SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Guest ToqueJambo]

59 minutes ago, Rods said:

Correct 

 

It may turn out Dundee have the dirt and are willing to dish if reconstruction does not go through.

 

Aberdeen, Hibs and St Mirren will be told to vote for the plan by their paymasters Celtic as the whole thing could come tumbling down.

 

I hope it does 

 

Dundee voting against their own promotion hopes and Hibs voting to go down one place to 7th have got to be two of the biggest face palms in this whole thing.

[Drumjambo]

3 hours ago, Anderson5 said:

In fairness, I don’t think any fans outwith us want a change to the 12 team set up. And even then, I don’t think any of us wanted a change to the set up prior to March. 
 

The players on the other hand seem to be pretty unanimous in wanting a change to the 12 team set up. 

 

No Id disagree - I've always thought 12  wi the 3 times then the split for 5 games was mickey mouse. I would think lots of fans don't like 4 games a season.

 

Id far prefer a 16 playing home and away once like every other proper league - i think 14 is a decent compromise so you don't go to ibroke 3 times a season (which we have done twice) and as at least 2 teams were gonna have to do  this year had the league been played out

 

Im not against splitting the 16 to a 7 and 9 you could then have 3 home 3 away for top and 4 home and 4 away bottom

 

That would give you 18 home and away top and 19 home and away bottom but hey what do I  know??

 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

21 minutes ago, Gambo said:

Are we needed in the top division so that the Scottish Cup can be completed?

 

Whilst i think.it should be cancelled for season 2019/20, we know one team in particular are desperate for its completion, but that cant be done if one expelled team are not playing competitive football.

 

???

Lennon wants it played in a hub, prior to League games being played. 

 

Perhaps forgotten our preseason is in December if some have their way 

[Jambof3tornado]

10 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Of all the games in the world that would benefit from being held behind closed doors...

 

Not even a global pandemic can stop those prehistoric bigot fests it seems.

To be fair it makes no difference to anyone but the old firm when they play each other. I dont give a shite.

[Beast Boy]

4 hours ago, Anderson5 said:

In fairness, I don’t think any fans outwith us want a change to the 12 team set up. And even then, I don’t think any of us wanted a change to the set up prior to March. 
 

The players on the other hand seem to be pretty unanimous in wanting a change to the 12 team set up. 

Absolute horseshit.

[Aussie Jambo]

9 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

https://www.usingenglish.com/reference/idioms/make+a+better+fist.html

😂 In my 50 years on this planet I’ve never once heard anyone ever say that. You learn something every day. 

I better make a better fist of taking the piss in the future. 

 

[Walter Bishop]

Incredible! 

 

 

Stuart Wallace

 

@srwallace1

·

2m

 

You can now add 75 to each number below. 200 today alone

 

#LegendsintheStands

 

 

 

 

Foundation of Hearts

 

@The_FOH

· 5h

Heartfelt thanks to all who've made a new pledge, increased an existing pledge, or made a one-off donation recently. Today, that number has risen by 125; over the weekend, the figure is 254; since SPFL called the leagues 535; since lockdown 823. Breathtaking. #pledgeforlife

[Guest ToqueJambo]

16 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

Lennon wants it played in a hub, prior to League games being played. 

 

Perhaps forgotten our preseason is in December if some have their way 

 

If the SPFL and co were smart they'd play the play-offs for promotion/relegation and the final cup games as soon as they get the go ahead for contact sport to resume behind closed doors. They can fund COVID testing for Hibs, Aberdeen, Celtic, Hearts, Hamilton, Dundee, Ayr and Caley and use these (6 -8?) games as a test for restarting the league.

 

They'd get an idea of the extent of the virus in football clubs and would be able to test BCD protocols and the appetite for fans to watch games with no crowds on TV. They'd also sort out two of the most unfair things about ending the league - forcing Hearts to finish the cup with a championship squad and letting Hamilton off having to play a play-off.

 

They're so blinded by just doing what Celtic want they're not coming up with any creative or sensible solutions at all.

Edited May 24, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Morgan]

Jimmy Cant was a Hearts player.  He was Hearts.

 

What a misuse of a username.

[NaturalOrder74]

27 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Or the expelled team have had to cut their cloth according to the league they unfairly found themselves in.  Some want to call it a tainted league title. Would they also want to call it a tainted Scottish cup win?

Come on mate what about sporting integrity it’s ‘only two games’, don’t worry about the play offs though they can’t be played, obviously 

[Thomaso]

55 minutes ago, Smithee said:

 

We don't always agree, but I'm right with you here. We fund the action, we take them down, that way even if we lose the club don't have to foot the bill.

If they won't give us respect, we take it.

👍

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

Play offs etc.

 

Reconstruction. 

 

I think we are going to move through this phase,  into the reality phase. 

 

Teams who are able to field a team,  and fulfill their fixtures. 

[Morgan]

34 minutes ago, 1971fozzy said:

they won’t give a shite when it’s played. Prob 2022 and they won’t care. As long as Celtic*  get their quadruple shite

Correct.

 

Feckin Celtic shite.

[Thomaso]

27 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Dundee voting against their own promotion hopes and Hibs voting to go down one place to 7th have got to be two of the biggest face palms in this whole thing.

The Dundee change of vote I just can’t get my head round  - Hibs? Despite losing £220k in league prize money and £500k in lost Derby revenue I had no doubt the bitter tossers would vote to put us down!

[1971fozzy]

3 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

The Dundee change of vote I just can’t get my head round  - Hibs? Despite losing £220k in league prize money and £500k in lost Derby revenue I had no doubt the bitter tossers would vote to put us down!

sums up their mindset. And also add in the lost ticket revenue when we come back up as they can fek themselves if they think we will fill that end again. #neverforget

Edited May 24, 2020 by 1971fozzy

[Guest ToqueJambo]

8 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

The Dundee change of vote I just can’t get my head round  - Hibs? Despite losing £220k in league prize money and £500k in lost Derby revenue I had no doubt the bitter tossers would vote to put us down!

 

Hibs you can sort of understand although they can't now complain of lost revenue given those figures. Dundee also voted to promote their rivals though. Their part in all this needs seems to have dropped from the limelight but it's crucial to the whole thing. I'd be massively embarrassed if I was a Dundee fan.

Edited May 24, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[stan]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

One view of what happened in Belgium 

 

 

The Belgian situation is astonishing. Openly corrupt and bizzarely proud about their self serving behaviour. Thanks for posting that.

[Pasquale for King]

2 hours ago, Paint the town maroon said:

Really? Was that called for? I just questioned the suggestion that there has been a glamour for a change in the current set up. I haven’t seen it and it’s never got even close to a proposal. 

http://www.supporters-direct.scot/scottish-football-supporters-survey-results-revealed/

 

http://www.scottishsupporters.net/scottish-football-supporters-survey/2019-20/

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52454127
 

players and fans want reconstruction 

[Last Laff]

15 minutes ago, 1971fozzy said:

sums up their mindset. And also add in the lost ticket revenue when we come back up as they can fek themselves if they think we will fill that end again. #neverforget

If they voted against it then what realistically was the alternative?  Not that I’m excusing their motives for voting it through, they went with supporters pressure mainly.  Same as our club would do if swapped positions. 

[Last Laff]

11 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Hibs you can sort of understand although they can't now complain of lost revenue given those figures. Dundee also voted to promote their rivals though. Their part in all this needs seems to have dropped from the limelight but it's crucial to the whole thing. I'd be massively embarrassed if I was a Dundee fan.

They voted to end the season, again, what was the alternative and if there was an alternative how realistically was it to getting voted through?   Voting the way it happened with reconstruction was and is the the only way forward. 

[Ethan Hunt]

35 minutes ago, Aussie Jambo said:

😂 In my 50 years on this planet I’ve never once heard anyone ever say that. You learn something every day. 

I better make a better fist of taking the piss in the future. 

 

Every day’s a school day 👍

[Fozzyonthefence]

17 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:

The Dundee change of vote I just can’t get my head round  - Hibs? Despite losing £220k in league prize money and £500k in lost Derby revenue I had no doubt the bitter tossers would vote to put us down!

I agree with the sentiment but £500k?  Where are you getting that from, especially  as it might be only one derby at ER?

 

Difference between 6th and 7th was £130k.   
 

You’re right though, they will vote to make sure we go down. 
 

[Fozzyonthefence]

5 minutes ago, Last Laff said:

They voted to end the season, again, what was the alternative and if there was an alternative how realistically was it to getting voted through?   Voting the way it happened with reconstruction was and is the the only way forward. 

The alternative was to have reconstruction talks before the vote or tied into the vote to make sure it got voted through, not after it when it had no chance of getting voted through.  Another alternative was to not make clubs vote to demote teams just so they could get their money or release out of contract players. Or the SPFL could have maybe explored all the options like they should have in a duty of care to all their member clubs. 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote they could have made a difference since the resolution would have failed and a new resolution would have had to be put on the table.  By voting yes, it meant reconstruction had no chance.  Why they did that, who knows.  

[Last Laff]

2 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

The alternative was to have reconstruction talks before the vote or tied into the vote to make sure it got voted through, not after it when it had no chance of getting voted through.  Another alternative was to not make clubs vote to demote teams just so they could get their money or release out of contract players. Or the SPFL could have maybe explored all the options like they should have in a duty of care to all their member clubs. 
 

 

So clubs where to vote against the proposal until reconstruction was eventually agreed on despite a lot of clubs having absolutely no appetite for it? 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote they could have made a difference since the resolution would have failed and a new resolution would have had to be put on the table.  By voting yes, it meant reconstruction had no chance.  Why they did that, who knows.   The other alternative would have seen no promotion to other clubs, again I can’t see that ever being voted through. 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote another proposal that the majority of clubs wanted would have been pushed through when the realisation that there was no money coming to the clubs and there was no way others could put season tickets on sale just like Hibs and Aberdeen done as soon as the they voted it through.  The duty of care the spfl have had wouldn’t have been correct if there was no promotion either.   
 

There was not really any realistic alternative that would ever be voted by the clubs apart from the shady one that got voted through at the time.

[Pasquale for King]

11 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

I agree with the sentiment but £500k?  Where are you getting that from, especially  as it might be only one derby at ER?

 

Difference between 6th and 7th was £130k.   
 

You’re right though, they will vote to make sure we go down. 
 

There’s hardly been any seasons where’s there it been three derbies, 2012 I think was the last one (obviously they were down for two seasons). If you take nearly 4K fans at £30 that’s £120k, they only ever sell out against us so that’s another 3k home fans at £30 plus food etc. You’re probably talking £450k all told, maybe more as I’m sure the tickets are over £30 now, i haven’t been since the last time we lost so I’m staying away.

[jamboinglasgow]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

One view of what happened in Belgium 

 

 

 

And I thought the situation here was the most corrupt, chaotic mess that was possible. 

 

That is astonishing, surely if clubs are offering money for votes it turns into a police matter. To go from a neat solution which disadvantaged no team, to one where the the winners have to pay a few other clubs while a team has to take relegated or else it doesn't get money while the two teams who fight it out for promotion have to play a game to decide it which the Belgian FA say cant be played.

 

There is something horribly rotten at the core of football, that at this time of desperate need and football needing to come together, we are seeing corrupt individuals trying to make money on it, clubs forcing short term decisions so they can be crowned despite it causing long term problems. 

[JimmyCant]

1 hour ago, Morgan said:

Jimmy Cant was a Hearts player.  He was Hearts.

 

What a misuse of a username.

What age are you ? On social media trying to get a rise out of people for amusement. Get a fecking life pal.

[Bunny Munro]

The Sun are saying that we are going for a 14-10-10-10 model, for two years, and a vote to take place after one year to keep it or revert back. 

 

They suggest that the championship may block it to spite Inverness. I'm personally concerned about the league 2 clubs blocking it as they prefer 14-14-14.

 

Another article suggests that he spfl are looking at one league of 16 of clubs need mothballed. Or two leagues of 14 with one starting in Jan.

Edited May 24, 2020 by Bunny Munro

[annushorribilis III]

42 minutes ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

The alternative was to have reconstruction talks before the vote or tied into the vote to make sure it got voted through, not after it when it had no chance of getting voted through.  Another alternative was to not make clubs vote to demote teams just so they could get their money or release out of contract players. Or the SPFL could have maybe explored all the options like they should have in a duty of care to all their member clubs. 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote they could have made a difference since the resolution would have failed and a new resolution would have had to be put on the table.  By voting yes, it meant reconstruction had no chance.  Why they did that, who knows.  

When you read the SPFL legal opinion it's obvious that they were advised to follow the path of least resistance and that meant :

 

force the clubs to end the season by tying the remaining prize money to that specific resolution.

 

then force  the clubs to vote on a winner and a relegated club (that's the Board off the hook, even though they had the power to agree on what would happen but passed the buck) 

 

But the interesting part of the legal advice on reconstruction was basically, : on no account have a  discussion on reconstruction  until after you have ended the season and got the the winners/losers elected by whatever means you choose because no way will you ever get an agreement (and even if you did, the TV deal is at risk).

 

This is what we need to see played out in court because the SPFL Board forced the clubs to relegate Hearts  (Hearts could NOT be relegated automatically by the points-per-game formula) and then they've put Hearts in a division where it looks like they won't have any chance of getting out of this season  - all the while , the clubs who kicked Hearts out are doing VERY nicely with the new TV money. How is that fair ? 

 

 

 

Edited May 24, 2020 by annushorribilis III

[TheGoodLord]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Hibs you can sort of understand although they can't now complain of lost revenue given those figures. Dundee also voted to promote their rivals though. Their part in all this needs seems to have dropped from the limelight but it's crucial to the whole thing. I'd be massively embarrassed if I was a Dundee fan.

For me this is where I’m at. I still to this day can’t believe the whole Dundee vote chicanery. It’s been lost amidst the rest of the shitestorm. If this escapes proper legal forensic examination it will be shameful. 

[jamboinglasgow]

23 minutes ago, Bunny Munro said:

The Sun are saying that we are going for a 14-10-10-10 model, for two years, and a vote to take place after one year to keep it or revert back. 

 

They suggest that the championship may block it to spite Inverness. I'm personally concerned about the league 2 clubs blocking it as they prefer 14-14-14.

 

Another article suggests that he spfl are looking at one league of 16 of clubs need mothballed. Or two leagues of 14 with one starting in Jan.

 

This may sound weird, but I think there will be an agreed solution to this. I think the reality of the financial situation has hit a lot of clubs this week. 

 

edit: just seen Daily Record making out everything is against Ann Budge. All these anonymous chairmen who brief against her are cowards.

Edited May 24, 2020 by jamboinglasgow

[Beast Boy]

14 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

What age are you ? On social media trying to get a rise out of people for amusement. Get a fecking life pal.

Don’t think he’s doing anything differently to anyone else on here, including yourself.

 

5 minutes ago, annushorribilis III said:

When you read the SPFL legal opinion it's obvious that they were advised to follow the path of least resistance and that meant :

 

force the clubs to end the season by tying the remaining prize money to that specific resolution.

 

then force  the clubs to vote on a winner and a relegated club (that's the Board off the hook, even though they had the power to agree on what would happen but passed the buck) 

 

But the interesting part of the legal advice on reconstruction was basically, : on no account have a  discussion on reconstruction  until after you have ended the season and got the the winners/losers elected by whatever means you choose because no way will you ever get an agreement (and even if you did, the TV deal is at risk).

 

This is what we need to see played out in court because the SPFL Board forced the clubs to relegate Hearts  (Hearts could NOT be relegated automatically by the points-per-game formula) and then they've put Hearts in a division where it looks like they won't have any chance of getting out of this season  - all the while , the clubs who kicked Hearts out are doing VERY nicely with the new TV money. How is that fair ? 

 

 

 

 

Bang on the cash.

[Fozzyonthefence]

16 minutes ago, Last Laff said:

So clubs where to vote against the proposal until reconstruction was eventually agreed on despite a lot of clubs having absolutely no appetite for it? 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote they could have made a difference since the resolution would have failed and a new resolution would have had to be put on the table.  By voting yes, it meant reconstruction had no chance.  Why they did that, who knows.   The other alternative would have seen no promotion to other clubs, again I can’t see that ever being voted through. 
 

Had Dundee stuck with their no vote another proposal that the majority of clubs wanted would have been pushed through when the realisation that there was no money coming to the clubs and there was no way others could put season tickets on sale just like Hibs and Aberdeen done as soon as the they voted it through.  The duty of care the spfl have had wouldn’t have been correct if there was no promotion either.   
 

There was not really any realistic alternative that would ever be voted by the clubs apart from the shady one that got voted through at the time.

No realistic alternative?  That’s absolute nonsense and one of the main points of contention that Hearts, Rangers and others had and will likely end up in court.  
 

There was no reason that the release of money had to be tied to calling an end to the season and calling relegation and promotion, nor any reason to rush it through in 48 hours. The money could have been paid to clubs as advances (not loans) based on league positions.   As other clubs have said, it was rushed through without exploring other alternatives like Rangers’ resolution which could easily have been amended. 

 

If other leagues can cancel the league and decide on relegation at a later date (off the top of my head Belgium did this and in England they did this in the National League, National League North and National League South, not to mention Holland made their league null and void), why was it not possible to do this in Scotland?  Of course it was possible but Doncaster didn’t give our clubs any other options, it was my way or the highway. 

[Hectormasson]

1 hour ago, 1971fozzy said:

sums up their mindset. And also add in the lost ticket revenue when we come back up as they can fek themselves if they think we will fill that end again. #neverforget

Correct ,never give that lot a dime , and limit their sits if any at tynecastle for ever......

[annushorribilis III]

Just now, Fozzyonthefence said:

No realistic alternative?  That’s absolute nonsense and one of the main points of contention that Hearts, Rangers and others had and will likely end up in court.  
 

There was no reason that the release of money had to be tied to calling an end to the season and calling relegation and promotion, nor any reason to rush it through in 48 hours. The money could have been paid to clubs as advances (not loans) based on league positions.   As other clubs have said, it was rushed through without exploring other alternatives like Rangers’ resolution which could easily have been amended. 

 

If other leagues can cancel the league and decide on relegation at a later date (off the top of my head Belgium did this and in England they did this in the National League, National League North and National League South, not to mention Holland made their league null and void), why was it not possible to do this in Scotland?  Of course it was possible but Doncaster didn’t give our clubs any other options, it was my way or the highway. 

ABSOLUTELY.

Doncaster said - clubs can't get the money without deciding on the end of season due to their  "articles" - thus DELIBERATELY creating  the impression no way could it be done. But that is bollocks - they could have passed a resolution to CHANGE the articles and pay they money out. Its quick & it's easy to do. As discussed , there was other means available to get the money out. 

 

relegation and promotion : they had to  have this because if they didn't they were going to HAVE to have recon. There was no way of avoiding it - BUT Doncaster would have already told the clubs - if you go for recon , the new TV deal is at risk. So, the clubs decided to relegate Hearts/others  because if they didn't here WAS going to be recon. 

 

So you have a bunch of "member clubs" empowered (by their own SPFL Board , who are trying to wash their hands of the matter) to relegate a much bigger & wealthier competitor, dump them in a league they might take 2 years to get out of (not playing until January, if at all ?, and with how many teams ? , what is the promotion criteria going to be ? ). 

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

Let’s hope next week will bring some clarity on the situation, I’m feeling positive.

[qferryjam]

1 hour ago, Last Laff said:

They voted to end the season, again, what was the alternative and if there was an alternative how realistically was it to getting voted through?   Voting the way it happened with reconstruction was and is the the only way forward. 

 

29 minutes ago, annushorribilis III said:

ABSOLUTELY.

Doncaster said - clubs can't get the money without deciding on the end of season due to their  "articles" - thus DELIBERATELY creating  the impression no way could it be done. But that is bollocks - they could have passed a resolution to CHANGE the articles and pay they money out. Its quick & it's easy to do. As discussed , there was other means available to get the money out. 

 

relegation and promotion : they had to  have this because if they didn't they were going to HAVE to have recon. There was no way of avoiding it - BUT Doncaster would have already told the clubs - if you go for recon , the new TV deal is at risk. So, the clubs decided to relegate Hearts/others  because if they didn't here WAS going to be recon. 

 

So you have a bunch of "member clubs" empowered (by their own SPFL Board , who are trying to wash their hands of the matter) to relegate a much bigger & wealthier competitor, dump them in a league they might take 2 years to get out of (not playing until January, if at all ?, and with how many teams ? , what is the promotion criteria going to be ? ). 

 

They kept pumping the no alternative narrative but AB has said herself after the vote, the documents showed there had been 6 different resolutions 5 which had basically been rubbished by the committee and legal argument, the only one not assessed in the same manner using the same legal arguments, was the resolution they voted on . It was basically weighted against everything else . 

 

[Ethan Hunt]

1 hour ago, JimmyCant said:

What age are you ? On social media trying to get a rise out of people for amusement. Get a fecking life pal.

He managed it though.

[OTT]

Budges plan seems good in principle. 14 teams trialled for 2 years with a vote in the middle to decide to keep it or not. Essentially means a permanent 14 team league. 

 

I don't much like the idea of 14-10-10-10 though. If we jumped to a straight 3 leagues of 14 it could improve the quality of lower league football and ideally aid youth development (since leagues 1 and 2 would pretty much combine, loaning to what are currently league 2 sides would mean the kids are playing against league 1 sides which should make more of a challenge). Ambitious clubs like Kelty who are investing to climb the leagues have less leagues to actually navigate their way through too.

 

My preference is 14-14-16, with it being trialled and clubs then vote to go to 14-14-14 permanently after a year. Keep things as 1 up 1 down + play offs. Stability is key. 

 

I think whatever way we go about it, more teams in the top league can only be a good thing. An extra 2 clubs should mean greater stability and hopefully a reason to try and play better football. The league is too competitive on the bottom end so shite defensive football is the norm. If Scottish football wants to clean up its image, then trying to move away from that is really needed. 

 

Its a good step towards the radical change we need, but a serious conversation needs to be had on the merits of summer football. I think Sky would be extremely receptive to this and it would help the clubs trying to qualify for europe as we'd be doing it towards the end of our season, rather than the beginning. Scandinavian clubs consistently do better than us. Moreover, they'd be our TV competition, which I believe would make for a better TV deal longer term (no real competition, big 5 currently which is suicide to compete for air time).  

[Ethan Hunt]

1 hour ago, TheGoodLord said:

For me this is where I’m at. I still to this day can’t believe the whole Dundee vote chicanery. It’s been lost amidst the rest of the shitestorm. If this escapes proper legal forensic examination it will be shameful. 

Agreed. Lots of people - on here alone - making lots of noise in an attempt to detract from that.  It’s important to remember that the SPFL’s resolution was flawed in that they neglected their duty to protect the interests of ALL 42 clubs. That cannot be disputed by the very nature that clubs have been disadvantaged. In addition, there is the issue of whether the vote in relation to the flawed resolution was valid. QC legal opinion is that it wasn’t. Throw in a whole heap of skullduggery involved in the days leading up to Dundee’s change of vote and Sir Walter Scott - the author of The Heart of Mid-Lothian coincidentally - is correct, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

 

They’ll be found out in court.

 

 

[Jambo66]

7 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Agreed. Lots of people - on here alone - making lots of noise in an attempt to detract from that.  It’s important to remember that the SPFL’s resolution was flawed in that they neglected their duty to protect the interests of ALL 42 clubs. That cannot be disputed by the very nature that clubs have been disadvantaged. In addition, there is the issue of whether the vote in relation to the flawed resolution was valid. QC legal opinion is that it wasn’t. Throw in a whole heap of skullduggery involved in the days leading up to Dundee’s change of vote and Sir Walter Scott - the author of The Heart of Mid-Lothian coincidentally - is correct, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive.

 

They’ll be found out in court.

 

 

Nicely done 👏👏👏

[Ethan Hunt]

2 hours ago, annushorribilis III said:

ABSOLUTELY.

Doncaster said - clubs can't get the money without deciding on the end of season due to their  "articles" - thus DELIBERATELY creating  the impression no way could it be done. But that is bollocks - they could have passed a resolution to CHANGE the articles and pay they money out. Its quick & it's easy to do. As discussed , there was other means available to get the money out. 

 

relegation and promotion : they had to  have this because if they didn't they were going to HAVE to have recon. There was no way of avoiding it - BUT Doncaster would have already told the clubs - if you go for recon , the new TV deal is at risk. So, the clubs decided to relegate Hearts/others  because if they didn't here WAS going to be recon. 

 

So you have a bunch of "member clubs" empowered (by their own SPFL Board , who are trying to wash their hands of the matter) to relegate a much bigger & wealthier competitor, dump them in a league they might take 2 years to get out of (not playing until January, if at all ?, and with how many teams ? , what is the promotion criteria going to be ? ). 

 

 

Someone posted a link to the SPFL articles on here. Within 24 hours of the vote to end the lower leagues being passed the articles had been re-written and updated accordingly.

 

For Doncaster - or anyone else for that matter - to suggest that the articles could not be changed by a members vote is frankly outrageous. The SPFL board had a range of options available to them. A number of those options would have meant that few clubs would have been disadvantaged. Andrew Smith of The Scotsman wrote a resolution that was perfectly competent. He had the foresight to protect Scottish football as a whole. If a journalist can pen a competent resolution, then the SPFL board have been negligent in their duty in not finding a similarity competent solution. They chose one solution and one solution only. They need to be aggressively challenged on why that resolution was the only one presented to the member clubs.

 

Scrutiny must be placed on the Sky deal, and in particular Doncaster’s reluctance to enter into discussions with Sky prior to any resolution being formed by the SPFL. Particular focus should also be centred around Doncaster’s £91k performance bonus in relation to the Sky deal, and how any re-negotiation might have affected that payment. 

 

The decision making, actions and competence of the paid directors of the SPFL must also be placed under intense scrutiny. The incumbents of the senior roles within the SPFL are paid handsomely - more that the PM of the UK -  yet they have been found wanting in the most basic aspects of their role. Despite Rangers dossier not being sexy enough for some people, it shown a light on the amateurish and incompetent way the SPFL board conducts its business. The fact that only 13 clubs saw the need to carry out an independent investigation into their actions tells you everything you need to know about Scottish football. It is rotten to the core.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[johnnythejambo]

As a season ticket from the early 70's I look with amusement at the folk wanting an 18 or 16 team league playing each other just twice. Well we had an 18 team league back then and boy it was not exciting if you were stuck in the middle of it. Pretty boring in fact. And another thing as a season ticket holder the games that excite me and get the atmosphere going is the ones against the old firm, wee team and possibly the sheep so to advocate halving those games fills me with dread. So instead of fired up, get into then games we replace with matches against Morton, Queen of South etc. Jesus no thanks!!!

[Jambo66]

12 minutes ago, johnnythejambo said:

As a season ticket from the early 70's I look with amusement at the folk wanting an 18 or 16 team league playing each other just twice. Well we had an 18 team league back then and boy it was not exciting if you were stuck in the middle of it. Pretty boring in fact. And another thing as a season ticket holder the games that excite me and get the atmosphere going is the ones against the old firm, wee team and possibly the sheep so to advocate halving those games fills me with dread. So instead of fired up, get into then games we replace with matches against Morton, Queen of South etc. Jesus no thanks!!!

What excites me is the possibility of winning the league.

The current set up is designed to make it as difficult as possible to stop either of the OF from being champions every single year. Having to play the OF 8 times and still be in with a shout is a massive ask. Since 1985 (the last time one of them failed to win the title), we got very close once and quite close in 1998. Aberdeen took it to the last day of the season once. Is that exciting? Not to me.

 

I would take 10 years of mid-table mediocrity to have, overall, a better chance of winning the league just once.

 

We need to get it down to one match at home and one away against each team. We are probably the only country in the world that celebrates the fact that only 2 clubs are allowed to win the league. And I mean "allowed".

 

And before you ask, I do remember before 1976, but not well 😁

[Kiwidoug]

32 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

What excites me is the possibility of winning the league.

The current set up is designed to make it as difficult as possible to stop either of the OF from being champions every single year. Having to play the OF 8 times and still be in with a shout is a massive ask. Since 1985 (the last time one of them failed to win the title), we got very close once and quite close in 1998. Aberdeen took it to the last day of the season once. Is that exciting? Not to me.

 

I would take 10 years of mid-table mediocrity to have, overall, a better chance of winning the league just once.

 

We need to get it down to one match at home and one away against each team. We are probably the only country in the world that celebrates the fact that only 2 clubs are allowed to win the league. And I mean "allowed".

 

And before you ask, I do remember before 1976, but not well 😁

Johnny and yourself have put up excellent arguements.  I come down on your side.  

 

Johnny is right that the mid-table games could almost be meaningless but that was during bad times.  We were down to a core of around 8,000, probably around half of whom attended away games.  My mates and I much preferred the away games.

 

As it stands, we will get what suits the OF and Sky.  Utterly depressing.

 

I would be ecstatic if the other 40 clubs could vote them out of the league because they make it uncompetitive and they bring the game into disrepute.  Scottish football would absolutely thrive.

[gator]

1 hour ago, johnnythejambo said:

As a season ticket from the early 70's I look with amusement at the folk wanting an 18 or 16 team league playing each other just twice. Well we had an 18 team league back then and boy it was not exciting if you were stuck in the middle of it. Pretty boring in fact. And another thing as a season ticket holder the games that excite me and get the atmosphere going is the ones against the old firm, wee team and possibly the sheep so to advocate halving those games fills me with dread. So instead of fired up, get into then games we replace with matches against Morton, Queen of South etc. Jesus no thanks!!!

I take your point, obviously things have changed since then not just due to the pandemic but also because of the money and who controls most of it in Scottish football, I think the number of viable clubs may well dictate alignment of divisions going forward, we might have to endure some of the matches you speak about, it may be the price we pay to keep a top league functioning!

[Jamhammer]

Can anyone explain to me why clubs who very recently said no to reconstruction are suddenly gonna change their mind or is today just gonna be another GTF Hearts?

Is it just the threat of the courts?

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

2 minutes ago, Jamhammer said:

Can anyone explain to me why clubs who very recently said no to reconstruction are suddenly gonna change their mind or is today just gonna be another GTF Hearts?

Is it just the threat of the courts?

Basically, it isn't just the threat of the courts. It's the reality that we have a case to take to court and that they will have a financial reduction / liability if we win.

[gator]

I think some will have changed their mind due to the threat of legal action, the question is are there enough to push this through, there seems to be a consensus on here that it won't pass due to self interest , grudges and just down right bitterness, this will be interesting!

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

6 minutes ago, gator said:

I think some will have changed their mind due to the threat of legal action, the question is are there enough to push this through, there seems to be a consensus on here that it won't pass due to self interest , grudges and just down right bitterness, this will be interesting!

I honestly would prefer court. I know it won't happen if reconstruction goes through but I'd rather call bullshit on the whole setup.