said:

Well if the vote was too late it should fall and cannot be counted

 

Championship needs 8 votes and only received 7

In the simplistic way of every day life across the whole planet.

 

However, here...

[Squirt]

1 minute ago, BarneyBattles said:

This 28 day thing, if that’s the case why were clubs given 2 days rather than take 28 days to consider it?

 

Because clearly the SPFL don't know their own rulebook, or were hoping that the clubs hadn't read it.

[Jamboelite]

4 minutes ago, CJGJ said:

Well if the vote was too late it should fall and cannot be counted

 

Championship needs 8 votes and only received 7

The Deadline was a request they have 28days so its not void.

[The Mercer Takeover]

Whole thing is a circus.

 

I suspect Hearts and Rangers didn't vote, nullifying the whole thing.

 

Agree completely on the disgusting pressure put on a Championship team to vote. Heads must roll at the SPFL for releasing data before it is fully complete. 

 

Scottish football is rotten to the core.