Leaderboard

MacBeth, A Scottish Tragedy - She (Football) should have died hereafter There would have been a time for such a word Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow Creeps in this petty pace from day to day to the last syllable of recorded time And all our yesterdays have lighted fools to dusty death (relegation) Out, out brief candle (reconstruction) Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player (Vigurs) That struts and frets his hour upon the stage And then is heard no more It is a tale told by an idiot (Doncaster) Full of sound and fury (Milne) Signifying nothing....

Why don't we just call ourselves Caledonian FC ?

I'd like to sign him A because he's a good player, but also to see the County meltdown on OTB!

Caught on video, his "downfall". http://meemsy.com/v/5592

In an industry no short in hypocrisy surely the erector of rather shabbily finished houses takes the biscuit. The man who formerly ranked second only to Terry Wogan as a sporter of dodgy hairpieces bleated long and loud on the steps of Hampden yesterday about how unfair and antidemocratic it was that two clubs were able to scupper the plans of the great majority. Surely that can't be the same man who is the last remaining original architect of the voting system that was originally designed to provide an effective veto for the ugly sisters and who was the only chairman who lined up with Celtic when the other clubs were of a mind to make the organisation more democratic earlier this season. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Scottish football's greatest hypocrite.

Just had to give this a bump. Still laughing.

Would love to see Brittain sign for all sorts of reasons. Sadly, can't see it happening.

Yeah but Rooney is a lot younger than Tokely and is scoring more goals ata similar level than McKay was at Northampton. Which suggests there may be more reasons than simple nostalgia to sign a young proven SPL goal scorer.

We could do with some cover at the back. Maybe we should sign Ross Tokely who I hear is impressing at Brora?

Ross we're just waiting on Ian Auld to add a commentary and then we're there. As soon as it's ready, we'll be in touch.

But under the proposal there would have been be no SPL, just a single league body who arrange the leagues. Teams then play games through the season based on their position at the beginning. Except come up with a proposal that gives most benefit to most teams, even through it is not perfect and get the ball rolling to get where we want to be. No point in thinking out of the box like that. But that is exactly how it seems to be phrased; So you are against the current playoffs between the second bottom in the SFL leagues and 2nd, 3rd and 4th in the league below ? If you are a SFL1 club then you should only play SFL1 clubs and not have to play against SFL2 clubs to finish the season. I don't expect you are against the playoffs, but surely you can see how that can be inferred. Think of it as the middle 8 in effect being an extended play off for the relegation and promotion places. You may believe the extended period is too long, but the intention of giving playoffs, which have been asked for, is there. You (both ?) also seem to be under the impression that I think the 12-12 to 8-8-8 is the panacea for the league. It is not and I can see that it is not perfect, some clubs will lose out on the big games, the split effects are bigger than now, there could be more chance of relegation if your form dips at the wrong time. I can see the good points of it as well, more potential opponents, a second chance at staying up if you had a bad early season, and see that it was never meant to be the solver of issues on its own. It was a concession to get the bits that everyone wants, single league body, fairer financial distribution, playoffs etc. If we had got it, then we could have had a chance to see if it would work for Scotland, just because it didn't work elsewhere doesn't automatically mean it wouldn't have worked for us. If it didn't, which I agree is not unlikely, then further change wouldn't be blocked by 2 clubs with a disproportionate ideas of their own importance.

They may have said they want a change but the sad fact is that they didn't vote for it. They may not have liked the structure that was on the table but that was part of a package which, rightly or wrongly, was the only package on offer. However, what was part of the package was a move to a 9 - 3 voting system which clearly would have made it easier to bring about change in the future. There are several on this forum defending Gilmour and MacGregor on the basis that they dislike the structure which was part of the package. Some are proposing alternatives. These alternatives may be better, but whether they are better or not is totally irrelevant to the debate - they were simply not on offer! If you wanted an alternative to either the current structure or the one in the package then you have to ask yourself, is it more likely you will get a specific structure with a 9 - 3 voting system or an 11 - 1 voting system? Frankly, it's a no brainer. If Gilmour and MacGregor wanted something different there was simply no alternative but to vote for the package which would have made change more likely in the future. There were really only 3 reasons for voting against the package: Because they think the pyramid system is a dreadful idea and no way must new blood be allowed into the league. Because they think the 11 - 1 voting system is great Because they think the current league set up is the best Gilmour and MacGregor should come clean and tell us all which of these reasons was their overwhelming reason for voting no. Yes, they may have said they want change but not only have they voted for no change, they have voted to make change a lot more difficult in the future.

I am going to say it .... yup .... I agree with IHE !!! Not sure about 14-14-14, but IHE is right, every system that could be proposed would be flawed in someone's eyes. For me, whatever the solution is, the foundation has to be simple ..... no splits or complicated realignments of leagues in mid season, no complicated self-preservationist tactics or rules, no multiple ruling bodies and a focus on turning the downward spiral in the opposite direction ... I tend to fall into the 16-16-16 camp with the addition of 6 new (ambitious) teams from juniors/HFL/South. If the likes of Caley Thistle and County can reach the SPL in 10 and 18 years respectively, then there is no reason others could not follow a similar path .... 16 teams does present a problem of only 15 home games per season as opposed to the current 18 in SFL or 19 in SPL, but maybe there could be some creative thinking on that with the establishment of an additional national cup competition or even regionalised cup competitions with home/away legs that would inevitably lead to a few derbies (and increased crowds). Failing that, if adding ambitious teams is not an option, I wonder if 20-20 might be an option? It would obviously call for 2 teams to be lost to non-league play, but with current finances and the game dying on its feet that - unfortunately - may not be as contentious, or as problematic an issue as it sounds .. go 20-22 initially and drop it to 20-20 over a few years through attrition. 2 leagues, 3up, 3 down, playoffs for a few more, pyramid system below that to allow ambitious teams a route into the 'big time', and all being run under a single organisation where each member club has a single vote and a simple majority is needed for most decisions. Youth development would also have to be taken seriously but not all clubs could afford academies so perhaps regional academies (initially) funded by the league and/or any grant funding available which could then be utilised by all clubs both big and small (assuming they did not already have their own that they chose to continue using). I know this will never happen, but its a fairly simple concept ..... These are ideas off the top of my head ... they may be good, they may be crap, but something has to change and for me the most important part is getting the foundation right and then building on that ... the rejected proposal doesnt seem to address that, but no-one else has really shouted a viable alternative from the rooftops ....... The problem is not that any of the above are bad ideas, the problem is delivering something from within the system that exists already and getting it past the 11-1 vote. As it stands we have some clubs who want a 10 team league, some who want 12 and others who want a larger league 14/18/16 or whatever. The reasons for each differs, some of it is opinion, but a great deal of it is determined by the business models under which each club currently operates....and within the SPL you probably have 3 or 4 very distinct business models based on club size, income sources, costs etc. You have the club at the top with a turnover of £50 or £60 Million all the way down to clubs with a turnover of £3 or £4 million. What seems to be widely agreed is that relegation has a huge financial impact on clubs. With that being the case then you have clubs who want to do as much as possible to "protect" their SPL status, clubs who think (arrogantly or otherwise) that they are never going to be relegation contenders and don't fear it, clubs who believe they have a business model which would survive relegation (and may be the case if they have wealthy benefactors)...and Celtic!!! That group of 12 clubs then have an opportunity to grow the games income, but in order to do so they need to open the doors to the whole (professional) game in Scotland. That then brings in the added complication of having to come up with a proposal that brings those other 30 clubs to the table. The two things most likely to appeal to the other 30 are better finances and an increased opportunity of promotion to the upper tier. Strangely, the finance issues seems to have been the one that has caused least problems with the SPL saying they were quite happy to give up £1.3 Million in the first instance...there were also guarantees that if/when finances were increased then this would be used to further level out the curve before the top league saw another penny. The other factor was always going to be tricky. How do you offer reduced risk of relegation to the (current) SPL clubs AND offer increased opportunity of promotion to (current) SFL clubs AND do all that without reducing the number of games in the season below acceptable levels? The answer to that, as far as the 12 SPL clubs were concerned (back in January) was the 12-12-18 structure. Probably not ideal in the eyes of any of the 42 clubs, but acceptable in return for everything else that came with it. Also, let's not forget that this proposal was not defeated because anyone voted against the structure. St Mirren and Ross County can play the "listening to the fans" card all they like, but their decision to vote against was based on other factors....although it seems totally unclear what those factors really were/are. The voting levels required on protected matters was always a smokescreen. I stated that before the meeting yesterday and the events and outcome of that meeting showed that I was right. Everyone around the table yesterday is a businessman and most of them will be dealing with contracts, company rules etc on a regular basis. They will be no stranger to the concept and reasons for protected matters. In fact, any ICT fans who has/had an interest in the merger of Thistle and Caley will be no stranger to them as the outcome of negotiations that allowed the merger to happen contained many...everything from what colours must be used on shirts, to which people were entitled to appoint members to the club board. These things were in place for a set period of time and were designed to "protect" certain matters which were important to those contributing to the new organisation. All of these are now gone because (although some are now honoured as tradition) with the exception of one thing......ICT fans benefit to this day from one particular protected matter, and that is the 10% voting right which is attached to just 108 company shares which are currently held by CaleyJagsTogether. You can argue the rights and wrongs of all those protected matters but the fact is that without them and without compromise then ICT would never have came in to being and we would not be where we are today. Given how difficult it was to get that agreement between two clubs should give us more of an appreciation than anyone on the need for/benefit of compromise and how difficult it will have been for the SPL to find enough common ground within 12 clubs to get the reconstruction proposal to the stage they did. We can argue the rights and wrongs of the decision taken yesterday, it's all "what if" and "what might be"....we'll never get the full answer to the first and only time will tell on the second.

just no

I like that idea! But it's perhaps more a case of: "This bar's a dive and if we stay we're gonna get our heads kicked in. Who wants to go somewhere else?" [All 12 put hands up.] "Right, votes for the Red Lion?" [10 hands] "Queens Head?" [st Mirren fan] "Blue Oyster Bar?" [County fan] "Oh well, no agreement on where to go so we'll just stay here."

^^^ I like that Monopoly analogy! Here's one for the SPL voting structure. A dozen guys are on a stag night finishing their drinks in a pub. "Right lads, do we stay here for a another pint or will we head to the next bar? Hands up we move on." (a forest of hands (ten) goes up). "Okay, that's unanimous ...10 wanting to hit the next pub. So, it's decided guys, we're staying here! Not a sufficient amount of us want to move on" !!! DEMOCRACY!??!

At the end of the day Scottish football has too many clubs. There is teams in the lower divisions getting average attendances of 400-600. Why should clubs with support of thousands even tens of thousands support clubs like this a lot of the lower league clubs should be looking at mergers or playing junior leagues. The whole of Scottish football is a joke and it will remain that way until we get new people in with a passion and love for the game who can embrace the fans opinions instead of just listening to sponsons/tv companies. Once we get the nation in love with the game again and clubs standing together instead of backstabbing and bickering through the media then the sponsors etc will come rolling in.

And under the current system it is impossible for teams to have no chance of Europe after 3/5th of the season ? The reports I have seen don't confirm either way if it was all protected measures or just the league structure. Even if it was just the league structure, then by offering the 9-3 more compromise has been given. The kudos you mention is one thing, they look good in the eyes of others and that in itself could bring in increased gates from away fans. "They helped us get a fairer share of the cash, I'll go to away games there". Fanciful I know but not impossible. And they could also be looking long term, giving up a little now, getting more overall income back into the game so they end up with more, remember 1% of something is better than 100% of nothing. Not with the current set up of 2 clubs being able to block anything for the other 40. But going to 12-12-18 with all the other things it would have brought may well have given us the stepping stone needed to get a set up in place that would have given us that. Of course if 12-12-18 had gone through, got Scottish football on a stable setting, given the excitement and competition we need, improved our UEFA and FIFA rankings, then been changed to a 16 team top division as that was the next step forward, there would still be those who say it would be a failure as it had to change. It may not be perfect, I have never said it was, but it seems to me to be right for right now. Something else may be better for another time.

What like it has been for the last 15 years ? Who said it couldn't be changed for 3 years ? Who ever told you that was wrong. What was in the original proposal was that any structure changes within 3 years needed a larger majority than most other changes. If everyone wanted to change after the first year it could be done. From the reports, even that was removed and changes to structure would be on the same majority as everything else so the single sticking point that St Mirren gave as the reason for saying no was removed and they still said no. But to get the good points above that would help the lower end, there had to be compromise from the higher end, as they would lose out. You were never going to get the money redistribution without there being something in it for those giving up the biggest share of money. So you couldn't just cherry pick what you like as not everyone would cherry pick the same things and so there would have been no chance of getting what you want. And will you take Stuart Gilmour with them ? The St Mirren vote seems to me to have been about them being convinced they would have been in the middle 8 nearly every season, and then losing out on potential home games with the big teams, Celtic, ICT etc. Thing is if that is their normal position then they likely miss out on that game anyway, and if we went with a 16 team league, once home and away, then they definitely miss it. Yes 12-12-18 is not perfect, but there is no perfect solution for everyone. I posted some thoughts on a possible format last It gave a top 16 with playoffs at top and bottom, and although some here liked some of it, there were some points that probably would never be agreed on by enough teams. This was a chance to get the bits that most fans want, fairer distribution of money, playoffs, pyramid system, with a compromise on how we got there and making it easier to tweak later if it wasn't working. It seems to me some teams, and people, couldn't see that we needed to take a little pain in the short term, to make it better long term. From my post No.65: The split just now is only for 5 games which is ~13% of the season. The proposed split is for 14 games which is ~39% of that season. The two splits are completely incomparable. How can you prevent teams from having a shot a European qualification after only 3/5ths of the season? Absolute madness. Also the split in the SPL is pre-defined you don't know who it will be exactly but you know it will contain 6 SPL clubs in each section meaning by virtue of being an SPL club you will play SPL teams for the whole season. This proposed idea meant that you could start the season in the SPL have any chance of a late push removed and to then finish your SPL season playing against SFL1 clubs every second week. The 11-1 system used to protect things in the new structure means change is effectively prevented look at how well this voting structure has prevented change in the SPL all these years. The only concession made was to change the 9-3 regarding the structure of the league only and not the other 11-1 protected items in the package. I don't see anything in it for the teams that are giving up money. Credit to them for attempting to do so but I am yet to see a benefit for them. The new structure has 1 less home game for them than the current SPL. The money is redistributed down the leagues as well. So income is lowered on both fronts there for the top clubs. There is the potential for an increased chance of relegation so again the SPL clubs near the bottom could lose out and again lose money. This new system is not going to significantly increase gates or commercial income to cover these losses. Comparing to a 16 team league is irrelevant as it will never be implemented.

The current system (not just the league structure) is rotten to the core and we desparately need change. What is wrong with the system is evidenced by the fact that clubs were given the option of all or nothing. Obviously clubs might be for a change in the voting structure and against the restructuring proposals but were simply not given the option of voting separately on the issues. In my view, the current system with the 11 - 1 vote for change means that no meaningful change is ever going to happen. I appreciate that a lot of fans don't fancy the league structure as proposed, but frankly, that was just a side issue in this sorry state of affairs. Voting for change today would have seen a change to the voting structure, the development of a pyramid structure and the first steps towards a much more sensible structure for the game. OK, so with that comes a league reconstruction which a lot of folk don't like but let's face it, there is no consensus around what folk actually do like. What was wrong with giving it a try? It just might have worked! And if it didn't work, at least we would then have the mechanism in place to change it. All this opportunity for change has been lost because 2 club chairmen have messed up big time. And please don't give me this crap about Uncle Roy standing up for his principles and listening to the fans - since when have the County fans been in favour of the 11 - 1 voting system? I've had a lot of respect for MacGregor in the past but that's gone I'm afraid. He's sold Scottish football down the river. Rangers will soon be back at the top table and it will back to square one. A sad day for Scottish Football IMHO.

I am glad this has failed and well done to the 2 chairmen that listened to their fans and voted no.

I disagree that the game is dying. In the last two days we have had two incredibly exciting semi-finals, this seasons SPL has been incredibly competitive regarding the race for Europe/Top six. The 12-12-18 would not have led to the race to win the SPL being more competitive, Celtic would still have won it comfortably. With regards to relegation, over the course of 14 games, would Partick, Morton, Falkirk and Livingston (Current SFL1 top four) really have enough in their squad to beat the likes of St Mirren, Hearts and Hibs? I doubt it. I excluded Dundee as they are not really SPL standard and this would probably lead to just the 1up 1down we currently have. The split just now is only for 5 games which is ~13% of the season. The proposed split is for 14 games which is ~39% of that season. The two splits are completely incomparable. I have no issue with the current split in the league. The 8-8-8 split is seriously flawed. I feel the cash distribution needs to be changed but not because Dunfermline are in financial difficulty, that is through their own mis-managament and should not be the sole catalyst for change. I fully believe it should be altered as just now it is completely unfair and aimed at keeping all of the money in the top league and most of that swallowed up by Celtic. Dunfermline can only blame themselves for their problems. Also Aberdeen are responsible for not binning the 11-1 earlier in the season as they thought they would come second and thus collect the 2nd place cash pot. So Stewart Milne only has himself to blame for a 10-2 vote killing of 12-12-18. This will also not lead to Sevco being moved up the leagues to compensate. They will take their place in SFL 2 next year and the reconstruction will not be in place for next season.

Stewart Milne hasn't got a leg to stand on. It was him and his club that stopped the 11-1 majority vote from being changed earlier in the season. Ironically enough, if he had voted for it then, league reconstruction would have been passed through today. Despite the many good parts of the plan (redistribution of money, playoffs, pyramid structure) the abomination of the planned splits, especially the middle 8, was ridiculous. How can you expect clubs to be able to sell season tickets at the start of the year not knowing what mini-league they would be in. Here you go guys, get your season tickets, we might have another game against Celtic, we might have one against Morton. Who knows! For the likes of Dundee this year, who knew they weren't going to make the top 8, they could have sat back, made sure they avoided suspensions, injuries etc and basically only turn up for the last part of the season. And the likes of Ross County this year wouldn't have made the top 8 and look where they are now! And it was a farce that if the whole thing DID get voted through and it turned out to be a complete disaster, nothing could be changed for 3 years. Personally I think we should retain the current league structure but introduce the good ideas: redistribution of money, playoffs, the pyramid structure, one governing body, and the 9-3 voting majority. The current split has generated plenty of excitement over the years. Granted, the last 5 games can be meaningless if you are in the bottom half and have already secured survival, but think of the excitement of not knowing who would make the top 6 in the previous 33 games before it. Hopefully now this means Doncaster will be resigning. I will personally drive him and Regan back to wherever the hell they came from.

I can't believe how many people are disappointed with this outcome. Thankfully this ridiculous idea has been binned and hopefully will lead to Neil Doncaster leaving his post and somebody willing to select the positive aspects of the proposal into a sensible reconstruction idea taking his place.

well done ross co and st mirren :clapoverhead: football as it should be. determine your own fate over the length of a season. imagine finishing 9th out of 12 and due to losing players to injury, team hitting a bad patch, getting relegated. what a crock of sh1t no stupid reset of points, no mini league and no play off's which are only to fleece the paying customer. remember aberdeen in the plays off some years ago. worst games of football ever seen. 2 teams not wanting to lose, playing on rock hard , bumpy pitches and players thinking of summer hols if dundee were better prepared this season, no fault on their part due to the dithering over newco, maybe relegation would have gone to the wire like top six, euro place, 2nd spot. best spl in years

How come his brother looks like Wallace & Gromit though?