The Covid 19 Pandemic is a truly serious game-changing situation for us all.
We are all currently staring into a future with no declared road map exit of
how we might move back to normality and the certainty of disruption now and
long into the future.
Against the background of lockdown to curb the virus spread we have all run smack bang into economic and social chaos.
We have gone from normality into unheard of times virtually overnight and with horrendous economic consequences coming every which way into the future.
Football is not important in the greater scheme of things but still has issues that need attention and urgently because it affects people’s lives.
This Week’s SPFL Plan to Move On
The SPFL are simply the members association who run our leagues on a “for the members, by the members, for the members” kind of way in theory.
For reasons known to them they collectively took the decision to start to draw an end to season 2019 – 2020 with its Covid 19 uncertainty.
This was probably to allow them and all their members (our clubs) to at least
start to plan for the future when income streams will return.
From speaking to those involved from the club side and reading and hearing more at a truly astonishing pace since Wednesday 8th of April, just 3 day ago, the SPFL decided in their wisdom that the best solution was to conflate two particular issues.
To back their case quite forcibly they also provided a dossier of over 100 pages of supportive material. All good bedtime reading for our club’s boards I have been told, but i haven’t seen it.
The issues the SPFL decided to conflate were to ‘pro-rata’ all games played so far this season so they could equalise and close the Championship and Leagues 1 and 2, with the Premiership going the same way if it became clear that fixtures could not be completed.
If and only if the motion was agreed by the members then the end of season prize money would be forthcoming from the SPFL bank almost immediately.
Money desperately needed by some members. A real lifeline in troubled times.
There was also another possible wee carrot dangled.
This might have been of a sort of half-hearted agreement to look at re-organisation of Scottish Football. This because despite the dossier urging clubs to vote yes, the SPFL knew some clubs would not be happy with their proposals and would not agree.
In the Real World of Challenged and Stressed Football Clubs
The SPFL conflation of “do this or no money” meant things like.
The title would be handed to Celtic eventually if Premier Clubs then followed suit, despite Rangers having a mathematical, albeit statistically unlikely, chance of catching their rivals.
Hearts would be relegated despite having enough games to catch their nearest rivals and stay safe possibly by a play off (if they hadn’t already been cancelled).
Partick Thistle would be relegated because they failed to play one league game while playing another SPFL competition and also had a bunch of games left to save themselves.
Stranraer would go down despite being proven late season successful relegation fighters.
Brora (declared Highland Champions) and Kelty (current leaders in Lowland League, by a bawhair over Bonnyrigg) would have no play off with a likely game against Brechin or whoever was going to be bottom of the SPFL2 league.
And these are just the tip of what football chiefs I’ve spoken with have termed an ill-considered iceberg of matters arising from a hapless attempt to bring some certainty to the SPFL membership.
72 Hours of Mayhem as Peter was Played Against Paul
People are interconnected today and from the moment clubs were pushed into a corner they discussed it together and in depth.
They all know who voted how why and when and have WhatsApp records too.
They all feel they could have done it better. I can’t try to sum up the sheer enormity and quantity of what has happened since Wednesday night but after I had penned a piece for SFM on Friday with suggestions that there was a civil war brewing that is just indeed what happened.
Every club effectively had a moral and economic choice and sometimes they were conflicting.
Friday was too close to call
I was in a few communication loops sitting at home on Friday afternoon as the vote unfolded.
I had been warned how close it was going to be and it was fascinating with first Inverness seen as the potentially key vote then an acceptance just before 5 that the whole thing had failed.
Then, 5.30ish, a different and quite hopeful view came out that after the vote had been seen to have failed that a 14, 14, 14, compromised was likely. Sense seemed to be prevailing. Then later and very late in the day a view that 1 vote (Dundee) had still to come and was in effect now the casting vote with all the power that casting votes carry.
Since then we have first seen Dundee castigated in the press and by unthinking media pundits as the villains for holding everything up.
(But that’s now old news).
Today (Sat 11th April), ICT Chief Executive Scott Gardiner was on BBC Sportsound alongside Richard Gordon, Michael Stewart Tom English, Kenny Miller and later on Willie Miller. It wasn’t a normal filler show in a period with no football.
It was truly amazing with some hard facts and honest insights. Uncommonly so.
I should have been forewarned after one well know football finance insider had tweeted last night (Fri) ahead of the curve that “Dundee will have earned some concession and will now change their vote” or words to that effect.
Wow he was ahead of the tsunami that burst this afternoon. If you haven’t heard BBC Sportsound at 2 pm today then the first hour or so is unmissable.
Since then matters have gone on apace we have now heard that Douglas Park, interim Chairman of Rangers, wants the SPFL CEO Neil Doncaster and legal counsel Rod Mackenzie (Rangers links) to stand down ahead of an independent inquiry.
So less than a day after a yet to be agreed vote outcome and genuine internecine war is brewing and exploding with Mr Parks claiming he has damning information from a whistleblower.
In turn he has been asked by the current SPFL Chairman Murdoch MacLennan to substantiate his “very serious accusations”. .
So Who Scored the Own Goal and What Can We Do About It?
As of now I actually don’t care who did what and when.
Stuff has happened and in the fullness of time we can look at how it happened and what we can do to avoid it into the future.
Today we need to move forward and that needs leadership.
Here is a 5 point roadmap.
Ditch this divisive plan
It doesn’t matter how Dundee vote just consign all this crap to history.
Pay all the monies due
This week no strings and if that needs a vote then vote on that and that alone.
Agree what happens and how to end the season
Scottish Football Supporters Association say this must include no relegation and pyramid winners should be included. Don’t penalise anyone at this time.
And an interim plan would be fine of three leagues like nearly got agreed for 20 minutes on Friday.
Take time
End the season properly and fairly and plan for the future to reinvigorate our game for the greater good. The world has changed but we haven’t.
Involve all stakeholders especially the fans
This should all be on the record and transparent.
The Time To Stop The War is Now
StevieBC 11th April 2020 at 17:50
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.
===============================
If I was TRFC I would want SR to remain in situ so that he remains part of any discussions going on in response to Park's complaint. If he is excluded from such discussions, then that decision would in itself lead to further accusations of secrecy or lack of transparency.
Douglas parks claims. if he does not come forward with any evidence, will the ibrox club be fined for bringing the game into disrepute, and any prize money they recieve will be gone to pay a fine?
easyJambo 11th April 2020 at 16:44
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 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'm not so sure EJ. Park D'Bus was quite happy to be part of an illegal concert party, and stood beside every action taken by said party.
I recall the days when crooked Minty was lauded as above reproach, courtesy of his position held.
I can't get the ridiculous situation of the Lying King suing Rangers retail, when he was himself was on the retail board. We have not a dissimilar situation developing here with Robertson.
My problem is a question of trust, and Sevco have done hee-haw to have earned it….Quite the opposite.
I'll be waiting to see what their evidence is.
Whistleblower or fifth columnist ? (how would you get your hands on this stuff ?).
From Follow Follow –
Things appear to be getting quite nasty, as the folk at Ibrox keep pushing to be deemed relevant and important. In their paranoia, they still believe themselves to be so hard done by all those imagined, unsympathetic forces ranged against their sense of entitlement, lashing out at all and sundry, as they throw yet another tantrum when they not are regarded as the most important element in Scottish football.
A great many clubs voted for this deal, far more than the few who oppose and opposed it. The club at Ibrox has but one vote, so why is it howling at the moon over others daring to oppose. It is time that the other clubs took TRFC to task over its over-inflated ego and remind it how great a favour it was given back in 2012.
If the present setup is to be re-organised and with many of the FAW now on the margins, maybe the SPFL/SFA should bring TRFC toheel by publishing the FAW for all to read, just to remind everyone how badly RFC were NOT treated back then.
"Who are these people?" is a weel kent phrase in this ongoing fiasco of deluded rage. The way the voting numbers appear at the moment, I cannot envisage, in the least, that SR's and Park's protestations have anything other than minimal support.
TRFC continue to be a permanent embarrassment and a regular disgrace in the way they conduct themselves.
Was the record not claiming this morning something like this.
Dundee have confirmed that they did not cast a vote on the SPFL resolution, Record Sport understands.
Record Sport can confirm that Dundee did not cast a vote, and have confirmed as much to the SPFL.
So someone is lying.
eJ, I hear what you’re saying WRT Robertson hanging on at the SPFL, absolutely!
But, it is such unconventional – dare I say, undignified
– behaviour by someone who is allegedly one of the more professional characters at TRFC?
I’d still bet he’s gone by Sunday night / statement o’clock?
easyJambo 11th April 2020 at 15:51
In my opinion no-one on that Rangers board has earned enough respect for people to take the stance you say. They have all been in position while some of the most outrageous statements imaginable have emanated from Ibrox over the years, so for me unless they come out with evidence to back up this latest one, I have every right to be suspicious of the real motives behind it. The SPFL are already asking for that evidence I see.
The statement below is allegedly from a Director of Morton, which was taken from a newspaper comments column. The last three lines are in my view what Rangers problem really is. That and the fact they have a desperate need for cash.
I am a director of a championship club and have seen the SPFL circulars to clubs first hand. They appear to have been absolutely open and honest and came to a reasoned recommendation that a vast majority of clubs agree with and voted for. I can understand objections from potentially relegated clubs like Hearts and Thistle but these clubs are bottom of the league after approx three quarters of the season because of their performances on the park. In all the circumstances it is inevitable that there will be winners and losers – it is nobody’s fault and there is no alternative solution that is any fairer! Rangers objection seems to lie mainly in declaring Celtic champions! No fair minded person can grudge Celtic that but when they think of Celtic, can anyone expect Rangers to be fair minded?
Saw this tweet from “Inside The SPFL @AgentScotland
The complete lack of self awareness & superiority complex is stunning even by Rangers standards, calling for the head of a man who in 2012 did everything to get new Rangers into the SPL then queue-jump the SFL at expense of clubs like Spartans is wild, plenty of tinfoil at Ibrox.”
=============================================
Should we start a charitable drive to donate supplies of tinfoil to Ibrokes? I’m thinking they must be running out of supplies…..
WATP – We Are Tinfoil People?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Paddy malarkey
the explanation of the voting slips, for those who didn’t hear Sportsound this afternoon, was essentially that Caley Thistle, Partick Thistle and Dundee agreed to vote no (or at least conferred that they would each be voting no). Both Thistles did as indicated. Dundee voted (but the vote was allegedly not received just as, I understand, hearts wasn’t). However Dundee then followed up with a communication that their vote was rescinded which should have alerted the SPFL to the fact they had voted and secondly that doing so would alter the result since a yes or no from Dundee was then sufficient to see the resolution stand or fall – and they have 28 days to make that decision if they so wish.
Park’s coercion point is widely rumoured to be a certain Mr Doncaster’s role WITHIN that decision to rescind and or to decide the vote in a particular direction.
watcher 11th April 2020 at 12:07
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.
———–
Thanks for the reply. I wasn't advocating any of the options, but that one would give 4 derbies, though not if the season is delayed, as would be the case with the present set up. The question was whether or not the Sky deal was dependent on the 4 and whether that was the motive behind current decisions.
A permanent tantrum and an occasional hissy fit
to the bits of paper , 11th April 2020 at 19:47
Cheers !
I'm thinking that if someone has access to the bits of paper , could they possibly manufacture a situation where one disappears , especially if that benefits your club or helps further it's agenda ?
Paddy Malarkey
Again, for clarity Scott Cameron confirmed each of the three “no” clubs whatsapped their completed slips to each other. So there’s at least 4 disparate sources for starters.
Smugas 11th April 2020 at 20:16
0
0
Rate This
Paddy Malarkey
Again, for clarity Scott Cameron confirmed each of the three “no” clubs whatsapped their completed slips to each other. So there’s at least 4 disparate sources for starters.
===========================================
He means they whatsapped photos of said forms.
Dundee say they did not send their vote seemingly who to believe.
upthehoops 11th April 2020 at 19:04
The Morton director’s comments re TRFC are perfectly fair and well founded. However I disagree with his previous sentence.
In all the circumstances it is inevitable that there will be winners and losers – it is nobody’s fault and there is no alternative solution that is any fairer!
I think that misrepresents the actual situation, although that may have been the way it was portrayed. There doesn’t have to be winners and losers (or only in a relatively modest way), but there are certainly alternatives that are fairer.
I understand that clubs were given papers extending to over 100 pages explaining the proposals 48 hours before the self imposed deadline. That is not sufficient for any club to firstly digest the information, seek further information, evaluate alternatives, disseminate the information to other club execs and come to a reasoned conclusion on how to vote.
Well, that was some achievement by the SPFL.
In the middle of an unprecedented crisis, the SPFL has managed to generate even more confusion – and even more uncertainty – for clubs and supporters alike.
The SPFL is even making the SFA look slightly competent…
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52256506
According to this, there is some confusion about whether or not Dundee voted. According to Scot Gardiner, Eric Drysdale, the Dundee FC Secretary, believes he voted no. It is not clear from the report who told Gardiner that John Nelms had intervened to tell Drysdale not to resubmit the vote that had apparently, and unknown to Drysdale, not been received.
easyJambo 11th April 2020 at 20:30
I understand that clubs were given papers extending to over 100 pages explaining the proposals 48 hours before the self imposed deadline. That is not sufficient for any club to firstly digest the information, seek further information, evaluate alternatives, disseminate the information to other club execs and come to a reasoned conclusion on how to vote.
===================================================
I'm with you EJ. The SPFA manufactured a short 'deadline' in contravention of their own rules. My guess is that was intended as an expedient way to get their other objectives passed without due scrutiny and comment.
I can understand clubs voting for the 'take it or leave it' proposal but I suspect it was through gritted teeth and thoughts of lots of red ink.
This kind of behaviour by the executive of a football authority is unacceptable and in any other sector they would be preparing their letters of resignation.
Scottish Football needs an outbreak of integrity – and some self-awareness from those in glass houses.
Speaking as a Celtic supporter, and making no bones about that. Pure self interest.
I hope my club just sits back, says little or nothing, and just let's the SPFL and Rangers get on with this shambles.
For me it is looking pretty much like the perfect storm, leave them to it.
What's the worst that can happen for us, the season is somehow abandoned. I simply don't see how that is a position which can be taken and as far as I am aware no association or governing body want that to happen. It is more likely that they will either wait until the games can be played or just call the league finished.
I can wait.
Can I also add, on a separate note.
"… as soon as signed and, if possible by 5pm on Friday 10th of April 2020" is not a deadline by any stretch of the imagination.
"… if possible" does not a deadline set. It is a request.
If the rules on these things is 28 days, as people are suggesting, then the deadline is 28 days.
The SPFL, if the documents are accurate, are asking for earlier submission. Presumably they can act as soon as all of the votes are in. However they are not setting a deadline.
Thanks for the very sensible blog Andrew – especially Point 5….
After all:-
“Football is nothing without fans” (Jock Stein)
Smugas 11th April 2020 at 20:16
I am not disputing Scott Cameron's statement , other than to say that it looks to me that Dundee's slip had indeed been received , was copied then pasted online (if that image is genuine) along with the two Thistles' . If it has been received , how can it subsequently be rescinded . ( Unless maybe it was received but not registered so that pressure could be applied to "do the right thing") . It amazes me that , in this day and age , things like this can be ars*d up , even when the Board know the scrutiny they will be under . Three no's in our division suits me , but I worry that temptation could cross Dundee's path and their point of view changes .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MWd0hT4bkOE
Homunculus 11th April 2020 at 22:09
Speaking as a Celtic supporter, and making no bones about that. Pure self interest.
I hope my club just sits back, says little or nothing, and just let's the SPFL and Rangers get on with this shambles.
=============================
The only way I can see Celtic becoming involved is if Peter Lawwell is implicated as one of the "heavyweights" referred to in the Whatsapp screenshots. There was a suggestion (not proof) in the Whatsapp stuff that he had been in discussions with Neil Doncaster shortly after 5pm on Friday.
The Time To Stop The War is Now
=================
One club needs a war to keep their fans onside.
Homunculus 11th April 2020 at 22:19
Can I also add, on a separate note.
“… as soon as signed and, if possible by 5pm on Friday 10th of April 2020” is not a deadline by any stretch of the imagination.
“… if possible” does not a deadline set. It is a request.
If the rules on these things is 28 days, as people are suggesting, then the deadline is 28 days.
The SPFL, if the documents are accurate, are asking for earlier submission. Presumably they can act as soon as all of the votes are in. However they are not setting a deadline.
=============================================
You are absolutely correct Homunculus. The thing is that the context given for the request was that of needing an urgent response. The implication that clubs should not be tardy in responding.
And the evidence is that the message was clearly received by it being acted on in the requested timescale by what appears to have been ALL of the clubs.
No club will have wanted to be guilty of causing delay in such a serious situation.
If a manager had tried to pull such a fast one with me or others I know then they would soon learn that was not a sensible move to have made.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath – and governance.
StevieBC 11th April 2020 at 19:00
'….I’d still bet he’s gone by Sunday night / statement o’clock?….'
Smugas 11th April 2020 at 19:47.
'.Park’s coercion point is widely rumoured to be a certain Mr Doncaster’s role…'
""""""""""""""""""""
If indeed the allegations are allegations against the uninstructed actions of a paid employee of the SPFL, Robertson would be derelict in his duty as a director if he resigned from the SPFL board.
His club allegiance would, of course, to protect him, rule him out as having any control over such investigation as may be undertaken by the employee's employers.
But he ought to be in post to examine whatever evidence is presented to the board after that investigation so that the SPFL membership as a whole could be satisfied that there was no jiggery-pokery, and that TRFC's proper rights had been safeguarded.
If the allegations are that some elected members of the Board instructed improper actions……. where would that leave us?
eJ's point @11th April 2020 at 17:55 is very sound.
If Robertson quits the Board, then 'tainted investigation!' would be the cry, if the allegations are shown to be soundly based.
If they are found to be false, then he would have to go- and if he as MD had authorised the allegations, he would have to go in even more disgrace than any of the wretched types who have been directors of TRFC.
The new PR guru has thus far been even more of a disaster than oor JT.
redlichtie 11th April 2020 at 23:08
=================================
Indeed.
It wasn't a deadline, no matter how many people try to say that it was.
If any vote wasn't received then no final decision can be made until the deadline is reached.
Unless the required majority is already achieved, or is arithmetically impossible.
In which case it makes sense to act as quickly as possible, given the circumstances.
An excellent summary of the shambles we r now in. Goodness knows what might follow and how this might be resolved but be assured a certain team and their cousins will do everything in their power to prevent nine in a row.
One small further point. Basing any argument on the need to start the new season because of the Sky Contract is a red herring. Sky are in no position to fulfil their side of the contract because they simply don’t have the money. The vast majority of subscribers have either cancelled or frozen their subscriptions and Sky no longer have the income.
Homunculus 11th April 2020 at 23:24
"In which case it makes sense to act as quickly as possible, given the circumstances".
—————
If that is happening now, with Doncaster talking to Dundee FC to get the deal over the line, then there is going to be a hell of a stushie if Dundee change their vote. Even if they communicate with Partick and ICT to get an agreed better deal for them somehow, the eruption elsewhere is going to be of volcanic proportions, and not only from TRFC.
Macfurgly@20.41
Perhaps the Dundee vote was imperfectly submitted? Sounds like a job for Mr Bryson.
Ex Ludo 12th April 2020 at 00:16
——-
In that case it will be eligible. "No" it is.
Ex Ludo 12th April 2020 at 00:16
'…Sounds like a job for Mr Bryson..'
macfurgly 12th April 2020 at 00:25
'In that case it will be eligible. "No" it is.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""
I enjoyed that.
Can I just clarify…
Legally, it makes absolutely no difference if Dundee had submitted a No vote or not.
Votes in favour of a written resolution cannot be revoked. See…
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/296
However, there is nothing to prevent a member who had voted against a resolution to withdraw that vote within the timeframe allowed.
Unless there is significantly more to this than has been shown, I suspect that the hysterical allegations of corporate malfeasance are born of a simple misunderstanding of company law.
Dundee were perfectly entitled to submit a written no vote and subsequently ask for that vote to be disregarded.
From what I can tell, that is what appears to have happened.
Also, why shouldn't board members speak to Dundee about a resolution that has board support?
Board members shouldn't be neutral on resolutions they are supporting.
Why should this be seen as a problem?
HirsutePursuit 12th April 2020 at 01:27
Also, why shouldn't board members speak to Dundee about a resolution that has board support?
Board members shouldn't be neutral on resolutions they are supporting.
Why should this be seen as a problem?
====================================
It would be a problem simply because some didn't get their own way. Interest free loans and Celtic not getting the title. I see the lunatic fringe vgb want Celtic stripped of every title since 2011.
We will just have to wait and see what happens I am still of the opinion that unless you call the leahues then no money is due.
The problem I have is this so called proof at this point consists of screen grabs of photos or conversations on whatsapp that may or may not be what Dundee eventually wanted to do. My other problem is with the credentials of the person who gave out the info scot gardiner ex Dundee chief exec, ex Hearts chief operating officer and was linked with sevco in 2013 as ceo his dream job which he turned down as he wasn’t given assurances that he would be calling the shots and is now at Inverness. Just read he worked for the blue pound in their commercial dept. Something just doesn’t smell right.
Gavin Wallace
@gav_wallace1
·
15hThe
@AyrUnitedFC
chairman
@lachlancameron
quoted on BBC Radio Scotland Sportsound as saying he felt “cohersed” in to voting they way they did…He won’t be the only one. This is very troubling.
32
15
36
Lachlan Cameron
@lachlancameron
·
13h
I wasn’t coerced into anything. I didn’t speak to any other club about this (other than a casual conversation with Ian McCall) and I have never been in a WhatsApp group with any other spfl clubs.
Looks like not everyone was in the whatsapp group then.
HP @ 1.16
Exactly. Dundee can withdraw their vote (apologies I think it was me who used the word rescind) although I’d be interested in comparable situations where a firm deadline is constituted (28 days) but an earlier indicative time is requested and understandably in these exceptional circumstances, preferred. The potential to create a king maker is obvious. What is more important are the discussions that have gone on around that withdrawal, both before and after.
Dundee’s role is interesting. They don’t benefit or are penalised by this vote. They’re (think) 4th so wouldn’t be promoted or relegated by this proposal, wouldn’t benefit or be penalised by any realistic restructure (12 or 14). That sets them apart from both Thistles. The other group whom, to me, are affected is a significant number or League 1 who would be distributed between what would be the middle tier with 8 of the current championship and 4 joining the lowest league. This was EJs point yesterday both in terms of equitable spread versus self interest (the Forfar CEOs point) and also the pyramid HL/LL factor. Noticeably that group didn’t have the same problem vis a vis this group.
For what it is worth I don’t see how Lawwell benefits either. Those of a blue persuasion will, of course, say he’s running scared but this proposal didn’t advance Celtics claim as champions anyway. I’d also have thought him far too long in the tooth to be caught out in a WhatsApp sting given, again, that there was no benefit to him or his club in coercing anything unless it was something around next seasons Sky deal which, with respect, will have his fingerprints all over it.
i quite expect Mr Doncaster to believe what is entirely his own hype however. I’d fully expect him to be around the periphery. I do wonder if the Teflon kid has eventually pushed his own boundaries too far. Good riddance in my view. I look forward to his no doubt heavily edited memoirs. The title ?
My Brutally Frank and Open Expose of how I Very Much Wish Things Had Been.
i have my pinch of salt at the ready.
Shug @ 7.04
again from Sportsound. It was Tom English who brought Lachlan Cameron into the discussion. Something like “I spoke to Lachlan during the week…..they need payments just to make wages” or words to that effect.
Lachlan himself made no contribution that I’m aware of.
What is it Rangers actually want? They say they want the league to finish but can't offer a realistic proposal as to how and when. Despite not wanting the league to finish they want prize money right now. The proposal they put up for that was deemed legally incompetent.
I suspect (and it's only my view) that what they really want is for Celtic not to be awarded the league title. The one sure way for that to happen would be to declare the season null and void, which has been declared a non-starter. Despite that I read one prominent blogger, who has access to people within the game, claim on Twitter that Rangers continue to lobby clubs to push for null and void. No idea if true, but it wouldn't surprise me if it was. In the almost certain knowledge they won't get their preferred option, creating a scenario where there was bias in the decision making would be an ideal situation to ensure that season ticket sales are maxed out to 'show the haters'. Yet if Celtic are awarded the title would it be out of bias on the part of the SPFL? Ergo, would it mean anti-Rangers bias? Could any club who feels they have lost out claim it was all down to bias?
I suspect league reconstruction is on its way, which would mean Hearts would remain in the top flight. What it wouldn't mean is Celtic not getting the title. I just wish Rangers would come out and say
'Stopping Celtic getting the title is our prime motive. Failing that we will do everything we can to create the impression it is completely discredited and was unfairly awarded by an incompetent, biased governing body'
In answer to my own question, the above is what I seriously believe Rangers want out of all this.
Loving the debate 're the new debacle in Scottish Football.
I appreciate some may have a laissez faire attitude to all this but wonder if that would be the same had the coronavirus lockdown had hit us on 30 December 2019?
And right on cue here is a Rangers supporting Daily Record journalist pushing for null and void – but the money must still be paid out of course! All written of course only to show care for the victims of this horrible virus. No other motive to this at all.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/celtic-rangers-title-spat-shows-21852483
The reason TRFC are so scathing of the SPFL’s proposal?
It only pays prize money when league positions have been finalised.
Although Championship, League One and League Two clubs would get the cash now, Premiership clubs still have to wait.
Desperate times!
HirsutePursuit 12th April 2020 at 09:39
—————————–
Hand out prize money but forget the prizes!
That is exactly what the Daily Record journalist is saying in the article I posted. Incidentally the same guy 'understands' Rangers have more evidence against the SPFL. How strange they didn't strike while the iron is hot and give it to him to publish with the subsequent boost to online hits and paper sales, while destroying the SPFL into the bargain.
The whole point is, given this most unique set of circumstances, it would have been better to keep the issues of money and league positions separate.
I liked Michael Stewart's idea of issuing 80% prize money now based on current positions to try and ensure no club goes under and hold back 20% until it is more clear if the season can be played out. The appropiriate balance can then be paid out later rather than have a club being overpaid and spending all their cash.
If football was still being played then some teams would have no idea where they may be playing next season.
Potential play-off teams have to wait until the very last game to see where they will be playing. Such teams should already be thinking about budget plan A and plan B for 2020/21.
The rest in the middle already know their league status will be the status quo.
Therefore why the rush 're settling League positions?
In my understanding of it Rangers* wanted no calling of the leagues but the equivalent of the prize money paid out now as a loan – with clubs able to elect to repay it when the actual prize money distribution takes place.
To me that seemed to create a possible (and surely unintended) scenario of a club electing not to repay the loan due to their financial circumstances at the time but still being due and expecting to receive their share of the prize money i.e. the SPFL effectively becoming a banker of last resort.
In my view it would be fair to hold on calling the leagues for a little longer (end April?) but I feel it also fair to distribute 75% of the prize money now to help alleviate short term financial problems. The balance can be distributed when/if the leagues are called.
And as Wottpi says, keep early prize money distribution separate from reconstruction or any other issue.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Smugas
By default, a written resolution expires after 28 days if no timescale is mentioned in a company's articles.
The SPFL's articles say…
So, written resolutions (for SPFL purposes) will always be resolved when either:
Sufficient members vote to approve such resolution(s)
or
28 days from the issue of such resolution(s) have passed.
The board have no power to set a different hard deadline.
Appreciate the input on the legal position of the resolution HirsutePursuit. I actually don't mind the request for an early response where circumstances truly require them. As you say, the legal position will remain at 28 days whatever transpires in early voting.
My beef is that the SPFL executive bundled separate issues together and made it an apparently 'take it or leave it' vote with a pressing 'deadline'.
That is plain wrong and there should be consequences for that.
With regard to next steps, how about :
1. The existing resolution is withdrawn and voting cancelled.
2. A new simple resolution is put forward offering immediate distribution of 75% of the prize money with the balance on the eventual calling of the leagues.
3. A representative task force immediately set up to discuss reconstruction options with proposals being put forward for consideration within one month.
4. Calling of the league to be reviewed at the end of April.
Scottish Football needs proper leadership to get out of this mess.
Note : 4. should read “Calling of the leagues to be reviewed at the end of April.”
SFNASA
One of the main reasons for the skullduggery and behind closed doors collusion is 9/10 in a row.
Rangers are desperate to stop it hence ‘null and void’
Just like the ‘going for 55’ nonsence nobody else in Scotland or the real world really cares.
I have real sympathy for Partick and Hearts who had a realistic chance of avoiding relegation.
Ive no real solution apart from the fact I’d like the season completed sometime even if that means 3 games a week behind closed doors.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 10:30
Surely it would be wrong to withdraw the resolution until the 28 days are over.
I think I am right in saying that a significant proportion are in favour of it. Something like 85% of the votes cast to date.
There is a decent prospect of a resolution being voted on and passed. Why would it be withdrawn now because a small minority don't like it.
That would just be pandering to the child who screams the loudest and wants her own way.
In their statement, Sevco say they will not be bullied into silence regarding the League body's handling of the members' ballot, but are refusing to hand over "compelling evidence"! Whit?
They are all consumed by their obsession (ably supported by the SMSM) with stopping 10IAR.
Desperate times in Govania right enough.
However, perhaps I should not judge them and Mr Parks (on whose watch this is all taking place) too harshly, since Barry Ferguson endorsed his appointment (on PLZ Soccer -The Football Show) with the comforting reassurance for the supporters that, since he knows Mr Parks personally, the club's immediate future is in capable hands. Well see.
Finally, I await an intervention from CFC (which I believe will be forthcoming this time).
bect67
agreed,i think celtic would have been waiting to see how this unfolds,game of poker comes to mind
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 10:56
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 10:30
Surely it would be wrong to withdraw the resolution until the 28 days are over.
I think I am right in saying that a significant proportion are in favour of it. Something like 85% of the votes cast to date.
There is a decent prospect of a resolution being voted on and passed. Why would it be withdrawn now because a small minority don't like it.
That would just be pandering to the child who screams the loudest and wants her own way.
==================================================
So just to be clear, you are happy with the bundling of issues in one resolution?
You see nothing wrong with that?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Null and void certainly gets us talking. Ignoring the debate about whether it is a legal option please let me put forward a suggestion about how it might just help football around the world! Please humour me!
Null and void means all games have not taken place therefore all teams are on zero points. Zero points means no winners and no losers so any prize pot must surely be shared equally. Each division has its own prize pot of course. It feels good helping the smaller clubs doesn't it! That's Scotland sorted!
How might this help the rest of the world I hear you ask?
Well how about I pick another league say the Europa League, entirely at random of course, and we give it the "null and void" treatment too! You know how it goes! No games played, won or lost so the prize pot has to be shared equally amongst all the competing teams. It feels good supporting teams all round Europe doesn't it!
So ther you have it null and void is a blueprint (some may be concerned that I am trying to give credit to a particular team when using this word but I'm not!) that can be copied around the world.
Sporting integrity and financial worries sorted! A crisis does bring the best out in us all! Or does it?
Homunculus 11th April 2020 at 22:09
……
I am with you on that one.I can wait also.
“If you wait by the river long enough, the bodies of your enemies will float by.”
……………
John Clark 11th April 2020 at 23:21
…..
His club allegiance would, of course, to protect him, rule him out as having any control over such investigation as may be undertaken by the employee’s employers.
But he ought to be in post to examine whatever evidence is presented to the board after that investigation so that the SPFL membership as a whole could be satisfied that there was no jiggery-pokery, and that TRFC’s proper rights had been safeguarded.
…………….
I remember a certain Cambell Ogalvie was allowed to remain on board even due to a conflict of interest.
Ogilvie admits it has left him unable to fully carry out his duties as SFA president and he is now keen to try and facilitate peace talks with the outspoken Green.
“Over my years in football, it is not the first time a club has had issues with the governing body,” said Ogilvie. “I wasn’t party to the discussions which took place over the last six months. I’ve been standing back from it, which has been awkward for me because I feel that, fundamentally, I’ve not been doing my job properly.
Are the votes of ICT & Partick valid?
They've appeared to spoil their papers by marking with a 'cross' instead of the required 'tick'.
redlichtie
How can you separate the issue of distributing prize money with final league positions?
Genuine question.
The SPFL board cannot simply 'decide' to distribute it's prize money funds.
It would need to rewrite a number of its articles and rules and seek approval for all of those changes through a members vote. Even then (depending on the scope), such changes could be subject to a successful challenge by judicial review.
It could be many months before those significant additional powers are made available to the board.
However, the board has a readymade solution through the existing rules – apart from one issue. The current resolution seeks to address that.
The board can already say the season is over and decide on final positions, relegations and promotions. It has that power under the existing rules and no vote is required for that to occur.
Its problem is the recent UEFA statements saying that top leagues should keep the option of finishing their schedules this season.
The current resolution seeks to finalise league positions in the lower leagues without formally calling the season to a halt.
If those clubs – including Dundee, ICT and Patrick Thistle – are successful in defeating the resolution, it only achieves a delay in distributing the prize money until the board officially call time on the season.
The SPFL board has – through this resolution – already told us how it will ultimately decide on final league positions.
I am genuinely struggling to understand, in these circumstances, why any lower league club would vote against.
adam812 12th April 2020 at 11:31
Null and void certainly gets us talking. Ignoring the debate about whether it is a legal option please let me put forward a suggestion about how it might just help football around the world! Please humour me!
Null and void means all games have not taken place therefore all teams are on zero points. Zero points means no winners and no losers so any prize pot must surely be shared equally. Each division has its own prize pot of course.
===========================
But they don't, there is one league and one prize pot, split amongst all 42 teams based on their position in the league, not the division.
So the issues I have include
1, Why are people getting prize money at all, if the competition is ruled void, then why give out prize money.
2, Why would you award prize "money", but not anything else. It cannot surely be "prize" money.
3, If the season is void, however it is agreed to split the money evenly (call it what you will) it has to be split 42 ways. That is how the system works.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 10:07
10
3
Rate This
In my understanding of it Rangers* wanted no calling of the leagues but the equivalent of the prize money paid out now as a loan – with clubs able to elect to repay it when the actual prize money distribution takes place.
To me that seemed to create a possible (and surely unintended) scenario of a club electing not to repay the loan due to their financial circumstances at the time but still being due and expecting to receive their share of the prize money i.e. the SPFL effectively becoming a banker of last resort.
In my view it would be fair to hold on calling the leagues for a little longer (end April?) but I feel it also fair to distribute 75% of the prize money now to help alleviate short term financial problems. The balance can be distributed when/if the leagues are called.
………….
Ask all clubs who want money now to state openly why they need the money now and let the rest of the clubs decide if each clubs plea for cash is justified in said clubs getting a handout.
…
SPFL effectively becoming a banker of last resort.
…
If i was the SPFL i would take Mike Ashleys stand, I am not a bank.
Please humour me!
adam812 12th April 2020 at 11:31
………..
Null and void means all games have not taken place therefore all teams are on zero points. Zero points means no winners and no losers so any prize pot must surely be added to next seasons prize pot, a rollover some may say,Null and void means all games have not taken place therefore there can be no prize handout if nothing has taken place.
Let us see how the Null and void crackpots like that one.
Lets just forget it.
Start the league from where it finished, when the Govt gives the OK to do so. No winners, nor losers… yet !…..No prize money either.
If a club can't honour its fixtures, it's a forfeit.
Who can moan about that?
Homunculus
Thank you for your comments.
I used the term prize pot to describe the money to be distributed to the participants normally rewarding success. As we have to accept normal doesn't exist at present I am happy to change the distribution in line with your point 3
My earlier comments were aimed at pointing out some of the consequences of going down the null and void route if it was adopted everywhere. That said it would help a lot of smaller clubs.
Can I thank the one or two (now 4) people who seem to, or may, have appreciated my earlier post in the spirit it was intended.
At the same time I will now listen to my kids when they say that my dad jokes are not very good and shouldn’t be heard or seen!
Surely Null and Void has gotta be taken out of the whole debate . If null and void is ever passed then we open a can of worms regarding broadcasters claiming their TV money back also opens clubs up to refunding season ticket holders , possibly corporate sponsors ? etc etc etc. This is purely about stopping Celtic getting their hands on title number 9 . Thats how crazy that club from Govan is , they are facing financial armageddon ( even without the corona virus ) and still their driving force is their hatred towards everything Celtic, regardless of the cost to themselves or Scottish football in general. I thouhut when King left maybe just maybe we might start seeing some adult thinking coming out of Govan but it seems that Park is cut from similar cloth as King when it comes to all things Rangers . I wonder how Dungcaster is feeling today , the guy who was a prominent figure at the birth of the poisonous club 8 years ago . Theres the thanks for you Neil . I do feel for other clubs caught up in this i.e Hearts etc etc . I think a league of 14 for one season makes sense as it pleases just about everyone except you know who. Like probably everyone on here Im sick to the back teeth with Rangers , for a 8 year old club they dont half cause the whole of scottish football a lot of trouble
From a different perspective: rather than trying to find a solution that is best for the clubs,
what is the fairest solution for the fans, aka the paying customers?
I can only get to some home games, but I take my hat off to those supporters – of ALL clubs – who commit to attending all home, league games. They might attend some/all away, league games as well as cup games.
These people are the true life blood of senior football across Scotland.
I don’t have a Scooby what the ‘best’ solution is to the current SPFL impasse.
But, I think I do know what would be the ‘worst’ solution.
And that would be ‘null & void”.
‘Null & void’ is, IMO, the SPFL and the 42 clubs telling the fans they are just financially useful chumps.
Thanks for buying league tickets, pies and bovril, etc. over the majority of the season. However, we have all decided that you didn’t actually pay to watch any league games at all. It was a game of football, but it wasn’t a league game so it doesn’t count. Thanks for your money, and look forward to seeing you all again next season…
‘Null & void’ could also be the worst decision for the future of the game.
When the restrictions are lifted, fans could quite reasonably reassess their financial – and time – commitment to a game which continually ignores fans’ opinions and feedback.
Loads of null and void debate here. I too am of the view if that is the case then prize money can’t be distributed. Also, at the risk of boring everyone to tears I am of the firm view only Rangers are pushing for it, and as we can see from the Daily Record article I posted they have also set it in motion via their fans who work in the media.
I am also of the view if Rangers were 13 points ahead the league may already have been called, and the media would be forcefully attacking any protest from Celtic. It’s just the way Scotland is.
HirsutePursuit 12th April 2020 at 11:48
redlichtie
How can you separate the issue of distributing prize money with final league positions?
Genuine question.
The SPFL board cannot simply ‘decide’ to distribute it’s prize money funds.
It would need to rewrite a number of its articles and rules and seek approval for all of those changes through a members vote. Even then (depending on the scope), such changes could be subject to a successful challenge by judicial review.
……………………….
The SPFL board had choices and time, they just chose a particular path to railroad through.
At such a time of threat to our clubs I think they failed to find a way to protect all their members and simply chose the wrong option.
Accordingly and not surprisingly club self interest rather than common good has become the order of the day.
Ignited and exacerbated by a board that has long been out of touch and fanned by uncertainty and a coming financial depression.
If the vote stands as is I would expect litigation from the disenfranchised clubs.
Never more has our game needed strong unifying and open leadership that sees beyond the pettiness and shallowness of club politics.
paddy malarkey 11th April 2020 at 22:35
Smugas 11th April 2020 at 20:16
“I am not disputing Scott Cameron’s statement , other than to say that it looks to me that Dundee’s slip had indeed been received , was copied then pasted online (if that image is genuine) along with the two Thistles’ . If it has been received , how can it subsequently be rescinded . ( Unless maybe it was received but not registered so that pressure could be applied to “do the right thing”)”
Cannot see the slip been genuine
If it was received as part of the bundled docs, it would be an original white background doc like Particks, with black written instruction. If then scanned in colour for upload as attachment including signature aplied in blue ink it would appear in original content,white background blue ink, however this version has greyed background as may be expected with an exposed to light scanned copy, but, how can the ink signature still be blue, if a copy is scanned and exposed to light then the whole doc would be grey background and grey ink. And if no light, as stated above, then it would be original content if scanned in colour and blue ink intact, you cannot have it both ways.
This was never sent, and if sent, it is on a server somewhere, produce it by showing the email and address it was sent to.
HirsutePursuit 12th April 2020 at 01:16
Can I just clarify…
Legally, it makes absolutely no difference if Dundee had submitted a No vote or not.
Votes in favour of a written resolution cannot be revoked. See…
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/46/section/296
======================================
Confirmation of the above in the instructions the clubs received.
Shug, Just for the sake of honesty and clarity.
Scott Gardiner has always been a Rangers Fanatic.
So are his brother and father.
Scott was employed with Rangers before 2012.
It was indeed his dream job.
Not sure just what is going on but it will all
have to come out shortly. Someone is playing somebody.
watcher 12th April 2020 at 14:53
Shug, Just for the sake of honesty and clarity.
Scott Gardiner has always been a Rangers Fanatic.
So are his brother and father.
Scott was employed with Rangers before 2012.
It was indeed his dream job.
Not sure just what is going on but it will all
have to come out shortly. Someone is playing somebody.
============================
Thanks for that watcher.
Now i'm more disinclined to believe the bearer of the news.
Being honest I'm not 100% convinced that whatsapp screenshot even says Dundee the last letter could be the letter (h) to me but it could just be someone writing in a rush so I can give them the benefit of the doubt.
Hopefully the truth will see the light of day this time.
Hi guys
Been a while since I posted but read most days much to the charging of the missus.
I just wanted to ask is it Parks snr or jnr who is also involved with Hamilton, if its the senior one then surely now is the time that DUMBcaster can do something about involvement in more than one club. Aslo for for what it is worth my view to stop the null and void brigade is just keep the leagues on standby no money given out till lastinute then blame sevco and hearts for other clubs going bust just a thought, back to the 16 Yr old Lagavulin
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 14:32
Thanks for that, if it's a true copy it does tend to support what a few people have been saying here, HP in particular.
The deadline was 28 days, a Yes vote cannot be changed. Failing to vote within the 28 days is effectively a No.
Kentes 12th April 2020 at 15:13
I would rather something could be done to try to get money to the clubs and save them.
As others have said, the SPFL have it within their gift to finish the league, declare the positions at the point and pay out the prize money. It wouldn't be that difficult from what I can see.
However UEFA have asked leagues not to do that, and to instead wait a bit to see if it becomes possible to play the rest of the games. Even threatening lack of European football to any league which doesn't play along.
What happened last week was a ham-fisted, poorly implemented attempt to be all things to all men. To get some of the money out, by declaring the lower divisions over. However keeping the league running by not finishing the top division. This complying with UEFA's wishes.
It seems to have spectacularly blown up in their faces because they appear to have tried to force it through quickly. Rather than just doing things properly.
What we may now have is entrenched positions, with the SPFL saying, we will pay out the prize money as and when the league positions are decided and the prizes are due. If they never become due then no-one gets a prize.
It is all madness because it seems a small number of clubs don't want to play along with the only sensible option. It would now seem the same clubs, or at least one of them are portraying themselves as some sort of champion of truth and justice. When they are in fact putting everyone at risk, in order to follow their own agenda, and play to their own support.
Further statement/letter from Murdo MacLennan
Raman Bhardwaj@STVRaman
Statement from SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan. Main points: – resolution wasn’t rushed (saying Stewart Robertson happy with time given) – one club in championship (Dundee) have still to cast vote. – Rangers have provided no evidence to back allegations re corporate governance claims: "I wrote to Mr Park on Saturday…requesting any material to support these allegations. I regret to inform you that..I have received nothing..(it's) difficult to understand why Mr Park should not wish to share this alleged material with me"
@Kheredine@Kheredine2018
@spfl chairman on @DundeeFC vote: "We've had a number of conversations with the (club) chairman over the weekend in which he reiterated the club had not yet voted on the SPFL resolution. The SPFL has proceeded on the basis of the unequivocal instruction received at 6pm Friday"
@spfl chairman on money to clubs: "For the Board to be able to authorise end-of-season fee payments to clubs (£9.3million gross), final league placings MUST be determined. Those…suggesting..SPFL may make such payments, without a line being drawn under (the) season are wrong"
@Kheredine @Kheredine2018
@spfl says 'missing' @DundeeFC vote slip (voting 'No') gets to them AFTER Dundee wrote to them saying "any attempted vote from club should NOT be considered as cast". The plot thickens significantly. Vote is 'cast' – vote doesnt arrive – 'dont count our vote' – vote arrives?
@Kheredine
@Kheredine2018
·
16m
. @spfl
chairman on @RangersFC
claims: “I wrote to Mr Park on Saturday…requesting any material to support these allegations. I regret to inform you that..I have received nothing..(it’s) difficult to understand why Mr Park should not wish to share this alleged material with me”
……..
I see easyJambo is ahead of me.
Full text
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 15:48
@spfl chairman on money to clubs: “For the Board to be able to authorise end-of-season fee payments to clubs (£9.3million gross), final league placings MUST be determined. Those…suggesting..SPFL may make such payments, without a line being drawn under (the) season are wrong”
===============================
People in charge of paying out c£9m want to do it subject to the rules. Rather than just paying it out as loans, in advance, of a season which people are trying to get invalidated.
Who do these people think they are. Rangers have spoken, just get on with it FFS.
Question for the SPFL and SFA.
Will you seek to sanction Douglas Park on a "Bringing the game into disrepute" charge?
This latest crisis in Scottish football has certainly galvanised this particular online community based on the comments and concomitant TU’s and TD’s.
FWIW it seems to me that it once again exposes the weakness of the Scottish structure in that there are 3 main parts to it. The SFA, the SPFL and the club’s all co-exist in what is essentially a political arrangement and three way structures tend to be inherently unstable in politics. Many things will change post virus and perhaps Scottish football will change too.
A couple of earlier posts have speculated if CFC should be making a statement. Again fwiw, why bother ? Their vote has been cast, anything further would fuel the paranoia in certain quarters that Peter Lawwell’s unseen hand is pulling the strings once more.
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 15:56
People in charge of paying out c£9m want to do it subject to the rules. Rather than just paying it out as loans, in advance, of a season which people are trying to get invalidated.
==============================
I don’t believe that it is as black and white as that. As a “members organisation”, those members can effectively vote to change anything they want, subject to the specific voting requirements of any resolution.
e.g. Motion: The Clubs agree that on medical and government advice it will not be possible to complete fixtures for season 2019/20, prior to the, as yet undecided, start of season 2020/21. We therefore agree to end the SPFL league season at this point, and distribute funds to clubs on the basis of current league positions/PPG averages. Further discussions will follow over the next X weeks regarding the award of titles / UEFA places / promotion / relegation / play offs / reconstruction / pyramid involvement.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 15:57
Question for the SPFL and SFA.
Will you seek to sanction Douglas Park on a "Bringing the game into disrepute" charge?
=================
Look at some of the nonsense they have ignored from various People in charge at Ibrox since 2012, so I doubt it.
However, taking Murdoch MacLennan's letter at face value, perhaps it's time for them to demand a retraction and an apology from Rangers, and if it is not forthcoming to tell Rangers they will discuss it in the Court of Session.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 16:08
I did not mean to suggest for a second that the rules couldn't be changed. Just that people need to stick to them or change them. If you want to change them you do it via the proper method.
That is exactly what Rangers tried to do, and it was rejected by the SPFL, they claim on the advice of a QC.
Re your suggestion, can I highlight this one part (and I know you just threw it together to illustrate the point) "We therefore agree to end the SPFL league season at this point …"
Based on the current rules Celtic would be champions, as the champion is named when the season finishes, there is no mention of the number of games.
The resolution would have to specifically say that the season wasn't finishing but the "prize money" would be paid out anyway. I doubt that would be effective for this season. As I said before, it is not in my opinion tenable to change the rules of a competition during that competition.
If people want prize money paid out then finish the season. That is what the SPFL were trying to do (for the lower divisions). We all know that they would have done it at a later date for the Premiership, there is little chance the games are getting played.
Sorry if behind the curve on this but can someone tell me when Premiership teams would get their share of the prize money if the resolution was passed?
Do they have to wait until a final agrred decision has been made on final placing or the remaining games have been played?
Rangers Statement to @STVRaman
A spokesman for Rangers advised that Rangers Company secretary, James Blair, has had several email exchanges with the SPFL legal adviser, Rod McKenzie. Remarkably, we have learned from an email received from Mr McKenzie that our proposed resolution is deemed unnecessary because the SPFL board already has the authority to provide loans to member clubs which can be exercised by the SPFL at any time. The Inverness CEO, Scot Gardiner, confirmed on national radio yesterday that SPFL representatives made it clear on several conference calls that it was necessary to approve the SPFL resolution in order to release funds which would relieve the financial hardship being experienced by many clubs.
Member clubs will be shocked to learn this is not the case and any club facing short term financial difficulties should request a loan from the SPFL immediately. Our resolution was never intended to release end of season fee payments but instead to provide loans as an advance on such payments. It is now apparent that this is already within the power of the SPFL. This provides further evidence that an independent investigation is urgently required.
END
wottpi 12th April 2020 at 16:20
Sorry if behind the curve on this but can someone tell me when Premiership teams would get their share of the prize money if the resolution was passed?
Do they have to wait until a final agrred decision has been made on final placing or the remaining games have been played?
=================================
Nothing to the Premiership clubs yet.
The SPFL proposal, as accepted 10-2 by the Premiership clubs, but still pending approval by Chamionship club, would have handed authority to the SPFL Board to make that determination when it was appropriate, e.g. after the next UEFA meeting on 23 April.
It is anticipated that it would follow the same arrangement as that proposed for tiers 2-4.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 16:27
I was under the impression the the SPFL board already had the authority to finish the league, and as such pay out the prize money.
"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"
I believe they wanted to effectively close the season for the lower divisions, whilst actually keeping it open, as UEFA requested.
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 15:38
………
That is a very clear post, and good for anyone trying to understand what is going on.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 16:22
Rangers Statement to @STVRaman
EDIT
..SPFL board already has the authority to provide loans to member clubs which can be exercised by the SPFL at any time.
It must come as some relief to TRFC then that lesser lights can keep them on .Of course TRFC will have no need now to pursue early payout of prize money.
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 16:40
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 16:27
I was under the impression the the SPFL board already had the authority to finish the league, and as such pay out the prize money.
“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”
I believe they wanted to effectively close the season for the lower divisions, whilst actually keeping it open, as UEFA requested.
================================
I think that is correct, but I’d be pretty sure that the Board didn’t want to be seen to be acting unilaterally, so went for the members vote route.
The big question for me remains. Who on the SPFL Board was pushing for all the other bits (relegation / promotion/ play offs) to be added to the resolution at this point and for what reason(s)?
Thanks EJ.
Still very confusing as the SPFL is now one organisation unlike the old SPL & SFL days.
I would have thought it should be all or nothing.
Having different conditions for the different divisions doesn’t seem, IMHO, to be consistent if final positions must be resolved before layouts.
A lengthy statement from Ann Budge
https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/chairmans-update-12-april-2020
Extract from it.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 16:49
I think it was simpler than that.
They have the facility to finish the league (the SPFL) but they didn't want to do that, because of the UEFA thing.
So they went to the members to ask for permission to finish the lower three divisions, but leave the top one going. I don't think that was ever envisaged. Bearing in mind that up until fairly recently there was the SPL and the SFL. Two different leagues.
I think they went to the member clubs with a new resolution because they had to, or just shut the whole league down.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52262072https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52262072
The SPFL tried to “unduly influence the outcome of the vote” by insisting their resolution had to be passed in order to release funds to clubs, says Hearts chair Ann Budge.
And Budge confirmed that Hearts will propose league construction to ensure “no club is financially penalised”.
Hearts supported Rangers’ counter resolution, the progress of which Budge claims was held up by the league.
She says it is “hugely disappointing” the matter was not properly addressed.
“If the SPFL genuinely wanted to work with member clubs to find a solution to the matter of releasing funds they could and should have reverted both more timeously and more helpfully,” Budge added.
More to follow.
I know ALL clubs are experiencing a cut-off of their main revenue stream, i.e. the fans, but what this wee bun-fight has highlighted, is how reliant they are on prize money, and what happens when it is not forthcoming.
The first item on the agenda when football resumes should be Financial Fair Play.
I read something yesterday that said as many as 20 of the 42 senior clubs in Scotland may not survive the current crisis. It brought this thought to mind…
In 2012 Dundee FC was the principal beneficiary when an SPL member club went out of business.
Could Dundee, ICT and Patrick Thistle benefit if a delay in awarding prize money forced other clubs into the hands of insolvency practitioners?
Asking for a friend.
Following on Ann Budge's statement I can see this heading to the Courts. That is not helpful except to enrich the legal profession.
My earlier suggestion was received negatively but in the circumstances I repeat it (with some additions) – with regard to next steps, how about :
1. The existing resolution is withdrawn and voting cancelled. (Or a motion raised to set it aside and that is then voted on – I appreciate this could fall but if that is the case then the game's a bogey)
2. A new simple resolution is put forward offering immediate distribution of 75% of the prize money with the balance on the eventual calling of the leagues. (If as it seems it is already within the power of the SPFL to make a loan then make the distribution through loans that are automatically repayable by offsetting against whatever prize money eventually becomes due)
3. A representative task force immediately set up to discuss reconstruction options with proposals being put forward for consideration within one month. (With proper consideration of and engagement with all stakeholders)
4. Calling of the leagues to be reviewed at the end of April. (With some of the immediate financial pressure off let's see how things look in a couple of weeks – this can be a regular review every four weeks until UEFA or reality intrudes)
Scottish Football needs proper leadership to get out of this mess.
I wonder if it’s more simple than that HP. Budge’s statement would seem to infer that the Thistle Thistle Dundee pact (for want of a better word) was common knowledge. Common in so far as knowledge of it was knowledge that the resolution would fail. In voting so late @ 16.52 was Dundee’s simply the latest and crucial bit of the jigsaw. The powers that be, whoever that may be, then got to work on the holder of the last piece. Could it be that that it was Dundee was purely or at least relatively coincidental? It doesn’t absolve the powers that be’s action(s) of course, nor does it give us any insight into their primary motivation.
Please also pass onto your friend that I cannot speak for Partick or Dundee but I’d be monumentally surprised if Caley thought they’d be last man standing in any financial game of billy big balls.
Redlichtie,
can I add as an addendum to your resolution.
can someone give us a straight answer at the outset of your month long considerations, the real answer, not what certain parties feel, perceive or even want the answer to be, as to whether Sky’s new contract in August would apply to a reconstructed set up or not?
The SEVCO statements are getting more deranged by the day. Smacks of their desperation to be seen as the premier club in Scotland.
Whatever happens in the vote, nothing will happen until UEFA declare their preferences on this season as otherwise they could withdraw permission for any club and indeed the national team to take part in their competitions. Only a moron would risk that.
Seems like they are desperate for a null and void season to hide their blushes for their performances on the pitch, at the moment they don’t even have one of those.
Talk of league reconstruction is a squirrel to spare the blushes of teams that ought to have done better with the resources they have.
The SPFL should charge SEVCO with bringing the game into disrepute. I doubt they have the balls.
wottpi12th April 2020 at 16:52
3 0
Rate This
Thanks EJ.
Still very confusing as the SPFL is now one organisation unlike the old SPL & SFL days.
I would have thought it should be all or nothing.
Having different conditions for the different divisions doesn’t seem, IMHO, to be consistent if final positions must be resolved before layouts.
,………….
I think you have hit on the point that most people are missing.
The SPFL board can, within the current rules, close the entire league down finalise positions, declare champions and make its determination on which clubs are promoted and relegated.
It is not completely certain that the current rules permit the board to make those calls on a per division basis. It is arguable either way, I think.
The resolution it has presented seeks to overcome any doubt. It has effectively asked the clubs to explicitly agree that the lower divisions are treated as at season end, but keeps it open for the premiership.
This gives the lower tiers immediate access to SPFL prize money and keeps the SPFL in line with UEFA's wish that the top leagues keep open the option of resuming the current season.
Of course, this means the premiership clubs still have to wait for their prize money.
Smugas 12th April 2020 at 18:16
Redlichtie,
can I add as an addendum to your resolution.
can someone give us a straight answer at the outset of your month long considerations, the real answer, not what certain parties feel, perceive or even want the answer to be, as to whether Sky’s new contract in August would apply to a reconstructed set up or not?
=====================================
Sky will keep the contract but will probably want to renegotiate the number of games they cover, partly in lieu of an increased number of teams (if applicable), but also to make up for the shortfall this season and any delayed start next season. They may also seek to provide coverage of games behind closed doors if that eventuality happens.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 18:07
Here's a simpler solution.
Declare the league over (there is only one league)
Pay out all of the prize money
No vote required.
I think there will be clauses pertaining to the trending 'force majeur' in the SPFL/Sky deal. Both parties will need to excercise a certain amount of pragmatism and I don't see it being of utmost concern at the moment.All media rights will undoubtedly take a hit the world over.
https://twitter.com/Sean_FTB/status/1249359532763086848?s=20
Did TRFC ask for loans or the early release of prize money? They themselves seem confused.
Lie and deny.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 18:07 2.
A new simple resolution is put forward offering immediate distribution of 75% of the prize money with the balance on the eventual calling of the leagues. (If as it seems it is already within the power of the SPFL to make a loan then make the distribution through loans that are automatically repayable by offsetting against whatever prize money eventually becomes due)
===========================================
WRT point 2 Red, that wouldn't be possible. For any prize monies to be awarded, the league must be declared and positions finalised. That may be likely to happen at some stage, but is by no means guaranteed. (N & V).
As such some other form of security would be required. I doubt the SPFL would accept being left holding multiple empty stadiums should the worst happen. Basically it would need to be something a bank would happily accept.
Insurance companies doing what insurance companies do, find some reason not to pay out on a policy.
An extract from a statement by East Fife.
It’s good that we are all talking constructively about this. If I might respond in a hopefully similar manner to a couple of points raised.
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 18:31
Here’s a simpler solution. Declare the league over (there is only one league). Pay out all of the prize money. No vote required.
RL : From what I understand there is a UEFA request not to do this. Clubs are also clearly not united in wanting this for reasons we all understand. Why do something that will just inflame the current situation and potentially lead to legal action that will delay/jeopardise much needed assistance?
===================================================
Corrupt official 12th April 2020 at 18:36
WRT point 2 Red, that wouldn’t be possible. For any prize monies to be awarded, the league must be declared and positions finalised. That may be likely to happen at some stage, but is by no means guaranteed. (N & V).
As such some other form of security would be required. I doubt the SPFL would accept being left holding multiple empty stadiums should the worst happen. Basically it would need to be something a bank would happily accept.
RL : Why can a resolution not be put forward to amend/suspend the relevant rules & regulations to allow a distribution of prize money now? But it actually doesn’t even need that. I was in fact proposing a loan of a sum equivalent to 75% of the prize money, not actual distribution of the prize money.
What other security is required? The loan is effectively secured against prize money due – that link (an offset) should be an implicit part of any loan agreement. BTW I mentioned 75% – it is also surely not beyond the wit of man to come up with a percentage that does not create any meaningful exposure for the SPFL. Heck it might be 80% or even 85%.
Scottish Football needs to make pragmatic compromises to ensure we all get through this challenging period.
Redlichtie/ CO, Agree with what you say, I seem to recall a slight flaw in the TRFC proposition regarding loans on the strength of prize money due. Clubs would 'elect' to pay back the loans when prize money released. That has to be a big no no. The loan would have to be automatically deducted from money due.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 18:57
It’s good that we are all taking constructively about this. If I might respond in a hopefully similar manner to a couple of points raised.
Homunculus 12th April 2020 at 18:31
Here’s a simpler solution. Declare the league over (there is only one league). Pay out all of the prize money. No vote required.
———————————————————–
RL : From what I understand there is a UEFA request not to do this.
=======================================================
Which is exactly what I said earlier today.
So the SPFL came up with what is probably next best idea, but they need agreement to do it. Hence proposing a resolution for the memebrs to vote on.
Finish the other three divisions, pay out ALL of the prize money to them based on current positions, and leave the top division / league open.
That way they pay as much money out as possible, payments not loans. Therefore no complications re when / if the loan is going to get paid back, requirement for security etc.
I can genuinely see why some clubs have an issue with this, absolutely. However what is Rangers’ problem with it. The top division would not be finalised and they would still have the chance to play all of the games, win the league and get the CL qualifying place.
jimbo 12th April 2020 at 19:00
redlichtie/ CO, Agree with what you say, I seem to recall a slight flaw in the TRFC proposition regarding loans on the strength of prize money due. Clubs would 'elect' to pay back the loans when prize money released. That has to be a big no no. The loan would have to be automatically deducted from money due.
———————————–
Jimbo – I have pointed to that aspect previously. I have no doubt that the wording was intentional. Just brazen.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Please don't tell me that this whole fiasco was caused by a club being too proud to ask the league for a loan . It cannae be that simple , Captain
Red, maybe I shouldn't have abbreviated N&V, (Null & Void). In the event of such an event, however unlikely, there will be zero prize money to off-set against. Any loans, whatever percentage, delivered on the strength of it, would be as good as down the river.
paddy malarkey 12th April 2020 at 19:12
Please don't tell me that this whole fiasco was caused by a club being too proud to ask the league for a loan . It cannae be that simple , Captain
==================================
Think it was more to do with their incompetence.
The loan idea – whilst not completely impossible – seems to be fraught with difficulty.
For example, what happens if loans are made on current positions and multiple clubs still go into administration before the season is called?
Since the season is still live, points deductions would be automatically applied and league positions altered accordingly. Some clubs might – on the basis of 'unforseen circumstances' – have grounds for appeal, but that process is certainly not straightforward.
Can you imagine the absolute carnage that would ensue – allowing some appeals and dismissing others. The current anger and recriminations would be as nothing if clubs lose prize money they have already spent (as a loan) and/or are relegated when others are 'forgiven' for what appears to be the same offence.
And, of course, some clubs will be expecting additional prize money, which the SPFL will not have.
In my experience, apparently simple solutions are rarely as simple as they first appear.
I listened again to the podcast of Saturday's 'Sportsound'
What I would like to know is:did the BBC phone Gardiner to invite his views, or did he phone the BBC asking for the chance to get his suspicions aired? Was he merely being a stalking horse for TRFC, or being used as support for the two ex-Rangers men and the gombeen man on the 'panel'?
Richard Gordon, cutting off Kenny Miller, merely said 'we are delighted to say we are joined on the line by …'..
Since 2012, of course, anything that Radio Scotland has to say about TRFC is viewed by many with justified suspicion.
And ,of course ,anything said by defenders of the Big Lie is automatically to be discounted, especially any canting, hypocritical expressions of concern for the good of Scottish Football and smaller clubs in danger.
John Clark 12th April 2020 at 19:54
==================
Sportsound wasn't much better today. Neil McCann and Chick Young, with Rangers statement from yesterday basically being taken as fact. The amount of Rangers minded pundits on that show simply can't be a co-incidence. It has to be by design. There is no other explanation.
shug 12th April 2020 at 20:04
upthehoops 12th April 2020 at 20:14
============================
I stopped after reading the first paragraph. A "Yes" vote would not have given ICT promotion.
UTH @ 20.14
—————————————–
Aye and we know who the alligators will be
ej, I take it that is based on the notion that a yes vote would be followed with a possible reconstruction to 14 teams in the Premiership. Hence the writers use of 'probably'.
shug 12th April 2020 at 20:04
I find that highly unlikely.
jimbo 12th April 2020 at 20:37
ej, I take it that is based on the notion that a yes vote would be followed with a possible reconstruction to 14 teams in the Premiership. Hence the writers use of 'probably'.
====================================
Every statement I've seen suggests that the chance of reconstruction following a "Yes" vote is slim as it requires an 11-1 vote by Premiership teams.
Ann Budge said as much in her statement earlier today, but despite that she is proposing a temporary reconstruction for next season.
This is along the lines of sunsport/recordsport understands stuff what's good for the goose and all that can't let the lunatics have it all their own way.
Now just think if this was round the other way the moon howlers would be out in force with petitions and to my mind as likely as the whistle blowers proof.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 20:22
I stopped after reading the first paragraph. A "Yes" vote would not have given ICT promotion.
=======
Which is of course your right. As far as I am concerned the allegation in the story has every right to be taken as seriously, or not seriously, as the one Rangers are making. Neither are providing any hard evidence.
With respect to those peddling the Scott Gardner story, I highly doubt it is true, and in any case, this is a direct accusation, based on no evidence whatsoever, that an individual has used his influence at one club to help achieve a favorable outcome on behalf of another. Not an expert, but that sounds to me like an unfounded accusation of criminality, which is actionable.
An allegation has no right to be taken seriously if there is nothing of substance to underpin it, aside from mischief, and a shoehorning of some random thoughts into a pre-prepared narrative.
I like to think we hold ourselves to better standards here.
paddy malarkey 12th April 2020 at 19:12
4
1
Rate This
Please don’t tell me that this whole fiasco was caused by a club being too proud to ask the league for a loan . It cannae be that simple , Captain
……………..
And with stewart Robinson on the board he would have known he could have asked for a loan, maybe even a quite word in someones ear.
Psssst. any chance of a loan….Cheers.
shug 12th April 2020 at 20:04
'…Further, our senior Celtic source understands…'
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
…that there's nothing to beat a good wind-up!
Highly improbable that an such an alleged act of bribery of that kind would become known so soon after its commission. Someone is having a laugh, I fear.
Big Pink 12th April 2020 at 21:21
To me it is verging on defamation, unless it is true.
You are right to be cautious about this.
I actually had the thought yesterday that only the SFA or SPFL could ever manage the Herculean feat of raising Rangers aloft onto the moral high ground.
Today, I think they have had an empathy nose-bleed, and set about restoring balance 🙂
They have done so successfully With their accusations, refusal (so far) to provide evidence they say have, and now telling straight porkies wrt to their assertion that they never at any time asked for distribution of prize money – just a few days after er, asking for distribution of prize money.
Equilibrium restored?
The sad thing is, their characterisation of the powers that be, irony aside, would not have been out of place in these pages. Strange times.
I won’t go into the fine details of what regulations are in place to either enable or prevent the distribution of funds, mainly because I have never found myself able to understand regulations due to the curious language in which they are drafted.
My ideal solution, if it is allowable, is to get the money to needy clubs without preconditions on ending of competitions, Following that, two simple rules;
Of course it should be that simple, but the halfwits who run our clubs and institutions will have none of that will they?
John Clark
… except it's not at all funny
I remember many years back an SFM poster was always implying something 'nuclear' was about to happen.
Are we there yet?
Scottish Football needs a Sanity Clause – peace needs to break out ASAP for everyone's benefit.
Redlichtie
One of the great sadnesses of the last eight years is that we have become so immune to shock and outrage, I doubt we would ever actually recognise 'nuclear' if it happened.
Or if it did, someone at Ibrox or Hampden would no doubt say, "Haud ma beer"!!!
Big Pink 12th April 2020 at 21:21
———————–
Fair point on Scott Gardner. However, on the board last night we were told by some posters we can't dismiss accusations just because it's Rangers who are making them. However, I see you have covered Rangers behaviour in another post.
Big Pink 12th April 2020 at 21:36
'..the fine details of what regulations are in place to either enable or prevent the distribution of funds..'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Where are they to be found, BP, as a matter of interest? I've looked quickly through the Articles and Rules of the SPFL and didn't see anything relevant.
And I think it remiss of the SPFL letter just to say 'final league placings MUST be determined' without giving chapter and verse.
I checked in with JJ a moment ago but sadly there were no pearls of wisdom to be had. I’ve now gone beyond the organic Côte du Rhône and progressing into 18 yo Glenfiddich. I must therefore say bonsoir.
At the acknowledged risk of offence, I struggle to fathom how a substantial number of supposedly intelligent football fans such as those posters and readers of this site can fall for the ruse that’s being played out in front of them.
Let’s remember that in recent times our football authorities miraculously managed to conjure out of thin air a myriad of baffling ‘solutions’ which didn’t exist in their rules and regulations. Conditional SFA licence, temporary membership, imperfect but eligible, separate operating company and metaphysical club to name but a few – when it became necessary to pretend Rangers had somehow survived liquidation – it was a done deal under the guise of “unless the board decides otherwise”, all for the sake of money and contracts.
Yet now, when some Scottish clubs are on the very edge of financial oblivion, our football authorities have blatantly attempted to gerrymander their preferred outcome by falsely linking the release of prize money with passing their chosen resolution, one of which six options was openly flaunted like a tart in a miniskirt while the other five were denigrated, and somehow that is alright? Neil Doncaster is mischief making because he does not want to lose the much-prized new-season Sky contract and Doncaster is incapable of re-negotiating a favourable deal. Rod McKenzie is doing what Rod McKenzie does by putting convenient legal obstacles in the way, obstacles that mysteriously vanished in 2012.
Celtic will almost inevitably win the league title, on merit, and Hearts will almost inevitably be relegated, also on merit, although it would be ideal to play for the remaining 24 points if that becomes possible in the remainder of the calendar year. Partick Thistle have even more to gripe about.
Was it Greavsie who used to say football's a funny old game.
Not long ago people on this blog would have given their right arm to see the back of Doncaster,McKenzie and their likes. Mainly for their duplicitous and incompetent ways.
Suddenly, for some, they are honest brokers.
I keep seeing talk about democracy and 85%, or whatever,voting for the resolution. However for the vast majority of the club's in the SPFL it matters not a jot. Their league positions are unlikely to change much and they can cash in their chips now as opposed to seeing if they gain or loose a few quid further down the line.
The resolution was a loaded question to a mainly captive audience.
If Sporting Integrity was the driving force of various blogs, not so long ago, to ensure a new club wasn't placed in a division it didn't deserve to be in, then why the sudden acceptance that other clubs will not be afforded the right rise or fall by their performances on the pitch.
Especially when the same crew are in charge who Turnbull Hutton described as being corrupt, bullies and effectively marked them as threatening blackmailers putting the frighteners on people to get the predetermined result they always sought from the outset.
Deja vu anyone?
Ah well, what do I know?
It would seem that Stewart Robertson remains on the SPFL Board.
I wonder if Doncaster is now checking out his own exit options?
He's done 10+ years as CEO of the SPL/SPFL.
In an earlier article he had mentioned that he thought it was better/safer that his kids were not educated locally, hence his family had returned down south whilst he stayed in Strathaven during the week.
If TRFC is lacking tangible evidence to back up their serious allegations against the SPFL – then they will play the man, in time honoured fashion.
Doncaster could be the fall guy – and negotiate a suitably hefty pay off – and leave the interminable SPFL squabbling behind him.
(Not that he deserves a penny though, due to his dodgy behaviour in 2012 and invisible leadership throughout.)
Seems to me, that if the league is called, and Sevco get paid out for 2nd spot, it may be on the wrong side of administration for their liking…..Creditors would sook it all up, and there would be hee-haw in the tank to finance a 3rd Rangers IPO……..And they wouldn't be able to blame the SPFL for "Hoddin' back wur money we wur pure entitled tae"…….That would give Third Rangers a rallying call and the PR upper hand in negotiations for re-entry……A ten point start or something.
Bet the new surface is being done on tick too.
It will be something mental like that.
I can guarantee however, that whatever it is they're up to, it is not philanthropic in nature.
wottpi 12th April 2020 at 22:22
…………
The same crew may have learned a lesson in 2012 and tried to do things by the book, the problem being is that they are not very good at it
Highlander 12th April 2020 at 22:12
Yet now, when some Scottish clubs are on the very edge of financial oblivion, our football authorities have blatantly attempted to gerrymander their preferred outcome by falsely linking the release of prize money with passing their chosen resolution, one of which six options was openly flaunted like a tart in a miniskirt while the other five were denigrated, and somehow that is alright?
==================================
Agree 100% Highlander.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Highlander 12th April 2020 at 22:12
Let’s remember that in recent times our football authorities miraculously managed to conjure out of thin air a myriad of baffling ‘solutions’ which didn’t exist in their rules and regulations.
================================
I think that it entirely possible that the SPFL Board will announce that they have found a means whereby they can distribute funds (payments, fees, advances, loans or whatever) to clubs without doing anything else.
Before the funds are actually handed over, every club CEO will be required to say "all hail Kim Jong Doncaster"
Seriously though, the reference to payment to clubs is in the AoA, but refers back to the rules
The Board has the power to determine the end of a season and it doesn't look like it needs a vote of members to do so.
wottpi 12th April 2020 at 22:22
Was it Greavsie who used to say football's a funny old game.
Not long ago people on this blog would have given their right arm to see the back of Doncaster,McKenzie and their likes. Mainly for their duplicitous and incompetent ways.
Suddenly, for some, they are honest brokers.
———————————————
What is it they say on here, play the ball not the man.
Tomorrow's Herald back page seems an appropriate point to sign out for the night.
easyJambo 12th April 2020 at 23:07
Tomorrow's Herald back page seems an appropriate point to sign out for the night.
=====
I saw that earlier, and fair play to them. Pretty much sums it all up.
Goodnight all, take care and stay safe. If anyone can't see that Rangers only aim is to cancel the season completely…well, they are perfectly entitled to think otherwise!
I hope that clarifies matters.
Custer One
Given some of the detail provided in the latest Hearts statement I think you are probably right.
Couldn't run a piss up etc etc even if trying to do 'the right thing'.
redlichtie 12th April 2020 at 21:46
There was a contributor called Barcabhoy / @Barcabhoy1 who would hint at a “nuclear” event, back in the day.
For the record I have no objection to Celtic an Dundee Utd being given their titles on the basis of a good points lead and a low probability of being caught.
However for a small number of other clubs there are fine margins in terms of points and games to play that cannot and should not be so easily dismissed at this early stage.
Having considered the permutations across the leagues, there are no certainties with regards winners, losers, promotions and relegations. Many may disagree; however, taking every scenario in to account, the application of every rule makes every league's outcome too unpredictable.There is too much uncertainty.
Without argument, it is those clubs that have abondoned the system of rules and practices, by which they are directed, that have become significantly more susceptible and least likely to weather this horrible storm.
It's been commonplace for many years for fans to question overspending by some clubs and under investment (or lack of) by others. Quite often, a club's fanbase has demanded more activity in the transfer markets regardless of the strength of the 'company' and too often clubs have indulged in the demands of their fans.
Personally, I have no issue with monies being distributed, but absolutely not awarded, before the season is determined. But it must be fair.
Above all, lessons MUST be learned and Scottish Football must demand corporate governance regardless of the stature of a member club. Without exception. After all, corporate governance is the measure of the viability of any company.
Scottish football must be for the greater good. Give them the money. We've (I've) no wish to punish the many.
https://twitter.com/gjust67/status/1249474195609845761?s=21
Just when you thought it couldn’t get any more surreal. Bonsoir encore un fois.
I've not been that active on SFM or other blogs because of an illness in Scotland called "scunnert" often expressed as "fair scunnert".
I've been blogging about SFA Reform, Domestic Financial Fair Play, Increasing UEFA Solidarity payments/decreasing rewards to clubs that qualify for UEFA competitions.
With great assistance from some SFM stalwarts for which I'm very grateful, we put together a time line of fraud and skulldugery by the SFA, The SPL/SPFL and the chameleon club/company, depending on the issue, resident at Ibrox.
https://www.res12.uk/
A timeline that also covers how the Lord Nimmo Smith Commission was deceived and how it, like other so called judicial processes established by the SFA/SPL/SPFL were set up to achieve a desired result by hook or by crooks.
A result that Celtic, contrary to appearances, have had no more interest in overturning any more than they have bringing the SFA and Board members of the current version of Rangers who served on the Board of Rangers FC to account for obtaining a UEFA licence in 2011 under false pretence to Celtic's financial cost and who accepted the 5 Way Agreement they denied sight of at the last AGM.
The game is rotten to the core, run by liars and charlatans and if it collapsing under the weight of its own mendacity were to produce right minded thinking leaders and something we could all enjoy being part of, I might hope that the words of Kahil Gibran were taking form before our very eyes.
"Your pain is the breaking of the shell that encloses
your understanding.
Even as the stone of the fruit must break, that its
heart may stand in the sun, so must you know pain.
And could you keep your heart in wonder at the
daily miracles of your life, your pain would not seem
less wondrous than your joy;
And you would accept the seasons of your heart,
even as you have always accepted the seasons that
pass over your fields.
And you would watch with serenity through the
winters of your grief.
Much of your pain is self-chosen.
It is the bitter potion by which the physician within
you heals your sick self.
Therefore trust the physician, and drink his remedy
in silence and tranquillity:
For his hand, though heavy and hard, is guided by
the tender hand of the Unseen, (edit no not Fenian)
And the cup he brings, though it burn your lips, has
been fashioned of the clay which the Potter has
moistened with His own sacred tears.
Did they not say it had been attached in a PDF file so it could have tripped the firewall seems like something you would not leave out of your skullduggery statement, Unless you were trying to drive a certain agenda.
Admin may remove this.
https://www.glasgowtimes.co.uk/sport/18375828.glaring-omission-scot-gardiners-radio-revelations-will-disappoint-spfl-conspiracy-theorists/
Doncaster and the heavy handedness of last week has well and truly lit the internecine war blue touch paper.
With no option of standing together the clubs have had to address their own self-interest driven questions and to choose what they considered as best for them as individual businesses.
To most it was a pragmatic financial and moving on decision based on the realities they could foresee of ending this season now, where they would be next year and what they see as the probable revenue streams.
As in any and every season some clubs are major financial losers although arguably unfairly in a contracted season.
One club has a particular problem and issue with what they saw as the likely champions award in the top league.
Fair enough but it didn’t have to be this way.
The SPFL board and the strangely quiet and absent SFA have had their share of rightful criticism from this site.
This whole unnecessary episode is simply more of the same and is down to the leadership vacuum that is Scottish Football.
In these unprecedented times the SPFL board should have gone on to a war footing and protected their membership as best they could.
They didn’t.
In doing that they have failed us all and have set club against club.
Now we have the outcome predicted by this site last week.
There is a danger that some might see this as just one team following a futile mission to stop their rivals crystallising their significant points difference.
I understand that but that is a sideshow, won’t happen and moves nothing forward.
The real issue here is that the SPFL lacks leadership, vision, insight and empathy.
Our way out is not about imposing something that will harm our game and I include both Friday’s ill thought vote and any attempt at null and voiding.
Necessity can become the mother of invention and we need to pay the monies out as soon as possible and find a way that is for the good of the game, not the simplest tick-box closure plan attempted by our well paid administrators.
I think things will get much worse.
Finloch 13th April 2020 at 09:21
I think things will get much worse.
==============
I said in an earlier post that if the SPFL are sure of their ground then they should advise Rangers to withdraw their allegations or discuss the matter in the Court of Session. Likewise Rangers, if they do have compelling evidence, only need to hand it to one of their many media friends to publish, bringing the whole shooting match down in one fell swoop. If the SPFL are sure of their ground, they need to stop Rangers in their tracks. Much of the online community are now wholly convinced there is a fenian conspiracy at play, and that the entire thing is being orchestrated by Celtic. Does anyone seriously think if Celtic were being allowed to dictate matters Rangers would not have included it in one of their seemingly endless statements? Ah..statements. Like the one Rangers issued a few days back demanding PRIZE money be paid out now. Then the one yesterday which denied what they had actually written in that statement! Interestingly yesterday's statement was devoid of insults and threats, and merely spoke of LOANS, as part of their denial of what was actually said.
Let's get this in court. Even the threat of such will be enough if Rangers are bluffing. Likewise a threat of court would surely prompt Rangers to go public with the evidence if they have it. Otherwise the monster has the bolt through it's neck, has been charged with electricity, and is about to wreak complete havoc. It can't be allowed to.
Finloch 13th April 2020 at 09:21
I agree with you 100% on this.
The SPFL Board and its advisors who are driving the agenda seem to be intent on advocating a “herd immunity” solution. If enough of of us stick together (75%) then we can get through this. So what if a few old clubs get seriously damaged or die. We must keep what we hold dear to our way of doing business.
I notice even Mathew Lindsay of the Evening Times seems to have a big question mark over Scot Gardiner's vote for ICT.
However that's not my point. It's just that you learn something every day.
Football players, managers and coaches regularly jump from one club to another. It's a profession. Sometimes c/w a fondness or loyalty to certain clubs.
Likewise it's common knowledge that Non Executive Directors can be on the boards of multiple firms.
But I didn't realise that there were individuals who move around executive posts at football clubs.
In this current story, Eric Drysdale, Dundee Secretary used to be CEO of Raith Rovers. And Scot Gardiner, ICT's CEO used to be in senior positions with Hearts and Dundee!
He seems to be a very ambitious man. I wonder where he is aiming for next in his career? The pinnacle?
Finloch 13th April 2020 at 09:21.
It seems to me that the SPFL at least tried to do the right thing, by calling the lower divisions, (thus releasing prize monies), but not calling the league overall, (thus keeping UEFA and broadcasters sweet).
As the SPFL have pointed out, short term loans would be available to the top tier as back-up, but I would think they would need to be securitised. The prize monies themselves cannot be used as security, because without the league positions being finalised, they are not secure. (Null & Void is a possibility with no prize money due).
However they did make a monumental howler by releasing the voting position prior to all votes being made. A ballot is secret, to avoid voters being influenced by herd mentality.
I am not privvy to how much pressure the SPFL were under from clubs needing funds tout suis, but the urgency by which they sought response, points to it being quite a lot. . I think the voting standings should have been kept under wraps until the process was completed. That was their only mistake. Reconstruction cannot be on the table until how many building blocks are available to build with, is known. That may be some time away.
Again though, the clubs themselves are not innocent in all this, as cliques appear to have formed, and influence via the herd clearly not so much an issue. Clubs were aware of how other clubs intended to vote…………The vote really should have been for individual clubs to make their own decision. Instead pacts were made, (or at least appear to have been), with much lobbying undertaken. Some clubs revealed their voting intentions prior to the vote.
Although voting percentages required were sectioned by divisions, the overall league vote was a landslide in favour of the SPFL proposals.
Balanced between keeping UEFA/broadcasters sweet, and getting funding out to those in need, it's difficult to see how they could have gone about it any other way.
Having said all that, if evidence of malfeasance is produced, then it must be acted upon, but to date, that evidence lies solely in the imaginations of the lobbyists, until shown otherwise.
I stand to be corrected here, however there is now talk of the Police becoming involved. Am I not correct in saying that if someone has evidence of the commission of a criminal offence they are obliged to give it to the Police.
Maybe I just watch too much TV.
So what do the SPFL do now.
I would suggest that they must announce that they are doing nothing until the first week in May. If it is true that No voters are entitled to change that vote to Yes then they must wait until the deadline before they can actually announce the result.
Unless the 75% Yes is now achieved in the Championship, as it has been in the other two polls as far as I can remember. A Yes cannot be changed so is final and better to act as quickly as possible if it is achieved.
So the clubs can wait until the first week in May. Then a decision can be made on what should happen next. Either finalise the league (UEFA may withdraw their objections by that time) or come up with some other plan and put that to the members.
Abandoning a resolution which so many people support cannot happen. If it is to fail it has to fail through the proper process. We have had enough of people just making it up as they go along.
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 10:55
Abandoning a resolution which so many people support cannot happen. If it is to fail it has to fail through the proper process.
——————————————————
Isn't that the point? It did fail through the proper process. As a result, the SPFL board took it upon themselves to nobble what was, we are led to believe, the only vote out of 42 cast that somehow failed to get through thanks to a technical glitch, or, if you prefer, it did get through but was subsequently withdrawn, with that withdrawal somehow successfully by-passing the technical glitch.
Now call me a sceptic for casting doubt on the veracity of Doncaster & co but the chain of events we're expected to swallow would be rejected by Hans Christian Andersen as beyond fanciful.And that's without going into the SPFL's unwarranted insistence in tying up the release of funds with passing their resolution. I really do hope the police get involved as quite a backlog has built up for them to investigate since 2011.
Highlander 13th April 2020 at 11:17
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 10:55
Abandoning a resolution which so many people support cannot happen. If it is to fail it has to fail through the proper process.
——————————————————
Isn't that the point? It did fail through the proper process.
================================
How could it have failed, they were only a few days into a 28 day deadline.
Given that No voters can change their mind the proper process cannot be completed until the deadline is reached. Any abstainers then automatically become No.
Unless the resolution is accepted there is no option but to wait 28 days for a final result.
jimbo 13th April 2020 at 10:08
I notice even Mathew Lindsay of the Evening Times seems to have a big question mark over Scot Gardiner's vote for ICT.
========================================================
David Low's twitter has a few other snippets on his timeline Jimbo.
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1249592044496052224
Technically, the point about 28 days is correct.
However, as we don’t really have that amount of time to save what is widely regarded as quite a number of clubs from going ‘to the wall’.
Although I accept the old saying that common sense is not so common, I feel the resolution will be passed (today?). However, the in- fighting and blame games will continue.
Final thought though – Does this guy Gardiner think he’s Dominic Cummings – or does he just want his 15 minutes of fame?
If so many clubs are at risk of their demise couldn't the SPFL immediately pay out to each club an interim amount of the minimum their individual divisions would receive as prize money while this is sorted? At least it would allow most clubs to pay their April wages.
Prem – £1,125,000
Champ – £175,000
One – £70,000
Two – £45,000
CO, That’s a strange one. David Low states that Scot Gardiner is not a director of ICT. So I looked it up! On Wiki. He is. But on the club official website he is not! Indeed they say:
“ICTFC’s board is rooted in the local community; It has ambition and heart. These are Inverness people who love the Club and the City.”
You certainly couldn’t attribute those qualities to Scot Gardiner.
Why are so many pundits saying he is CEO? I am confused. Is it possible to be a CEO but not on the board?
Jimbo
TRFC’s CEO is not on the plc board. Not necessary, but ill-advised according to David Low.
And David would have, I think, checked with Companies’ House for his info.
I agree with those who think that castigating Scott Gardner because of his views is quite simply wrong.
I happen to take the same view as he does though
My problem with him is that he appears to be the guy whose intervention has caused an escalation of the crisis, an intervention that appears to have left out some crucial information which would have explained the snafu over Dundee’s email.
Perfectly possible for an attachment to fall foul of a spam or virus filter, but for a subsequent post from the same address (although in this case it was from a different address), to be received.
I believe the SPFL board, two of whom I know fairly well, are more than capable of riding roughshod over others to get what they want, but as Homunculus says, in this instance it doesn’t appear to be necessary given the 28 day rule.
I am far more inclined to believe Ann Budge’s assertion that coercion was used. I’d also be inclined to believe the TRFC assertions, except for the barrage of accusations, contradictions and foot-stomping, which have the effect of obscuring the Wood with the trees.
One question though does bother me. Who benefits from the resolution being passed? I mean specifically in this way? I doubt it is Celtic or Dundee United. They are shoo-ins for the title anyway.
We certainly know who is (unfairly in my view) penalised. Hearts and PT.
The UEFA angle doesn’t hold any longer either since they have assured the Belgians that their Euro places are safe next year
More questions than answers. In this climate it is easy to sow the seeds of distrust.
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 11:27
With respect, that serves only more amply demonstrate how the SPFL board tried to bludgeon its way to its desired outcome by insisting that only No votes could be withdrawn, not Yes votes.
I note you steered clear of commenting on what was in any case my main point, that the board realised it was about to lose a democratic vote, so it intervened in order to prevent that happening.
With TRFC posturing for the benefit of their support, and their ST sales,
the Ibrox club’s behaviour is consistent: we demand everyone does what we say, we don’t give a monkey’s about other clubs, WATP!
With the SPFL unusually daring to answer back, TRFC might have to deploy its standard, ‘big stick’, final threat;
withhold the ‘blue pound’ and boycott those ‘Rangers hating’ clubs.
…oh wait…
It’s a club acting like an elderly, punch drunk fighter: full of noise, empty threats and bluster;
“I coulda been the SPL Champion…”
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 11:36
David Low’s twitter has a few other snippets on his timeline Jimbo.
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1249592044496052224
====================================
I’ve been keeping an eye on David Low’s tweets and his spat with Tom English.
I’m disappointed that David feels that he has to “play the man” in this circumstance, casting doubt on Scot Gardiner’s motives and calling for the ICT owners and Directors to get involved because of the precarious nature of ICT’s finances, and even raising the issue that SG may be furloughed, so isn’t allowed to work.
Perhaps he should raise the same question of other clubs, their owners, directors and executives, who report year on year losses, that are funded by owners, shareholders or other benefactors. That would include Livingston, St Johnstone, Ross County, Dundee, Dundee United, Morton, Falkirk, Raith Rovers and a few more household names.
The bottom line is that ALL clubs are losing out financially as a result of this crisis, with no income but having to pay some wages, and other fixed costs. The SPFL’s prime consideration should be to ensure that the impact of the crisis on ALL clubs is minimised, so that they can ALL get through to the end of the crisis. That means working together for a common purpose rather than the self interest that is all too evident at the moment.
Highlander 13th April 2020 at 12:19
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 11:27
With respect, that serves only more amply demonstrate how the SPFL board tried to bludgeon its way to its desired outcome by insisting that only No votes could be withdrawn, not Yes votes.
I note you steered clear of commenting on what was in any case my main point, that the board realised it was about to lose a democratic vote, so it intervened in order to prevent that happening.
=====================================
As I understand it that is actually the law, not something the SPFL just put in themselves. A yes vote cannot be revoked.
I didn't "steer clear of anything". Like everyone else here I discuss what I choose to. However as you brought it up, they had no need to "intervene" at that stage. They had 4 weeks, as the deadline is only met at those 28 days, or if the resolution is passed.
296 Procedure for signifying agreement to written resolution
(1) A member signifies his agreement to a proposed written resolution when the company receives from him (or from someone acting on his behalf) an authenticated document—
(a) identifying the resolution to which it relates, and
(b) indicating his agreement to the resolution.
(2) The document must be sent to the company in hard copy form or in electronic form.
(3) A member's agreement to a written resolution, once signified, may not be revoked.
(4) A written resolution is passed when the required majority of eligible members have signified their agreement to it.
I get that Scott Gardiner may be the biggest blue nose on the planet but he is the CEO of ICT.
Surely the club's decision on such an important matter was made by their board.
How is it we are told that serious professionals at other clubs have little control and have to do their board's bidding (whether they knew about it or not) but appear to being asked to believe the ICT CEO is some kind of rogue operator.
If he saying or is doing anything out of turn in relation to the ICT stance then I would expect him to be getting his P45 soon so he is free to head to a role at Ibrox that many appear to believe awaits him.
The interweb awash with claim and counterclaim regarding the CEO at ICT. Whatever the truth is, unless the directors of said club make clear that he is doing their bidding then Gardiner will be forever regarded as duplicitous, something that will be reinforced should he ever find a career opportunity elsewhere.
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 11:36
‘..David Low’s twitter ..’
“”””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””””
A wee while ago I used the phrase ” the obliquity of the ecliptic” which I had lifted (as many will have known) from ” The Greek Interpreter” , a short ‘Sherlock Holmes’ story which I was re-reading at the time.
David Low’s opening words in his tweet “This Gardiner fellow..” tickled me, because they might very well have been used, perhaps a little disdainfully, by such as, say, Dr Watson and perhaps the great defective himself.
And I’m still curious to know whether this Gardiner fellow was approached by the BBC or had phoned in on his own initiative. (It appears that one cannot email BBC Scotland ?)
Since 2012 contributers to this site will know that I have been a constant and consistent critic of members of the SPFL, and others, who put their own organisations' financial interests ahead of rules, morality and (in some cases) outright legality.
Let me make this absolutely clear. I have no doubt whatsoever that key personnel within the SPFL ensure that it will do, at all times, what is in its own best interest – regardless of whether or not their actions are favourable or prejudicial to individual clubs.
The SPFL is now, as always, looking after itself.
But, is it currently suggesting that it should break any rules? Is it proposing to do anything that is immoral? Is it undertaking any action that is unlawful?
In 2012 I have no doubt the answer to all three questions was yes. Its actions cut deep in the heart of the integrity of the competition it is entrusted to manage.
In contrast, how it is proposing to respond to the financial tsunami our clubs are ensuing is broadly fair. I believe that, in this case, the SPFL is playing a relatively straight bat.
Has it made mistakes? Absolutely.
Are its key personnel to be trusted? Absolutely not.
However, I do find it difficult to find empathy with those who are advocating various 'solutions' to the current problems that are contrary to existing rules, are morally dubious and, as I understand them, are likely to be unlawful.
Those answers, in my opinion, are no answers at all.
The SPFL is certainly tainted: but we need to look at every proposed solution on its own merits.
As Homunculus said in an earlier comment, we should be playing the ball, not the man.
Big Pink, I’m probably giving my age away. When I was younger I seem to remember the terminology Managing DIRECTOR rather than CEO. I assumed CEOs were still directors who run the business on a day to day basis.
I blame the yanks for all this new fangled work speak.
I’m off for a power nap. (Afternoon sleep)
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 10:34
I bet you don't
John Clark
My information (from a producer at BBC) is that Gardner initiated the call. I don't think that there is much to be inferred either way though.
If he felt strongly enough about the situation he was entitled to broaden his reach.
Sorry BP. Much as I respect your position as ‘custodian’ in my ‘bampot’ team of the other day, I have no time for this guy who, quite simply, is playing fast and loose with our game for his own selfish ends (not ICTs or anyone else’s)
He’s a chancer, ‘coarner boy’, opportunist – call it what you will.
And here’s something else – whether there’s any truth in the rumour of him being offered a position at the crumbling dome (from The Celtic Star) or not, the intrepid reporters (where are they?) of SMSM would have been all over this story had CFC being the alleged club involved.
Big Pink 13th April 2020 at 13:38
'…My information (from a producer at BBC) is that Gardner initiated the call..'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I'm happy to hear that, and , of course, Gardiner is as free as anyone to phone the BBC to express an opinion or provide factual information.
I would have been sorry indeed if the BBC had conspired/contrived to ensure that a particular opinion in a controversial matter had been solicited, with no countervailing opinion from a contributor of equal 'standing'.
easyJambo 13th April 2020 at 12:21
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 11:36 David Low’s twitter has a few other snippets on his timeline Jimbo.
https://twitter.com/Heavidor/status/1249592044496052224 ====================================
I’ve been keeping an eye on David Low’s tweets and his spat with Tom English……………
==============================================
I agree with all you say EJ wrt the good of Scottish fitba'. However as club CEO he has a duty to his club alone, and it's responsibility to it's creditors. It may well be that the creditors are not of a nervous disposition, but that would be rare in the world of finance, although not completely unheard of.
That is the difficult tightrope being walked here. Emotional decisions will always be over-ridden by legal responsibilities. As you say, many clubs are in the same boat, and some may have more nervous creditors influencing their decision making, but that is not of SPFL doing. It's what the law requires.
I don't think David Low is suggesting Gardiner has acted outwith his legal obligations, but merely pointing out that there are other factors to consider, other than emotions, when decision making. Factors that English may not be aware of.
It may be a worthwhile question for English to put before Gardiner, as that is his job, and hopefully clear the air. Gardiner seems to be quite comfortable in front of a microphone, and hasn't been shy to date.
Big Pink 13th April 2020 at 13:30
One question though does bother me. Who benefits from the resolution being passed? I mean specifically in this way? I doubt it is Celtic or Dundee United.
================================
It’s a question I have asked myself. I can give a personal opinion on what each club in the Premiership would see as their own preferred outcomes, notwithstanding the SPFL’s current proposals.
Can all of the above be achieved? Almost! The only ones that conflict are the award of the title to Celtic and the null & void scenario as desired by Rangers.
Can all the above be achieved and minimise the hardship on ALL clubs? Yes with the exception of null and void, as that could require the redistribution of funds including those already received by clubs.
Rangers would not be adversely impacted financially by dropping their null and void claim, so I’d suggest that is the way forward.
In summary, everyone could get virtually everything they want (and more importantly need) if there was a collective willingness of all the clubs to act for the greater good. It would mean compromise in terms of the league structure and financial distribution model for next season, but as it stands we haven’t a clue what next season will look like in any event. Let’s sort what we can now and start planning alternative strategies to cope what might impact on next season.
So as it stands to my untrained and innocent eyes, that the following would perhaps, be a sensible approach to adopt, to get us out of the current impasse?
1. Due to ongoing COVID-19 crisis end current season immediately
2. As above, give out prize money and european spots based on placings
3. As above, agree league reconstruction to avoid clubs being relegated( for one season?)
4. Er……that's it?
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 14:03
———————————————–
Thanks for the response, but I'd add that as well as SG having a responsibility to his own club, his club also has a shared responsibility towards the other clubs that participate in the League.
The SPFL's rules also state the following:
Relationship between Clubs and the League
B1 In all matters and transactions relating to the League and Company each Club shall behave towards each other Club and the Company with the utmost good faith.
B2 No Club, either by itself or its Officials, shall by any means whatsoever disparage, belittle, discredit or unfairly criticise any other Club, the Company or the League or the Directors and the directors of any other Club and the Company's and other Club's officers, employees and agents (which shall, for the avoidance of doubt, in the case of the other Club, exclude its supporters).
I'd suggest that there have been a number of breaches of those rules over the last few days, if not directly, then by proxy through selective briefings to the SMSM or individuals via social media.
The legal requirements have been eased somewhat as a result of the Covid-19 crisis in that Directors liability in certain circumstances has been relaxed, e.g. trading while insolvent.
easyJambo 13th April 2020 at 14:08
Rangers – 2nd place cash now, null and void and access to the EL qualifiers
==================================
That makes no sense, if the season is null and void how can a team be in second place.
If the season is finished, absolutely no problem, but that is a different scenario.
I know you are not advocating anything, just saying what you think each club wants out of the situation. However if that is what Rangers want it really can’t happen in any sensible World.
If the season is null and void then the only options are no prize money for anyone or an even split for everyone in the league.
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 14:37
I agree wholeheartedly, but that is where we’re at.
vascodapars 13th April 2020 at 12:11
If so many clubs are at risk of their demise couldn't the SPFL immediately pay out to each club an interim amount of the minimum their individual divisions would receive as prize money while this is sorted? At least it would allow most clubs to pay their April wages.
Prem – £1,125,000
Champ – £175,000
One – £70,000
Two – £45,000
———————————————–
Whilst there is a scenario of a null and void season and the money being split evenly amongst all of the teams then that wouldn't really work.
You could use your system but the maximum payment would have to be c£595k.
Though that would only really matter for the teams in the Premiership, so it does sound like a sensible solution.
I think the SPFL would have to insist on some sort of security. They would be providing loans to businesses with every prospect of them suffering an insolvency event prior to being able to repay those loans.
Wouldn't this be a good time for Rangers* to finally issue their interims and show how a club can successfully come through trying circumstances? A role model to follow for the rest of Scottish Football….
…which urgently needs clear leadership from the Chairman of the SPFL to sort out this mess and not let it drag on for up to three further weeks.
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 14:48
vascodapars 13th April 2020 at 12:11
If so many clubs are at risk of their demise couldn't the SPFL immediately pay out to each club an interim amount of the minimum their individual divisions would receive as prize money while this is sorted? At least it would allow most clubs to pay their April wages.
Prem – £1,125,000
Champ – £175,000
One – £70,000
Two – £45,000
———————————————–
Whilst there is a scenario of a null and void season and the money being split evenly amongst all of the teams then that wouldn't really work.
You could use your system but the maximum payment would have to be c£595k.
Though that would only really matter for the teams in the Premiership, so it does sound like a sensible solution.
I think the SPFL would have to insist on some sort of security. They would be providing loans to businesses with every prospect of them suffering an insolvency event prior to being able to repay those loans.
———————————————————————
A possibly far-fetched and perhaps not universally popular option would be asking Celtic to take a look down the back of their sofa and come up with equivalent cash to underwrite these loans?
It would of course be better if they volunteered – for the greater good of Scottish Football and all that. From the Haves to the Have Nots? Remember that without the other clubs Celtic could not have had access to Champions League cash….
Clubs who do not wish to accept such a loan would be quite at liberty to elect not to participate.
SFNASA
Just had a look at the Tom English v David Low Twitter spat. David is a very successful man in the world of finance and was heavily involved in the Fergus McCann Celtic takeover. Tom says he doesn't know what he's talking about though. Also, David is only the latest Celtic fan to basically be told by Tom that any view on this matter from a Celtic perspective doesn't count. Tom writes well, and seems a clever guy. However the meaning of arrogance, or showing some humility towards others seems to have escaped him.
Tom has ridiculed the views of Celtic fans since he first worked in Scotland, writing for Scotland on Sunday. It is interesting how he is getting into such a lather over this current issue having been so dismissive of the slam dunk case of Rangers being incorrectly awarded a European licence in 2011, or the gerrymandered LNS outcome, with the quite absurd one off ruling made by the SFA on incorrect player registrations. Meanwhile the SFA continue to fine other clubs, dock points, and throw them out of competitions for incorrect player registrations.
Just another point…
What we are calling 'prize money' is technically 'fee payments' as per the SPFL's articles of association.
The quantum of fees due to each club is determined thus:
This places the SPFL under a binding contractual obligation to disburse those revenues to clubs as fees in the precise manner set out by the existing rules and the percentages shown within the table.
It would need to be tested in court; but, in my view, any changes to this article and the associated rules would not override the existing contract that exists between the SPFL and each and every member club to make payments on the current arrangements. Any club that loses out would, in my opinion, be able to claim damages for losses.
Simply speaking, the SPFL appears not to have any discretion in the use of its Commercial Revenues.
…and, in any case there is zero chance that sufficient clubs would agree to amend this article and those rules.
easyJambo 13th April 2020 at 14:29
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 14:03
———————————————–
Thanks for the response, but I'd add that as well as SG having a responsibility to his own club, his club also has a shared responsibility towards the other clubs that participate in the League.
=========================
You're welcome EJ. …..Doesn't usurp the law but I'll give you that as I happen to agree with the sentiment.
.
I also agree with Cygnus X-1 above, and it pretty much settles every position other than Sevco's. I would let them fight their own corner on that while they are dealing with the disrepute charges that must surely come their way regarding the allegations meted out. Remember this was the same mob responsible for translate-gate, and I doubt anything is beneath them.
It's also the same mob who engineered a next day go-ahead for an abandoned home gate v Livi.
That is not a financial situation that has improved any, yet here they are, delaying what will be a substantial payment (for 2nd spot) to themselves….A dated payment they must surely have expected.
For some reason, Covid 19 appears to have upset a schedule they had planned. I get the impression that money will be arriving too soon if paid out now…….I say call the league, and give them their league payout immediately.
I have a feeling it will go in a p in the £ to creditors, and not be available to help finance a new start for the same club, not company, later.
EJ
Pretty much sums up the stations that the gravy train can call at. Weighing it all up, it seems to me that Hearts and Partick Thistle and Stranraer have an issue that they would be reasonably expected to go to war on.For the same financial reasons, so perhaps might Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers.
But what would compel the SPFL board to make a huge issue of this? Nothing seems so critical that anyone would want to start WW3 over. That is what is puzzling. How does anyone on the SPFL benefit so greatly from this resolution that they would risk a fragmentation of the industry?
Easiest way to foster unity would have been to deal with the relegation issues pragmatically. Have a vote on reconstruction along the lines we have been suggesting for weeks and publish the votes (given the 11-1 requirement of the top division).
Why is reconstruction such a stumbling block? Makes no sense to me at all.
HirsutePursuit 13th April 2020 at 15:44
Do you think it's as high as zero.
The clubs in League 2 get paid between £45k and £67.5k
If there is an even split they would all get c£595k
Literally every club below the Premiership would get more money, even the Championship winner.
The lowest placed club in the Premiership would lose about £530k.
Null and void and equal split of the money would be great for the lower division teams, it would potentially be financial suicide for the Premiership clubs.
BP
What ‘huge issue’ do you think the SPFL has making?
There has been a lot of noise around its proposal; but, what detail do you think it can/should let go?
What, in practical terms, could/should it have done differently to get consensus?
Homunculus
13th April 2020 at 16:13
………
Yes, zero chance is likely to be an overestimate.
HP
I think you misunderstand me. I don't see what compelling reason they would have at all. However there have been accusations of coercion, so that leads me to ask what compelling reason they may to employ coercion?
Is it the usaul rough and tumble of everday life? I've been in the Labour Party most of my life. Coercion is very often the tactic of first resort, and I'm sure the politics of business is pretty much the same.
Of course if you're at the pointy end of the decision, you will cry 'foul!', but in the current circumstances, perhaps folk are even more sensitive to that?
I read that Germany and Italy are actively trying to get the remaining league games played behind closed doors and televised live. If this comes to pass then the pressure on the epl and the spfl will be to follow suit.Perhaps waiting for the 28 days for the result of this fiasco will allow the top league to play to a finish after all..as long as the pitches are still ok.
gunnerb 13th April 2020 at 16:37
Unless there was to be
a, A change in Government policy
b, A vaccine
c, Some way of demonstrating that no-one involved (players officials etc) had the virus and therefore could not spread it between them.
There is no way of this happening.
The Police have been instructed to disperse groups of people. There would be a minimum of say 50 people involved in a gum. I'm basing that on 20 per team plus various officials, medical staff etc.
That's without mentioning things like fitness of the players, officials etc.
BP
I don't know in what form any alleged coercion has taken place. I do wonder though, if being told hard truths is being seen as such?
Image you are the chairman of a Championship club sitting in a challenging position – say in second or third. Maybe your club is at the foot of the division, but not far off the next club.
In any case, I tell you that the only realistic opportunity to get the season's prize money early is to agree to declare the season over and pay out on current positions.
Is that coercion?
Or is it simply a hard truth that – depending on your position in the league – you might not want to hear?
Homunculus 13th April 2020 at 16:51
EDIT
c, Some way of demonstrating that no-one involved (players officials etc) had the virus and therefore could not spread it between them.
——————————————
I think this is what the German/Italian football authorities are pinning their hopes on. I have no idea how realistic this might be in relation to the SPFL.
The Lowland League shows some leadership, and with a modicum of common sense.
http://slfl.co.uk/season-ends-with-immediate-effect-kelty-hearts-crowned-as-champions/
Season Ends With Immediate Effect – Kelty Hearts crowned as champions
13/04/2020 By Media Team
The board of the SLFL have today decided to end the league competition with immediate effect. The board took into account the points per game average based on the standings at the cessation of football on the 13th March, and as such have declared that Kelty Hearts are this season’s champion Club.
Furthermore, the board would like to make it clear that it feels that no member club should be disadvantaged by the current health crisis we face, and as such there will be no relegation from the SLFL in season 2019/20. We are aware of the implications for our fellow pyramid leagues, the EoSFL and SoSFL, and will announce contingency plans to cover this in due course.
I would anticipate that the contingency play will involve running with a 17 or 18 team league next season.
Kelty was 6 points ahead of Bonnyrigg with 5 games left (out of 30)
Bonnyrigg had a game in hand, so was likely to be just 3 points behind, with a game at home to Kelty still to play.
Btw
I have no insight here – but I wonder if a compromise of sorts could be found.
If the top league is not being called right now, why not leave open the possibility of playing the play-off games?
I don't think there is any realistic prospect those games would actually be played, but it would still allow the prize money to be paid on finalised league positions.
It would need a complete revote – since the conditions are different from the current resolution.
Might this bring ICT and Dundee on board?
gunnerb 13th April 2020 at 17:22
================================
The advent of some form of self testing, even if it took 24 hours to get a result, would make it reasonably straightforward I would have thought.
I say that because to do it when it wasn't being done regularly for front line workers would just be wrong.
This is quite recent
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/04/13/test-kit-covid-coronavirus-antibody/
To add a final twist to this farce…
If the SPFL and the clubs eventually agree a cash pay out, etc.
…and then Big Mike enters stage left, to slap in an injunction (?) to freeze the prize monies due to RIFC/TRFC?
Everyone knows that the Ibrox finances were already shaky, and this could be a rare 'payday' in cash – which could be legally ringfenced to help offset their damages liability to Ashley?
Now that would be too funny.
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 16:07
while they are dealing with the disrepute charges that must surely come their way regarding the allegations meted out. Remember this was the same mob responsible for translate-gate, and I doubt anything is beneath them.
…………………..
That reninded me.
What became of the SFA charge after the ibrox players and staff failed to conduct themselves after the derby clash?
If i remember the players conduct was clubbed together with the club conduct to save the players getting a ban.
But i can’t remember the outcome, if there has been an outcome.
…………….
Ps, It is very quite down ibrox way today, have they ran out of ink? I have a few Black cartridges that are compatible with an Epson if they want to send Mark Hately round to collect.
Whit ye like Stevie.
……Everybody knows Memorial Walls are first in the queue. 
C1…..”What became of the SFA charge after the ibrox players and staff failed to conduct themselves after the derby clash?”
6 game ban for Neil Lennon.
Corrupt official 13th April 2020 at 18:46
'.Everybody knows Memorial Walls are first in the queue..'
StevieBC 13th April 2020 at 17:50
'.…and then Big Mike enters stage left, to slap in an injunction (?) to freeze the prize monies due to RIFC/TRFC?.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
"The Court of Session website has effectively indicated that only essential civil business will be dealt with" says a partner in a law firm in an article in today's 'The Scotsman'.
He says the Coronavirus (Scotland)Act 2020 " hands meaningful tools to courts, allowing them to continue to conduct business but their logistical capability to actually do so remains a huge concern.
I doubt whether an injunction against TRFC would be the first item in any pile of cases filed.
Wonderful luck that insolvency laws are modified, Companies House rules relaxed, and court proceedings indefinitely delayed when a club on its financial knees might be given a wee lifeline to stagger on for a month or two before going belly-up because a creditor can't take legal action!
Keef reporting that John Nelms is now going to vote "Yes"
I note the DR reporting ICT's chairman Ross Morrison's views on the SPFL and the events of last week.
As discussed previously, it sounds very much like the tactics used in 2012 which Turnbull Hutton was so widly applauded for calling out in public.
Bugger !……I was going to have a long lie, but now I'll have to get up early to watch the ragin'.
Of course, if Dundee do submit a yes vote it doesn’t, quite yet, finalise the positions in the Premiership.
So clubs in the top division will need to wait for the board to make its determination in the coming weeks.
While they’re waiting on their own prize money, I wonder how many Premiership clubs will be applying for emergency loans from the SPFL to keep the lights on?
Be interesting to know the maximum loan amount it would make and how much due diligence it will undertake before funds are released.
Probably just as well the clubs who might need financial assistance most urgently have been extremely supportive of the league in these difficult times.
It’s always good to have friends who will help you out when you need it most.
Two questions for Murdoch Maclennan chairman of the SPFL
If Dundee now change their vote which we all knew was coming was there any kind of quid pro quo in their favour?
If the Lowland League board (with no remunerated members) can close their season down, declare bona fide champions and come up with a plan where both their current members and their prospective pyramid leagues members were not further damaged why can't the SPFL board do the same?
The most ironic SMSM headline in the history of Scottish football?
Unsurprisingly, from The DR today;
"OPINION SPFL voting farce proves Rangers claim that something's rotten in the running of Scottish football – Hotline"
Perhaps Ann Budge should seek that the SFA should award Hearts the Scottish Cup and put Hearts forward as one of Scotland’s EL entries, on the basis of their record in this season’s competition being superior to any of the other clubs left.
I wonder what Aberdeen, Hibs and Celtic would think about that.
It’s an absurd suggestion I know, but there is a logic behind it based on the precedent of what the SPFL are proposing.
StevieBC
The most ironic SMSM headline in the history of Scottish football?
Unsurprisingly, from The DR today;
"OPINION SPFL voting farce proves Rangers claim that something's rotten in the running of Scottish football – Hotline"
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Such great investigative journalism – only around 20 years too late…..
Scottish Football and media need an injection of self-awareness.
StevieBC 14th April 2020 at 08:45
The most ironic SMSM headline in the history of Scottish football? Unsurprisingly, from The DR today; “OPINION SPFL voting farce proves Rangers claim that something’s rotten in the running of Scottish football – Hotline”
=============================================
How much more proof do you need Stevie…………Of how sensibly opinioned Daily Record readers are?….There was me thinking it was LNS, The Pinsent Mason report, A secret 5-W-A., and a brand new club with 54 titles under it’s belt that proved it.
Never mind, they got the correct answer eventually, but they should have shown their workings.
It’s at times like this we should be thankful that Sevco limited Celtic’s exposure, and it’s only 750 of Celtic’s fans they will eventually have to pay back ticket money to…We owe them a debt of gratitude
……………. And they will owe those fans thirty seven and a half grand…..Winding up orders?
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 09:31
Perhaps Ann Budge should seek that the SFA should award Hearts the Scottish Cup and put Hearts forward as one of Scotland’s EL entries, on the basis of their record in this season’s competition being superior to any of the other clubs left in the competition.
I wonder what Aberdeen, Hibs and Celtic would think about that.
It’s an absurd suggestion I know, but there is a logic behind it based on the precedent of what the SPFL are proposing.
=============================================
Cat amongst the pigeons
Finloch 14th April 2020 at 07:44
'…If the Lowland League board (with no remunerated members) can close their season down, declare bona fide champions and come up with a plan where both their current members and their prospective pyramid leagues members were not further damaged why can't the SPFL board do the same?'
"""""""""""""""""""""""
I notice,Finloch, that BP referred to UEFA having withdrawn its threat to cut the Belgians from UEFA comps for ending their season prematurely?
Not doubting BP, of course, and my attention has wandered a little over the last few days, but if that is true, then you ask a very pertinent question: if European places are secure even if the PL season is truncated, then what indeed is to stop the SPFL board from devising an arrangement that ensures that no club in that league is more afflicted than any other by the consequences of things that were not in anyone's control, while not taking extraordinary measures to help clubs whose financial troubles predated (by a long way) the pandemic?
John Clark 14th April 2020 at 10:09
if European places are secure even if the PL season is truncated, then what indeed is to stop the SPFL board from devising an arrangement that ensures that no club in that league is more afflicted than any other by the consequences of things that were not in anyone's control, while not taking extraordinary measures to help clubs whose financial troubles predated (by a long way) the pandemic?
============================================================
Indeed John, but I think we'll discover that the health of Scottish football club's was in pristine condition prior to the closure, and will be proven so in their financial declarations required for European entry.
Completely away from fitba' but I can't recall reading anything from AllyJambo for a while. Hope you are OK pal….. Pop in and say hello.
Nae interims yet but an announcement of what sounds like another revenue stream ending….and was it really “Following a number of supporter enquiries over the Easter weekend…”? Surely our intrepid SMSM were on the trail and already listing the queue of likely replacements….
“Tuesday, 14 April 2020, 09:30 by Rangers Football Club
RANGERS Football Club’s contract with Ladbrokes as a provider of in-stadia betting services will come to an end in advance of next Season 2020/2021.
Director of Commercial & Marketing, James Bisgrove, commented “Following a number of supporter enquiries over the Easter weekend, we can confirm the arrangement with Ladbrokes, who provide betting facilities at Ibrox stadium, will not continue next season.”
In anticipation of our 150th anniversary, Rangers will continue to grow its Commercial Partnerships programme, both domestically and internationally.”
And good luck with that last bit in today’s environment. Also a 10th anniversary (if they get there) doesn’t really have the same ring to it though.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
John Clark 14th April 2020 at 10:09
Is that not the general idea regards what Budge is talking about.
You allow clubs to be named as winner of their divisions and award prize monies to all accordingly but have a temporary restructuring of the whole league so that no team is disadvantaged going down and those who had a chance of going up do so in an expanded format.
That would mean that all teams would have a chance to prove their worth 'on the field' with everyone knowing how they would be promoted or relegated come the end of that season.
I wholly accept Hearts have proven their worth on the field by being crap for most of the season but as people well know on 29 December 2019 T'Rangers were 2 point behind Celtic with a game hand, ten games later they are 13 points adrift. That's football – a lot can happen in the remaining 8 games.
I keep hearing about folk, like the Ross County and Forfar chairmen, voting because they wanted "certainty" – but there is none.
Currently (and at the time of resolution)
-We don't know what Uefa will say.
– We don't know if the top division will need to be played out.
-We don't know about the Scottish Cup and the destination of our fourth Euro slot.
– We don't know when football will restart and in what format.
– We don't know how long we will have to play a season.
– and probably a few more things no-one has thought of.
I accept that we do know that some clubs will be in financial difficulty and as such distribution of funds as quick as possible is a desirable outcome.
The problem is that, as usual, there seems to have been very little thought given to innovative and imaginative solutions to a unique set of circumstances.
Like the debacle of 2012 the powers that be have opted to rush everyone into voting for what they see as the easiest option for them.
CO, thanks for pointing that out. I hope AJ is well and good.
redlichtie 14th April 2020 at 10:55
——————————————-
There is a story behind that decision.
David McDonald the Ladbrokes PR guy (still sponsors of the SPFL) put out a tweet criticising Scot Gardiner following Saturday's Sportsound (tweet now deleted).
Needless to say, TRFC fans were quickly on the case looking at his timeline and found a tweet of him laughing at Alex Rae and goading him about Celtic winning the treble.
It no doubt had a load of TRFC fans cancelling their accounts with Ladbrokes and complaining to the club.
“In anticipation of our 150 th anniversary , Rangers blah blah blah ” that always makes me laugh when they come out with that
, I actually cringe with embarrasment for them and I know I should’nt because they have no shame and nothing embarrasses them
Corrupt official 14th April 2020 at 10:40John Clark 14t h April 2020 at 10:09 if European places are secure even if the PL season is truncated, then what indeed is to stop the SPFL board from devising an arrangement that ensures that no club in that league is more afflicted than any other by the consequences of things that were not in anyone's control, while not taking extraordinary measures to help clubs whose financial troubles predated (by a long way) the pandemic? ============================================================ Indeed John, but I think we'll discover that the health of Scottish football club's was in pristine condition prior to the closure, and will be proven so in their financial declarations required for European entry. Completely away from fitba' but I can't recall reading anything from AllyJambo for a while. Hope you are OK pal….. Pop in and say hello.
___________________
I'm fine, thanks, Incorruptable, You
, just too close to the disasters, the virus and Scottish football, to feel like posting recently. I have to admit that in a league that has (fairly) often reconstructed for the hell of it over the past three decades to not be considering it as a first option to do its best to avoid major damage to some of its clubs, and therefor the game as a whole, leaves me feeling ever more sickened by those running our beloved game.
In all honesty, though, until the pandemic is cleared, ie a viable vaccine discovered and made available for all, I find myself unable to give the attention to football I once found so uplifting. I also doubt that it will be viable to consider proposals for next season that don't factor in the distinct possibility/probability, that there will be no professional football played before the end of the year – or at all in the foreseeable future. At the very least they should be discussing a set up that will allow a league large enough to facilitate a 'play each other twice' league should, as I suspect, there be no chance of starting early enough for a 12 team league with a split in the second half of the season that might avoid what we see happening now.
Once again, thanks again for your concern, it's nice to know my absence has been noted
Best wishes to every SFMer, and please, please stay safe.
Having a wee chuckle at Michael Stewart's twitter feed where folk are telling him Hearts have been crap all season as if he has been posted missing on another planet for 2019/20.
Have they not been paying attention to him being the biggest critic of Levein & Co and him seeing them as being the main reason for the current league position!!!
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 11:17
redlichtie 14th April 2020 at 10:55
——————————————-
There is a story behind that decision.
==========================
There is a story behind that story too EJ, that has nothing to do with the Sevco PR machine. ..
It was a Ladbrokes owners, GVC, who made the decision to reduce their "visibility in football", taken through the card ages ago….All Sevco have done is chose the timing of releasing it to artificially suit their own ends…..
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/ladbrokes-sponsorship-spfl-end-after-18939561
AJ. Glad to hear you're fine bro, but you'll soon be back in the fold. We all get a bit down and have other distractions at times……But yir still a guid Jambo through an' through…..Ye won't lose that Bud.
Stay well and hear frae ye soon.
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 11:17
'..David McDonald the Ladbrokes PR guy (still sponsors of the SPFL) put out a tweet criticising Scot Gardiner following Saturday's Sportsound'
""""""""""""""""""""
A mini-Ratner moment for McDonald? Or a damaging assault on a TRFC source of revenue?
John Clark 14th April 2020 at 12:46
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 11:17
'..David McDonald the Ladbrokes PR guy (still sponsors of the SPFL) put out a tweet criticising Scot Gardiner following Saturday's Sportsound'
""""""""""""""""""""
A mini-Ratner moment for McDonald? Or a damaging assault on a TRFC source of revenue?
=======================================
See C.O's post at 12:11 above.
I was already aware that this was Ladbrokes last season sponsoring the SPFL so the impact of McDonald's tweet will not be significant. William Hills is also dropping their sponsorship of the Scottish Cup.
However, I don't know if the placement of bookmakers outlets within stadiums is linked to the SPFL sponsorship deal. If they aren't linked then it is a unilateral act by Rangers not related to the end of the SPFL sponsorship.
EJ @ 13.18
However, I don't know if the placement of bookmakers outlets within stadiums is linked to the SPFL sponsorship deal. If they aren't linked then it is a unilateral act by Rangers not related to the end of the SPFL sponsorship.
————————————————————-
Was wondering just that myself EJ. Can't remember what bookmakers I have seen operating in the grounds that I have been at? Would be interesting to know.
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 13:18
A thousand shops for the chop Easy. …It was the distinct lack of the "tearing up of contracts", in the Sevco statement that got my spidey senses tingling……That and the general dishonesty in their portrayal of events……
I'm not even sure if the Crumbly dome was staffed at the weekend. Furloughed I believe.
https://calvinayre.com/2019/02/05/business/ladbrokes-coral-betting-shop-staff-redundancy/
JC – Court of Session update re video conferencing and teleconferencing once court business resumes next week. There remain a few live cases which are of interest.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/about-the-scottish-court-service/scs-news/2020/04/14/covid-19-update
A legal opinion re the "Vote"obtained by Partick Thistle.
https://cdn-5dd296c4f911cc1c581d2ef3.closte.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020.04.14-FINAL-Joint-Opinion-PTFC.pdf
… plus a club statement
https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/partick-thistle-fc-board-update-14th-april-2020/
Correction to the link to the legal opinion.
https://cdn-5dd296c4f911cc1c581d2ef3.closte.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020.04.14-FINAL-Joint-Opinion-PTFC.pdf
IMO it's pretty damning of the SPFL's processes.
"23 We consider the information provided by the SPFL to be materially inaccurate….:
(a) ….The (SPFL) Briefing Note does not address or acknowledge the fact that, such alterations being required, it would equally be possible to change the Articles and Rules to allow payments to be made at this time, based on current league positions (perhaps with some provision made for adjustment/balancing once the league fixtured (sic) were completed if league positions had changed by the end of the season), without the need to terminate the league season early."
SFNASA
"(b) The SPFL makes interim payments in the course of a season and we understand that it has already done so in the course of the 2019/20 Season.
(c) The SPFL had power to advance moneys to member clubs on an interim or provisional basis as loans, pending confirmation of the final payments. In this respect, it has been reported the SPFL has in fact confirmed (to Rangers FC) that it considers that has the power to make loans now without bringing the season to and end or any alteration to the Articles being required. It appears from the email exchange between Mr Britton, of PTFC, and Mr Doncaster, of the SPFL, dated 12 and 13 April 2020, that it is indeed the case that the SPFL would in principle entertain applications for loans from members clubs, possibly with the provision of personal guarantees or securities."
In this context my understanding is that the 'directors' referred to relate to SPFL directors :
"24. In the foregoing circumstances we consider that that there may be a basis for the argument that the directors’ duty, in respect of the provision of sufficient information, in a clear manner, so as to allow informed decisions to be reached, has been breached. In this respect, we recall that “a lack of information may constitute misrepresentation by omission”. Given that it is a “matter of fact and degree” whether sufficient information has been given to allow an informed decision to be taken by members, the failure to explain to members that a lesser alteration of the Articles and SPFL Rules, so as to allow payments to be made to member clubs, without the immediate termination of the current league season (and all that that entails in respect, notably, of promotion and relegation), and/or the failure to identify the possibility of loans being made were material and relevant omissions, could be characterised as a misrepresentation by omission, if it is indeed the case, as a matter of fact, that the principal concern of certain member clubs was to secure payment now without the immediate termination of the current league season."
"25. If, moreover, as is understood may be the case, it could be shown that at least some member clubs which voted in favour of the Written Resolution would not have voted in favour of the Written Resolution had they been made aware of the alternatives discussed above, it respectfully appears to us that there would be reasonable grounds for challenging the validity of the procedure which has been adopted to date, and indeed of the Written Resolution were it now to be purportedly passed. Plainly, direct witness testimony from member clubs who were so induced to vote in favour of the Written Resolution would be required in order to allow such a claim to be advanced in proceedings." (My emphasis)
Remembering back to the RTC and Dr Heidi Poon era the key point with making any loans (that is loans controlled by a particular constitution) was/is the availability of funds with which to do so. Thus the Trust/Sub trust arrangement specifically allowed them to loan Player X moneys funded by contributions made by Player X. I understand the £1 lent to player X was the £1 he himself had put in, purportedly to the benefit of his family. Ordinarily in that situation the money is ring fenced or, at the very least, heavily controlled. So for instance had the player put his £1 into an investment fund the fund could use it to buy bonds, shares, gold or whatever. The one thing they cannot do is loan him it back (and thats a commercial loan, never mind the dinnae bother option that defined the EBT scheme). They can loan him a different £1 but that requires them having access to more than £1. Does that make sense?
I suspect, without reading the SPFL articles (help HP!), they may be similarly constitutionally bound that they cannot simply lend the £9.3m they hold from TV companies etc on a temporary basis. The money is presumably ring fenced until such time as “final placings are decided” or to put it in other words, when the terms of the money providers contracts are met. It may well be the case that they could temporarily lend a different £9.3m which is what is supporting the press speculation just now, including Partick Thistle’s statement above. But there’s the kicker. They dont have a spare £9.3m and they don’t have a temporary banking facility (what everyone outside Ibrox calls an overdraft) with which to facilitate such a payment.
All mere speculation on my part of course.
After discussion of the validity of Dundee's 'No' vote :
"G. Next Steps and Conclusions
38. The Written Resolution having been rejected, that is the end of the matter. If the SPFL do not accept that this is the effect of its own Articles, then, in our view, court action can be commenced to seek a declarator and interdict to that effect."
"39. Alternatively, even if the Written Resolution is not regarded as already having been rejected (and recognising that, at present, the SPFL does not suggest that the Written Resolution has passed), a further ground of challenge may be available. In particular, we consider that there may be grounds for saying that the whole procedure adopted by the SPFL to date, in respect of the Written Resolution procedure is challengeable as being in breach of the duty discussed in Section E, above."
Show me a legal opinion designed to suit one party to an action, I'll show you a different legal opinion designed to suit the opposing party.
That's what these guys get paid a lot of money for, they can take whatever position you ask them to, and find a way to support it.
Think Big Tax Case and how many lawyers / opinions which contradicted each other were put forward. They all knew the reality, and cared not a jot about it.
Well actually it was the most senior of them who just stripped it back to it's bare essential. If it looks like wages and smells like wages it's wages and tax is due. No matter which of your Aunt Agatha's offshore accounts you get it paid into.
"40. The SPFL should be invited to accept that the Written Resolution, in terms of the SPFL’s own Articles, was rejected. Moreover, if the necessary evidence from one or more member clubs who voted in favour of the Written Resolution but who would not have done so had further information been provided concerning the possibility of payments being made without terminating the season can be obtained, the SPFL should further be invited to accept that the Written Resolution cannot be passed given the breach of the duty to provide sufficient information, and that the votes which have been cast to date require to be set aside and treated as being of no effect, all with a view to the adoption afresh of a fair process, that is, one which allows members to make a properly informed decision, including with reference to the possibility of alternative means by which payments can be made otherwise than by the termination of the current league season. If such evidence is to hand, and the SPFL nevertheless declines to proceed in this way, proceedings for declarator and interdict could be raised on this ground also."
I have to say that the opinion (and it is just that) echoes my own view on this whole process and what can and can't be done.
Rather than my picking up that argument again I suspect it will either be determined in court or dealt with by the SPFL in a pragmatic way i.e. scrapping the current resolution and starting again with a better informed membership.
Scottish Football needs some integrity to break out.
PS Are the SPFL now using Rangers* solicitors for legal advice? That opinion is scathing.
Phil.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/04/14/emails-conspiracy-theories-helpful-questions-and-a-scoop-in-the-six-counties/
Homunculus14th April 2020 at 15:51
Show me a legal opinion designed to suit one party to an action, I'll show you a different legal opinion designed to suit the opposing party.
========
I was just about to post much the same. Why have courts? I am sure the SPFL will get Counsel to oppose what Partick's Counsel is saying. What is truly beginning to alarm me though is that a whole bunch of lay people, none of whom are legally qualified, have decided that the case put forward by Partick, Hearts, Rangers etc is the right one and there is no other case to be heard. There is a huge agenda at play here and while I fully accept the anger of Hearts and Partick in terms of potential relegation is justified, I don't think the groundswell in support is because of that. If Rangers were 13 points clear does anyone think this groundswell in support of Partick and Hearts would exist? Operation Null and Void or at the very least operation discredit the title is well underway. It will work. It always does in Scotland.
I often see the same people castigating self-interest among clubs. They don't do irony, that's for sure.
Partick Thistle’s statement :
“Tuesday 14th April, 2020 at 2:17pm
At a time when football is not a priority and when people are suffering across the country, Partick Thistle is dismayed that Scottish football remains in limbo as a result of Friday’s vote.
The basis of our approach throughout this situation is that no club should be worse off, either financially or in a sporting sense, as a result of any resolution.
We have obtained a Joint Opinion from Senior and Junior Counsel to identify what can be done to remedy this situation. The QC’s legal Opinion concludes:
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
To secure a vote to end the season, the SPFL linked it to releasing funds to hard-pressed clubs, making it clear there was no alternative. However, as it now transpires, there was a vehicle to release monies in the shape of loans, quite apart from the possibility of changes being made to the SPFL Articles to allow the payments normally made at the end of the season to be made now. We would urge the SPFL to move immediately to approve loans to clubs against the monies owed to them at the season end, based on their current position in the league.
With that urgent situation dealt with, there can then be considered discussion involving all clubs to address the way forward for Scottish football in this unprecedented season. The SPFL presented to clubs (in 25 pages of briefing note and resolution and with 48 hours to consider it) that there was no alternative. It is now apparent that that is not the case.
Again, we restate that we are uncomfortable with the position Scottish football finds itself in at a time of national emergency and have been reticent to get involved publicly. However, as a Board, we would be wrong not to share the Opinion with our fellow clubs across the leagues, as well as with our staff, management, players and fans.”
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 15:51
Can’t disagree with that. But that’s what the courts are for, to sort out a final decision and to stop chancers getting away with riding roughshod over people by interpreting the law one particular way.
As I said the other day we are now being asked to accept that an organisation (including lawyers in Doncaster & McKenzie) with a track record for incompetence and poor decision making has suddenly managed to get its act together and cross all the Ts and dot all the I’s on this issue.
12 Angry Men would have been a pretty boring film if Hank Fonda had just said, fair enough I’m believing all the guff being put before me.
Regardless if other options could/should have been considered, the whole thing now seems to be revolving around whether or not the well circulated pdf of a Dundee NO vote should be counted or not.
Everyone seems to agree it was clearly submitted by Dundee on 10 April at 16:48 and received by the SPFL at some unknown point on the same day but apparently not before the 17:00 deadline. As we know that deadline was perhaps somewhat false ( I note that the wording “PLEASE RETURN AS SOON AS SIGNED AND, IF POSSIBLE, BY 5.00 PM ON FRIDAY, 10 APRIL 2020″ was used) given the statutory allowance of 28 days period for voting.
If the SPFL can explain what happened to the Dundee vote at their end then we may be closer to understanding matters.
If a simple cock up by one party or the other then just say so and then we can try and move on.
However, as usual for Scottish Football, its all cloak and dagger stuff and far from the straight forward walking, quaking duck we both probably want to see.
RedLichtie, I'm no legal expert but the legal advice about Dundee's no vote being binding seems to contradict what we know so far. Someone posted recently the SPFL rules that clearly state that any proposal gives 28 days for clubs to vote on it. The 5pm Friday 'deadline' was merely an indicator that it would be better for clubs to vote quickly ("if possible") so as to allow the prize money to be paid out.
Company law was then also provided (by someone else?) that clearly showed that in all such Company votes, any Yes vote could not be rescinded once made, but a No vote could be rescinded up until the actual deadline of 28 days.
The opinion suggests that SPFL's articles effective confirm that Dundee's vote was effective at the point it was sent.
35. In our view, it is not possible to reconcile the procedural approach purportedly adopted by Dundee, and seemingly accepted by the SPFL, on the one hand, and the terms of the Articles, on the other hand. In particular, in terms of Article 185, the Dundee Rejection Vote was deemed to have been cast when it was sent:
“Any notice or other document [sent]1 otherwise than by post, or sent by facsimile transmission or telex or email or other instantaneous means of transmission, shall be deemed to have been served or delivered when it was left or sent.”
36. The sender of the email has confirmed when it was sent, and the SPFL have confirmed it was in fact received. The Dundee Rejection Vote was therefore deemed to have been cast at 4.48pm when it was sent. In particular, it is our opinion that the Dundee Rejection Vote had legal effect at that time, rather than when it was (later) received. In our view, neither the contractual effect of the Articles nor their content could be varied by a unilateral written notice (which we have not seen) apparently sent for and on behalf of Dundee that “any attempted vote from the club should not be considered as cast”. The subsequent conversations in terms of which it is said that the vote has not yet been cast, are inconsistent with the actual vote having been executed and having had effect when it was sent at 4.48pm on Friday 10 April.
37. The consequence of the proper construction of Art 185, in our opinion, is that it was no longer open to Dundee to seek to withdraw their vote subsequent to its dispatch. We consider our analysis to be consistent with the very purpose of including provisions such as Art 185. We consider too that our construction is consistent also with basic ideas of fairness in voting procedures. Our construction avoids the situation which now arises of those who have cast a vote in a particular way either being subjected to undue pressure or being placed in a position of unfair advantage in seeking to secure favourable treatment for a changed vote.
Guys, I'm not carrying a torch for any of the clubs with serious interest in this matter. All I'm doing is looking at the facts as best I can discern them.
The Thistle opinion is just that, an opinion, but what is set out resonates with my own understanding of company governance and what has been reported by the various parties and media.
There will doubtless be a rebuttal and I am interested to see it. In the meantime though we should not consign the Thistle opinion to the waste bin just because it doesn't fit with our own views. That's what Trump does with his 'Fake News' rants.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
I hope that Thistle have confirmed with their sources, Tom English, Scott Gardiner and TRFC that they have evidence to support their assertions and that they are prepared to stand by them in court. I would hope also that there is consistency in the loan arrangements understood to have been made to TRFC and Gerry Britton, and that they have a response to a direct rebuttal from Murdoch McLennan on the point of no payments being possible before the season has ended.
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 15:51
Show me a legal opinion designed to suit one party to an action, I'll show you a different legal opinion designed to suit the opposing party.
====================================
I agree entirely, but once you have competing opinions, you would have to be very confident with the opinion you have if you intended to proceed as originally planned.
The PT opinion expresses a view that a declarator and inderdict could be sought. The SPFL may be reluctant to test that in court.
In these particular circumstances, I think that the SPFL Board would be wise to take a step back, allow payments in whatever form to be made, then submit a new motion about the termination of the leagues.
I'm equally aware that wisdom and football authorities aren't natural bedfellows.
If I’ve understood the argument correctly, the interpretation taken by the PT lawyers re the revocation of “No” votes was based on standard company practice that you don’t normally ask for No/Reject votes. Only Yes/Accept votes are counted until the required majority threshold is met, and if not the motion expires after 28 days.
Their argument went on to suggest that because the SPFL had requested Accept or Reject votes, then both should be deemed irrevocable.
A nothing statement from Dundee
https://dundeefc.co.uk/news/club-statement-25/
Following a weekend of discussion and contemplation, we would like to issue the following statement.
As we made clear in our statement on Friday afternoon, it is a time for integrity and impartiality within Scottish football. Our view on that has not changed.
Over the past few days, we have entered into various positive discussions with reconstruction at the forefront of these.
Given our discussions and considering all aspects, we don’t feel we are in a position to comment further on the resolution that was put forward.
We understand that this may bring more questions than answers and we will look to give a much more substantial account of the past few days at the conclusion of this process.
Our supporters should know that we are, as always, looking out for the best interests of both Dundee Football Club and Scottish football as a whole.
(c) The SPFL had power to advance moneys to member clubs on an interim or provisional basis as loans, pending confirmation of the final payments. In this respect, it has been reported the SPFL has in fact confirmed (to Rangers FC) that it considers that has the power to make loans now without bringing the season to and end or any alteration to the Articles being required. It appears from the email exchange between Mr Britton, of PTFC, and Mr Doncaster, of the SPFL, dated 12 and 13 April 2020, that it is indeed the case that the SPFL would in principle entertain applications for loans from members clubs, possibly with the provision of personal guarantees or securities.
———————————–
As I said, "potential" prize money cannot be used as security towards a loan application.
Are Partick Thistle aware that every club in need can provide that necessary security?
Can Partick Thistle themselves provide that security?
What options are available to clubs who cannot provide security, are they to be damned?
Does calling the division prematurely remove the requirement to provide securities, enabling equal treatment of all clubs, based on their sporting achievements to date, within said division?.
…….I'd say so.
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 16:38
The opinion seems to a large extent to rely on the fact that the Companies Act specifically mentions 28 days and an acceptance vote. That an acceptance vote is final once it is made and if the majority is reached then the board can act, not having to wait for the 28 days to pass. That would seem to make sense, why wait to do something if the majority have agreed it is a good idea.
However it does not specifically mention a rejection vote, leaving that open to interpretation. Though I think people need to remember that the the law is not just based on the words contained in the legislation, we also have to consider the intention of the legislator and any relevant case law. Hansard notes are very useful for the former.
Another interpretation is that as the law does not mention the rejection then it cannot be taken as being final until the 28 day period is over. People are entitled to change their mind. For example if their board put additional things to them during the 28 days, or if new information comes to the attention of the board which they can pass on to the members. That means that members can change their mind without having to re-start the entire process, potentially taking weeks. Clearly the board will support a resolution it put to the members itself and will try to convince the members it is a good idea. Again this makes absolute sense to me.
Re the loan thing. Am I not right in saying the SPFL (or it's predecessors) have supplied emergency loans in the past, to allow teams to get to the end of the season, and prevent carnage in the league. I can't think of anything specific off the top of my head but it does ring a bell.
It's just another mess on top of the mess the SPFL have already created. Though I don't have a lot of time for some of the complaints. "We didn't know this, you should have explained that better, but what about that". 1, they should have known better they are running multi million pound businesses and 2, you had 4 weeks to ask or to find out, why didn't you do it. Before anyone says anything about 5pm Friday, it is very clearly a request, not a deadline.
I think I described it (I can't be arse looking back) as something like a ham-fisted solution, poorly implemented. I stand by that.
The issue now is that this will have to get resolved, one way or another and it's looking very unlikely that playing the games is going to be the solution.
Corrupt official 14th April 2020 at 17:08
Does calling the division prematurely remove the requirement to provide securities, enabling equal treatment of all clubs, based on their sporting achievements to date, within said division?.
…….I'd say so.
———–
Or just that it removes any precondition on the SPFL holding the funds (TV monies and sponsorships) to physically make the fee payments using those funds.
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 17:12
I'm very much in agreement with the points you have made. Just a couple of things to add
If the proposer of a motion decides that there is no prospect of achieving a majority within the timeframe required then they are free to withdraw it.
I'm sure that Gretna received an advance, from the then SPL, of their end of season payment in order to complete the season, before going bust in the close season.
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 17:12
Again I have no issues with what you say but is the point of the 28 days not also to allow folks time to mull things over, if and when appropriate. There has been little time for thought been given to the member clubs IMHO.
The SPFL appear to have acted like the double glazing salesmen of old and pressured members into a deal while the non existent manager put in a call to the salesman to make the customer believe it was a take it or leave it deal. That's why customer cooling off periods were introduced.
The PT opinion and info from other sources appears to suggest there may have been other relevant information/options that were out there but was not passed on to those who have now locked themselves into a Yes vote.
If it was so straight forward then all Dundee had to do was cast a simple yes or no but now seem to be having "various positive discussions with reconstruction at the forefront of these."
Is a potential reconstruction plan now a piece of new information that has come to the attention of the SPFL board?
If as opposed to the board convincing Dundee to vote Yes, Dundee convince the board to accept their thoughts on reconstruction I assume the board will have to do what EJ says and drop the resolution on the basis it probably won't be passed within the 28 days.
Smugas 14th April 2020 at 15:44
……………………
https://twitter.com/ClusterOne2/status/1249705097724071943/photo/1
………..
Back in march, there will be no handouts, i believe back then the SPFL were letting it be known they are skint.
………………………..
There has been a lot of talk this last week about loans, and it is now known that a club can ask for a loan. Made me think if the old ibrox club ever asked for a loan back in 2012.
wottpi 14th April 2020 at 18:10
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 17:12
Again I have no issues with what you say but is the point of the 28 days not also to allow folks time to mull things over, if and when appropriate. There has been little time for thought been given to the member clubs IMHO.
=====================================
They had 28 days.
I read the instructions which were allegedly sent out to them.
Point 3 says that if the member agrees with the resolution the voting slip has to be returned within 28 days, if a majority is not received by that time then it will elapse.
They has plenty of time to ask questions, seek their own advice etc.
These are people running multi million pound businesses. Maybe their owners / shareholders / members should re-consider who they want to run their business for them.
Smugas 14th April 2020 at 17:20
Corrupt official 14th April 2020 at 17:08 Does calling the division prematurely remove the requirement to provide securities, enabling equal treatment of all clubs, based on their sporting achievements to date, within said division?. …….I'd say so.
———–
Or just that it removes any precondition on the SPFL holding the funds (TV monies and sponsorships) to physically make the fee payments using those funds.
========================
Possibly that too Smugas. It seems pretty clear that there will be zero monies released until the divisions are called. …….Not without security.
It will be wrong if clubs nearby them in the tables go bust waiting, and they gain advantage by that which they couldn't do on the field.
wottpi 14th April 2020 at 18:10
Homunculus 14th April 2020 at 17:12
EJ et al….
TBH I think we are all agreed that this is a complete amateurish mess and one we unfortunately expect from those involved.
I think we also share a desire to protect clubs from going out of business but have concerns about the various ways of achieving that.
There have been various suggestions on the best way forward and I really hope that a positive outcome can be achieved without recourse to the courts.
I have to say though that I am alarmed to hear that Dundee are now having "various positive discussions with reconstruction at the forefront of these."
Surely that means the vote will have to be taken again? A new resolution for consideration? Another 28 days?
And, potentially, changed votes if others don’t like it?
Separate the issues – the conflation was a stupid idea and, bluntly, it was an attempt to coerce clubs to vote in favour of measures they at the very least had qualms about. Have a vote on distribution after a quick round robin on the favoured distribution criteria. At the same time, commit to a speedy review on other issues with transparency and engagement with members – no take it or leave it last minute stuff.
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath and 41 other SPFL clubs.
Stoopid questions, but have to be asked anyway.
During these prolonged negotiations / threats / confusion, etc…
Has the SPFL itself made any attempt to obtain feedback from the fans / paying customers – about what they think?
Has any club made an attempt to gauge their own supporters' feelings on what is preferable?
I'd guess – and hope – that at least one club of the 42 has requested feedback and/or set up e.g. a free online Monkey survey at the very least?
…you'd think…?
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 16:55
'…Their argument went on to suggest that because the SPFL had requested Accept or Reject votes, then both should be deemed irrevocable.
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I take a different view from my learned friend, M'Lud.
It is not within the SPFL Board's power to change the date by which such a vote should be made.
If they suggest that an early vote is desirable (e.g. so that if possible matters can be speeded up) that remains only a suggestion.
If any member had not even begun to think of voting until the 27th day the vote could not have been tallied. (ought not to have been tallied up in any case, when not all votes were in before the deadline). And, under company law, any 'no' vote actually cast (mistakenly or otherwise) can be changed by the member who made it- within the 28 day period.
But how in Heaven's name was any change to the Articles, properly made, not notified to Companies House within the 15 days time limit?
I mean, if that is not in the highest degree a mark of incompetence, I don't know what is!
The QC's argument on insufficient information having been provided is stronger.If the possibility of loans being made was actually there, then perhaps the members ( who should in any case have asked, (did anyone?) ought to have been informed.
Cluster One 14th April 2020 at 18:13
"…Back in march, there will be no handouts, i believe back then the SPFL were letting it be known they are skint."
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
On the subject of loans from the SPFL , could it be the case that (as Cluster one reminds us) the SPFL has no legal power to disburse any of the broadcasting monies, and, not having any other monies of its own, would be itself compelled to borrow commercially?
If that was the case, then perhaps they would have been right not to suggest that loans could be made to clubs: thus ,of course, tweaking the PT's QC's second argument?
And it could not be said that the SPFL had a duty to borrow or that they necessarily be successful in seeking a loan of the amount they might be thought to need to meet the possible calls on it.
Blind Pugh can see that the SPFL cannot release monies/loans without security until this voting farce is played out. What if some clubs go bust in the interim?
This farcical situation reminds me more and more of part of the lyrics from Bob Dylan's 'Desolation Row):-
"… ……………………….the Titanic sails at dawn,
Everybody's shouting 'Which side are you on'?"
Like all civil wars , this can only escalate, and it is scurrilous for Gardiner, Nelms and the others who no doubt will join the circus and act in the best interests of the fans (as Stevie BC says above – has anybody asked them?).
To use the example of another song 'Four Wheels on my Wagon' – Barry Maguire?, disaster surely awaits as the wheels come off one by one (and the Injuns catch up) if this is not resolved soon.
Oh, don't worry, The UEFA cavalry will ride to the rescue on 23rd April and guide us happily forward
bect67 14th April 2020 at 20:11
'…… What if some clubs go bust in the interim?.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
That made me wonder how many clubs may at fairly imminent risk ,even if there were to be a significant distribution.
I turned to Companies House, looking to see what had happened to club accounts during the Second World War, when football was limited.
They're not there. At least in the case of the few clubs I looked for, there is nothing there between 'Incorporation' in 19 oatcake or whatever, and the early 1980s. I daresay they kept filing such accounts as they had in order to stay in business, and CH archives will have them.
Suppose there were to be no games until October? How many clubs might go under before then?
28th March
Celtic, Rangers and Motherwell receive larger cash payouts as top-six spots guaranteed, says Burrows
By Mark Hendry Sports Writer
Celtic, Rangers and Motherwell received larger payouts than other Premiership clubs because they cannot finish below the top six, 'Well chief Alan Burrows has said.
Some questions were raised as to why the top three clubs would receive £395,000 plus VAT while the rest of the clubs only earned £157,500 plus VAT despite the season not yet being concluded.
Motherwell chief Burrows, however, took to BBC Scotland's Off the Ball show to clear up the issue and explain that his club was handed a higher sum early because they are one of only three outfits guaranteed to finish in the top six mathematically, should the season not be played to a finish.
bect67 @20.11
To use the example of another song 'Four Wheels on my Wagon' – Barry Maguire?, disaster surely awaits as the wheels come off one by one (and the Injuns catch up) if this is not resolved soon.
———————————————————
My memory of Barry McGuire was "The eve of destruction". But I'm auld but it could be relevant
Homunculus 14 April 2020 at 18:37
If we were operating in normal times I might be more inclined to agree with you but everything was being done at top speed, on Skype, Zoom whatever.
There is evidence out there saying information needing to be discussed wasn't received until meeting were underway.
Given isolation etc legal counsel and other supporting parties and access to information may not have been available.
The clubs have had a bundle of fivers waved in front of their nose and grabbed it.
I'd be more worried if my club was being run by those types than someone thinking the matter through.
I note recent reports are of Dundee trying to see if the prize money could have been reordered to provide a parachute type payment to those being disadvantaged by not being able to play their way out of relegation.
Maybe not a lot of cash but seems a reasonable to me as a recongition that the situation is far from ideal and taking the sting out of it rather than selfishly just taking what you can and saying tough luck get on with it to the losers in the deal.
John Clark 14th April 2020 at 19:36
——————————————-
At paragraphs (9, 27) the QC sets out his view on what is envisaged by the 2006 act in terms of accepting a written resolution, i.e. only yes votes expected.
In (32) he notes that the SPFL invited members to vote in favour or against and, according to precedent, as long as the process adopted is not illegal it can proceed on that basis (30 & 31).
He then goes on to go through the timing of Dundee's vote (33) and the SPFL's articles stating that it's the sent time that determines when a vote is submitted (35).
He states that the vote had legal effect as of the time of submission (36) and argues that it could not be withdrawn (36, 37) by his construction of SPFL article 185.
I'm not sure that article 185 gives that certainty, but that is an argument to be decided by someone above my pay grade, looking at both the provisions of the Articles and the 2006 act.
wottpi 14th April 2020 at 21:12
————————————-
Sorry but that just isn't true.
They had 28 days and access to as many professional advisors as they wanted to talk to.
I, probably like most people here have been able to contact anyone I wanted to. On a personal and professional level. Have meetings to discuss things and make decisions. Maybe 20 years ago you would have a point but not nowadays.
These people will have access to the same, or better technology than me.
Here's the bit you posted which was accurate
"The clubs have had a bundle of fivers waved in front of their nose and grabbed it."
They should have thought about it, thought it through and taken the advice they needed to. It is them who need to answer to their own shareholders, owners, supporters, staff etc.
Raith Rovers have made their own statement to their support if anyone is interested in some thoughts from the lower divisions. I am absolutely certain that there are other clubs who disagree, there were some votes to reject the resolution.
http://www.raithrovers.net/43940/rrfc-board-statement-2.htm
The Board of Directors of Raith Rovers are making this statement to update supporters on what has happened over the past few days in relation to the SPFL Resolution to call an end to the 2019-20 season.
We had hoped to be able to give you some good news. That is not possible, however.
The SPFL Board met today (Tuesday 14th April 2020) but we have been advised that as of 8pm Dundee FC had not submitted their revised vote.
Raith Rovers FC and 15 other clubs in League 1 and League 2 voted in favour of the Resolution by the 5pm deadline on Friday 10th April in order to ensure the quick distribution of much needed funds to all 42 league clubs and to enable us to move to the next stage of the process – consideration of league reconstruction.
We have, from the very start of this process, supported the idea of league reconstruction and have made this clear in all our communications.
The SPFL documentation received by all clubs on Wednesday 8th April made it clear that declaring the season ended was the only way to achieve distribution of funds and to then proceed to the next stage.
Several clubs wanted a guarantee that reconstruction would happen – this could not be given as it is not within the gift of the SPFL.
Any decision on reconstruction requires a vote by all 42 member clubs.
We were clear that this had to happen as soon as possible after the first vote.
We would support a move to an SPFL Premiership of 14 clubs and 3 leagues below that of 10 each but will seriously consider any alternative model which emerges.
Our preferred solution would mean admitting Kelty Hearts FC and Brora Rangers FC to SPFL League 2 with no clubs being relegated.
This would result in 4 very competitive leagues when football eventually restarts.
However, this cannot be considered until stage 1 of the process is completed.
At the time of writing 80% of clubs have voted in favour, but Dundee FC have still to vote and their vote – as everyone knows – will be the deciding factor in determining how matters progress going forward.
Our position is clear! We want the 2019-20 season declared over, funds distributed and discussion about reconstruction to start very soon.
Any attempt to deem the 2019/20 season null and void and deny us being named as winners of League 1 and/or not promoted will be vigorously resisted.
We will update everyone as soon as the situation becomes clearer, whenever that might be.
In the meantime, thank you for your support and we wish you all good health during this crisis.
We look forward to seeing you all in season 2020-21 at Stark’s Park.
bect67
‘Twas The New Christy Minstrels who did “Four Wheels”.
Barry ‘Eve of Destruction’ McGuire was a member and sang lead vocal on the song, written by Burt Bacharach
Curiously, Dick Van Dyke was the original performer of the ditty.
easyJambo 14th April 2020 at 21:24
'The subsequent conversations in terms of which it is said that the vote has not yet been cast, are inconsistent with the actual vote having been executed and having had effect when it was sent at 4.48pm on Friday 10 April
""""""""""""""""""""
The basic point is that there is no dispute about the fact that Dundee cast a vote.
But as a 'no' vote, it seems to me to be strictly the case that they are entitled to change of mind at any time up to the 'legal' deadline ie the 28th day, unlike 'yes' voters who are not permitted a change of mind.
I think there was no contractual power on the part of the SPFL to demand a vote before the 28th day, nor any contractual obligation on Dundee to cast a vote before that day., and they were merely requested to vote by the Friday.
The SPFL can be very badly faulted for releasing any info on the state of the vote until that 28th day had come and gone; but the ramifications of that would not, in my low-grade, non-legal,layman's opinion, affect the validity of a new vote from Dundee.
Homunculus 14 April 2020 at 21:35
You have nothing to back up what you say.
The SPFL asked for a vote by 17:00 on Good Friday.
Lockdown or not, many folk take that day as a holiday and turn their phones and emails off.
I am happy you have full contact to your world but as a business owner I have found the accounts departments of firms who have outstanding invoices somewhat difficult to make contact with these days!!
As intimated before, this site has always played the long game and taken time to review analyse and debate matters.
The football authorities probably took a few hours to review Rangers Euro application back in the day but we have given them pelters and all been happy to accept Auldheid and his compatriots efforts undertaken over years of researching to get to the bottom of matters.
Yet this time round we are being asked to swallow that the SPFL resolution last week was the best they could come up with.
Having written my thoughts above, the timing of the whole thing now just adds to the stink.
As I also implied given the reports 're Dundee, the fact that no-one even thought how those teams who were potential losers in the resolution could be recompensed in some way for their enforced 'sacrifice' just shows a total lack of thought in terms of avoiding future conflict and long term bad feeling among SPFL members.
As usual they have found yet another way to piss people off.
wottpi 14th April 2020 at 22:24
Homunculus 14 April 2020 at 21:35
You have nothing to back up what you say.
The SPFL asked for a vote by 17:00 on Good Friday.
================================================
I have everything I require to back-up what I say.
The deadline was 28 days. It is specifically stated in the instructions provided with the resolution.
This nonsense that people were given a deadline of 5pm on the Friday is just that, nonsense.
Are we to believe that these people who run football clubs in Scotland did not understand the difference between a deadline (explicitly stated) and a request (again explicitly stated). If that is the case then they should not be in the position they are, that however is a matter for the club they represent to deal with.
I see we are now at one of those circular argument moments, possibly beyond it. So I won't bore the others any further with this. The deadline was 28 days, that was clear. The 5pm Friday was a request, that was also clear. If people running those businesses are incapable of reading plain English they are almost certainly in the wrong job. That however is a matter for the people paying their wages. Not me.
Ps I note Raith Rovers in their statement refer to Friday 10 April 2020 at 17:00 as a ‘deadline’.
IMHO a clear indication that they and possibly others perhaps did not read the small print in the way Homunculus has, and realised they actually had 28 days.
I wonder how long they will have to wait to see their much desired reconstruction come to fruition?
Homunculus
I agree no point in getting into a circular argument but my PS above was drafted before your last reply.
Therefore by your own posting you must recognise that by their own words Raith viewed Friday at 5 ( not 28 days later) as being a 'deadline' to be met before other matters could be progressed.
Otherwise, given their clear desire for reconstruction why did they not use the 28 days to fully explore the matter with the SPFL , seek legal advice and, possibly along with other like minded clubs, fight for what they believe and exploit a rare opportunity of uncertainty.
The fact they didn't means they probably fall into your implied classification of incompetents who are easily suckered by the SPFL and the likes of Hearts, ICT, PT and Dundee are the ones on the ball re underdtanding the rules and what is actually at stake in the long term.
Nicked from elsewhere but interesting to note at the time of this year's lockdown, looking back to the 16 March of 2019 the four bottom teams in all four SPFL divisions at that time didn't finish bottom by the end of the season.
St Mirren, Alloa, Stennie & Albion Rivers rose and Dundee, Falkirk, Brechin and Berwick finished bottom at the end of the season.
Sorry Homunculus for one last post but in trying to find on the web what was asked of the clubs I note the following from Aberdeens statement.
So I agree you are technically correct but the thrust and desire from the SPFL was to pressure clubs to meet the false deadline of 5pm on the 10th.
An interesting excerpt from PT's legal opinion…
Now, this is confusing to me.
The SPFL letter says it's articles and rules do not "make any provision' for finishing the league without the complete number of scheduled games.
It goes on to say that its preferred solution is to amend the rules (note: not the articles) to give the board express powers [to deal with the situation in a specific way].
So, if this is the preferred method, could the board have proceeded in a different way?
It's worth saying that there could be an issue of language here. Whilst, on one level, it is true that there is no specific provision that sets out in any detail how the board should proceed, there is some assistance in the articles.
Which to my reading says that if there is no specific rule to guide them, the board can make any determination it thinks is appropriate in the circumstances.
Its currently preferred determination, in this case, appears to be to seek consensus through the written resolution it has presented.
As I say, this may just be a question of language. In saying that there is no provision in the articles and rules can only mean that they think those articles and rules have not anticipated the specific circumstances that they are facing.
Given they have such wide ranging powers, it would be difficult to understand if the SPFL board agreed with the Partick Thistle legal opinion. Namely:
"… the Articles and the SPFL Rules do not presently allow the current season to be declared to be over without all fixtures being played."
Because if the current resolution is not passed, it may be facing a choice of doing just that or let a number of its member clubs go under.
I hope it has the courage to use the power it has wisely.
…also worth pointing out of course, that the legal opinion agrees that "…payments cannot be made until the current season concludes"
There is no artificial conflation, payment fees are simply a consequence of final league positions.
Lastly…
The SPFL board has now set out its desired outcome – to end the season and disburse the fee payments.
Since it is clear it already has that power under article 103.9 and a written resolution is unnecessary, it may well be leaving itself open to legal action if a member suffers financial hardship through the delay in making those payments.
Just a thought.
Without going over the minutiae of the Articles once again, the argument seems to be that the balancing payments cannot be made until the season is ended. The balancing payments for this season are estimated at around £9m, indicating that around £16m has already been paid out, with no specific reference in the articles as to when those interim payments are made or how much is paid out. The SPFL Board clearly has the power to make interim or advance payments as and when it decides.
It is my understanding that the SPFL makes interim payments to Premiership clubs of a largish amount in August, smaller amounts in December and April (following the split), then the final balancing payment is paid in May on the basis of the end of season league positions.
In the current circumstance, the SPFL is retaining both April’s interim payments and the end of season balancing payments. The current impasse means that Premiership clubs are currently missing April’s interim payment in addition to lost matchday income. That hardship is shared by all clubs and is reflected in the decisions of clubs to furlough staff and cut or defer wages, although no club should have budgeted to receive their end of season balancing payment until May.
The SPFL proposals tied several elements together, namely, 1) ending the league season – no more games, 2) determination of final league positions – PPG ranking, 3) making balancing payments in accordance with final league positions, and 4) determining arrangements in relation to promotion, relegation and play offs.
To my untrained eye, if the SPFL had uncoupled those elements, then I’m certain that it would have got agreement to 1), 2) and 3), but would been asked to come up with a more equitable solution to element 4) to ensure that no club was materially disadvantaged by the premature end to the season.
The proposals were a rushed and botched job by the SPFL Board and their advisors. It is not too late for them to put it right, by withdrawing the current resolution and putting forward revised options, including a more equitable solution to element 4).
Scottish Football now has its very own Good Friday Disagreement.
Like most things in our game the reasons are both simple and complex, uniquely exacerbated by our particular duopoly which dominates all thinking.
Neil Doncaster’s decision last week not to circle the wagons at a time of crisis like the Lowland League Board chose to do and instead to conflate what could be crucial payments with his view of the world has backfired.
This site warned of the consequences if he didn’t change but that is now history and we are where we are.
As in all complex crises the only way through is to see the Good Friday Disagreement as the Good Friday Disagreements and address the issues in the same way as The Lowland League did at the weekend.
Show the same strong leadership.
Award the 2019 – 2020 titles based on the points per game ratios.
Find a way to get the money to all his members this week.
Accept that we might need a flexible short-term solution for next year because there are still too many unknowns and nobody knows when football will return.
Respect all the grass roots pyramids.
Commit to real change going forward.
HirsutePursuit
That's what I'm gaun wi' tae.
Call the leagues. Get the auditors in to every club to see how many will be good to continue, before debating reconstruction, (No point stuffing money in a coffin), and start planning for next season.
Stop falling for Sevco's sabre rattlin and faux support. Auditors give them the fear, and if the Sevvies don't have something to shout at Timmy next season, they'll probably no be able to support themselves, let alone anybody else. There might be an extra spot in the Prem to play for soon…..
There's something I think we can all agree on.
If your club ends up slipping down?. If it's well run, it will soon be back up again. If it's due to come up, and no well run?…. It will soon go back down again.
That's how divisions work.
But next season, best to get stuck into each other right from the off, and no leave it til the last minute. This thing might come back again.
We know what happened the last time a virus mutated and returned.
Interesting article linked below.
It seems the SPFL, in a rare moment of foresight, may have seen what was coming down the line and got their ducks in a row:
From 26 March
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52047550
“The next payments to clubs are the final end-of-season rewards for league placings, but it is currently unclear when those will be paid because of the continuing uncertainty over when the season will actually end – and how.”
(I assume this was briefed to the journo by SPFL)
This effectively puts the SPFL in the position they are now; look Mr member club – we’ve paid you all that would be due before the season end and some of that we’ve paid early….
If one also goes back to that time you will recall Mr SFA Broadfoot on record saying it was the end of season payments that were the difficulty (I’m sure he said the small April interim was no problem).
In other words they knew then that whatever problem they perceived (but haven’t since thought to either substantiate or address) existed then as now and other than dangle a cash carrot to mask an otherwise unappetising stick have done p!ss all about it.
it is naive if unsuprising to have thought no-one would notice.
it is patronising that we should just be expected to follow the carrot.
it is incompetent that it should have come to this.
it is not unfamiliar territory however.
OttoKaiser 15th April 2020 at 08:54
From 26 March
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/52047550
===============================
That's for posting that link as it confirms that I was wrong in my assertion that the April interim payments were still being held by the SPFL. It seems that they have already been distributed.
During this tumultuous period in Scottish football, has anyone seen or heard directly from the lesser spotted SPFL CEO?
…or what about the SFA CEO?
Every single day, during this pandemic we can see gov’t. leaders in front of the TV cameras: might not have anything new / tangible / positive to say – but there is a recognition and acceptance that the population needs to clearly see that there is active leadership dealing as best they can during a period of great uncertainty.
Now, I wouldn’t expect Doncaster or Maxwell to give public, daily updates about Scottish football.
But, I would have expected at least one – fully open – press conference from each/both, before now.
I’m guessing that our ridiculously remunerated, Scottish football CEO’s are ‘leading from the Hampden bunker’ in between games of dominoes…?
Wottpi @ 00.23
Regarding the 2 days versus 28 days argument, I wonder if those complaining about the 'coercion' checked the (current) SPFL Rule Book. If they did, and objected anyway, then that's at the very least petty. If not, then their argument is weakened.
I'm sorry that I may be a little behind in terms of where UEFA stands in relation to the early termination of leagues and the effect of that on the entitlement of relevant clubs to participate in the next CL/EL competitions.
If there is any uncertainty on that point, it adds an extra angst to the decision-making.
Does anyone know what the definitive position is?
JC,
As I understand it, UEFA have asked national associations and leagues to hold off until 25th April before calling their seasons.
The Belgian league has postponed its ratifying meeting until the 24th.
In terms of UEFA's current thinking, this may be a useful insight.
https://www.givemesport.com/1561135-uefa-president-says-liverpool-will-be-crowned-english-champions-one-way-or-another
EJ
Was there not some debate when details of the last interim payments were made public?
I believe Celtic, TRFC and Motherwell received significantly higher payments than the remainder because those three, on their current points totals, were guaranteed to finish in the top six.
Edit – just seen your later post 🙂
Mrs C has commandeered the pc and I don't know how to use this phone to copy and paste etc, so thank you HP foryour post of 10.27
I had faint memories of Ceferin having said the very opposite some time ago ( about Liverpool's situation).
And incidentally, mention of Ceferin reminds me he is another chap who does not reply to emails sent to him personally! no gentleman! and quite possibly uses his knife to eat peas!
HirsutePursuit 15th April 2020 at 10:27
Not wanting to be cheeky but awarding titles to teams well out in front is not really the issue.
I would like to think true football fans would agreed a team cruising at the top deserve it.
The issue for all leagues here and abroad is how to best deal with the situation where there are tight situations at the top (La Liga & Eredivisie), tight promotion & relegation situations throughout their divisions and also close battles for euro spots in their top divisions for CL or EL places.
Should it be done in a thoughtful constructive manner with fairness and sporting integrity in mind or, as seems to be the case here, 'tough luck, suck it up and get on with it'.
I’m sorry, but folk can quote as many rules and regulations as they like to explain why the SPFL can’t issue prize money without declaring the season complete, but both the UK and Scottish governments managed to introduce emergency legislation in the space of a few short days in light of the unprecedented coronavirus crisis. The SPFL’S obstinacy is based on an unwillingness, not an inability to do the right thing. They are duping us into believing their hands are tied when in reality their own inaction is to blame.
If the SPFL board genuinely wanted to help the clubs financially, it would call an EGM to facilitate the disbursement of 75-80% of the unpaid prize money based on current positions, a process that could be complete in very short order, but instead it is holding a gun to clubs’ heads and threatening them that no money can be released without passing the SPFL’s own resolution.
For the hard of thinking, the SPFL has deliberately bundled together the release of much needed money to accepting its resolution. It’s my way or the highway. To my mind, their actions in bludgeoning their way to having their resolution accepted go beyond coercion and border corruption.
It is also grossly unfair to call the season over and relegate Partick Thistle for example AT THIS POINT IN TIME when they are only two points behind QotS, having played a game less.
Current expectations that no further games will be played this season may well transpire to be accurate, but at this point in time they are based entirely on guesswork.
Celtic will still win their ninth consecutive title once this is all over, whether that is through completing their remaining games or reaching a point where the season cannot be completed, so I really fail to see why their support is getting so agitated about declaring the season over, especially since Rangers’* ‘null & void’ option is a complete non-starter because it would result in no prize money being able to be awarded.
Surely sporting integrity dictates that every chance should be given to completing the current season IF IT BECOMES SAFE TO DO SO and giving this precedence over next season, regardless of Doncaster’s apparent inability/unwillingness to re-negotiate a favourable deal with broadcasters, something he should already be working hard on, or resigning if he’s too incompetent to do so.
I can't understand what The Rangers are trying to achieve with this "rebellion" they are leading. The general opinion seems to be that they want the second place prize money but Celtic can't be declared winners of the League. Surely they can't be second then as Aberdeen or Motherwell could catch them if the season were completed. I think another poster claimed that they want their cake and eat it.
If their aim is to stop 9 in a row well how does that work? If no winner is declared or a null and void situation is arrived at then all it means is that if Celtic win the league the next season it would still be 9 in a row as nobody else would have won it between 8 and 9.
Highlander,
I get your argument and agree with most of – since my own red line here is that no club should be punished by relegation if the outcome is not yet certain. I believe that is a pragmatic course of action, and one that should have been wrapped into the resolution.
What I don’t agree with is your assertion that the SPFL board are unwilling to do the right thing. I think they have been ham-fisted in their approach, but I don’t see any skullduggery – just incompetence.
If HP’s interpretation of the rules is correct, it may be that they are guilty of not taking on board the responsibility they already have by making the declaration themselves. Thus demonstrating indecisiveness.
You may be correct that the arrogance that is apparent among football directors would encourage them to take an entrenched position in the face of dissent, but I really don’t believe that was the original intent.
In fact, if I was a Hearts or PT or Stranraer fan, I might well take the view that the whole thing was engineered to ruin my club, because that resolution aside from dishing out money asap, only imposes harm on those three clubs, and confers no additional benefit on others as far as I can see.
Highlander 15th April 2020 at 11:32
========================
I absolutely agree with you on the relegation thing. It is very unfair. Both Hearts and Partick in my view would have had every chance of avoiding the drop in their current situations.
In terms of where this particular Celtic supporter is concerned I wish we could somehow play out the league, but how and when? What 'agitates' (using your word) me about the season being called early is this. Firstly I think after my club surged into the new year while Rangers faltered we were going to win the league had it gone the distance. Rangers, and many elements of the media though have seized on a worldwide crisis to try and manipulate the situation for their own ends. As we know if something is said often enough it eventually gets generally accepted as the truth, especially in Scottish football. Here are two quotes already in the past few days.
Firstly from Hearts fan Ewan Murray in the Guardian: '…That Rangers don’t want Celtic’s retention of the trophy nailed down is as obvious as Tuesday follows Monday; it may be that a sufficient racket has been made for any title celebrations to be laughed off by all external observers anyway.'
Then this from Rangers fan Matthew Lindsay in the Herald: '…But if Celtic are awarded the Premiership at the end of this whole sorry saga the accusations that foul play was afoot will not die down quickly if at all. It will leave an indelible stain on this particular piece of silverware.'
It is not difficult to see that Rangers efforts are having an impact. Their desired voiding of the season might not happen, but they are clearly getting the message across in terms of discrediting Celtic, who have done nothing wrong at all.
So as you and the rest of the Hearts fans rightly call foul about the relegation issue through no fault of your club, I am calling foul on my clubs achievements being demeaned by a club who have already failed on three domestic fronts this season, and who are being ably backed by a media who need little encouragement.
Highlander.
To my simple mind, if the current articles and rules allow the immediate disbursement of funds, we should use those measures to release those funds.
That gives the greatest number of clubs the chance of survival. Surely we need to focus on keeping the patient(s) alive before planning a care plan!
Certainly, it is unfortunate that a team finishing in last position gets relegated. It is unfortunate that teams in that position do not have the chance to work their way out of that position. I do, genuinely, have sympathy for those teams.
But, in the current circumstances there is no prospect of playing out the remaining schedule. Do you think the suggested method for determining final positions is grossly unfair? Is it truly outrageous that a team in last position gets relegated after final positions have been confirmed?
Is there not a greater level of unfairness in a handful of clubs creating a roadblock to the release of much needed funds in persuit of their own personal ambitions?
By the way, I have long been an advocate for a sixteen team premiership. I think that would be the optimum number – on a purely sporting basis.
However, the challenge in any immediate attempt to change the composition of the league divisions is that a TV contract has already been signed for next season.
Many, in any case, would fundamentally disagree that league reconstruction would be a positive move.
Can those problems be overcome? Perhaps, but we shouldn’t pretend that a solution is days or even weeks away.
In the meantime, clubs will die.
Artificially conflating the finalising of league positions (leading to the release of fee payments) with the question of league reconstruction increases the risk that clubs will die.
I think that is the ultimate in unfairness.
Highlander 15th April 2020 at 11:32
I think I can speak on behalf of most Celtic fans in as much as we would also rather see the league played out, but are realistic enough to see that chance as slim to nothing. I am not saying we are bullet-proof but we have no skin in the, "Where we end up next season", bunfight. …..
Clubs are not moaning about this season's pay-out if we're honest, but what cash they will have access to next season….There are clubs need it now.
In the meantime, some clubs will suffer, and some won't make it through till then, due to a bunfight that may be for nought. Is that fair?. Celtic fans want the league called to prevent that. Our only skin is making sure there is a league to get back to. This virus really might be that serious. There may not even be a next season !…It may be truncated, who knows?…There may only be 20 clubs left, 30, to reconstruct with, who knows?
The SPFL need plan A, B, and C, in place as soon as poss. It is being delayed,but not by anything Celtic, or it's fans are doing.
For "Irate", don't be looking at Celtic, or its fans, who are forsaking, potentially, an end to a season that will never be topped…. Be looking at those chucking buns. Be looking at those bringing the game into disrepute. Be looking at the SMSM and it's drivers.
If anything, we are only guilty of seeing the bigger picture.
BP @ 11.59
I take that point and also generally agree. But what they haven’t done is given any reason for their unwillingness/general incompetence.
Its not difficult to say “we did it this way because….”. We’re big boys and girls. If their justification is something unpalatable (the sky deal is never far from the surface) we will cope. We will base our future purchasing decisions accordingly. And if one counters the other, well, there’s the real source of the problem.
We all said it in 2012. Whatever they did from them on was still unlikely to change. Cest la vie complete with Gallic shrug etc etc. But it would be utterly transparent and clearly artificial. If some idiot somewhere has decided that if they recreated a helicopter competition finale that everything else would somehow be miraculously swept away then said idiot has, never has, any business either being in the position he’s in.
Smugas
Correct. I think that's where the arrogance kicks in.
"Who the feck are youse to question us?"
Refusing to defend the decision but defending their right to make it.
Wottpi @ 11.26
I think you have hit the nail on the head there . The difficult decisions facing us is'nt whether Celtic should be awarded the title ( any reasonable fan would agree that they more than likely were gonna win ) but the problem is the relegation issue . That the SPFL were'nt forward thinking enough to see that this would be a problem just underlines how amateur this organisation really is . I heard that Dungcaster is on around £300K per annum ? If this is true it is outrageous , no way should he be getting paid that sort of money. Anyhoo In my humble opinion it must be a league of 14 next season . Hearts have been rotten all season but they do have a genuine chance of making a play off so I think they deserve a reprieve and if they do I hope Anne Budge learns the true meaning of the word "integrity " ..Anne , Rangers will never be a freind to you , Rangers would bring the whole of Scottish football down if it meant Celtic not getting this title.
A 14 team league for at least 1 season til hopefully a bit of normality returns to football. Play each other twice home and away , then split , top 7 and bottom 7 and play again twice home and away . This would also do away with the nonsense of possibly playing a team once at home and 3 times away under the current set up. Only problem I see is if the Sky deal rests on 4 Glasgow derbies , there is no guarantee that Rangers would make the top 7 when considering their financial troubles but a competent organisation surely would nt agree that there had to be 4 Glasgow derbies…….would they
Latest Dundee statement
Highlander 15th April 2020 at 11:32
===========================
I'm not really sure where you are getting that Celtic supporters are getting "so agitated about declaring the season over," You must be speaking to different people from me.
Every Celtic supporter I know feels exactly the same way as you. If the games can be played safely, even if it's behind closed doors, then that is the desired solution. Even better if the support can be there, but that would really take some turnaround.
And if it transpires that the games are played, and someone else wins the league then so be it. The best team over the course of the season wins the league. Everyone is having to deal with these circumstances and difficult times.
So the actions of the Championship clubs were regrettable (although Dundee was a willing partner)
Yet two Premiership clubs modified their positions "from the understanding we had the day prior"
So Dundee are complaining about the collusion they were party to in the championship, but were also party to some collusion with Premiership clubs.
UTH
…and don’t blame any of this on CFC/Peter Lawell – the club is not represented on the SPFL Board.
Plus …wtf is going on with Dundee – latest statement that they confirm they intended voting against proposal, but no clarification wrt what actually happened to their vote! They seem to be trying to squirm out of that one.
I still think, much to my disappointment, that the season will not be played out, and CFC declared worthy champions – that is in any reasonable argument of probability – same for Liverpool (SEVCO, its ‘cheerleaders, and the SMSM notwithstanding).
If they’e not, then you’ll hear from Mr Lawell.
btw, we are far from finished with statements, counter statements, amended resolutions , possible injunctions, whilst QCs, Lawyers (the real financial winners in this shambles) roll up to collect their hefty fees from clubs – some of the about to go to the wall.
Anybody else think that Dundee statement is missing a paragraph off the bottom. “And so to conclude…”
HirsutePursuit 15th April 2020 at 12:36
To my simple mind, if the current articles and rules allow the immediate disbursement of funds, we should use those measures to release those funds. AGREED
That gives the greatest number of clubs the chance of survival. Surely we need to focus on keeping the patient(s) alive before planning a care plan! AGREED
Certainly, it is unfortunate that a team finishing in last position gets relegated. It is unfortunate that teams in that position do not have the chance to work their way out of that position. I do, genuinely, have sympathy for those teams. DISAGREE – They don’t have to get relegated. There is a choice to be made by clubs agreeing to amend the Articles.
But, in the current circumstances there is no prospect of playing out the remaining schedule. Do you think the suggested method for determining final positions is grossly unfair? NO Is it truly outrageous that a team in last position gets relegated after final positions have been confirmed? YES – I believe that it is “outrageous” for other clubs to vote for another club to be so significantly disadvantaged, while that same vote protects their own status, and that vote is conditional to the distribution of funds.
Is there not a greater level of unfairness in a handful of clubs creating a roadblock to the release of much needed funds in persuit of their own personal ambitions? DISAGREE – as you have suggested previously, it is within the SPFL’s Board’s power to release funds. The unfairness works both ways. It’s called self interest. It is not exclusive to clubs being disadvantaged.
HirsutePursuit 15th April 2020 at 12:36
With the greatest respect, I agree entirely that getting the funds to clubs urgently is the number one priority to prevent clubs going under, but you appear to be accepting the SPFL’s fabrication that doing so requires acceptance of their resolution when you say a handful of clubs are creating a roadblock to those funds.
Whether the SPFL releases funds utilising existing rules/regulations or by urgently drafting emergency ones, the ending of the season is an entirely separate matter which has no bearing on the release of those funds, yet the SPFL board sought to falsely suggest that the much-needed payment was dependent on it. They could still find a way to pay out right now if that was their priority, as it should be.
They wouldn’t even need to wait for John Nelms to pontificate for up to 28 days if they’d not deliberately conflated those two things for their own ends.
However, I will butt out at this point in the debate because I’m even beginning to annoy myself in probably giving the false impression I’m annoyed at posters on here rather than those idiots in the SPFL who couldn’t run a bath.
Full Dundee statement
“If what we achieved in our pause was presented by the spfl in the first instance we would have voted in favour of the proposal.”
So what Dundee may well end up voting “yes” to is different from what was presented to the other 41 clubs.
Also Dundee changed their position as a result of seeing what the SPFL had published after 5pm on Friday about how the voting was going.
It sort of undermines the original vote, does it not?
https://www.sfm.scot/spfl-myopia-flares-into-civil-war/#comment-32373
Not seen much comment from Mr Doncaster, but I was reading some tweets from someone who’d been in liaison with him about introducing domestic FFP to make sure clubs were more resilient. Seems to be that the clubs being in such dire straights is largely due to the clubs being unwilling to even put FFP in the domestic league to a vote. If that’s so then they really are reaping what they sow.
Also, we are sorry to disappoint all of the conspiracy theorists by saying that we were never exposed to any ‘deals’ from either of the Glasgow giants. They both acted, as we would expect, with complete professionalism.
…………………
Fair play Celtic & Partick Thistle.
……….
Unashamedly borrowed;-)
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/rangers-chairman-douglas-park-demands-21871158?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=sharebar
…….
Someone is not happy.
wottpi
I think that UEFA will insist on champions being declared in the top leagues so that qualification to its competitions is still seen to be on 'sporting merit'. In these circumstances, it seems highly unlikely that any league would refuse to finalise league positions and prevent its clubs from participating in European campaigns next season.
I don't think UEFA can universally decide on how it will work and the individual Leagues and associations will determine their own methodology.
Personally, I would like the board to make the determination that all outstanding matches are given a scoreline of 1-1 in the Scottish Premiership. That would fulfill the need (if it exists) to account for all 38 scheduled matches.
But, as long as it is fundamentally fair, it doesn't really matter what formula is used. As long as the final positions are determined in a way that UEFA will recognise as having 'sporting merit'.
Some leagues – like the English and Scottish Premierships – the outcome will be clearcut. In others – Spain for example – the final result will be close.
In any league, regardless of the closeness of a final result, the winner will still be recognised as such by UEFA.
Whether the final results are determined on goal difference or a 30 point margin – a winner is a winner.
We really do need to give up on the idea that any further games will be played this season.
Gary Ralston at The DR running with a story that Park is demanding retraction of a quote attribute to the SPFL Chairman McLennan.
It’s from 2017.
It’s in ‘Private Eye’!
Apparently this same quote was raised / questioned after his SPFL appointment back in 2017, so it’s nothing new.
Desperate stuff from Ibrox.
They obviously have nothing else to back up their ‘allegations’ about the SPFL.
Can we take the paragraph below to mean that Dundee now expects clubs to be relegated, but with some sort of additional settlement (kindness?) from all the other clubs, or is it that they are negotiating a restructuring deal that will see three clubs promoted to the Premiership and one relegated?
Highlander, EJ
The SPFL board have a wide range of powers to manage the league competition.
It doesn't have the legal authority to resile from the existing contract with the clubs to make fee payments based on final league positions.
Sure, it can put forward a resolution to change the articles. But, even if such a resolution could be passed (which I think is utter fantasy), the obligation to pay out on the arrangements for this season would remain.
easyJambo15th April 2020 at 14:16
0
0
Rate This
Can we take the paragraph below to mean that Dundee now expects clubs to be relegated….
………
It is a fairly confused statement overall; but yes, that is also my reading.
Which seems to suggest that Dundee will support the resolution.
But who knows!
According to Raman at STV
https://news.stv.tv/sport/football/spfl-says-football-wont-return-until-august-at-earliest?top
Highlander,
I understand your concern.
The key SPFL personal are rarely on the correct side of any dispute. It makes my skin crawl to support its position on anything.
That said, it is always great to air our thoughts and have those sense checked on here.
Discussion is good as long as we're playing the ball not the man.(c) Homunculus
If Dundee goes on to change their vote to "yes", could the following statement be described as an inducement to change their vote
"If what we achieved in our pause was presented by the SPFL in the first instance we would have voted in favour of the proposal."
Could that be construed as an act of Bribery under Scots Law?
It may be that the SPFL will avoid such accusations by dropping the current resolution and propose a new resolution that meets with Dundee's approval.
Completely off topic.
Has anybody else noticed that no matter who gets asked a question on the tv/radio,
be it reporter, politician, member of the public or pundit, that their reply more times than not starts with the word "SO". Has this always been the case ?
I admit I am watching more television than normal but its beginning to p*** me off.
I also admit I may be going a bit stir crazy.
HS
Higgy’s Shoes, you need to get out more – for no more than 60 minutes daily of course!
So… this will really p!ss you off.
I’ve also noticed in recent times, that many answers also start with;
“I mean…”
Ha!
Higgy's shoes @ 16.05
————————————————-
This SO thing started a while ago (feck knows how it started) but it p***es me off as well HS.
Stevie BC @ 14.13
Apparently this same quote was raised / questioned after his SPFL appointment back in 2017, so it’s nothing new.
————————————————————————
Yes I remember that. Was their any outcome? If the quote is genuine at very best it doesn't look good! I would not be happy if someone in his position made a statement like that about my club.
Well Stevie BC
In which case what will really 'do your nut in' is the number of contestants on Pointless who start there answers with – wait for it ….!
So, ……
Off now to await news of the SPFL meeting due at 5pm – I think!!
Further screenshots of WhatsApp conversations are doing the rounds on t’internet, so consider their provenance. I’d question the spelling of “Scott” Gardiner as I believe he answers to the name of “Scot”, although that could be from one of the other participant’s contact list.
They are from allegedly from Thurdsay and Friday before the vote. Some of the names will be familiar, Ross Morrison is the ICT Chairman and Ross McArthur the Dunfermline Chairman and SPFL Board member
Gretna were loaned the equivalent of their prize money to allow them to complete the season in their admin year
From the Dundee Courier – Breaking News
https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/sport/football/dundee-fc/1268401/dundee-fc-spfl-vote-yes-season/amp/
Dundee have submitted a ‘yes’ vote to the SPFL’s proposals paving the way for Celtic, Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers to be crowned champions.
Courier Sport understands the Dark Blues told Hampden chiefs of their decision this afternoon and are awaiting a response from league bosses.
Should the SPFL board accept Dundee’s vote, the Championship, League One and League Two seasons will immediately be declared on a points per game basis.
The Premiership will remain on hiatus, but could subsequently be called at the SPFL board’s discretion.
Higgy's Shoes, So, I'm glad someone else has noticed that!
I first remember it's usage in the late noughties. I listened to Radio 4 every morning travelling to work. It seemed to be mostly prevalent by academics in reply to a question. It's common place now by anyone and everyone. I think it gives the user a sense of grandeur.
So, it’s explained here…….https://www.dictionary.com/e/sentence-initial-so/
Ewan Murray@mrewanmurray
Confirmation from SPFL that Dundee have, ahem, voted “Yes” should be imminent. An appalling episode all round. Over to Partick Thistle…
SPFL confirm resolution passes. "The SPFL board has also committed to consult on possible league restructuring in time for season 2020/21 around an expanded Premiership model." Ann Budge and Les Gray will lead a task force.
M MacLennan: "There has been talk of voiding the season, making emergency loans and so on, but what has been agreed today is not just the best way forward, it was the only realistic way forward and I now call on all 42 clubs to move forward in a constructive and positive way.”
Should be remembered: only (actual) delay in calling Premiership is Uefa guideline of at least 23 April. They'll do it as soon as they can.
Even by their standards, it's quite something for the SPFL to issue that statement without even a hint of apology for the laughing stock they have again reduced our national game to. They act as if this was all totally normal.
Full SPFL Statement
https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-resolution-approved-by-clubs-in-all-four-di
So John Humphry’s name is spelled without an ‘e’. Who knew? ( I had to look him up because I wasn’t sure whether it was ‘Humphries’ or ‘Humphreys’)
But I remember raging in sympathy with him a few years ago when he blasted the toss-pots who try to give a false academic air to their usually trite utterances and replies to everyday questions.
And while we are on the subject of language, when the hell did ‘snuck’ become the past tense of ‘sneak’ except in feckin US movies?
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 18:08
I can only think that Hearts will not be fighting the decision if this is true.
“The SPFL board has also committed to consult on possible league restructuring in time for season 2020/21 around an expanded Premiership model. Ann Budge and Les Gray will lead a task force.”
Presumably both were spoken to before this was released.
John Clark 15th April 2020 at 18:29
…
And while we are on the subject of language, when the hell did ‘snuck’ become the past tense of ‘sneak’ except in feckin US movies?
============
Absolutely, JC!
It's gotten out of hand, so it has.
I am absolutely sure both Mr Gray and Mrs Budge are ably qualified to head the working group. Am I right in saying it’s the team that would otherwise be relegated and the team in the play off position that they are affiliated to when considering the merits or otherwise of expansion?
And slightly less tongue in cheek. I’d suggest again that Anne’s first job tomorrow is to phone Sky and ask the simple questions. What do you want and what don’t you want? And then take it from there (possibly via the lawyer to make sure they’re not just humouring her!)
And I notice the restructure has suddenly been focussed on the Premiership only.
John Clark 15th April 2020 at 18:29
—————————————————-
I think I could of pointed out more annoying things than snuck John.
Homunculus 15th April 2020 at 18:33
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 18:08
I can only think that Hearts will not be fighting the decision if this is true.
“The SPFL board has also committed to consult on possible league restructuring in time for season 2020/21 around an expanded Premiership model. Ann Budge and Les Gray will lead a task force.”
Presumably both were spoken to before this was released.
===============================
Personally I think that she has been set up to fail. The SPFL Board will have a good idea of top clubs’ views on reconstruction. 11-1 on the face of it seems unachieveable. If she does indeed fail then the SPFL Board will escape the criticism, saying that it was one of the strongest proponents who had the job, but failed to persuade the clubs to support it.
This is what she said in a statement as recently as Sunday.
Her first step should be to contact all clubs this evening and ask for their preferred reconstruction models (preferably by 5pm on Friday)
. If any more than one Premiership club comes back with “we don’t want reconstruction”, then she should resign from the task force and head for the Court of Session in support PTFC.
Whatever the outcome, it will be viewed as her legacy for her time in charge at Hearts. If she doesn’t come out with something positive about her task, then ST sales will bomb.
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 18:08
======================================
On the assumption that Rangers will vote no, and I think that is a given do you not think it would be possible to get everyone else on-side.
Hearts and Hamilton have to be a yes. I suspected most of the bottom six would be the same (for selfish reasons). Hibs will surely want the derby (did their captain not say that recently).
There might be a bit of heats and minds required but I wouldn't dismiss it out of hand. Particularly if the SPFL is supportive.
gunnerb 15th April 2020 at 18:47
'…could of pointed '
"""""""""""""""
Yes, let's both of us shout at Michael Stewart. Outrageous, with his 'could ofs' and 'should ofs'. Can the man read anything other than a game of football? Is that the way he writes?
I have not heard even one other 'football player-turned-pundit', not even Derek (who has actually come on a ton , and is clearly Richard Gordon's 'pet') thinks the word 'of' has any place in that contraction.
It gars me greet.
Homunculus 15th April 2020 at 19:13
===================
Reconstruction now looks a shoe-in to me. Isn't there even a chance Rangers would vote for it it? Having Hearts in the top league ticks all the boxes in terms of stadium, support, sponsors and media coverage.
From SPFL Statement:-
“The resolution also gives authority to make a decision on the remainder of the Ladbrokes Premiership season, and the board is committed to consulting with Premiership clubs before any such decision is made”
That should light the blue torch paper in Govania – cue further confrontational and obstructive statements from Messrs Parks and Robertson about null and void, tainted title etc
I myself personally (just as bad as I mean and So!) think that the traditional bitterness (what is that complaint about McLennan- from 2017 for Gods’s sake! – all about?) will be well evidenced in the near future.
SEVCO is IMHO a ‘bad article’.
John
I have often thunk that myself 🙂
One observation over the fiasco of the last week is that the SPFL board, constituted of roughly the same people who were involved in the liquidation crisis of 2012, had chosen not to make a proposal aimed at safeguarding income streams.
In 2012 of course, they were demanding that TRFC be parachuted into the SPL “to keep the money flowing in the game”.
In 2020 they were happy to see the third biggest club in the country relegated, even though they had the perfect opportunity to introduce the reconstruction narrative.
That said, who believed them in 2012?
Big Pink 15th April 2020 at 19:59
John I have often thunk that myself ?
=======
This etymological diversion has just been distracting,
from the get-go!
(Sorry: I'll get ma sneakers…)
bect67
I fear you are correct, and that the debate will be overshadowed by the warring factions of the Big Two – or at least the warring faction of one of them 🙂
A shame really because this last week has not been about either of the Glasgow giants. It has been about how the governing bodies perceive fairness, and in particular how spectacularly low their empathy reserves are, a fact laid bare by their failure to see, or care, that some clubs would be severely disadvantaged by their arrogant bungling.
Exactly the quality required for real leadership is empathy. I'm not so sure there's enough of it anywhere in the game to fill a phone box.
upthehoops 15th April 2020 at 19:43
================================
Their only concern will be playing to the fans now.
There will be a lot of sabre rattling, wagon circling and various other pictures in words.
Remember these are the people who will use orange shirts, "surrender no", "watp" and pretty much anything else to get those season tickets sold. Any feedback from their fans sites would suggest that they would not be impressed if the club then supported re-structure.
In fact if anything they are currently leaving the league, suing everyone and anyone, bringing down the corrupt cabal, refusing to play in cups and pretty much anything you would expect. Oh and there's a lot of boycotting going on. From every other team in the league to Dundee FCs business partners, I kid you not.
StevieBC
Insects? Who's talking about insects?
bect67 15th April 2020 at 19:56
From SPFL Statement:- “The resolution also gives authority to make a decision on the remainder of the Ladbrokes Premiership season, and the board is committed to consulting with Premiership clubs before any such decision is made” That should light the blue torch paper in Govania – cue further confrontational and obstructive statements from Messrs Parks and Robertson about null and void, tainted title etc
=========================================
I think it more likely he will once again be asked, (privately) to produce his evidence or face a disrepute charge. He may just prefer the given alternative of, STFU !.
"Away an' play wi' yir buses", as my granny used to say.
Then again…..He may have evidence, and the clubs will be getting nothing this week…..Suppose it will be dependent on the whistle still having a pea in it.
Higgy’s Shoes 15th April 2020 at 16:05
15
0
Rate This
Completely off topic.
Has anybody else noticed that no matter who gets asked a question on the tv/radio,
be it reporter, politician, member of the public or pundit, that their reply more times than not starts with the word “SO”. Has this always been the case ?
…………………
I was always told never start a sentance with the word So, and to this day i am guilty of it, but every time i do it i hear that voice saying don’t do it.
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 18:49
'…The SPFL Board will have a good idea of top clubs’ views on reconstruction. 11-1 on the face of it seems unachieveable. '
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I rather think you're being a shade pessimistic, eJ.
Anne Budge , and Hearts, won a great deal of goodwill in the world of Scottish Football by their determined effort to avoid relegation (unlike Rangers) and the grit and determination shown by fans and board and the FOH.
She is perceived to be an honourable woman among some decidedly viewed as being not quite so honourable men.And while business is business ( if the canting cheat of all sports cheats remarked as he slid the stiletto Airdrieonians FC) I suspect that 11 men have been so confused and confounded and a bit ashamed of self-seeking that they will do the honourable thing, even at some financial cost in the short to medium term.
The sport is so interdependent and the crisis of coronavirus is so clearly no club's fault that some realistic and 'humane' response has to be made. No PL club would necessarily die if some league reconstruction was undertaken.
And a badly shaken SPFL might be prompted to get its arse in gear , overhaul itself and come into the 21st century.
I imagine that the number of football supporters in the clubs in the PL in Scotland who would not be distressed if Hearts were to be relegated out of hand would be quite small.
And I suspect that 11 of the PL clubs' boards think that as well.
Cluster One 15th April 2020 at 21:23
The language is organic, splitting infinitives is no longer forbidden, ending sentences with a preposition is also fine too. Multiple conjunctions, who cares. A conjunction at the start of a sentence, or after a comma, worry yeah not. As to the apostrophe, whether a contraction, possessive, or the much abused possessive plural, no one cares any more.
And folk are worrying about league reconstruction, where are peoples' priorities. Oh and apparently there's some sort of Global pandemic going on. Who noticed.*
*I am with Jim Moir on this one. The question mark is too elaborate, like the curly-wurly.
John Clark 15th April 2020 at 18:29
So , I've got a 26 year-old daughter who thinks that the preterite of jump is jamp . I don't watch (American) movies , so know not its provenance , if any .
John Clark 15th April 2020 at 21:33
I rather think you’re being a shade pessimistic, eJ.
Anne Budge , and Hearts, won a great deal of goodwill in the world of Scottish Football by their determined effort to avoid relegation (unlike Rangers) and the grit and determination shown by fans and board and the FOH.
She is perceived to be an honourable woman among some decidedly viewed as being not quite so honourable men.
=================================
I’m not sure that your view of Ann Budge is shared by the other clubs. One contact I have told me, just tonight, that she wasn’t liked by the other clubs’ chairmen. She wasn’t re-elected to the SPFL Board after her first year when she only got one vote from the Premiership clubs (her own).
I’ll continue to view the situation as a half empty glass, until such time that there is a positive indication that all the Premiership clubs intend to vote in favour of reconstruction.
The first thing I’ll be looking for is a timeline. It shouldn’t take long to prepare plans, as there have been plenty alternative structures outlined in recent weeks and months. Plug in the appropriate implications for the financial distribution and it should be ready to go within a couple of weeks, definitely not months.
The SPFL statement referred to reconstruction as “an expanded Premiership model”, so it may be that the parameters of what will be considered are already set, i.e. a change to Premiership numbers only (14 x 10 x 10 x 10). It would be ironic if such a model was recommended, but Dundee rejected it because they wanted 3 promoted (including themselves) and 1 relegated (Hearts), instead of 2 up and 0 down.
I think it will come down to money as the prize money for the additional 2 teams in the Premiership could be in the range of £1.5m-£2m, although £300k of that would be saved by not having to pay parachute payments to relegated clubs at the end of this season. It might mean current premiership clubs each taking a hit of £100k to £150k each in their prize money next season, which might not be attractive to some.
If a proposal from the task force is put to a vote, will the SPFL Board support it with the same vigour as they did for the “end of season” proposal? I somehow don’t quite see that happening.
One of my TRFC – supporting mates fell out with me earlier because I wouldn't join him in attacking Peter Lawwell over this voting fiasco . He must be a really bad man , that Peter Lawwell . He sent TRFC in to SPFL with a resolution which didn't have the required number of signatories and it failed . He sent them back again with the requisite number , only for them to be told that it wasn't legally sound . He then instructed them to throw the toys out the pram , and scream and scream . TRFC duly did his bidding . Meanwhile , various other groupings emerged , all with different agendas but all acting under Peter Lawwell's instructions . All this was done to distract from his primary purpose , which is displaying a visceral hatred of TRFC every day in a cowed media .
If Hearts don't get relegated and we do , it'll end in tears (and not just mine ).
Homunculus.
Jim Moir? Is that the comedian?
haven't heard from him since the days of a stand up comedy programme that was aired about 15 years ago on tv (can't remember the name) The programme introduced viewers to Frankie Boyle and Craig Hill.
Jim had an excellent character called Obidiah Steppenwolf III
HS
If Dundee voted yes in the hope that there would be a reconstruction involving 3 up and one down they are living in cuckoo land.
John Clark 15th April 2020 at 21:33
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 18:49 '
…The SPFL Board will have a good idea of top clubs’ views on reconstruction. 11-1 on the face of it seems unachieveable.
' """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
I rather think you're being a shade pessimistic, eJ.
——————————
If it's any consolation EJ, I'll echo John's optimism and will be sending a wee email to Celtic advocating change. I'm in the 3 divisions mould, which to my mind will compress the standard into a tighter range. The levels tween Prem and 3rd are just too disparate.
Numbers?…..Divisions should be related to levels, and numbers just for the sake of it, I feel, are meaningless. Quality should be the emphasis.
Although monies will, (if all goes to plan) now be released, I still think this virus will take some clubs…..As it will many businesses……We've got a bit of a waiting game on that yet I fear.
easyJambo 15th April 2020 at 22:32
I think it will come down to money as the prize money for the additional 2 teams in the Premiership could be in the range of £1.5m-£2m, although £300k of that would be saved by not having to pay parachute payments to relegated clubs at the end of this season. It might mean current premiership clubs each taking a hit of £100k to £150k each in their prize money next season, which might not be attractive to some.
==================
The big questions here are – How much prize money will there be without a League sponsor? Is the new TV deal so much better that a League sponsor won't be missed?
I get that everyone (without exception) is both voting and reflecting self interest. Also that the SPFL board is set up to be a reflection of majority view of the clubs – not anything else. Still there's an absolute reflection of the limitations of the model thats showing. It is simply incapable of reaching a greater good outcome. Because it is inherently undemocratic and build around owner whims.
Jumbo
Rather than 3 up and 1 down there is another possible scenario to consider. Given previous comments ICT may not want to benefit in any way that harms other clubs so they may turn down promotion opening a spot for Dundee. If another club was to decide to try their luck in England, as many of their supporters are suggesting tonight, there might also be a place for Ayr United whilst allowing Hearts to stay where they are too.
In 2012 after a certain vote, fans of RFC (IL) threatened to boycott away games to financially cripple and with the aim of putting other football clubs out of business. Last week the board of Newco submitted a requisition to SFA for the release of monies to help all clubs in Scotland. Tonight fans of Newco are threatening to boycott away games to financially cripple and hopefully put clubs out of business. This was stated live on SSB by 2 fans and much more on twitter. So wtf is going on?, the board wanted to help and the fans want the opposite. I get the fans not wanting 9IAR but nothing has been decided yet as football may commence again and Newco have the chance of winning the league. Both of these events are highly unlikely to be honest. This out pour of hatred is not acceptable from this new club and a wee bit of deja vu would not go amiss. They are what they are and will never change, they are the scourge of our game..Please please boycott.
So, TRFC got the money to pay for the pre pack. Time to move on.
It is interesting to read so many Rangers fans on social media hoping/praying/Rangers should force 'as many clubs to the wall as possible now.' Sometimes in life you should definitely be careful what you wish for.
I also see many are now taking a stance against Anne Budge for accepting the offer of looking into league reconstruction.
If there has been bitterness and rancour since 2012 it is about to hit new levels I'm afraid.
In all the confusion of the last 12 hours does anyone know if Partick Thistle, having taken the time to get quite clear advice from a QC, have accepted that The SPFL rules can allow Dundee to change their vote as now seems to have happened.
If not do they, Thistle and indeed others still have the option of taking this to the courts?
Finloch 16th April 2020 at 07:36
In all the confusion of the last 12 hours does anyone know if Partick Thistle, having taken the time to get quite clear advice from a QC, have accepted that The SPFL rules can allow Dundee to change their vote as now seems to have happened.
If not do they, Thistle and indeed others still have the option of taking this to the courts?
=======================================
If they want to stop the process in its tracks then they will have to move to get an interdict today, as the clubs are due to get their money on Friday. If they wait until after the money is deposited is club accounts, seeking only to stop the relegations, then they may have difficulty in persuading a judge of what precisely the interdict is meant to achieve. given there would be tacit acceptance of some of the SPFL proposals “passed” by member clubs.
Their complaint is about the process by which the vote was carried out, covering before, during and after. I don’t think that you would have much grounds for complaint if you were then accepting the bits that you liked from that same vote.
IMO Partick’s aim should be to seek that the SPFL are prevented from implementing the results of that vote, in the hope of forcing a new vote on distributing cash without the dependency strings attached. Partick would then seek to negotiate with the SPFL Board in the same way as Dundee appears to have done about the other aspects of the proposals.
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 08:01
IMO Partick’s aim should be to seek that the SPFL are prevented from implementing the results of that vote, in the hope of forcing a new vote on distributing cash without the dependency strings attached. Partick would then seek to negotiate with the SPFL Board in the same way as Dundee appears to have done about the other aspects of the proposals.
…………………………………………………………
Thanks EJ
I agree it is their only offensive option.
Doing nothing means relegation with only a very outside chance of structural change as I suspect the Budge and Gray Taskforce faces some blind-sighting, some cynicism and ultimately the usual long grass.
Homunculus 15th April 2020 at 21:38
……..
I use to love a curly-wurly.
Shrunk to half it’s original size now. I believe the mobile Text made no one care any more.
Budge and Gray trying to sort out league reconstruction is like turkeys getting a vote on Christmas!!
Whatever happens I hope at the end of all this there is some sort of reconstruction of our ruling bodies.
Nothing learned still a shambles
Here we go (hear we go) with the post SPFL whinging from SEVCO and its entourage- there will be many more, increasing in desperation over time I’m sure.
Constant Gardener McCoist was first out of the blocks today, follow followed by Steven Gerrard (self appointed expert on the running of Scottish football), using the same ‘marking you own homework’ analogy and wording as him (nothing if not coordinated), calling for an independent inquiry.
How about concentrating on trying to win a trophy first Stevie and less on boardroom and wider matters?
bect67 16th April 2020 at 11:09
Here we go (hear we go) with the post SPFL whinging from SEVCO and its entourage- there will be many more, increasing in desperation over time I’m sure. Constant Gardener McCoist was first out of the blocks today, follow followed by Steven Gerrard (self appointed expert on the running of Scottish football), using the same ‘marking you own homework’ analogy and wording as him (nothing if not coordinated), calling for an independent inquiry.
==================================
Serious allegations Bec. I think we should get Mason Pinsent to investigate.
Valentinesclown@00.24
The term “cognitive dissonance “ could have been specially coined to describe the supporters of all the clubs playing out of Ibrox. The continuing belligerence is a direct result of the dog whistling and media manipulation instigated by the different boards who have run all of the clubs based in Ibrox. There is a distinct parallel with the core of Donald Trump who were out in force in the Michigan state capital protesting against social distancing and the lockdown. The protesters were of course openly carrying firearms including AR 15’s. Presumably they were hoping to somehow get rid of the virus by shooting it.
Bill1903 16th April 2020 at 10:56
…
Whatever happens I hope at the end of all this there is some sort of reconstruction of our ruling bodies.
Nothing learned still a shambles.
======
And the paradox in Scottish football continues;
The 42 clubs have a typically strong connection with their community and fans, whose support keeps their clubs alive through thick and thin – and hopefully through this crisis. Clubs only survive on the goodwill of their fans.
This latest SPFL voting shambles doesn’t raise even an eyebrow for seasoned Internet Bampots, who have long since become desensitized to the Hampden incompetence / (alleged) corruption.
The last couple of weeks is just further validation that the SFA and SPFL organisations have a 100%, total disconnect with the supporters of the 42 senior clubs.
We are continually reminded that the SFA and SPFL bodies ARE the 42 clubs.
And yet, to paraphrase: those same 42 clubs are nothing without their fans.
As Hampden continues to take its eye off the ball, there is a real risk – IMO – that paying punters might drift away from the game anyway after the lockdown.
Now could be an opportune time for both the SFA and SPFL to drop their antipathy towards their paying customers – and urgently review their own positions WRT customer service, customer communication, customer feedback, continuous improvement, etc. (I know!).
That’s what ‘normal’ organisations would do…
StevieBC
I trust you are not suggesting a new role for a recently unemployed media colossus!
adam812 16th April 2020 at 11:51
'….I trust you are not suggesting a new role for a recently unemployed media colossus!'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
So abysmally poor has been 'football governance' PR for many a year that one could be forgiven for thinking that they had been using his exceedingly poor services for years!
I've viewed the TRFC Twitter clip where the 'Gers Gaffer was interviewed on Sky Sports News this morning. In it he is demanding an independent forensic investigator be hired to look into the alleged skulduggery of the SPFL this past week. Who put this 'forensic investigator' idea into the lad's head? Gerrard would not know the first thing about organising investigations or inquiries into such matters
Stevie's eyes kept shifting from side to side as if he had prompt notes scattered around his kitchen table. I wonder if one of them had 'mark own homework' scribbled on it?
I note Gerrard used the term 'up there in Scotland' and he was concerned at reports of the goings on 'up there'. I got the impression he was glad to be out of it and that he would not be using the return half of his ticket back to Glasgow anytime soon.
When Sky are granted the opportunity of interviewing Liverpool FC's famous son at this moment in time and to a UK wide audience, surely the first and most burning question would be "Do you think Liverpool FC should now be awarded the Premier League title?" Of course, that would open the can of worms and possibly lead to a similar question being asked of him in respect of the situation north of the border.
Ok, I’m harping on a bit but I blame the cabin fever.
The SMSM is now reporting that Fraser Wishart of the PFA has indicated that the players have no objections to playing the outstanding SPL games behind closed doors. Most fans would prefer the full league card to be completed – if at all possible.
But, my moan…
So…
we have the SFA and SPFL dealing with this crisis via extensive communications with the 42 clubs, the TV companies, sponsors, the government, the SMSM, and now the players.
…but not a peep about the most important stakeholders: the supporters!
I am not a ST holder, but what about those who are ST holders and haven’t missed a home game for X years? In addition to SPL games they may have never missed a cup or European home tie either for X years.
Yet, the out of touch blazers are going to decide whether or not games can be played – whilst barring those long term supporters who put their hard earned money into the game – every season?
I’m not saying that the games should or should not be played behind closed doors.
I just find it breathtakingly arrogant – even for Hampden – to make unprecedented decisions without even attempting to engage meaningfully with the supporters – to find out what they think could/should be done.
Billy Boyce, yes it’s the obvious question! I wonder why they didn’t ask it? It’s what everybody is wondering about regarding SG. A wee bit like Barry Ferguson, to a lesser degree, winning an unfinished league with Kelty. I bet Barry is content that their league wasn’t a null & void case!
Billy Boyce 16th April 2020 at 14:21
'..he is demanding an independent forensic investigator be hired to look into the alleged skulduggery of the SPFL this past week.'
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""
If he broadened that to include the forensic investigation into the SFA /Rangers FC of 1872 'relationship' in the matter of UEFA licence awards, and the manufacturing in 2012 of the biggest and most absurd lie in football sports history, that would put him on the side of the angels, Billy Boyce.
As it is, he's just making a bigger ars. of himself than he already demonstrated himself to be by being conned into working for a serially lying club and buying the ridiculous PR hype churned out by self-prostituting 'journalists'.
He will in the end , whatever tainted shekel he receives, he will get no thanks from anyone at Ibrox.
And nothing but contempt from me for debasing himself.
Billy Boyce 16th April 2020 at 14:21
=============================
Put Stevie "Let's Go" G under a bit of pressure by asking him the most obvious question, and the one the majority of the Sky viewing audience would be interested in.
What a ridiculous suggestion. How dare you, Sir.
You'll be suggesting that question was banned in advance of the "interview", next and that it was all stage managed. Rather than being an open, frank, ask what you want, hard hitting interview.
Anyway, I won't be making any comment until the subtitles have been released as well. I want to make sure what was reported is a fair and honest reflection on what he said.
Homunculus
Thistle will not be taking legal action
https://ptfc.co.uk/ptfc-news/partick-thistle-fc-board-update-16th-april-2020/
Partick Thistle FC Board update – 16th April 2020
Thursday 16th April, 2020 at 3:26pm
To be relegated at any time in a club’s life is, in a sporting context, an enormous setback. You accept your fate, because it was in your hands to change the outcome.
However, to be relegated in the arbitrary and unjust way we are currently experiencing, with no say in it, is heartbreaking for everyone at Partick Thistle, including staff and players and especially our fans.
We advised the SPFL on Tuesday of the joint counsel’s Opinion we had sought in relation to the validity – or not – of the Dundee FC vote cast last Friday.
To be clear, we did not threaten litigation, we sought clarity on the legal points raised.
We still regard this as a strong legal Opinion that raises significant issues around the whole process of the vote and related matters. Having taken further legal advice, we have been advised that we have the option to take this before a court. Instinctively, injustice demands reparation.
However, as a Club, the decision to relegate Thistle is first and foremost about our people and what this might mean for them. To pursue court action costs money and considerable time – so we have had to consider carefully whether both could be better spent on securing the Club’s future and protecting the livelihoods of those we employ. In deciding what our next steps should be, that was our first priority.
Thistle has always lived in the real world so we also looked at the bigger picture of the life-changing pandemic we find ourselves in. The resulting lockdown is challenging the very existence of some clubs. If we were to take this action to court, there is a risk that might stop the release of much-needed monies to those clubs on Friday.
That’s a step too far for us. Regardless of what’s been inflicted on Thistle, we can’t be responsible for pushing even one club to the brink. It would be hypocritical of us to have espoused “do no harm” as a reason why we shouldn’t be relegated and then do exactly that.
Taking all of that into account, although we stand by the legal Opinion, the Board has agreed that we will not seek “further remedy” against the SPFL in order to overturn the Resolution. Although we remain at a loss to understand why a decision was taken – at a time when Governments are seeking to support jobs across sectors – that will cause significant damage to Thistle and others.
Instead, we will focus our efforts and monies on Thistle and look forward, not back. That includes making a positive contribution to the discussions on possible changes to the league structures.
We aren’t looking for sympathy, we don’t need it. We are a well-run, debt-free club with a proud history of rolling with the punches. We may be down but we are not out. When football returns, we will be here, ready to play, regardless of the league we are in.
To our fans, we hope you understand why we have reached this decision. No one should regard this as a sign of weakness – it shows our strength and resolution to get through this despite relegation being forced on us. We aren’t doing what’s easy but we are doing what is right for our Club, our people and for clubs across Scotland. We are grateful for your solid support and encouragement – and when next we meet at Firhill, it will be to start the fightback to right this wrong.
Well done Partick Thistle! It appears to be a well considered statement with decisions made truly for the good of Scottish football. Hopefully reconstruction talks will lead to a positive outcome for all those who face relegation.
I notice much talk about how games can be played given social distancing rules.
If the time comes when it is possible to get two teams on the park why not look at the average gates of previous meetings and then play games at larger stadiums where social distancing can be accommodated on the terraces and queuing systems as per shops and the like can operate for turnstiles and toilets.
Hampdum is sitting doing hee haw for most of the time so smaller teams/matches could play there no bother and fans who wanted to attend would have plenty room.
Celtic Park and Ibrox could accommodate most ‘west coast games’ and Tynie and Easter Road, east coast games. Local centres like East End Park could deal with Fife and the Dundee clubs and Aberdeen deal with the North – East.
A bit mad but just a thought!!!
For long enough, this site has looked to find a way to improve governance of Scottish football with the usual mechanism being a clear-out of those in power. Although undoubtedly not a Celtic site, the balance of numbers here (and the apparent evidence of decisions supporting Rangers and TRFC) has led to a mindset that the powers that be are biased toward the Ibrox clubs. With the decisions this week, many – if not all – TRFC fans are also looking to clear out those in charge at the SPFL (not sure if they have a current view on the SFA, who are at a distance to the end of season decision).
With ALL fans apparently now looking for change, is there a way this can be effected? Is it at all possible for it to be effected in a way that all sides accept?
Accepting that there is a groundswell for a clear out, I'm not sure what the current structure/situation would be replaced with. It's a members organisation so all clubs have apparent equal input/voice, but we know that's not the case in reality. The members get to vote on a board to represent them but that board still has to do what the members want. How would that be changed for the better?
Obviously, things like local FFP; better league structures; strict liability etc could be useful additions, but it might take independent governance authorities to implement those rather than the (potentially) self-interested clubs. Is it feasible that someone outwith the clubs run the game?
If the groundswell becomes a tidal wave that does clear the decks, what would a workable structure look like? I ask, realising that ANY change is unlikely, while also realising that other countries have similar structures already, so maybe this is the best option there is. It just doesn't feel like it, with the problems we see here; the 'problems' caused by money in the EPL; the problems all leagues have with UEFA, FIFA etc.
Can we have some kind of non-partisan petition created along the line of "Scottish Football fans have no confidence in the governance of the sport by the SFA and SPFL."?
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
Homunculus 16th April 2020 at 15:15
Anyway, I won’t be making any comment until the subtitles have been released as well. I want to make sure what was reported is a fair and honest reflection on what he said.
……………….
https://twitter.com/lookingthinking/status/1250760902862876672/photo/1
……
They may have learned their lesson with the subtitles (and anything with the word Title in it is a bad word down ibrox way)
Why bother with subtitles when a recorded interview can be edited.
redlichtie 16th April 2020 at 16:56
If you post a link when you set it up I'm sure a lot of people here would be interested in signing that, and even sharing it about.
New podcast with David Low on the SPFL and the future for the game.
Doing another one tomorrow with Andrew Smith, Chairman of the Scottish Football Fans Association, author of the current blog.
“The SPFL looks an absolute mess”SG
…..
So;-) that could be both Mr Park and Mr Gerrard up before the governing bodies for bringing the game into Disrepute.
Park D'Bus has went awfy quiet considering he has all that evidence of corruption. He is in a difficult spot now. Do nothing, and he will be viewed by the fans as weak and cowardly. A liar even.
Worse still, a realisation may dawn that he is just another one, in a long line of shyster "businessmen" taking advantage of their gulli…..errrrrr, Loyalty and love for the club. He wouldn't want that notion to take hold, by those he needs to sell tickets to. Not the sort of guy anybody would choose to buy a used car from.
I suggest he has to come out all guns blazing, and slap his evidence on the table. …….Take the SPFL the full road.
Otherwise he is done……..Then what for Sevco?
BP – Just started listening to the latest podcast. Just to correct your introduction piece. There are not 48 clubs in the SPFL (12 x 4), at least not yet.
Is there a means of accessing previous podcasts? I can’t find any link to them from the menus so that you can flip in and out of then without interfering with posting on blogs.
That was a very good and effective statement by Partick Thistle. It makes its points well, uses matters of fact calmly, makes no offensive, blustering, threatening vengeful utterances, and thus holds the moral high ground while eliciting genuine sympathy and a recognition of the unfairness, when others might have been reasonably prevailed upon to work harder for a more equitable arrangement.
Top marks to the drafter.
Had he been employed by King and permitted editorial freedom, , the absurd nonsense that came from both King and JT would have been avoided.
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 18:20
Is there a means of accessing previous podcasts? I can’t find any link to them from the menus so that you can flip in and out of then without interfering with posting on blogs.
If you are logged in then you can open a second SFM page in a new tab. you can use one tab to fillow the threads and the other to listen to the podcasts,
EJ
Podcast.sfm.scot
J
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 18:19
Statement O'Clock
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/supporters-update
Thursday, 16 April 2020, 19:00
by Rangers Football Club
The most important issue facing all of us at this time is the Covid-19 pandemic and the Board of Rangers sincerely hope all of our fans and their families are staying safe and healthy. Hopefully we will all be back supporting our team as soon as possible.
However, given events of the past week, we feel we should make comment on the SPFL resolution vote. No fair minded person can take the outcome of this vote seriously. The SPFL has conducted a process which has been misleading and deeply flawed.
In particular, publishing the outcome prior to all clubs having voted has undermined the democratic process and demonstrated unacceptable standards of corporate governance by the SPFL Executive.
We are extremely concerned that member clubs were not provided with enough information, or time, to allow them to make fully informed decisions.
Also, we are aware several club directors claimed they were being bullied at a time when Scottish football should have been acting in unity to alleviate the financial hardship of many of our clubs. Addressing the latter was one of our primary objectives and the resolution we presented could and should have been progressed.
The SPFL chose to obstruct our resolution which would have given clubs the required financial support, without the pre-condition of ending the season. The fact that this solution was not afforded sufficient consideration defies belief and further underlines the view held by many clubs that the processes and behaviours of certain individuals must now be the subject of forensic examination.
For our part, Douglas Park has already requested an independent investigation into the conduct of the executive. The SPFL appear to have acknowledged the need for an internal investigation – but only an independent investigation will provide satisfactory, credible answers. We repeat our call for the immediate suspension of Neil Doncaster and Rod McKenzie pending the outcome of the independent investigation.
It is imperative that constructive engagement begins immediately with members to evaluate all options for completing the 2019/20 Premiership season, including on the field of play. The SPFL must allow every opportunity to do so. There is precedent within Scottish football that a league must not be compromised by changing the rules during the course of the competition.
The anger of our fans is understood and shared by our Board, who continue to examine all legal options available.
Another revisionist statement from Dundee.
https://dundeefc.co.uk/news/club-statement-27/
"By way of further explanation of our statement from 15 April, Dundee FC submitted its vote to the SPFL and issued its statement simultaneously. There was no changing of our vote at any time that day as has been reported in some channels."
If I've got that right, he is claiming Dundee never voted to reject the resolution.
From my recollection they did submit a vote, which they then retracted by asking the SPFL to ignore it. I must have imagined it. Must be an age thing.
John Clark 16th April 2020 at 18:52
Their Chief Executive is a lawyer and a former player.
If he didn't have any part in writing I would have thought at the very least he approved it's release.
bigboab1916 16th April 2020 at 19:13
If you are logged in then you can open a second SFM page in a new tab. you can use one tab to fillow the threads and the other to listen to the podcasts,
===================================
That's what I've ended up doing, but its a clumsy way of doing it and it doesn't resolve the issue of being able to access previous podcasts. It would be easier if there was a means of opening the podcast in a new tab.
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 19:22 That's what I've ended up doing, but its a clumsy way of doing it and it doesn't resolve the issue of being able to access previous podcasts. It would be easier if there was a means of opening the podcast in a new tab.
Do you mean like playing this in like say a windows media player or something else without having two tabs open?
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 19:22
bigboab1916 16th April 2020 at 19:33
Further to my previous post, it is possible to download the podcast as an MP3 file using the icon in the top right corner and play it on your media player.
Homunculus 16th April 2020 at 19:18
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 18:19
Statement O’Clock
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/supporters-update
Thursday, 16 April 2020, 19:00
by Rangers Football Club
So, the TRFC board are now falling in line with their manager’s earlier demands today for a full ‘forensic investigation’. They have even ‘borrowed’ his phraseology. The same board are being rather clever here in not revealing or even mentioning the damning evidence they hold, courtesy of that pesky whistle-blower.
Should the SPFL alleged villains resist such a move then who exactly will have the power to enforce this investigation – the Courts or a lynch mob heading for Hampden?
Homunculus 16th April 2020 at 19:21
'.Their Chief Executive is a lawyer and a former player..
"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Even more plaudits to the drafter/vetter if he is a lawyer: the statement is singularly free from lawyer language!
Mind you, the reference to the expense of litigation might suggest a lawyer-like practical experience!
Both Park and Gerard have demanded a criminal investigation of the SPFL although they used the synonym forensic. Perhaps another example of using big words to add spurious gravitas without quite understanding what they mean?
Or a meringue?
Homunculus 16th April 2020 at 19:18
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 18:19
Statement O'Clock
https://rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/supporters-update
=========================================
Cheers H. To my reading that appears to be just a holding statement, with which to continue cage rattling with. The SPFL have already told them where to put their demands for an independent investigation. They have asked for the evidence he claims to have.
Without producing evidence, they have not furthered their case in any way. Nice and noisy though. Just the way they like it.
40 minutes after my post?…Think they've been reading?.
The EPL is having problems with regards the end if season decision too!
Premier League clubs at loggerheads over June plan to end virus-hit season
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/apr/16/premier-league-clubs-at-loggerheads-over-june-plan-to-end-virus-hit-season?CMP=Share
I'm way behind with the blog and much water has snuck under the bridge since my last visit.
So, I have nothing to add to the topic de jour, but I do share the annoyance of the use of "So" that prefaces many responses.
Another one that gets me, is the oft used footballers' post match responses, e.g.
INTERVIEWER
" Jamie, you had a great game today and your third goal was special. You must be pleased with that.
JAMIE,
Yes, no, I thought it was a great team performance, etc.
ThomTheTim
Aye naw, it’s a pain intit?
Nice of them to wish their own fans and their families well – very insular . And it does indeed look like there was no pea in the whistle . They should be running out of toys soon .
Did I miss the SFA compliance officer issuing the results of the investigation into Rangers* application for a licence to play in Europe in 2011/12?
I believe that we are only a couple of months away from the second anniversary of the start of the investigation.
Might as well do something useful whilst we have this ongoing hiatus in football activities…..
Scottish Football needs a strong SFA compliance officer.
Billy Boyce 16th April 2020 at 19:39
Sorry Billy. I never got to your post before replying to H.
Before it gets to any courts, any evidence will have to be put before the PF by plod, for the departments consideration. As for the lynch mob……There is a lock-down, although they do like a wee dander to Hampden when it is shut.
Not much point in going when it is open right enough, as there might be a game on which doesn't require their presence.
Nah. I'm afraid its put up, or shut up, for them. Without credibility they are a busted flush.
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 20:10
Maybe they shouldn't have tried to bluff with that busted flush.
It's never good to bluff in a half arsed way. Go for it or don't.
redlichtie 16th April 2020 at 19:58
Along with the result of that investigation , the authorities could also release the results of their investigation into the propriety of having Alastair Johnston as a director . Roll them all together and include them in the independent enquiry , along with anything else that is causing grief . Nobody would object to that , would they ?
Here's a good one from the Bears Den….
"There is no doubt whatsoever that the SPFL are corrupt as f*** that's why they will never agree to an independent enquiry as it will expose them as what they are and more. How do us as a club force this enquiry?"
"I do think we we will get the independent with them planting the guy doing the investigation . i'm going with Lord Nimmo or Carloway or some other b*east protector"
My bold for irony emphasis!
99% of them seem very angry with their board for claiming to have evidence that could bring down the SPFL with the latest statement being interpreted as an indication that they have no evidence other than the Whatsapp images and accusations of bullying….
"Sounds like the start of a climb down PR piece from us. New PR guys has come in and tried to make a name for himself and completely f***ed it. Absolutely no mention of a whistleblower, which pretty much confirms it was the leaked WhatsApp messages, and is now a damp squib. Basically now begging for an independent investigation and saying they might look into the legalities. Absolutely f*** all is coming from this and we are probably now in a weaker position than we ever have been."
"Yeah, after that statement I totally agree with this. I don't even mind that we've never had anything. If we dont have something then we dont have it. But for us to make a play like this, as if we have a strong hand and are going to war, on the strength of what looks to be nothing, is an absolutely disastrous decision and an embarrassment. We've humiliated ourselves here."
ThomTheThim 16th April 2020 at 19:55
'..Another one that gets me, is the oft used footballers' post match responses, e.g.'
""""""""""""""""""""""
I wouldn't myself be too critical of people whose everyday work doesn't involve speaking into microphones answering stoopid questions from folk who have already answered the question : as in "That was a close game, Jason: it must have felt great scoring the winner with that brilliant penalty in the last minute, sure it must?"
[ eh, btw, what's with the 'snuck' ?
]
paddy malarkey 16th April 2020 at 20:16
redlichtie 16th April 2020 at 19:58
Along with the result of that investigation , the authorities could also release the results of their investigation into the propriety of having Alastair Johnston as a director . Roll them all together and include them in the independent enquiry , along with anything else that is causing grief . Nobody would object to that , would they ?
========================
Too much?…..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ExT6l4_euLI
I’ve now finished listening to the podcast. Normally, there is little I would disagree with when David offers his opinions, but I certainly do not share his views on what happened over the last week, as expressed in the first half of the podcast.
When he moved onto the future financial implications for clubs going forward during the second half of the podcast, we were back in sync.
Regarding the past week’s events, I found his views condescending, dismissive and lacking empathy with any club that voted against the resolution. Let’s take some of his quotes.
He opened with a statement that what we were all facing was “a human tragedy and financial meltdown”, which I think we can all align with as the backdrop to the situation that Scottish Football finds itself along with every other activity in the country. With that in mind ……….
He then went on to describe the no voting championship sides as an “overspending cartel or concert party”. There was no reference to “yes” voting clubs who also routinely overspend.
“There were always going to be casualties” – Beyond the shared pain that all clubs are suffering at the moment, there didn’t have to be.
On the SPFL’s conduct and accusations of bullying – “The SPFL took advice” …… “It’s normal to politik” and likened it to a “three line whip” – So he is saying that it was ok for the SPFL to pressurise clubs to vote “yes”, but not for the dissenters to canvass other like minded clubs.
“What’s particularly objectionable” ……… (names four clubs) ……… “is the faux pretend concern for the welfare of others” ………. “The faux concern is objectionable” – That’s pretty strong language to use. Perhaps those clubs did have self interest at heart, or perhaps they did have genuine concerns, but did the “yes” voters not exhibit the same self interest?
On the immediate reconstruction he describes it as “moving the deckchairs” and asks “what clubs are going to be around?” ……… “How do you accommodate all the games in a constricted period of time”
“There has to be reconstruction going forward.” – I think this referred to a more medium term aim depending on how things played out.
Then back to the impact on relegated clubs
“no one size fits all solution” ………….. “they just happened to be at the bottom of the league” ………. “the tail can’t wag the dog” ………. “It’s the betterment of the league, the sustenance of the league is the most important thing of all” ……. “very unfortunate for the teams at the bottom.” ……… “That’s the way it is” ……. “Life’s not fair.” – In other words “tough”.
The above is David’s opinion, which he is entitled to have and share, but I strongly disagree with it.
In the second half of the podcast David rightly highlighted the challenges facing clubs over the next 12 months re reduced income, contract situations, squad sizes, wage bills etc. On that we are agreed.
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 20:36
==========
Respectfully disagreeing and being able to eloquently put over your own view is one of the real plus points of this forum.
Did Mr Low genuinely expect Thistle to vote to get relegated rather than play out the fixtures ? All clubs voted on selfish lines . Luckily for some , they ended up being on the right side of the decision as to what's best for Scottish football . And I hardly think we overspend , unlike some Premiership clubs who can buy a player for an alleged £7 million whilst relying on loans from directors and other sharks to give them a chance of finishing the season . Hey ho ! Maybe we'll win a lot more games next season ( said that last year as well !).
easyJambo 16th April 2020 at 20:36
'…The above is David’s opinion, which he is entitled to have and share, but I strongly disagree with it.'
"""""""""""""""""
I was left a little bit disturbed by the, in my opinion, unwarrantedly dismissive tone that David Low adopted. I made reference the other day to SDM's 'business is business' statement as being in itself justification for ( at the time, a supposedly wealthy club) screwing another club.
Low's attitude reminded me of that, in that he makes no allowance for the extra-ordinary circumstances occasioned by Covid-19, when even a Tory government has acted against every hitherto cherished Tory principle of political economy in order to keep people alive.
A bit disappointing, really, at a time when an attitude of constructive helpfulness is called for in relation to parties innocent of any moral blame for the difficulties they face.
I note that TRFC are demanding the right to finish the season on the pitch , a day after voting to deny us that same right . What are they like ?!
paddy malarkey 16th April 2020 at 21:24
I note that TRFC are demanding the right to finish the season on the pitch , a day after voting to deny us that same right . What are they like ?!
——————————
They're like……Pitchless !
Re SEVCO latest Statement o’ Clock …
I freely admit that my contributions to this blog (the fairest, most even handed and best – I don’t contribute to any others) is very Celtic centric.
One of the aspects which attracted me, from back in the RTC days before HMRC effectively liquidated Rangers (1872 – 2012) was that it afforded me freedom of expression outside the usual partisan sites – respecting all contributors. The objectivity, humour, good natured ‘banter’ and absence of vitriol are its usps.
A lot of the SFM community seem to be of the opinion that SEVCO is ‘throwing the toys out of the pram’, and becoming ever more upset when people don’t dance to its tune. Accordingly, the utterances from the relatively new club are becoming more irrational (witness the complaint they have levied against McLennan) and disjointed.
However, I have learned, over the years, to regard their WATPism (!?) in a light hearted way (good for my soul you see) so I offer this as a response to the latest drivel:-
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” (Napoleon or was it Peter Lawell?)
Basically, in other words, when you notice he is screwing up, be kind enough to allow them to fully complete their error(sorry about the split infinitive).
Looking forward, with relish, to their next ‘threats’
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 21:43
They're like……Pitchless !
==============================
Pitchless….. and potless.
2P or not 2P. WATP!
Scottish Football needs a strong Arbroath.
The TRFC statement was as predictable as it was expected and as was stated in an earlier post it reads like a holding statement which adds nothing to previous utterances. The cards have been played and they’ve got nothing but unlike Cool Hand Luke, nothing in this case is not a cool hand.
redlichtie 16th April 2020 at 22:41
Corrupt official 16th April 2020 at 21:43 They're like……Pitchless !
==============================
Pitchless….. and potless.
2P or not 2P. WATP! …
=======
Or, they don't have a pitch to p!ss on?
As regards the new Ibrox Chairman's rather unimpressive contributions recently…
IMO, it could indicate that he is not at all close to the action around Ibrox. He could be otherwise preoccupied with trying to save his main business?
Mibbees his new 'PR expert' and others just quickly got Park's ok to issue statements/allegations/demands – without Park taking the time to review in detail and consider potential repercussions?
If Park thinks that RIFC/TRFC is a lost cause, then he would quite rightly focus all his time and attention on those businesses/investments he had a chance of saving, IMO.
The TRFC statement and the fans jumped on the bandwagon boycots, We have all seen this movie before and it ends the same as the last movie. The investigations… yes we have seen that before.
The boycots… yes we have seen this before.
The call for the governors of the games heads… yes we have seen this before.
The calls to radio stations with the cries of injustice… yes we have seen all this before.
The finger of blame pointing outwards instead of inwards… yes we have seen all this before.
Only difference this time is they are not on the pitch getting a good leathering.
Big Pink 16th April 2020 at 23:21
EJ
Podcast.sfm.scot
J
=======================
Gotcha
Thanks
EJ
The nature of David Low’s defence of the SPFL was always likely to be contentious on here. For balance, Andy Smith of the SFFA will need putting his side of things on the podcast tomorrow.
JC,
It must have snuck in there when I wasn't looking.
Useful tool to help government track virus.
Help slow the spread of #COVID19 and identify at risk cases sooner by self-reporting your symptoms daily, even if you feel well ?. Download the app https://covid.joinzoe.com/
That ThomTheTims a right wee so-and so
Big Pink 16th April 2020 at 23:55
EJ
The nature of David Low’s defence of the SPFL was always likely to be contentious on here. For balance, Andy Smith of the SFFA will need putting his side of things on the podcast tomorrow.
=======================================
I fully expected David to express those views based on what he had tweeted over the last week or so, but I think that it is fair to subject what he said to some scrutiny.
Similarly, I'd expect anyone who disagrees with any of Andy's views expressed in the later podcast to do so.
We know from experience that every word uttered on behalf of clubs, or by the MSM, is dissected to the nth degree, on blogs and message boards across the country.
Re the demands for an independent investigation into the SPFL by both Rangers and their Manager.
I for one would have welcomed an independent investigation into this organisation some time ago, but the very fact Rangers and their media pals want to cherry pick when to have one tells us just how difficult it would be be for such a thing to happen.
The Nimmo Smith investigation years ago was 'Independent' but clearly had a Terms of Reference drafted with a desire outcome in mind, with Rangers huge benefactors of the gerrymandering. As such, are Rangers wanting an investigation that has a pre-determined outcome, and if they were being honest, an outcome that says Celtic can't be awarded the league and ergo nine in a row? Let's face it, that's what it's all about.
I don't believe there is a Rangers fan who genuinely cares that much whether Hearts, Partick or whoever are relegated. After all, there are many of them who are hoping several Scottish clubs go to the wall, completely ignoring the fact their club is as much, if not more at risk than others.
As for the legal threats in their latest statement. Empty barrels make the most noise is the first phrase that comes to mind.
If Parkie permitted Peter a pitch to piss on did Peter pick the park that prickly Parkie picked?
or something.
Not listened to the podcast yet partially because like Easyjambo I found David Low's tweets and contribution to the SPFL resolution debacle somewhat unhelpful, dismissive, condescending and patronising .
It all seemed a wee bit out of character. Perhaps the lock down is getting to us all.
My hope after the effects of Covid-19 have lessened is that society can be rearranged to work for more of the population than was previously the case. That the people elected to make these decisions will take a humane approach to the situation and not get by on idiotic populism and naked ambition. Don’t hide behind a flag.
This is also my hope for Scottish football although this last week or so has been a predictable shambles. The circumstances are unprecedented and some genuine self-reflection from the authorities, certain clubs and fans and some in the media would be constructive. Improvements to the game should not be based around the commercial implications of having a minimum of four Celtic v Rangers games shown live on the TV or those clubs visiting away grounds as many times as possible per season.
UEFA has to reorganise their club competitions too. This could be third tournament below the Europa League with more consideration (any would be a start) to and guaranteed access for more clubs outside of England, Spain, Germany, Italy and France. These bigger clubs, already the wealthiest by far, need to accept less. Don’t let them tell anyone they can’t afford too.
Our Scottish clubs should consider each other as partners, first and foremost, and rivals second. Competition is important and can be achieved respectfully and without the occasional vitriol or tedious petty rivalry. I would guess all anyone wants in society or sport is fairness. Football is meaningful and simultaneously trivial. Stay safe.
https://twitter.com/ncgeehan/status/1251068889934553088?s=21
Be careful what you wish for.
Incredibleadamspark
Good post if only the powers that be ( sport and politics ) thought likewise life for everyone would be so much better . One thing that is really annoying me just now is how it is all of a sudden cool and trendy for celebreties to champion the NHS . The same celebreties who were pushing for the tories at the general election . The same tories who have systematically under funded the NHS the past 10 years and allowed their rich friends to cherrypick certain NHS services that actually are profitable to use for their on personal gain… Richard Branson is one that springs to mnd among others .
Regarding David Low ,I too thought his views were a bit skewed , he is usually very balanced, was thinking at one point if his account had been hacked !! As this point in football we need the powers that be to really stand up and lead . I know I know but more than ever they need to put things in place to safe guard our game . For me , I cant see the harm in a 14 team league , even if it was only for a couple of seasons to let teams adapt to this new age that football is facing . I can only see positives in this. In the top league it would be much better to be playing an even amount of games home and away after a split, same as bottom half . I would imagine it would be tight at the bottom and there would be a lot to play for hence decent attendances at the tail end of the season . On a bigger issue , FFP MUST be phased in , an absoloute MUST . Rangers are perilously close to going bust again , if they do ,whats to stop them repeating their wreckless financial ways once again ??? Absoloutely nothing . The authorities need to deal with the bigger picture here and do what is best for Scottish football , not for the Govan area of Glasgow. Finally , I think there should be a decent percentage of any EUFA money earned trough Champs league / Europa cup participation distributed to the clubs in the top league . I know I will get slaughterd from fellow Celtic fans for saying that but we need a competitive league . If we get a competitive league maybe just maybe other teams will start getting back into europe again . Aberdeen, Hibs , Hearts , Dundee Utd have spectacularly under achieved over the years surely there is a possibility that they could once again get their foot in the door in european football to help our cause. Big ask I know and sadly I dont think the authorities have it in them to do anything new BUT all of the clubs who are facing a bleak future , even Celtic happily sat idly by and allowed the mediocre lack lustre ( corrupt ) leadership of our game to flourish and actually work against what is best for every club in Scotland. After this is over every club need to sort out once and for all the two governing bodies that run Scottish Football especially the SFA. We are in a really dark place at the moment and where are the SFA , has Maxwell even said anything …. is he still alive ?
Ex Ludo 17th April 2020 at 11:17
https://twitter.com/ncgeehan/status/1251068889934553088?s=21 Be careful what you wish for.
========
The Toon Army has to get Riyal: the troops could soon be deserting the club again, if the Gulf between NUFC and the top 6 doesn't narrow anytime soon…
Poor jokes aside: IMO, the Internet Bampots are painfully aware that business goals trumped sporting ideals / integrity a long time ago.
For the MSM to now question the source of a UK football club buyer's wealth is risible and irrelevant – and perhaps about 20/30 years too late?
[But, the Al Sauds do make King look like an angel… relatively speaking.]
roddybhoy 17th April 2020 at 11:55
The main draw back for any 14 team format is the proportionate division of revenues. Like it or not the main revenue driver for the tv deal is the Celtic v Rangers games. The rest are filler and betting fodder outside of Scotland, while within Scotland the market is small. Its the sole reason for trying to make sure there are at least 4 per season. The number of other clubs sharing the spoils in the top flight (with crumbs flowing down) affect the other 'biggish' clubs share of the spoils. It is therefore also captured in the myriad of self interests the SPFL vote for and to an extent the SPL split off from the other leagues and subsequent reattachment, the threats during 2012 of an SPL2, the threatened withdrawal of the other top flights from the league in the aftermath, etc.
It is Adam Smith economics in sport but makes a fatal mistake. 'Clubs' represented by their majority owners are considered to be the only voice that matters in much the way landowners used to be the electorate. All other football interests have their voices silent unless it threatens the model itself,
The only realistic way to change this is to break the model. Fans will never have more economic power to flex than they do right now.
StevieBC 17th April 2020 at 11:56
'.., the Al Sauds do make King look like an angel… relatively speaking.'
""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
Any mention of Saudis in relation to football and sport makes me laugh as heartily and scornfully 31 years on from the u/16s world cup finals I laugh now at 'sporting integrity' being used in relation either to RFC of 1872 or to TRFC of 2012.
RFC of 1872 lied to the whole of Scottish Football and got away with it for years, with not a cheep from the SMSM.
TRFC are presently and from 2012 have been living a lie, with not a cheep from the SMSM.
Interesting piece in Guardian on NUFC takeover. Much to take for Scottish football as well
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/apr/16/exit-the-house-of-karrimor-enter-the-austere-and-unforgiving-house-of-saud
Phil.
https://philmacgiollabhain.ie/2020/04/17/a-choreographed-conflict-conceals-a-looming-crisis/
Shug@14.26
PMGB is strongly hinting that a Third Rangers is imminent. I know this outcome has been long predicted but this isn’t 2012. Close Bros in the best of times are not renowned for being laissez faire in their business dealings and the current situation is nowhere near that.