In these difficult Covid 19 dominated times with no apparent roadmap for escape we are all on the cusp of financial pressures that will only get worse for our clubs and football communities.
Ahead of writing this I spoke with a couple of club insiders this morning looking for extra insight.
No surprises that both are genuinely disturbed about the current crisis and especially fear the financial implications.
Both commented without much prodding that we have never more needed leadership from the SFA, SPFL, UEFA and also the government.
“Making it up as they go along” and “Playing Peter off against Paul” were interesting quotes on the current plans to bring a partial end to our season.
There was in particular a lack of support for what they have been asked to cast a vote on tomorrow and how it has been packaged.
For those who have been gorging on Netflix here is an extract that summarises the SPFL position and plan.
the SPFL has therefore today circulated a written resolution to its 42 member clubs recommending that SPFL clubs approve:
- the immediate termination of Season 2019/20 for the Ladbrokes Championship, League 1 and League 2, without the remaining fixtures in the League being played;
- all play-off competitions being cancelled; and
- final season placings to be determined by the number of points per game earned by each club in the matches they have played. This would result in the following final divisional tables for Season 2019/20 in the Ladbrokes Championship, League 1 and League 2:
if approved, this would result in the promotion of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, and the relegation of Partick Thistle and Stranraer.
if the resolution is approved, the SPFL has also committed to consulting with clubs over the possibility of league restructuring ahead of season 2020/21.
It Doesn’t Have to Be Like This
The Scottish Football Supporters Association Board (all volunteers) is a mix of fans of different clubs, some big and some diddy. No club or club attitude dominates our thinking in any way.
As a group of fans we have been discussing the deepening crisis because the moment lockdown came into place all football fans suddenly became faced with a different world.
- Not just no football to watch.
- Maybe clubs disappearing.
- And a very uncertain future when things start happening again.
None of us know how much things will have changed if, or rather when, new normality returns but it is not difficult to challenge the SPFL proposals in tomorrows vote.
To us as a group they are perhaps well meaning to get closure but deeply misguided and will potentially drown in unintended consequences and hubris.
Our SFSA board member Henry McLeish is probably most proud to be an ex East Fife semi-pro, but also a well respected ex Scottish First Minister and also author of the insightful (but mostly ignored) McLeish Reports outlining where change was most needed.
Henry said that in his view there is no merit in going ahead with Friday’s vote as it currently stands.
His main reasons are it is confrontational between member clubs some with vested- interests. Furthermore it will damage the whole ethos of our burgeoning and vibrant football pyramid.
Maybe worst of all it is ultimately open to on-going expensive and damaging arguments and litigations because of financial claims and counter claims.
Time for Cool Heads and Clear Thinking
The Scottish Football Supporters Association don’t profess to have all the answers and have no vested interests but here we have created a 3 point strategy that we feel will help guide Scottish Football to best ride this crisis and allow the real planning and budgeting at all clubs ahead of whatever is coming our way.
Parameter 1
This is Not a Time for Own Goals.
Covid 19 and the aftermath will cause enough financial hardship and stress to clubs and fans.
This is not a time to pitch clubs vs clubs or fans vs fans. And not a particularly good time to offer a possibility, of a possibility, of a possibility of reorganisation in time for Hearts and others not to get unfairly relegated.
Parameter 2
We Need an Interim Plan Where There Are no Losers
This could be a 1 year’s solution, possibly 2 at most, where every club (and fan) gets a positive post Covid 19 start allowing the best possible financial move into the new season 2020 – 2121 for all.
See our plan starter for ten below (insights and other plans welcome)
Parameter 3
Scottish Football Desperately Needs a Re-launch (But not in a manic rush)
How best should we set up our league structures to help our domestic and international game move into the future?
How do we look at an updated list of McLeish insights and incorporate them?
How do we involve the Scottish Government and the real stakeholders, the fans?
How do we capitalise on our football community for the greater good?
The recent surge of clubs coming into the fairly new pyramid system both in the Highland area but especially in the central and southwest regions is screaming out for a new and fairer framework.
Any long-term solution is likely to be evolutionary rather than revolutionary and grounded but it must be fit for purpose and fair for all from day 1 for all the members.
It has to work and be seen to work top down and bottom up.
How Might an Interim Plan Look for 2020-2021?
Here is a starter for ten that doesn’t change very much from what works today and incorporates the following.
- No relegation for season 2019-2020
- No need for play-offs.
- No Covid-driven negative vote on Friday 10 April
Scottish Premiership 2020-2021
14 Clubs (This year’s 12 plus the top 2 in the Championship)
Scottish Championship 2020-2021
14 Clubs (The 8 remainers from this year’s championship plus the top 6 from the current first division)
Scottish Division 1
16 clubs (4 remainers from current division 1, + all ten clubs from division 2 + the champions from Highland and Lowland Leagues.
Current number of senior clubs 42 Number in interim plan 44
Looking Ahead
League Reconstruction season 2021 onwards in a wide and open process involving the clubs, the Scottish Government and the fans and looking at how to best run professional and semi professional men’s football across Scotland.
In Summary
Times are and will become hard enough
All 42 Clubs and Fans Should Be Working Together
Together We Can Stop the Own Goal Vote
Andrew Smith
easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 15:31
Finloch 9th April 2020 at 14:51 3 Whats in these difficult times.
=========================
I’d echo those three “whats” With regard to your second “what” and “expensive solutions”: There is something that is fundamentally wrong with the process, when your club can be relegated simply by the votes of competitor clubs, thereby cutting your club’s future revenue from all sources.
————————————————————-
EJ, is a club in 3rd, but could possibly have gained 2nd, not being disadvantaged?, likewise the club awarded 2nd advantaged, from its potential to drop to 3rd. That goes through the card, 5th to 6th, 6th to 7th etc…Both ways, up and down.
If Hearts are to be relegated, it represents a drop of only one position from that previously held. The same advantage or disadvantage faced by all 42 clubs.
Of course human nature will encourage tactical voting, but only a couple of clubs have any reason to vote tactically for or against Hearts. For the remainder of the 42, whether Hearts are relegated or not has no impact on them. They have their own wee battles.
Hearts position though does highlight the disparity between the percentages paid through the divisions, but tactically speaking, every club only has the club immediately above and below them as a concern….. Positions earned on the field of play to date.
After this announcement , I think we should seriously consider summer football .
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52236228
Corrupt official 9th April 2020 at 17:44
————————————————
While I acknowledge the points you have made, I don't think that they answer the point I was making that it is fundamentally unfair for clubs to be able to impose relegation on a competitor.
You suggest that "tactical voting" may be at play. I would just describe it as "self interest". The alternative is to seek a collective solution that minimises the impact on all clubs.
That collective responsibility is not apparent, particularly when three of the SPFL Board members represent Hamilton, Alloa and Brechin, all three being clubs that benefit by securing their league positions, when relegation would remain a possibility if the season had run to a normal conclusion.
Call me ignorant but someone isn't getting it. Whether it's FIFA, UEFA, SFA OR SPFL, it's only 8 weeks to June the 10th, Europe is not gonna be open for football and Scotland Still got a long way to go.
easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 18:18
Corrupt official 9th April 2020 at 17:44
————————————————
While I acknowledge the points you have made, I don't think that they answer the point I was making that it is fundamentally unfair for clubs to be able to impose relegation on a competitor.
================
I'm happy to use "self-interest", to replace "tactical voting", EJ, but it is the same self-interests faced equally, right through the card by every club. As has been pointed out, it is only one league, with divisions. Hearts are technically dropping one place (potentially), being placed in seeding pot 2, for lack of a better way of putting it. It's difficult to argue against it being merited.
Hamilton, Brechin & Alloa may be represented on the SPFL board, but so are other clubs. No matter who was represented by the board, or "on" the board, a claim of self-interest could be made against any one, (or some) of them, by practically every club in the league jostling for a position.
Hearts are not unique in that
However, I agree the conflict of interest potentially exists, but everyone on the board should be wearing their board hat, and not club hat.
As this decision to be reached impacts every club, the only way around it would be to have a board with members with zero club connections…… That's simply not going to happen.
Every club is in the positions held through their own endeavours on the field thus far.
The SPFL board was in place before Covid 19 was heard of.
In fact every club was in the position they put themselves in,,,,, prior to this pandemic
If you are too far away from a seat when the music stops?.
More importantly for me is, "How many seats will be taken away?."
easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 15:31
'.There is something that is fundamentally wrong with the process, when your club can be relegated simply by the votes of competitor clubs.'
$$$$$$$$$$$$
Yes. I'm struggling to think of any other field of business in which one member of an interdependent but inter-competitive association of businesses can have its fate determined by other members some of which are in very direct competition with it, while others may benefit indirectly.
It's not like turkeys voting for Christmas, but some turkeys voting some for other turkeys to save themselves!
Corrupt official 9th April 2020 at 19:24
As this decision to be reached impacts every club, the only way around it would be to have a board with members with zero club connections…… That’s simply not going to happen.
===============================
You are correct that the decision reached will impact every club. My issue is that the impact of the decision is not distributed equitably.
We are in uncharted territory and in circumstances that were not envisaged by the SPFL’s rules.
Hearts is not in a false position on their performances to date, but do they deserve to have their lifeline removed by the stroke of a pen (or the press of a key)?
The fact that other clubs had the potential to move up or down a place is a much more marginal call than one that sees a club relegated, e.g. £125k between 6th and 7th.
Edit: if you go back to my posts from a couple of weeks ago, you will see that I said that I thought Hearts deserved to be relegated. I’ve no issue with that. My issue is how the SPFL Board has gone about things, not just relating to the Premiership, by failing to consider all alternatives and putting them to the vote, such as reconstruction. We are led to believe that “reconstruction is difficult”. That is an abdication of responsibility to the wider game.
easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 20:47
I'm happy to concede the funding difference and highlighted it in the division pay-out disparities. I'm also ok for league reconstruction, but that will take time. Not due to league starting frames.
If I was on the SFA I would be sending auditors into every Scottish club. Before reconstruction ideas are thrust forward, we need to do a head-count of what will be left to play with when this episode resumes some normality. Was it Rabbie Burns who said, "Ye can only p*ss with the c*ck yir given."?
There are clubs who have much more to worry about than a relegation….Some might be happy to take it, if downsizing or whatever, eventually saves them long term.
Relatively speaking even my club, Celtic, will have to downsize…..As will all others, but thems the breaks.
For the record I wouldn't even hazard a guess how many clubs we will be left with, or new start-ups, or what, but I'm not optimistic.
I think even the SPFL board are aware of that. Thats why imo, reconstruction is not on the agenda yet. There are more prescient issues need attending first.
The problem is as EJ says a matter of self interest, but how else are clubs going to vote? Even if an average points allocation to decide placings was followed by a pre season relegation mini tournament for the bottom six how many would sign up to that? 14 team league? too many games or clubs lose twice a season visit from Celtic and TRFC.I suspect Hearts unfortunatley will be the big losers at the end of the day but as I suggested in an earlier post the blow might be softened by financial assistance.One thing I am unclear on. Regarding the votiing,Is it a complete spfl majority for all matters or does the top leagues(s) have a separate conclave in other words does Brechin have a say in what happens to Hearts?
gunnerb 9th April 2020 at 21:18
The problem is as EJ says a matter of self interest, but how else are clubs going to vote? Even if an average points allocation to decide placings was followed by a pre season relegation mini tournament for the bottom six how many would sign up to that? 14 team league? too many games or clubs lose twice a season visit from Celtic and TRFC.I suspect Hearts unfortunatley will be the big losers at the end of the day but as I suggested in an earlier post the blow might be softened by financial assistance.One thing I am unclear on. Regarding the votiing,Is it a complete spfl majority for all matters or does the top leagues(s) have a separate conclave in other words does Brechin have a say in what happens to Hearts?
====================================
The voting requirement for the current proposals is 75%. In practice it requires all of the following:
75% of Premiership clubs (9/12)
75% of Championship clubs (8/10)
75% of Leagues 1 & 2 (15/20)
Reconstruction requires three phases
90% of Premiership clubs (11/12)
then:
75% of Premiership & Championship clubs (17/22)
then:
75% of Prem, Champ, L1 and L2 clubs (32/42)
easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 22:02
The voting requirement for the current proposals is 75%. In practice it requires all of the following:
75% of Premiership clubs (9/12)
75% of Championship clubs (8/10)
75% of Leagues 1 & 2 (15/20)
———————————————————————————
So 3 dissenting clubs in the championship OR 6 from lgs 1&2 and the games a bogey? Can't see any way this will pass.I would love to be a fly on the wall at these meetings , what a bunfight!
New blog up
Looking Ahead.
Times are and will become hard enough.
£20 IS PLENTY.
Clubs will find it hard next season, but so will many many fans. Thousands may be lost to the game because of this situation, Even if a £20 is plenty just for one season, it could keep many fans onside so that clubs and fans can come out this the other side. I know many may say but clubs need as much money as they gan to survive, but many fans through no fault of their own may be just surviving and football will be the last thing on their minds.
Well written and argued blog.
I wouldn't disagree with any of the suggestions, although there are alternative reconstruction configurations that would work equally well.
The primary consideration should be to ensure the continued existence of football clubs at all levels following this crisis, inflicting as little damage as possible on their long term viability..
The level of self interest displayed by individual clubs to date is alarming. Those in charge of the game need to demonstrate that they are working for all the clubs in their league structure or under their jurisdiction, without casting anyone aside. That includes individual clubs and lower leagues.
There have been number of positive developments in the pyramid below the SPFL in the last couple of years. Much of that has been achieved through good leadership and governance that allows the clubs to develop their own solutions to issues. The SPFL should learn from their experience of implementing change, accommodating new entrant clubs, league reconstructions, play-offs, licensing and much more besides.
The plan as set out by Andrew Smith appears to be a solution that ensures no team can justifiably claim to be victims despite pure sporting integrity having to be set aside.
Finishing all the outstanding games looks to be an impossibility and in fact no one even knows if next season can start on time! In view of this the season needs to be ended so that funds can be distributed.
Jobsworths say rules are rules that have to be followed but in the unprecedented times we find ourselves it is necessary to take unprecedented steps to protect the game we love.
Lets not have any special bailouts though. Clubs that have tried to buy success really don't deserve to be given special treatment. I expect some thumbs down for this part of my post but surely no club should be gaining benefit on the back of people dying?
Just to repeat this very import potential loophole that needs to be addressed – which I am sure it will…..
From the reported Rangers* proposal : “…..member clubs shall be entitled to effect repayment by written confirmation to the League that the loan provided to that member Club may be set against the equivalent amount of the payment to be made to such member club on such determination.”
Note the use of the word 'entitled'.
Why would this not be an automatic deduction from the prize money when that is decided?
What if a club elects not to have their loan set against the prize money? How would the loan then be recovered? Would the club still get their prize money?
I can see problems ahead if there happened to be a cash-strapped club without access to other lines of credit.
Scottish Football needs to keep their eye on this ball!
I think the reconstruction proposals in this blog have merit.
However, I for one place no special prominence on views by Henry McLeish, another public figure who sat in silence in 2012 as every rule in the book was bent or broken, and some were just made up. Interestingly the 'club' every rule was bent, broken, or made up to suit, are the ones doing most wailing right now, and have the audacity to mention corporate governance in their statement. Interestingly they were the only club with audited accounts (produced well before Covid-19) which stated they needed several million to get to the end of this season.
I am a Celtic fan. and Celtic need opponents to play. The other clubs are as dear to the heart of their fans as mine is to me. As fans we are in this together. I hope every club survives this. I also hope when it's over the the authorities implement domestic financial fair play with severe penalties for not adhering to, although I doubt that very much.
“…How do we involve the Scottish Government and the real stakeholders, the fans?…”
========
Good blog.
Probably like many, I only became aware of the SFSA a few years ago – when it promoted a widely publicised online poll / survey.
IIRC there was a significant number of participants, producing fairly clear messages to take to the governing bodies, gov’t., and clubs.
But, following completion I don’t remember what actually happened with the results, and don’t remember receiving any e.g. auto e-mail updates?
Unless I just missed it, but what actually happened with the survey results?
Sevco cannot get a loan for love nor money via any recognised banking corporation. How ironic the club that seeks to be another club, wants to tap the clubs the other club stole from. ………
And get this………All they have to put forward by way of security, should it eventually transpire they received too much, is the promise to pay it back from, errrrrrrr, …..errrrrrrr…..?
I wonder what my bank manager would say offered those terms and conditions in the current elimate.
Latest statement from TRFC
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/rangers-football-club-members-update/
'easyJambo 9th April 2020 at 20:47
…We are in uncharted territory and in circumstances that were not envisaged by the SPFL’s rules…'
#####################################
We've had a virtual (extraordinary) general meeting by conference call & the solution offered (average points per game to decide final league placings) for a vote by all member clubs (importantly, not just the board) wasn't an existing option by their own rules, which never,ever envisaged partial abandonment of a season for all clubs.
easyJambo 10th April 2020 at 11:00
"…we have received numerous reports from fellow scottish clubs relating to attempts to coerce and bully them…"
=======
Psychological Projection: TRFC accusing others of bullying tactics!
And yes of course, when another club is 'bullied' they immediately contact TRFC!
"…spfl’s legal adviser did not deem our members resolution as competent…"
Nevermind the resolution.
As a club/company, RIFC/TRFC is incompetent – and insolvent.
And everybody knows.
Karma.
Jingso.Jimsie 10th April 2020 at 11:06
We've had a virtual (extraordinary) general meeting by conference call & the solution offered (average points per game to decide final league placings) for a vote by all member clubs (importantly, not just the board) wasn't an existing option by their own rules, which never,ever envisaged partial abandonment of a season for all clubs.
=============================
The problem with the proposals is that no alternatives are offered that might be equally or more appealing to member clubs.
What is on offer is being driven by the Board and not the clubs.
They have also put several different elements together as a package to be voted on as an all or nothing option.
“Over the last 36 hours, we have received numerous reports from fellow Scottish clubs relating to attempts to coerce and bully them into voting for the SPFL’s own resolution. We are proud that many fellow clubs will stand strong and not be swayed.”
(TRFC Statement)
Not sure how to read this. I hope and trust the ‘fellow Scottish clubs’ are not ‘reporting in’ to the Ibrox club as if to an inspirational leader? For a brotherly moan or, perish the thought, for guidance!
Whilst we await the outcome of today’s vote, here is my Internet Bampots team to take on the SMSM for the Sporting Integrity Trophy:-
John Clark
Stevie BC Easy Jambo Allyjambo
Red Lichtie (C) JingoJimsie Upthehoops Corrupt Official HirsutePursuit
Auldheid Paddy Malarkey
On the bench; Shug; Bordersperson; Smugas; Macfurgly; Timtim
Manager ; Big Pink
Thanks to all (plus others eg NormanbatesmumFC – my favourite blogger name) for what continues to be a fantastic sporting integrity education!
I hope that I am wrong but cannot see the resolution being passed. The self interest of the few is being pursued to the detriment of the many. What one particular team could not do on the playing field they are determined to scupper off it by any means, even to the extent of appearing to offer support to their cousins from the east. The same cousins who equally failed to perform adequately on the field to ensure their survival. A parcel of rogues.
I see Henry McLeish’s name has cropped up on here. While there is much merit in his reports nothing changed.
I was in the studio audience when Radio5 did a live programme on the Rangers crisis in 2012. The panel consisted of Henry McLeish and Pat Nevin amongst others. Mr Mcleish was given the last word from the panel. He declared, “Rangers will survive, they are too big to fail “
I wonder if his view had changed since 2012?
bet67
…with Auldheid up front, poaching for that last minute winner!
There are very few fiercer critics of Rangers* than me, but sometimes our constant clamour to discredit the current club playing out of Ibrox blinds us to the occasional sensible idea coming from Govan.
The unprecedented coronavirus crisis has created an urgent need for the release of funds, without which some of our clubs could well go out of business. I care not a jot if Stewart Robertson’s plan is simply a poorly-hidden attempt to furnish his own club with desperately needed funds, if the immediate release of those funds saves even one other club.
Similarly, Celtic FC and its fans rightly claim that their preference would be to see the remaining league fixtures played in their entirety IF POSSIBLE, yet Rangers’* proposal to do just that is shot down in flames at a point in time when it is not yet impossible to play them, even if the passage of time reduces the likelihood.
A poster above pointed out that unprecedented steps have to be taken to save the game we love and that Jobsworth’s rules should be ignored to facilitate that, yet that is precisely the argument the football authorities used to justify ‘resurrecting’ Rangers* by concocting the five way agreement for TV and other contractual reasons.
I don’t claim to have the solutions but clubs are currently indulging in self-interest (as a Jambo I hold my hands up to having a vested interest), but the SPFL board will try to bludgeon its way to serving its sole master – money, and will do everything in its power to preserve the new multi-million pound Sky contract. An unblinkered and progressive board led by a progressive leader would consider all the available options, including playing the outstanding games whenever it is possible to do so, if indeed such a time ever arrives, even if doing so affects the start of the new season. God forbid that Doncaster & Co had to earn their salaries and re-negotiate a deal!
bect67 10th April 2020 at 11:43
Whilst we await the outcome of today’s vote, here is my Internet Bampots team to take on the SMSM for the Sporting Integrity Trophy…
===================================================
We'd win 36-0!
Sccotish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Sevco bleating about getting the money, but Celtic not getting the trophy?………As highlighted in their own accounts. Sevco have never been guaranteed to finish the season anyway. Not by a very long chalk.
How about they produce documentary evidence they could afford to see out the season, inc full payroll, BEFORE they ask for a tap ?
Just a thought.
Redlichtie, For the sake of clarity the Bon Accord that Arbroath beat 36-0 was NOT Shotts Bon Accord!
btw, I still love your smokies. Could have been doing with a pair for Good Friday.
Postpone until mid june final placings and in the time allowed discuss reconstruction.Prize money could be halved this year and released immediately.A contingency fund of £12m established to allow all troubled clubs to apply for zero interest loan to assist during these unusual times. The fund to be administered by independent accountants/trustees and applications to be supported by audited interim/full accounts. In the meantime the clubs would have to cut their cloth accordingly.
The SPFL have responded
https://spfl.co.uk/news/board-update-on-rangers-resolution
The SPFL responds to TRFC in the latest game of statement tennis
https://spfl.co.uk/news/board-update-on-rangers-resolution
This isn't going to end well, whatever course is eventually taken. There are clear divisions between member clubs and the SPFL Board which is not good for the future of the game.
Homunculus 10th April 2020 at 14:09
The SPFL have responded
https://spfl.co.uk/news/board-update-on-rangers-resolution
==============
Assuming this response is accurate, I think it is fair to assume Rangers are rabble rousing with the tone of their statements. Not like them!
Also (and this is only my view), it's time they got to the real crux of the matter, and it's not the 'abhorrent' potential relegation of Hearts. In my view they want a solution where the league title is withheld this year, like so many of their fans have been pressing for. However, I think they probably know that won't happen, so with the aid of their many media friends they want to show how anti-Rangers (and ergo pro-Celtic), the SPFL are. It has been a tactic since the days of Charles Green, and it helps keep the season ticket sales up.
upthehoops 10th April 2020 at 14:18
================================
The difficulty is they can't just finish the season and not declare champions, the one thing follows the other.
I got this from Scottish Football Monitor a wee while ago.
========
A4
Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;
C38
The Club occupying position one in the League at the end of a Season shall be declared the Champion Club of the League and shall hold the "The Scottish Professional Football League Championship Trophy" until the next Season's League Competition is concluded
===========
As soon as they decide the last match has been played then everything else just falls into place. There is no "awarding the title" involved.
I think that the statements attributed to the SPFL spokesman, demonstrate a similar level of spin as is being attributed to Rangers.
A spokesman said: “These are extremely difficult times for the people of Scotland and for every club in the land. Agreed
“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. Agreed
However, why add the determination of promotion, relegation, cancellation of play-offs, impact on the Pyramid leagues and a woolly commitment to reconstruction, as part of the proposal to deliver payments to clubs?
“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.”
There is no reason why a resolution to the other outstanding issues cannot be progressed in quick time with good leadership, communication and a desire to do it.
You know whenever I read a Rangers statement or peruse the insane ramblings of their prominent fans and bloggers a quote of Jimmy Hoffa's comes to mind
"Always watch what others accuse you of because quite often it's what they most suspect about themselves"
"tainted title Declan,pure tainted".
Use the quote for Sevco and its fans,it also works a treat for President Trump.
Make of this what you will .
https://twitter.com/4ladshadadream/status/1248619176047964161
paddy malarkey 10th April 2020 at 15:36
==============================
I make of it that Rangers have an "unofficial outlet" which allows them to send out messages they don't want directly attributable to the club.
uth, agreed.
It looks like TRFC is leveraging the SPFL uncertainty to generate ill feeling – and to enable Ibrox to circle the wagons.
Get the bears agitated, foaming at the mouth – whilst the Blue Room occupants point outwards at all the "Rangers haters".
Solidarity and all that: and buy your ST's here!
We've seen this low brow strategy many times before.
If it was a movie, it would be;
"A Nightmare on Edmiston Drive VII" (or IX?
)
paddy malarkey 10th April 2020 at 15:36
Make of this what you will .
https://twitter.com/4ladshadadream/status/1248619176047964161
================================
I’ve seen posts from that twitter account previously and generally it does seem to be in the know.
Let’s assume for a moment that the timeline in the twitter thread is accurate.
How does Neil Doncaster explain why the SPFL Board put out a statement that only referenced the email contact with Rod McKenzie and omitted to mention the contact made with himself (the SPFL’s Chief Exec and others in the SPFL management group.
If the Rangers account of the timeline is correct, then it does demonstrate a level of misinformation and coercion in order to achieve the Board’s aim.
As ever when governing bodies attempt a cover up, the consequences of that can be just as serious.
It’s surprising that TRFC hasn’t summoned its – currently – under utilised legal team(s).
A wee legal threat towards the SPFL?
A refusal to vote / to delay the vote until legal arguments have been resolved?
Another visit to the Court of Session?
There’ll be quite a few furious headlines for the SMSM to copy/paste tomorrow.
http://www.celticfc.net/news/17911
https://twitter.com/reuters/status/1248633205584003072?s=21
Own goals at the Nou Camp too?
“Another visit to the Court of Session?”
StevieBC@16.12
That would be unfair as the pursuers would have home field advantage.
@Kheredine@Kheredine2018
Statement due out shortly from@spfl
As I understand it, at least 3 Championship clubs have voted against the SPFL board resolution. That’s enough to defeat it, as 10 from that division needed to be in favour. @BBCSportScot @BBCScotlandNews
If only the Championship has voted against then I can see some fudge of a settlement for Championship clubs, then a second vote of Championship clubs only on the amendment ……… or am I just being cynical.
Wow!
Rangers* accused of lying by SFA…
https://spfl.co.uk/news/board-update-on-rangers-resolution
Mind you if the SFA can glibly lie that the deid club Rangers is lying, I’m unsure who to believe…
https://spfl.co.uk/news/statement-from-the-spfl-board
As at 5pm, the SPFL had received 39 responses, 85% of which have been in favour, as follows:
Ladbrokes Premiership (nine supporting votes needed) For 10 Against 1
Ladbrokes Championship (eight supporting votes needed) For 7 Against 2
Ladbrokes League 1 & League 2 (15 supporting votes needed) For 16 Against 3
With three clubs yet to vote, the SPFL will issue further updates in due course.
A spokesman said: “It is very important that clubs consider carefully the resolution and we are grateful to those clubs who have voted already.
“With the Ladbrokes Premiership and Ladbrokes Leagues 1 & 2 divisions each having approved the resolution, we await the voting slip from the one Ladbrokes Championship club that has yet to vote. We will provide an update as soon as we are in a position to do so.”
THE SPFL IS STILL TRYING TO GERRYMANDER THE RESULT THEY WANT BY EXTENDING THE VOTING DEADLINE
From the Daily Record.
The SPFL gave clubs two days to respond as an urgent request, but the rules state that they have 28 days to respond to any such request.
As a result three clubs simply refused to comply with the request, meaning that the proposals could not be passed.
Doncaster hoisted by his own petard?
You'll never guess where this comes from
"Why are we not surprised about this.?
Said all along, if Hearts get their wish not to be relegated, they won’t give two f***s about anything else..
We’re up against every club in Scotland and both football authorities.
No paranoia there. not even a wee bit.
Compromise after vested interests digging in their heels and an announcement soon
I think it will end up three leagues of fourteen.
Not quite what Andrew Smith said in our blog but still a bloody nose
What pyramid?
What leadership?
What a way to run our leagues!
What sort of organisation requests a secret ballot, with votes to be cast by a specific time (which is not in accordance with their own rules), then goes on to publish incomplete results while showing willing to accept votes beyond their self imposed deadline (now back within the rules if they allow 28 days), unless they are seeking to further influence how any late votes are cast?
Incompetent and corrupt to the core.
The bottom line is that this has to come to a resolution (pun intended) sooner or later.
That is now looking to be a couple of months away, at least, if we have to await the remaining games being played. If they are ever played at all.
I go back to this
A4
Season means the period of the year commencing on the date of the first League Match in a Season and ending on the date of the last League Match in the same Season or otherwise as determined by the Board and which excludes the Close Season;
How can the new season start until this one is over. It can't just be left as things are just now.
So, that would be a £388K salary for a CEO who couldn't organise a vote in a voting booth.
Shambles.
Did we expect anything different…?
Homunculus 10th April 2020 at 18:07
You'll never guess where this comes from
"Why are we not surprised about this.?
Said all along, if Hearts get their wish not to be relegated, they won’t give two f***s about anything else..
We’re up against every club in Scotland and both football authorities.
No paranoia there. not even a wee bit.
==============================
So what's the 'anything else' but? Finding a way for Celtic not to be Champions by any chance? Celtic want to complete the league, just like they do.
The SPFL might be underestimating the power of fans in this if they think when the time is rightto play and be it behind closed door games and also that everyone is just going to take out a SKY subscrption to see these remaining fixtures. If they think fans will be happy if it’s a free to view TV when some have taken out season tickets and paid to witness the same games, then clubs will be hit with demands for season ticket money back.
My take on this is that if they can have players assembled together to play the games in a contact sport involing groups, then obviously all players will have to be free from the virus and this would have to be done through rigorous testing, if this can be done to serve football commercial interests then all companies are going to demand that all of the workforce is to be tested so they can get back to earning also and, back to profits, anyone who thinks football willl be given prefeerence over other businesses is deluding themselves.
Litiigations for discriminating against businesses will spring up all over the place and the argument will be football is non essential in this time of crisis.
bigboab1916
i'm in a workforce just now that has more people than a bottom six spfl game,if it's ok for me it is ok for games to get back on
SKY latest on the vote
https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11787/11971721/spfl-resolution-vote-to-end-seasons-rests-on-technical-question-mark-over-dundee
Would/could a club say that they had been misled by the apparent deadline and would like to rescind that vote and recast it , having used the additional time to properly consider the proposal ?
Dundee’s statement is at odds with what the SPFL included in their statement supporting their proposals.
Dundee said:
The SPFL said:
Either Dundee or the SPFL is telling porkies.
Following the strongly worded, public response from the SPFL to the TRFC resolution – and subsequent whining,
Shirley, the TRFC MD, Stewart Robertson, now has to resign his position on the SPFL Board?
To state the bleedin' obvious.
If the votes were meant to be in by 5pm yesterday and some have not cast their vote or abstained then that's their problem they should now be discounted and the 75% should be from the votes that have been cast for or against end of story.
And with regards the timing of the vote. For the result to be useful it has to be:
1/ within the rules
2/. Communicated as within the rules, in the safe knowledge that it would be tested as such
3/. The proposer has to be trusted (oh dear)
4/. The proposer has to be competent (oh double dear)
*** apologies I deleted my response to EJ in trying to edit. Reposted here with edit***
eJ @ 22.40
I don’t quite see it that way EJ to be honest. What both statements say to me is the SPFL are essentially testing the water to see if what they are trying to do (distribute cash on the basis of sporting merit) is possible ie whether their test of sporting merit (points per game to date) has rigour and is supported by member clubs. I absolutely take your point that said vote is coloured by self interest, and I also agree that Sevco shouldn’t be castigated for trying to achieve the same result by an alternative method to be at least considered.
i think it is safe to say they are finding those waters somewhat choppy!
to me, as I said previously, you cannot treat the award of championships within the same resolution as relegations without a more meaningful concurrent discussion on restructure. Would for instance Utd have been quite so positive had I floated an idea, to be discussed later, that whilst the championship would be awarded, promotion was not guaranteed. I guess not. I assume you would similarly be less concerned about relegation if you saw it confirmed what the structure next year would be?
As regards reconstruction what about the upcoming sky deal will they be happy paying for a different product to the one they were supposed to have. What happens to the sky deal if it is based on 4 Celtic v sevco games as a minimum per season and sevco die before the season ends will scottish football be left with no tv deal at all.
StevieBC 10th April 2020 at 22:50
Shirley, the TRFC MD, Stewart Robertson, now has to resign his position on the SPFL Board?
===========================
Why would he resign? They moaned constantly for years via their media pals that they should be on the board, because they 'are the biggest club in the country by any measure' (their words, and they were in a lower league at the time). So clearly such arrogance will not lead to him resigning. Neither will it stop them using their media pals to give prominence to stories about 'Rangers depth of feeling', 'Rangers are not happy', 'Rangers have offered a solution for everyone'.
Here is my view. Rangers want the league to finish, because their support are demanding nothing is conceded to Celtic. Rangers could not care a toss about Hearts potentially being relegated. Rangers are skint, and expect money now even though they don't want the league to finish. Rangers know the media will never question them. Rangers want to have their cake and eat it.
Celtic have been pretty much silent other than to say they also would like the league to finish. My view is they are saying little because the less they say, the less they will get the blame for in the media. Yesterday's Daily Record still implicated them in the blame game despite that. It reminds me of a friend who once told me his wife was angry at him. When I asked why he replied 'because I exist'.
This whole situation of course is about every club, but I wonder which single club is most desperate for money right now? Seems clear to me which one it is.
shug11th April 2020 at 09:41
No no no. The starting point in that discussion now is we currently don’t have to offer what you thought you were going to get.
We will endeavour to provide it IF we can and IF and only if we have 42 clubs in agreement.
What you don’t do is promise them their earth and then come back and try to shuffle some deckchairs by fair means or foul, hope nobody notices because you think you know best.
shug 11th April 2020 at 09:41
———–
The Sky deal and Glasgow derbies crossed my mind as well. For example, a restructuring to 14 teams in the Premiership under the current arrangements would be:
(3 x 13) + (1 x 6) = 45 matches + cup competitions, which is too many matches.
In the event that the remaining matches for this season were played in the Autumn, (presumably with UEFA having dropped their requirements for leagues to have been completed before they would accept nominations for their competitions), and season 2020-21 beginning in late October say, then there would have to either be:
(2 x 11) + (1 x 5) = 27 under the present split system or:
(2 x 13) + (1 x 6) = 32 under a 14 team league with split, or
3 x 11 =33 or at a stretch,
3 x 13 = 39
with cup competitions added in each case, bar the last.
None of these would provide 4 guaranteed Glasgow derbies.
I think the only way to get 4 would be to end the current season now, or very soon, and hope that season 2020-21 can begin close to schedule, or close enough to get by with binning cup competitions and the winter break.
Would anyone know whether or not the Sky deal specifies 4 derbies?
2 * 13 + 2 * 5 Shirley?
(accept that gives 40 games for bottom 8)
Celtic fans will miss out on the adrenaline rush of sorrows and joy, in the run up to what will be a record equalling league tally, (previously held by ourselves), of 9 in a row. Only a fool would suggest Celtic will not, or would not, have triumphed. A semi-final and potentially a final, of a never to be equalled quadrebel is in the pipeline, with the first of those trophies already in the bag.
Cup games are cup games, but a betting man would only be discouraged by the low odds on offer.
With money in the bank, a more than able board-room of directors, substantial income from outside sources, and a sizeable credit rating, we are in a good place, (excepting the virus related issues).
Probably the only club in Scotland least persuaded or tempted by "Self-interest".
Celtic's only self-interest, if it can be called that, is ensuring as many, and as high a quality of-competitors remain.
Having a board-room of business acumen unequalled in our wee country, and a couple of genuine billionaires in the back/ground, is exactly the kind of thinking people to advance our game, and see it through this crisis.
As a mere fan, I will be disappointed to miss out on what may have been the glory run of all glory run-ins, to the end of any season's campaign ever.
So lets leave it to a relatively speaking tin-pot Dundee to decide…….Lets allow Sevco to steer the narrative. ……D'Oh !
I'm all for Sevco's wish to give the season every opportunity to complete, but am acutely aware that clubs need money now.
The loan idea?…..Absolute bonkers !…..Clubs may go bust anyway, and it is money lost from the game. There are numerous ways for these loan funds to be abused and disappear.
Instead, how about the SFA just issue a cover note, to the tune of the expected league dividend due.
Whack the league pay-out money into an escrow account, and clubs can forward invoices, and purpose of invoice, to the said account, The lawyers handling the account can then inform clubs when they are maxed out.
If and when the season can be completed, the invoices can be settled, and the remainder, if any, paid to the clubs on their pro-rata portion. This will provide comfort to those owed.
However, if a club goes bust due to debts exceeding their escrow portion, the portion allotted is relinquished back into the account, and none of the debts of the over-stretched club will be honoured.
Because that will be their own fault. Not the fault of the escrow.
Fair enuff?
Macfurlgy. The only deal on the table Proposed is.
14 teams . Play home and away =26 games. Split.
play home and away 12 games. 38 games total as now.
CO , tinpot Dundee is very harsh. The league is not decided by one game.
This vote is not decided by one club.
I still say those who abstained should now have their vote scrapped they had their chance and for whatever reason decided not to cast it. To now let them have say another 25 days is ludicrous and will give rise to thoughts of corruption whatever way they now vote I smell sh++e. The laugh is only Hearts had the bottle to cast their no vote in the top league. The null and void screamers abstained and their fans were blaming Hearts for not voting on the loony tunes forum yesterday you really could not make this up.
watcher 11th April 2020 at 12:14
CO , tinpot Dundee is very harsh. The league is not decided by one game. This vote is not decided by one club.
-=====================================
Maybe harsh, but I did say relatively speaking.
I get that Dundee are not the deciding factor in the vote, but they are the delaying factor. The potential for some clubs to unnecessarily suffer due to this delay is immeasurable at the time being. however almost every club forfeited their 28 day resolution time-frame, in recognition of the urgency required.
I could have worded it better. Apologies.
Sorry I may have screwed up that last bit about Hearts I was sure I read late yesterday that Ann Budge had said that Hearts had voted no but I can't find it anywhere.I may be going slightly mad as I have been in lockdown for a couple of weeks before the official 1 started my work was done in as soon as the very first cases started to appear works deciding they would not let their people travel. I only get out now to walk the dogs so I apologise if I got it wrong.
Hearts did vote no so did sevco so was actually 10-2 saying now Hearts were late with the vote I said before you could not make this up. Well I will give it a rest for a while dog walking time stay safe everyone.
Watcher @ 12.07
when you say “only proposal on the table” can I ask,
what?
how?
where?
when?
who by?
obviously I will fill in my own “why” blanks as appropriate.
Can emails sent not be received? Surely that can very quickly be independently checked?
(current point on Sportsound)
Would it not have been possible to pay the clubs now the minimum payments they could expect in prize money from the league , if it's perceived as a financial problem ? In the Premiership , the top six is finalised so all can be paid sixth-place prize money with the rest distributed when final standings are achieved . Bottom six all get twelfth place money , and so on through the leagues .
Wow. Don’t know if anyone’s listened to the last hour of sportsound. If not well worth a download.
John Clark 11th April 2020 at 14:13
If I am sending an email that I have to confirm arrived, and when, I simply chose the options to get a delivery receipt and a read receipt.
Also
If the vote requires 75% YES (of all clubs able to vote, as opposed to those votes received) then if a vote is not received then it is effectively a NO. So if someone was voting NO anyway then it wouldn’t make any difference. It’s only YES votes which would be missed.
Hoist. Petard. Neil. Rod. Goodbye.
statement (from Smugas) ends.
The latest statement is out
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/rangers-football-club-statement/
Saturday, 11 April 2020, 15:00
by Rangers Football Club
WE have been presented with evidence via a whistleblower that raises serious concerns surrounding the SPFL’s processes relating to its stewardship of the voting on the resolution presented to member Clubs.
Rangers’ Interim Chairman, Douglas Park, attempted to discuss this evidence with SPFL chief executive, Neil Doncaster, who initially refused to do so. The SPFL followed up that call with an e-mail, which we believe was a thinly disguised attempt to silence legitimate concerns.
Rangers will not be bullied into silence. We believe it is in the interests of all Scottish clubs and supporters that the evidence, which is alarming, be addressed as quickly as possible.
The voting debacle and the evidence we possess raise serious questions concerning the corporate governance of the SPFL.
Mr Park said: “The lack of leadership and responsibility from the SPFL as a members’ organisation has shocked me. If ever there was a time for complete openness and transparency, it is now. Crucial decisions are being made on the issues of promotion and relegation behind closed doors and without proper time for consideration or debate.
“The farcical conduct of this affair seems to me to bring the corporate governance and business operations of the SPFL into sharp focus. It is an example of an undemocratic culture, which has existed within the SPFL for far too long.
“As a member club, we are disturbed by the evidence that has been presented and feel there is no choice but to call for an independent investigation into this entire matter. Each member of the SPFL board has a duty to its members to ensure that such an investigation is instructed without delay.
“All we ask for is equality and respect. In the past few days, we have become alarmed at a seeming lack of even-handedness and fair play from the SPFL. This is surely unacceptable and, if substantiated, must be remedied.
“Other member clubs, who have seen the evidence we hold, share our concerns.
“We call for the suspension of the SPFL’s Chief Executive, Neil Doncaster and its legal adviser, Rod McKenzie while an independent investigation is conducted.”
Ha! The wolf bites the hand that fed the 5-Way Agreement: Park calls for suspension of Doncaster and Rod mackenzie!
Oh, the irony.
Oh the “rats in a sack” syndrome.
And gombeen man says ‘forget about the rules’ ……… oh, he said that in effect in 2012!
“Mr Park said: “The lack of leadership and responsibility from the SPFL as a members’ organisation has shocked me. If ever there was a time for complete openness and transparency, it is now. Crucial decisions are being made on the issues of promotion and relegation behind closed doors and without proper time for consideration or debate.”
Without proper time for consideration or debate?
It’s been spoken about for weeks now!
And once again fellow member clubs have been in consultation with their spiritual leaders?
“Other member clubs, who have seen the evidence we hold, share our concerns.”
Having said all that I’m happy too see Doncaster & McKenzie suspended for whatever reason by whomsoever! Who knows what will come out in the wash by bitter betrayed men!
One thing that is worth mentioning which doesn’t seem to be. I do have a degree of sympathy for Dundee (tin pot or not!) in so far as they were the “Club 12” that were given what, 5 days notice that they’d be a premiership Club in 2012.
but they’ve not been shed in the best light in the last hour or so!
Rangers latest statement makes interesting reading. Who are they after here and why? If this evidence against the SPFL is so damning then why are other clubs not speaking out? After all, siding with Rangers will present them with no issues at all. They would be on very safe ground.
On another note we should not forget not one single person on that Rangers Board has ever said Rangers illegal tax evasion was wrong. They also railed against an independent investigation into how the SFA handled it. None of them get to hold the moral high ground on anything.
Re the Doncaster 'witch hunt' by Sevco…
…They could just have opened there own can of worms!
The canary that sang?
Plus … wtf is Robertson all about?
I hate to say I told you so…..
BUT
what’s noticeable in the Sportsound discussion I referenced before is Celtic, Dundee Utd, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers weren’t mentioned once I don’t believe. It appeared very much to be case of differentiating between money distribution, relegation and subsequent reconstruction. Awarding trophies “as is” doesn’t seem to be exercising them at all.
I do wonder if all clubs share that view mind.
Let’s not get the current matter conflated with the wrongs that were done in 2011-2013.
There are serious issues and accusations being made about the conduct of officials at the SPFL regarding their recent proposals and subsequent vote. If they are correct then there should be no hiding place and I believe that everyone on this blog should support the independent investigation requested by TRFC.
Please don’t let the tribal rivalries get in the way of calling out the wrongs within the football authorities and hold those responsible accountable for their actions. It was (and still is, I hope) one of the key aims of the blog.
EJ, you are correct about the eschewal of tribalism, but the messenger does matter.
We should approach everything on a ‘true facts’ basis.
Immorality is no stranger in any boardroom in Scottish football, and we can do little about it. Breaking rules however is something else.
A wide ranging review of the entire game is more appropriate than the narrower one championed by TRFC.
In fact it is entirely arguable that the handling of the 2011 crisis has led directly to the games ability to deal with thus one.
I hope we don’t cherrypick our crises.
Interesting though to see if the SFA dance to the Rangers fiddle after running a mile from the last request.
Smugas 11th April 2020 at 15:47
I hate to say I told you so…..
BUT
what’s noticeable in the Sportsound discussion I referenced before is Celtic, Dundee Utd, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers weren’t mentioned once I don’t believe. It appeared very much to be case of differentiating between money distribution, relegation and subsequent reconstruction. Awarding trophies “as is” doesn’t seem to be exercising them at all.
==================================
It was interesting to hear from Ross Graham, the Forfar chairman. He said that it was not about the money they were due (c. £3.6k). That point was picked up by Willie Miller.
However, what Willie and the others didn't pick up on was that he went on to say that Forfar wanted to plan for next season with some certainty, with two visits each by Falkirk and Partick, which would bring in around £75k, rather than have visits from Cove Rangers and Edinburgh City if reconstruction was on the cards.
Bottom Line: It's all about the money for Forfar too, not immediately, but over the next 12 months.
Could a less conflated motion be passed – one that does not call the leagues but does distribute 75% of the prize money based on current league positions?
The balance could then be distributed if and when the remaining games are played or the leagues are called.
Clubs need cash now.
Scottish Football needs strong management at this time.
Given all of the voting shenanigans I can’t get rid of the image in my head of drowning sailors climbing on each other shoulders to try and save themselves. Never has Aulheid’s long spoon allegory been more apt.
Would that be a Dog-whistle blower?……Well, we won't know until we see this "evidence", as witnessed by other clubs. Who are these clubs?.
Is anybody going to resign in protest, from the SPFL board?
I'm with EJ here. If the SFM stands for anything, it's the integrity of the game in Scotland. If Rangers are the victims for once, rather than the villains, then we should be on their side. Some of us may feel the need to hold our noses but it's the institutions ultimately responsible for the Scottish game who should be in our sights.
Big Pink 11th April 2020 at 16:20
EJ, you are correct about the eschewal of tribalism, but the messenger does matter.
We should approach everything on a ‘true facts’ basis.
Immorality is no stranger in any boardroom in Scottish football, and we can do little about it. Breaking rules however is something else.
A wide ranging review of the entire game is more appropriate than the narrower one championed by TRFC.
In fact it is entirely arguable that the handling of the 2011 crisis has led directly to the games ability to deal with thus one.
I hope we don’t cherrypick our crises.
Interesting though to see if the SFA dance to the Rangers fiddle after running a mile from the last request.
==============================
I agree with much of what you say, but if an investigation results from today’s allegations, it may lead to the wider inquiry and review of football governance that you, I and many others desire.
Re the “true facts”, I don’t think that Douglas Park would make such serious allegations without having some substance to back up his claims. If they were false, then his credibility could be seriously damaged and would potentially have an impact on his business interests outside RIFC.
I’ve seen excerpts from Whatsapp conecersations circulating on social media, that at least back up the timeline that Scot Gardiner (ICT CEO) laid out on Sprortsound.
Big Pink 11th April 2020 at 16:20
'.In fact it is entirely arguable that the handling of the 2011 crisis has led directly to the games ability to deal with thus one.'
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
I've said previously that of course covid-19 is not all down to any malfeasance by TRFC. That already struggling club has no more to be disadvantaged financially than any other because of circumstances away beyond its and everybody's capacity to have foreseen.
But it is manifestly the case that having so seriously abandoned sporting integrity possibly ( and in great secrecy) in 2011 and certainly in 2012 ( knowledge of which came to hand relatively quickly), our Football Governance bodies left us with no alternative but to believe that expediency has a priority over truth and principle as it when it suits them.
No club knows that better than TRFC, the inheritors and direct beneficiaries of the corrupt 5-Way Agreement and the continuation and propagation of the lie that they are RFC of 1872.
It is not surprising therefore that TRFC will exploit what they know to the weakness of the moral authority of the SPFL ( and SFA, when it comes to it), in the hop that that exploitation will save them from the consequences of their own inexplicably poor stewardship of their resources.
TRFC are entitled indeed to precisely the same helpful arrangements as may be arranged for all other SPFL clubs, but only on the same terms and conditions as apply to the others, and are in absolutely no position to dictate terms or make unsupported allegationa/accusations in order to seek support.
So…
Doncaster is ‘Humpty Dumpty’, whom Sevco are wanting to see having ‘a great fall.’
Unlike in the fairy tale, ‘all the KING’s horses and all the KING’s men’ will help put Scottish football together again – if the clubs just trust them to lead the charge! We’ll start from scratch lads.
In other words, this massive disruptive deflection, riddled with all the horrible traits of the WATP mentality (arrogance, superiority, ‘divine right’ etc etc) is (I believe ) one last major throw of the dice to stop ten in a row.
There is no altruism in the SEVCO psyche.
If Doncaster has to go, then so too has Robertson.I certainly wouldn’t want him in the trenches with me!
BP – ‘A wide ranging review of the entire game is more appropriate than the narrower one championed by TRFC.’
Can’t agree I’m afraid. ‘Wide-ranging review’ is ‘move along – nothing to see here’ territory. Nail them on a single, demonstrable issue if you’ve got the evidence; the other stuff can follow later. It’s the same principle as jailing Al Capone for tax evasion.
Once you’ve got them bang to rights for something then you’ve got real leverage to go after the bigger stuff.
easyJambo 11th April 2020 at 15:51
================================
Whilst I agree with what you say to a large extent, I will remember who is doing the talking if that's OK.
Dave King may have just left the building as a director, however he is still there as the main shareholder, still has many contacts on the board (at the very least his concert party) and no doubt still has a lot of influence.
So whilst a convicted fraudster and proven liar is still so closely associated with them, I will be extremely cautious about anything they say, and their motives for saying it.
Since I’ve been harping on about the distinct lack of leadership coming from the SPFL CEO, it would be remiss of me not to comment on my own team, CFC.
Like many supporters, I was perturbed back in 2012 and afterwards, about the continued silence from the CFC Board about all the dodgy goings on at Ibrox and Hampden.
Like many, I felt they were keeping their powder dry until the most opportune time to speak up on behalf of all CFC supporters – and possibly on behalf of the vast majority of Scottish football supporters.
However, that time never came.
The handling of Res.12 by the CFC Board has been hugely disappointing and doesn’t seem to align with the founding values of the club, IMO.
And today we seem to have another leadership vacuum in Scottish football.
Again, the CFC Board may feel it is prudent to remain silent.
It’s not their ‘fight to pick’, so to speak.
But, the biggest club in Scotland could choose to step up and show Hampden some leadership qualities during this time of crisis – for all of Scottish football’s benefit.
Statement Ping Pong
This is a twitter message from Jordan Campbell, purporting to be reporting the position taken by Murdoch McLennan.
https://twitter.com/JordanC1107/status/1248999383372349442
A longer post was prepared but I realised it boiled down to just my distaste at the faux outrage of TRFC. Whatever the rights and wrongs, that institution has no grounds whatsoever to be the evangelical cheerleader of justice. I agree with EJ regarding this blogs raison d’etre but we must question the motivation of ALL the players involved in this almighty clustef’ck.
Edit: I note Homunculus’ earlier post and am echoing that sentiment.
I meant to add in my post that the distribution of "prize" money is conditional on the acceptance that the league will not be "null and voided" .
A parcel of rogues the lot of them. And people wonder why fans fall out of love with the beautiful game.
Scott Gardiner (ICT) seemed to be taking a very honourable stance in terms of their vote and you just wonder how big a peg he has to put on his nose when he meets up with those folks from the SPFL, SFA and Ibrokes. A sniff test indeed.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
spikeyheid 11th April 2020 at 16:40
I’m with EJ here. If the SFM stands for anything, it’s the integrity of the game in Scotland. If Rangers are the victims for once, rather than the villains, then we should be on their side
………….
If the ibrox club championed the bit back in 2012 and challenged the integrity of the game and the making up of the rules by the governing bodies as they went along and did not know what they were doing,
Yes i would have been right behind them. They don’t get to pick and choose when to challenge the integrity of the game.
We all knew this rabid dog at ibrox would come back to bite the governing bodies, if they had applied the rules back then there would be no dogs barking from ibrox today.
easyJambo 11th April 2020 at 16:44
Re the “true facts”, I don’t think that Douglas Park would make such serious allegations without having some substance to back up his claims. If they were false, then his credibility could be seriously damaged and would potentially have an impact on his business interests outside RIFC.
…..
Homunculus 11th April 2020 at 17:04
1
0
Rate This
Statement Ping Pong
This is a twitter message from Jordan Campbell, purporting to be reporting the position taken by Murdoch McLennan.
https://twitter.com/JordanC1107/status/1248999383372349442
………..
Let’s see who is telling the truth.
TRFC has demanded the SPFL CEO suspension, plus an investigation.
Yet, Stewart Robertson is still on the SPFL Board?
His resignation should have been announced simultaneously.
Does Park not talk to Robertson?
Just weird, IMO.