SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[EIEIO]

3 minutes ago, Ricardo Shillyshally said:

It should have been the SPFL board

This is correct however , in a leadership vacuum we had to step in.

[Beast Boy]

Simple case of vote for this, nobody gets stuffed, and we will throw our weight behind helping other clubs who will struggle. Don’t vote for it and we are taking £300k parachute, taking you to court for compensation, and crucially... you ain’t getting **** all help to see you through the nuclear winter.

[normando]

2 hours ago, cocomac said:

Agreed. Well done @Hagar the Horrible 

Maxwell is Partick through and through and can't be happy with the outcome for them. But he is also well out of his depth, just look how nervous he was during his TV interview last week. Doncaster sits on both boards and I am sure he was pulled onto the SFA board to help the inexperienced Maxwell. So I would question who really is calling the shots. It should be the SFA and Maxwell should be in the media every day (as per Davie Provans article on Sunday) but my guess is Doncaster is running both at present. He is making a real mess of what should be a relatively easy job and takes a salary far greater than what the job merits. The fans need to act now to rescue the game we love before it is to late. But how do we make our voices heard? Where is the fans body? 

Doncaster is paid more than the first minister and prime minister put together.for running a league similar to pitz at sighthill

just a born conman.

[drumie jambo]

3 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

Ross County, Hamilton, St Mirren, St Johnstone and Hibs will. 

I dont think they will. 2 coming up increases survival rate plus County will have 4 local derbies.

[luckydug]

10 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

Bit disappointed that Ann hasn’t tried to get Brora and Kelty into the leagues as both are far more deserving than Brechin.

 

We are most likely going to fail anyway so we might as well do the right thing rather than play politics.

Might be that increasing the number of teams affects prize money thus making the proposal need 90%.

Keeping the same amount of teams removes the financial aspects of the proposal means

only 75% approval needed. 

 

[Jammy T]

In very many respects that is a very very clever proposal and also effectively a a very good club statement 

 

Reference to Sky in particular is strategically excellent and suggests something there in the background.

 

Well done Ann

[Riccarton3]

8 minutes ago, true-jambo said:

She is saying the top league needs Hearts more than the championship does, and that the championship need Patrick more than Division 1. Or put another way the best way to protect Scottish football for the future at this time of crisis is by keeping clubs at a level they can best contribute to that aim.

So, there is context. A pretty big context. PRAGMATISM. 

 

Strachan's thoughts on our sports media will be proven once again. Negative, negative, negative. And twisted.

 

[BarneyvB]

🤞

[jock _turd]

It is see you in court time because , even though the proposal is perfectly balanced, the knives are out for us from a few clubs I doubt it will pass. One problem for us is we don't have a SPL vote so four going against the proposal is always going to be likely. Sadly this is where the whole SPFL falls flat on its face... the voting requirements for change are heavily weighted against any proposal being successful.

[Beast Boy]

2 minutes ago, kila said:

 

The stakes are really high for the SPFL now. Budge has reminded them how well funded/supported Hearts are with the FoH and benefactors, so if this needs to get dragged out in the courts then we have the funding to do that.

 

This AND you won’t get any help from us and our not inconsiderable resources when the wolf turns up at your door in a few weeks/months.

[soonbe110]

9 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

Ross County, Hamilton, St Mirren, St Johnstone and Hibs will. 

Why would they?  Her proposal increase their chances of staying in top league for three more seasons quite significantly. 

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

Any clubs voting against this will need to have a VERY good explanation for it.

 

[Seaside jambo]

I think Ann’s case for reconstruction is better than duncasters or anyone else’s from that bunch of shysters .

Hearts have done their best (shouldn’t have been their job ) it’s now up to the rest of the clubs. But if this proposal fails , War it is , take them all for what we can get ,and let them know , That you’re had chance n blew it big time 

Always Hearts Only Hearts 

[jock _turd]

1 minute ago, TypoonJambo said:

I doubt he even speaks French 😂😂

 

Me too he doesn't speak English

[KillieMitch]

From an outside point of view that seems an entirely reasonable proposal. Killie were already in favour of reconstruction and I'd be surprised if Bowie opposed that. 

 

I think the crucial thing might actually be that it makes games in the Championship more likely next season by keeping more larger teams in there. And ensures there is no risk of Hearts and Inverness bring marooned if that league can't play - that might tip it over the line. 

 

Agree with the posters saying the language is a mistake. Its like all of those rambling statements. The specifics are usually right, it's great that Budge wants to communicate, but everything gets buried in waffle and things get taken out of context. An editor the only thing missing from that proposal. 

[luckydug]

30 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

If it gets rejected, I'm pretty chilled. As I have posted many times, I think we have every chance of winning in a court action. If there was any doubt at all that we might not have the balls to raise an action, that has been put to bed once and for all now.

What's your opinion on how a court action from Hearts would affect the ability of the top two leagues to commence ?

Or would they have to wait until legal proceedings are completed ?

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, KillieMitch said:

From an outside point of view that seems an entirely reasonable proposal. Killie were already in favour of reconstruction and I'd be surprised if Bowie opposed that. 

 

I think the crucial thing might actually be that it makes games in the Championship more likely next season by keeping more larger teams in there. And ensures there is no risk of Hearts and Inverness bring marooned if that league can't play - that might tip it over the line. 

 

Agree with the posters saying the language is a mistake. Its like all of those rambling statements. The specifics are usually right, it's great that Budge wants to communicate, but everything gets buried in waffle and things get taken out of context. An editor the only thing missing from that proposal. 

Think that’s down to it almost certainly being put together with a lot of input from a member of the legal fraternity. 

[Squirt]

The thing is right, if it gets voted against.

 

Then what?

[true-jambo]

5 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said:

So, there is context. A pretty big context. PRAGMATISM. 

 

Strachan's thoughts on our sports media will be proven once again. Negative, negative, negative. And twisted.

 

Unfortunately yes, as has been stated on here most sports commentators/journalists will just read the headlines.

It would have been good to think the various chairmen could see what she is trying to point out, but given recent performances on national radio, pragmatism is a stretch too far

[The Mighty Thor]

That is a very well considered proposal. 

 

You'd have to be some kind of special to not see the logic in it.

 

Oh and if you are stupid enough to reject it then we'll see you in court. 

 

 

[Walter Bishop]

14 minutes ago, Mauricio Pinilla said:

 

Is there are particular reason those clubs would? Except hibs obviously. 

Fear of future relegation with possibility of 2/3 teams going down to "reset" the leagues. 

[kila]

4 minutes ago, Squirt said:

The thing is right, if it gets voted against.

 

Then what?

 

For us or for them?

 

[husref musemic]

1 hour ago, Captain Canada said:

It's a disgrace that it's fallen on Budge to put so much work into two proposals when it should  be Doncaster's job. 

 

I think it's a fair and sensible document but still expect it to be dismissed as early as tonight by self-serving clubs. 

400 grand a year & Celtic tell him what to do. 

[Hectormasson]

14 minutes ago, kila said:

The stakes are really high for the SPFL now. Budge has reminded them how well funded/supported Hearts are with the FoH and benefactors, so if this needs to get dragged out in the courts then we have the funding to do that.

 

I think it'll get voted through because there is no other proposal right now on how to deal with the impacts of the pandemic. There's talk of mothballing but nothing like what Budge has put together - it is in essence a plan on how we return to football and mitigate the effects of everything.

 

There is no shortage of incompetent clowns in the SFA, SPFL and at some clubs. If this proposal fails to get the vote, they will have to come up with a plan to save Scottish football and such a task is well beyond them. I think that might finally be settling in, because the recovery from this will take years. It isn't as simple as hitting pause and playing some games behind closed doors.

 

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏🇱🇻🇱🇻🇱🇻🇱🇻

[husref musemic]

3 minutes ago, The Mighty Thor said:

That is a very well considered proposal. 

 

You'd have to be some kind of special to not see the logic in it.

 

Oh and if you are stupid enough to reject it then we'll see you in court. 

 

 

weirdly Hibs at the last vote agreed to less money and a place lower to see us relegated. 

apply that logic here....

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

As others have said, this is both a sensible proposal and our cards on the table in one document. Reject it and we go to court and here is our bill, plus costs.

 

So if you play stupid, be prepared for your club to be damaged at a time you can least afford it.

[Anything2]

Surely teams like Cove and Edinburgh City must be up for this. They would basically have to out perform the 4 worst teams in L1 next season and they will be in the Championship the following season. Otherwise they would be up against teams like Falkirk which would be a much bigger challenge. 

[1971fozzy]

4 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

400 grand a year & Celtic tell him what to do. 

£400,000 to be Celtic*’s  rent boy. 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

2 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

weirdly Hibs at the last vote agreed to less money and a place lower to see us relegated. 

apply that logic here....

I’d happily do the same to them tbf

[Montgomery Brewster]

Just now, husref musemic said:

weirdly Hibs at the last vote agreed to less money and a place lower to see us relegated. 

apply that logic here....

They will vote against it. A certaintity. 
 

Old pontoon eyes (their chief executive ) plays to the more rabid vermin all the time.

 

would like it to be 11-1 with them being the only dissenting voice. Then next season we can go about setting about these halfwits big style. Gorgie rules .

[Fxxx the SPFL]

Just now, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I’d happily do the same to them tbf

no you wouldn't we need them in the league to be our bitches

[1971fozzy]

3 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

weirdly Hibs at the last vote agreed to less money and a place lower to see us relegated. 

apply that logic here....

absolute fuds. And if this gets rejected the potential for them voting against to cost them even more losses. Only Hibs.

absolute fannys.  Hopefully We stay up and further hurt them by boycotting their shitehole as well

[Squirt]

9 minutes ago, kila said:

 

For us or for them?

 

Them.

 

I mean I’d hope we go to court, and whatever would happen with that is irrelevant to my point here, but what about everyone else?

 

Let’s say the proposal fails, right ok. Over to the SPFL to come up with a proposal, disregarding any reconstruction of the leagues, as to how football gets started again in a fair and safe manner.
 

Then you’ll have some team’s saying we don’t want to play, some saying they do and it’s not fair not to let us play just because they can’t play, etc. etc. 
 

Then there’s the real possibility that clubs hit the wall and go under, meaning reconstruction could end up being required anyway and if the suggested model has already been voted against do they the brass neck to walk over to the bin in the corner, pull out Budge’s proposal and slap an SPFL sticker on it?
 

Like I I just don’t see any possible scenario where this gets voted down and doesn’t leave every one of the clubs who voted No look like complete tosspots in another months/2 months time. And if they do vote it down I can’t see any other way of getting the leagues going that doesn’t involve some clubs who can afford to play, and play safely, being told tough shit suck it up, which surely then starts the NEXT shit storm on this saga. 
 

Sad thing is whilst I’ve got a glimmer of hope that it’ll be passed, if you asked me to put my money down I’d be putting it on No.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Squirt

[Fozzyonthefence]

13 minutes ago, Squirt said:

The thing is right, if it gets voted against.

 

Then what?

It’s pretty obvious isn’t it?

[ritchies75]

 https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/sport/football/aberdeen-fc/2217785/aberdeen-supportive-of-hearts-chief-budges-plan-for-three-leagues-of-14/

[Guest ToqueJambo]

23 minutes ago, Walter Bishop said:

Ross County, Hamilton, St Mirren, St Johnstone and Hibs will. 

 

Why would Ross County turn down a derby with Caley?

 

Hamilton and St Mirren (and Hibs for that matter recently) are Celtic's playthings. My take is Celtic with the title wrapped up and another treble probably on the cards just want to get this sorted and if there's even a tiny chance we could prevent the league starting, they'll vote for it.

 

If Hibs and co do vote against, would the other teams have a case for making them cough up for legal costs and any associated compensation to Hearts and co?

[Victorian]

Aberdeen suggesting support.

 

0-1 behind then.    

[Rods]

Ross County, Hamilton,  and St Johnstone will vote on money St Mirren will vote what Celtic tell them to do and Hibs will vote against to appease their fans.

 

It will go through but Hibs will save face. 

[Tasavallan]

I see no major change to the pyramid system, the only thing to be sorted is what constitutes the SPFL and to which level money is distributed.  Reduce SPFL from 42 to 32 clubs.

 

I can see many semi-pro clubs in Leagues 1 and 2 reverting to non-league status as Berwick and East Stirlingshire have done and the more financially sound clubs like Brora, Kelty, Spartans, Talbot, etc.  moving up the tiers  

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 minutes ago, Montgomery Brewster said:

They will vote against it. A certaintity. 
 

Old pontoon eyes (their chief executive ) plays to the more rabid vermin all the time.

 

would like it to be 11-1 with them being the only dissenting voice. Then next season we can go about setting about these halfwits big style. Gorgie rules .

 

I don't know. Their new owner will be calling the shots. He will probably follow the money. If the upshot of voting this down is a massive legal and compensation bill to demoted clubs and possibly an induction or whatever to stop the league starting...

[The Mighty Thor]

1 minute ago, Victorian said:

Aberdeen suggesting support.

 

0-1 behind then.    

This.

 

The mutton molesters have proven time and again they cannot be trusted*

 

 

 

* unless Lawwell has already called and issued them their voting intention. 

[Anything2]

9 minutes ago, husref musemic said:

weirdly Hibs at the last vote agreed to less money and a place lower to see us relegated. 

apply that logic here....

Presumably, the league placings and prize money would remain as currently voted for and reconstruction implemented thereafter? If so Hibs would have voted to receive less prize money for literally no purpose, is that correct? 

[Ricardo Shillyshally]

If this goes to a vote, when will it be for all 41 clubs?

 

Dundee can obvs suit themselves

[Whatever]

Read it for a 3rd time and her comments about the French case going to court and our benefactor backing is very clever.

 

’We can afford to take this all the way, can you?’

 

Agree with others that there was legal help behind some of that.

[Fozzyonthefence]

BBC report I’m reading is saying 11 Premiership clubs need to vote for it now. 🤷‍♂️

[Montgomery Brewster]

4 minutes ago, Ricardo Shillyshally said:

If this goes to a vote, when will it be for all 41 clubs?

 

Dundee can obvs suit themselves

😂

[eyesandears]

1 minute ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

BBC report I’m reading is saying 11 Premiership clubs need to vote for it now. 🤷‍♂️

Yes, because it's a redistribtion of the money. 

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

1 minute ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

BBC report I’m reading is saying 11 Premiership clubs need to vote for it now. 🤷‍♂️

Hope that is true. Let's see who has the cojones for court.

[tynewater]

Given that Ann has put in most of the work involved in creating this proposal, I think it's absolutely right that she gets an opportunity to plug the case for Hearts staying in the Premiership as part of it. Bit like one of those free apps that pumps advertising at you, like Facebook. The directors running the other clubs are mostly business people, so they would expect nothing less than a sales pitch for Hearts being part of our proposal. It would be bizarre if Ann hadn't been banging the drum for us in this.

[Squirt]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

BBC report I’m reading is saying 11 Premiership clubs need to vote for it now. 🤷‍♂️

Yeah just seen that too

 

If that’s the case, it’s a non-starter IMO.

Edited May 26, 2020 by Squirt