Jump to content

SPFL clubs invest in independent advice on strategic review


Carl Fredrickson

Recommended Posts

julienbrellier
1 minute ago, Homme said:

 

Thankfully the people at the club aren't taking this view.

 

Can I just ask what you think is going to happen when this independent commission comes back, for any changes to be binding you need a vote and then we'll slip back into where we were before. I'm going to repeat here that most of the teams on that list were very happy to vote against their own interests to relegate us. As far as any sort of change in Scottish football is concerned we should be abstaining or voting against it, it had it's chance only what 2 years ago. I really don't see why we are trying to help out these teams. Thankfully I don't think most supporters will have forgotten, the club maybe, supporters no.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 298
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Rogue Daddy

    30

  • GinRummy

    14

  • Smith's right boot

    12

  • John Findlay

    11

Psychedelicropcircle

Nothing more that a marketing exercise that will fall on deaf ears! 
 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Daddy
3 minutes ago, julienbrellier said:

Any hearts fan entertaining even a shred of support towards this needs to have a word, have you forgotten we tried reforming the league but all the other clubs shafted us? why would we do anything, anything to help the likes of dundee and hibs. Couldn't care less if it's against the old firm, they'll do what they want anyway, apart from Inverness and a few select others nobody wanted to vote in their interests last time, why would we?

Thing is mate, we have to start somewhere… and COVID isn’t going anywhere soon. So, some of these clubs are probably crapping themselves in case we go into another lockdown and the leagues are called. Again!

I also wouldn’t trust any of them!… but, like I said, if something HAS to be done for the better of Scottish football, we have to start somewhere. 🤷‍♂️

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 minutes ago, Homme said:

 

Thankfully the people at the club aren't taking this view.

You can hardly blame your fellow supporters for being sceptical. I suppose Ann and the club need to try to co=operate with these rats but it’s fairly unpalatable.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jamboinglasgow
3 minutes ago, julienbrellier said:

 

Can I just ask what you think is going to happen when this independent commission comes back, for any changes to be binding you need a vote and then we'll slip back into where we were before. I'm going to repeat here that most of the teams on that list were very happy to vote against their own interests to relegate us. As far as any sort of change in Scottish football is concerned we should be abstaining or voting against it, it had it's chance only what 2 years ago. I really don't see why we are trying to help out these teams. Thankfully I don't think most supporters will have forgotten, the club maybe, supporters no.

 

We are doing it help ourselves. We benefit greatly if more money comes into the league, the reputation of the league improves (meaning more players and better sponsorship,) etc. The difficulty will always be in getting things voted through, show more money in the league and the smaller clubs will be on board, I also think if you show changes to the SPFL then Rangers would be on board. 

 

It may fail (such has sadly been the history of Scottish football) but we can either shrug our shoulders, moan that nothing will change, do nothing and nothing happens, or we can at least try to do something which could happen.

Edited by jamboinglasgow
Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Daddy
11 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

It was. Well remembered. Not that it really matters Deloitte are a huge multi-national. 

Yeah, I can’t see us getting involved in something like this if we didn’t trust/know who would be carrying it out. With any luck, we’re ‘well in’ with them and we get results/answers we can act upon. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jamboinglasgow said:

 

We are doing it help ourselves. We benefit greatly if more money comes into the league, the reputation of the league improves (meaning more players and better sponsorship,) etc. The difficulty will always be in getting things voted through, show more money in the league and the smaller clubs will be on board, I also think if you show changes to the SPFL then Rangers would be on board. 

 

It may fail (such has sadly been the history of Scottish football) but we can either shrug our shoulders, moan that nothing will change, do nothing and nothing happens, or we can at least try to do something which could happen.

 

Good post. Probably said it better than I could have managed to. Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

People seem to be painting this as some kind of rebellion.  Not how I read it. OF are happy for us to spend money on increasing revenue of the league.  No suggestions there will be any kind of meaningful change to revenue distribution models

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlphonseCapone

Tbh I'm glad we are at least trying to do something rather than simply bitching and moaning. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's SPFL endorsed. Rangers via Robertson are on the SPFL board so in my eyes it's an endorsement by proxy.

 

The main sticking point is the clubs are paying for it so the SPFL are telling them to batter in.

Link to post
Share on other sites
JamboGraham
Just now, db211833 said:

People seem to be painting this as some kind of rebellion.  Not how I read it. OF are happy for us to spend money on increasing revenue of the league.  No suggestions there will be any kind of meaningful change to revenue distribution models

 

Agreed...I honestly think the key objective here is to see if there is any path from £27m to nearer £50m. Nothing really stake here until the review confirms that a. There is a path and b. What each club would need to do to earn these extra millions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, julienbrellier said:

 

Can I just ask what you think is going to happen when this independent commission comes back, for any changes to be binding you need a vote and then we'll slip back into where we were before. I'm going to repeat here that most of the teams on that list were very happy to vote against their own interests to relegate us. As far as any sort of change in Scottish football is concerned we should be abstaining or voting against it, it had it's chance only what 2 years ago. I really don't see why we are trying to help out these teams. Thankfully I don't think most supporters will have forgotten, the club maybe, supporters no.

We are trying to help ourself as well matey....

 

Thankfully, deep set resentment tends not to lead to a positive mood and mindset in any aspect of life, and our board look like we have a progressive plan of attack...

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 1971fozzy said:

I’d be wary in the extreme. Dundee ffs 🤣🤣 couldnae even email properly.  Celtic and Rangers will chew it up and spit it out. 

I'm with you.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Treasurer said:

Anything that tries to drag Scottish football forward has to be seen as a good thing, but I would have thought that the SPFL, the people who are well paid to run Scottish football, should be doing this as part of their job description 

Nail on head , what do these people do that has helped improve the Scottish game?

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

Tbh I'm glad we are at least trying to do something rather than simply bitching and moaning. 

Surely we can still bitch and moan as well though?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SE16 3LN said:

I'm with you.

 

I'm sceptical too. Fool me once sham on you, fool me twice and all that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also not convinced this is the direction I'd go. Great, we go from 27 to 50 million in a few years. Divide that up, it's irrelevant in football terms. What we want is a competition.  I'd love to see us going completely Rogue,  we want a competitive league, even if the average standard of player is lower. 25 years of 2 teams winning the league?  Trying to get a few million extra pounds changes nothing. We need to play hardball,  the OF have no place else to go

Link to post
Share on other sites
part_time_jambo
1 hour ago, Saint Jambo said:

From our point of view, seems a sensible group of clubs to commission it. If the SPFL had commissioned it themselves we would have dismissed it. If the Old Firm had been in the group we would have dismissed it as just going to protect their interest. The bigger non-old firm clubs but with the agreement of the SPFL/ other clubs seems sensible.

 

But the problem is in the line "the SPFL is one the most exciting leagues in Europe". Surely the review should start from a place of honesty. Every season for over 25+ years has started with us knowing that one of two teams will win the league. To claim that makes the SPFL one of the most exciting leagues in Europe is total denial.

That line jumped out at me too. Really?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Portable Badger
16 minutes ago, julienbrellier said:

 

Can I just ask what you think is going to happen when this independent commission comes back, for any changes to be binding you need a vote and then we'll slip back into where we were before. I'm going to repeat here that most of the teams on that list were very happy to vote against their own interests to relegate us. As far as any sort of change in Scottish football is concerned we should be abstaining or voting against it, it had it's chance only what 2 years ago. I really don't see why we are trying to help out these teams. Thankfully I don't think most supporters will have forgotten, the club maybe, supporters no.

Use the output as the basis to breakaway and form a new legal entity without the Uglies

Link to post
Share on other sites

Would be nice if this did lead to much needed change.

 

Scottish football has so much potential because it is raw and passionate. It'll become more competitive if it brings in more money to pay out making the financial advantage of the Old Firm shrink a bit. A bigger league could play a pivotal role in that.

 

Corrupt/incompetent referees needs addressing as all too often it's one rule for the Old Firm and another for the rest of us. The whole setup (TV money, marketing) feels manufactured around those two clubs which only influences referees even more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Rogue Daddy
5 minutes ago, db211833 said:

I'm also not convinced this is the direction I'd go. Great, we go from 27 to 50 million in a few years. Divide that up, it's irrelevant in football terms. What we want is a competition.  I'd love to see us going completely Rogue,  we want a competitive league, even if the average standard of player is lower. 25 years of 2 teams winning the league?  Trying to get a few million extra pounds changes nothing. We need to play hardball,  the OF have no place else to go

Yep, the sooner Scottish football wakes up to the fact that THEY need us (Scottish football) more than we need them, the better. Most would also need to grow a set of 🏀🏐🎾! … personally, I think this is just the first step to something else (just a hunch!) I agree with you that 50 mill in a few years isn’t going to revolutionise anything. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Homme said:

It's SPFL endorsed. Rangers via Robertson are on the SPFL board so in my eyes it's an endorsement by proxy.

 

The main sticking point is the clubs are paying for it so the SPFL are telling them to batter in.

The fact that the SPFL are giving this the nod suggests to me that the OF are not complaining, which makes me suspicious. You can bet your bottom dollar that they would immediately undermine any move that threatens to diminish their duopoly in any way.

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlphonseCapone
10 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Surely we can still bitch and moan as well though?

 

We can, but now from a morally superior standpoint since we're actually trying to do something. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
LarrysRightFoot
8 minutes ago, db211833 said:

I'm also not convinced this is the direction I'd go. Great, we go from 27 to 50 million in a few years. Divide that up, it's irrelevant in football terms. What we want is a competition.  I'd love to see us going completely Rogue,  we want a competitive league, even if the average standard of player is lower. 25 years of 2 teams winning the league?  Trying to get a few million extra pounds changes nothing. We need to play hardball,  the OF have no place else to go

36 and counting. Utterly embarrassing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Biffa Bacon
1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

This is one of those situations where FOH should be consulting with its membership.  This is not about the day to day running of the club, but the strategic direction that Scottish Football  is likely to take over the next 10 years or more.

 

As majority shareholder, FOH should be influencing the direction of travel and not leaving it solely to the HMFC Board.

 

However, I fear the the FOH Board will choose the hands off governance approach and not interfere with AB's intentions for the club, despite the obvious implications for the fans.

Look at the reaction we have within minutes of posting... Deloitte's can't be trusted, they are in the pocket of the OF, Ron Gordon is in charge, we don't need a review, we should not be talking to clubs who shafted us last year. The bigots won't vote for change etc etc. The fan base could not agree how to buy a pint of milk, never mind drive the direction of Scottish football.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, S Form said:

The fact that the SPFL are giving this the nod suggests to me that the OF are not complaining, which makes me suspicious. You can bet your bottom dollar that they would immediately undermine any move that threatens to diminish their duopoly in any way.

 

If anything was to come of it it'd still be more money their way at the end of the day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Biffa Bacon said:

Look at the reaction we have within minutes of posting... Deloitte's can't be trusted, they are in the pocket of the OF, Ron Gordon is in charge, we don't need a review, we should not be talking to clubs who shafted us last year. The bigots won't vote for change etc etc. The fan base could not agree how to buy a pint of milk, never mind drive the direction of Scottish football.

 

That's what the Foundation is for though in my view. It does seem a bit odd to me that a business would undertake something like this without the input from or consulting their biggest shareholder...but maybe they have.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, AlphonseCapone said:

 

We can, but now from a morally superior standpoint since we're actually trying to do something. 

Phew! Had a bit of a sweat on there 😀

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

Be funny - not funny - if they recommend restructuring to 14-14-14 or whatever it was we recommended.

Be funny if they insisted shitty teams like Ross County failed on some criteria or another to be allowed in the top league. Medicine time. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally think rangers will be involved but they’ve realised that the inclusion of them publicly will mean that the message is lost.

 

Its certainly what happened with our league vote bid and reconstruction bid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
kingantti1874

Not entirely clear what we hope to achieve - not that I object just that I don’t necessarily understand the intended objective

Link to post
Share on other sites
washniklaw

If I was Doncaster I would be concerned.


Consultants brought in to look at raising revenue and consultants used to bring in sponsorship. On each occasion money has been lost to the Scottish game because he, or the clubs, have had to employ others get deals done. He has consistently been a little too close/friendly with certain clubs/companies and has rubbed other clubs/companies up the wrong way.


The review reads like a job description for a CEO. What ‘value’ is Doncaster bringing to the members for his wage? If you have to, consistently, employ others to your job then maybe your unsuitable for your position.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like the various other reviews of Scottish football over the years, this is well intentioned but ultimately pointless. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
RustyRightPeg
1 hour ago, OldGorgie said:

Anything that emanates from Fester Road should be treated with contempt as that lot treated us.


That’s it. Common sense prevails. 
 

Throw it in the dumpster even if it makes sense because it comes from the other side of the city!!

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robbies Tackle

All us diddies could find the greatest solution ever and it STILL won't get voted through if there's two teams (we know who they are) that say no.

 

Thanks Aberdeen you bunch of short sighted ****s.  

 

People think Dundee for their vote and Hibs (wee teamers) as well as St Mirren are the enemy.

 

No.  The enemy of Scottish football and who we should be focussing on is Aberdeen.

 

They voted against reforming the vote in 2012..

 

Rangers where going bust, they knew we where ****ed and decided short term to vote against an change in the vote to stupidly suit themselves, something they never benefited from anything ever.

 

Worst vote in history of our league.

 

Aberdeen fans must ask why club is blocking change to SPL vote rules - Gordon Waddell - Daily Record

Link to post
Share on other sites
Robbies Tackle
5 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:


That’s it. Common sense prevails. 
 

Throw it in the dumpster even if it makes sense because it comes from the other side of the city!!

 

That isn't common sense though.

 

In the modern world, you get and assist people that will help enhance.

 

It's a bitter pill to swallow but they and us, commercially and anything apart from on the pitch would be good,   Both clubs together when it comes to anything will have a significant amount of power for example. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom Hardy’s Dug

Deloitte?

 

Lucky to get any change from £5m.

 

Classic scope creep company for this type of work and just pull a lot of work off the shelf.

 

I know a few companies/organisations that have had the “Deloitte review” and it’s usually a load of shite most of which we as fans could tell the member clubs now.

Edited by Tom Hardy’s Dug
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, RustyRightPeg said:


That’s it. Common sense prevails. 
 

Throw it in the dumpster even if it makes sense because it comes from the other side of the city!!

 

13 minutes ago, Robbies Tackle said:

 

That isn't common sense though.

 

In the modern world, you get and assist people that will help enhance.

 

It's a bitter pill to swallow but they and us, commercially and anything apart from on the pitch would be good,   Both clubs together when it comes to anything will have a significant amount of power for example. 

If Hibs through Ron the Con have an idea then even the simplest will understand it is an idea that suits only them. Presumably you two were at primary when the Hibs support and Hibs officials  wanted us bankrupt and finished as a club.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Byyy The Light
1 hour ago, S Form said:

The fact that the SPFL are giving this the nod suggests to me that the OF are not complaining, which makes me suspicious. You can bet your bottom dollar that they would immediately undermine any move that threatens to diminish their duopoly in any way.


Wouldnt be surprised if this is a ruse including the OF to create a breakaway top league or top 2 to cut off the part time clubs. OF colts teams getting blocked. Covid votes etc. Bigger clubs maybe think it’s time to shed some of the part time baggage. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Tom Hardy’s Dug

So of the teams listed 3 or 4 are American owned (if you include Ron) - I am guessing this has been pushed by them.

 

Care needs taken here as whilst we need change I personally don’t want Americans *******ising our game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, GinRummy said:

Do Celtic have strong connections to Deloitte?

Izzat Gaelic for Dundee?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Byyy The Light said:


Wouldnt be surprised if this is a ruse including the OF to create a breakaway top league or top 2 to cut off the part time clubs. OF colts teams getting blocked. Covid votes etc. Bigger clubs maybe think it’s time to shed some of the part time baggage. 

Yup. Could well be part of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Saint Jambo
1 hour ago, Berra than you said:

Whilst I agree with your general point, this is largely true across Europe with the exception of England.

While it might feel like lots of the leagues are the same with only a couple of teams ever winning, over a 25 year period this isn't generally true even if a small number of teams dominate. It might be argued that it is getting worse, but even that is still unclear for many leagues.

 

Taking the last 25 years the number of different winners of the 'big 5' leagues are:

- England 6    - Italy 5    - Germany 6     - Spain 5     - France 9

 

But for the purposes of a review like this, those leagues aren't really that relevant. Looking at a group of what I'd think of as comparator leagues picked fairly randomly the picture is similar:

- Belgium 5     - Netherlands 5     - Greece 4    - Sweden 10    - Denmark 6     - Portugal 4    - Austria 6     - Switzerland 7

Most of those leagues have either had a smaller group of clubs win the majority of titles and/or a run of titles for a single club, but none have been the dull duopoly that Scotland has been over such a long period. And that is even allowing for me reducing the period of total dominance of Rangers/ Celtic from 36 years to 25 years on the grounds that being very generous it could be argued that there was some doubt in the late 80s and early 90s at the start of the season that someone else couldn't feasibly break through.

 

2 hours ago, Footballfirst said:

This is one of those situations where FOH should be consulting with its membership.  This is not about the day to day running of the club, but the strategic direction that Scottish Football  is likely to take over the next 10 years or more.

 

As majority shareholder, FOH should be influencing the direction of travel and not leaving it solely to the HMFC Board.

 

However, I fear the the FOH Board will choose the hands off governance approach and not interfere with AB's intentions for the club, despite the obvious implications for the fans.

 

I agree. Especially as it would likely be a case of consulting with members rather than asking us to make a decision.

 

There is a pretty strong case to be made that the interests of FOH as owners and the interests of overseas owners of the other clubs are not well aligned. The 'lifts all boats' approach of increasing turnover probably increases value which is great if you are an owner who might want to sell at a profit. But for FOH the question is what does that increase in turnover actually achieve. If revenue increases without any other changes, then the gap between the OF and the rest gets bigger in absolute terms bit smaller. If the extra funding is just spent on player wages it might marginally improve the quality of the league including in comparison to other leagues, but how high a priority is that if the change is only marginal. Would Hearts fans rather for example the quality of players stayed the same across the league and increased commercial revenue was used to allow the cost to the fan to be reduced. Clearly a private owner is less likely to be interested in that than a fan owned club.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jambo-in-furness

 

 

Just how short is our memory!!!

 

Never forget,  Never forgive,  Pledge for life.

 

getting into bed with those that stabbed us in the back?

 

not for me,   ffs it’s not even two years past!

Link to post
Share on other sites

SPFL endorsed says everything. Have we not learned anything ? Trust ? Wouldn’t trust anybody outside HMFC to water our plants

Link to post
Share on other sites
RustyRightPeg
58 minutes ago, OldGorgie said:

 

If Hibs through Ron the Con have an idea then even the simplest will understand it is an idea that suits only them. Presumably you two were at primary when the Hibs support and Hibs officials  wanted us bankrupt and finished as a club.


Aye and times have moved on haven’t they. We’re not gonna go bust so who cares what they think about that particular subject? 

 

The point is Gordon has a plausible idea that benefits the Scottish game and infrastructure as a whole but you want to disregard it merely because he suggested it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...