DoofersDad

According to the SPL the expiring TV deal was conditional upon 4 old firm derbies a season so there is no TV deal as things currently stand. And doesn't this just illustrate the sheer incompetence of people running the game in this country! How on earth do the powers that be get away with negotiating a contract that is dependent on 2 particular teams both being in the top 6 for four consecutive seasons? An interesting scenario would have been if there was an old firm game immediately before the split with Rangers needing to win to get a top 6 slot. Would Celtic have thrown the game in order to ensure the TV contract was not invalidated? This just illustrates that we must have change.

I think 12th man makes a very good point. If a club is successful in Div 1 without the boost of OF gates and the SPL TV money then clearly they can produce a good performance on the park with a relatively limited budget. On that budget they can also be pretty competetive with the SPL clubs and results in cup matches demonstrate season after season. Uncertainty about TV income has nothing whatsoever to do with it. The club getting promoted could chose to keep the same budget that it had whilst playing in the SFL. Playing in the SPL should boost their income through bigger gate receipts, more television income and bigger sponsorship income. If they are good enough to win the SFL there is no specific reason to assume that unless they increase their budget that they will drop straight down again, but if they do, they will do so with money in the bank. The reason clubs often struggle financially in the SPL is that they stretch themselves too much in a bid to gain further success at the next level. What is required is a sense of realism from the Board and the fans of what it is sensible to expect. Some years things will come together on the pitch and some years they won't and that will often have less to do with the budget detail and more to do with the way players develop as individuals and gel as a team, whether they get injured, whether we get the tactics right and whether we get the luck of decisions going our way at crucial times etc. Bottom line for ICT is that if we budget on the basis that we have some God given right to be in the SPL as currently constitued, then we will struggle.

What a complete and utter shambles! I have never met Kenny Cameron but some who have are saying that he is a decent, honourable man who very much has the interests of the club at heart. I respect that opinion and it may be that calls for his resignation following his statement on Friday are misplaced, but I remain to be convinced. Whilst all the media focus and public interest was on the decision of where Newco were to be playing next season, we are now seemingly being told that our Chairman's comments were not about that decision but about league reconstruction. Given that there has been no debate about the reconstruction proposals and, as far as I am aware, no previous statement from the club about them , it does seem extraordinary to say the least that Mr Cameron should come out with such an outburst on the back of the Newco vote. His statement may reflect that he and the club support the kind of reform the fans want to see but it certainly didn't come out that way. At best, the inept way Mr Cameron has handled this matter must raise questions about the way the club communicates with the the media and with supporters. But if this was just a monumental communications own goal, the club need to accept there is now an urgent need for far more transparency about what is going on. Those of us who have been critical of Mr Cameron don't wish to be critical but would rather support the club in securing the long term future of the club and good quality football at the TCS. But how can we do that other than by blind faith if all the evidence points to decisions being made by backroom deals rather than proper consultation. I have to say I am far from clear what the SFL clubs were actually voting for on Friday. I understand they were considering Newco's application and decided, quite appropriately to admit them to the league at the bottom tier. There should be no argument about that. I also understand that there is a view (strongly held by some in the game) that this decision will lead a number of clubs within the Scottish game facing significant financial problems. It appears that as a consequence of this, the SFL clubs were also asked to vote upon proposals for restructuring and that they rejected them and it now appears it was this rejection that apparently led to our Chairmen's controversial statement. This is where I start to have difficulty with what is going on. I have seen nothing in the media about what the vote was in relation to these proposals. We have heard what the vote was in relation to Newco but not about the restructuring proposals. Can anyone tell me what the vote was? Indeed, was there actually a vote about these proposals completely separate from the Newco vote? Next, where have these proposals come from and what consultation has there been? The statement from the football authorities that appeared on the St Mirren website made interesting reading but suggested that the proposals have been the result of discussions over the past 2 years. Really! Who has been discussing them? It seems like just yesterday Doncaster and others were pushing as hard as they possibly could to get a 10 team top flight and now mysteriously, just as Rangers go down the tubes, we are led to believe that these self same people are anxious to put forward reform that, far from reducing the number of teams in the top flight, proposes that the number increase first to 14 and then to 16 clubs. Further, despite the fact that these plans have apparently been in gestation for a couple of years, they suddenly emerge and are put before the SFL clubs just a couple of days before they vote on Newco's application. Even more intriguing is that their rejection results in our Chairman suggesting the vote has meant a once in a lifetime opportunity has been lost and the game has been thrown into disarray. Come on, Mr Cameron! Just what do you take us for? It seems pretty clear that a lot has been going on behind the scenes that the fans have been completely shut out from and there appears to be no wish to involve the paying public in decisions around the structure of the game that they pay to watch. Let's be clear about what the issues are here. Firstly Rangers Oldco are going into liquidation and the appropriate authorities will deal with that. Oldco will not be playing in the Scottish league structure again and we can consign them to the history books. Newco has been established and due process has been followed which places them in SFL Division 3. However, a consequence of this may be that the financial futures of a number of clubs is put in jeopardy and that therefore the need for reform that many of us have argued for over the years is now belatedly seen to be required by those who are charged with running the Scottish game. So how should this reform proceed? Well, for a start it should not proceed on the back of hastily drawn up proposals on which there has been no debate. Kenny Cameron's suggestion that the SFL Chairmen's rejection of the proposals represented the loss of a once in as lifetime opportunity must rank as one of the most stupid statements of all time. Let's just step back and take stock. All clubs in Scottish football (and not just in the SPL and SFL) should be considering what the current situation means for their clubs. They should be considering what the financial implications are but also consulting with their supporters to consider what their aspirations are for their clubs. For instance, are Buckie Thistle happy to play their football locally in the Highland league or would they wish to be part of a pyramid system which would give them the opportunity to play at a higher level? Do fans of the bigger clubs such as current SPL clubs want to watch games against the bigger clubs 4 times a year or would we rather be in a bigger division and watch a wider range of teams twice a year? There need be no mad rush to take forward this debate even if there is felt to be a need to have things in place for next season. What is wrong with a consultation period of, say, 4 months to take us through to mid November followed by the development of specific proposals based on that consultation with a further period of consultation on the proposals? A new structure could be in place for next season if there is a genuine willingness to change. Indeed I would have thought that such a route map would be very much in the interests of those who seem to want to use whatever underhand method possible to get Rangers back in the top flight as soon as possible. If the consultation resulted in a scrapping of the separate SPL and SFL and the creation of a new league which better reflected the wider needs of Scottish football, then there would need to be a process agreed for how those places were filled. Let us suppose for the sake of argument that the consultation resulted in a top tier of 16 clubs. How would it be decided who the 16 should be? I, and many others have been arguing that Newco should not be admitted to the SPL or SFL Div 1 because places should be allocated on merit and in line with the leagues' rules of promotion. And as Newco have no record of playing, they clearly cannot justify a place on those grounds. But with a new league set up, the principle of merit would still pertain but the promotion aspect wouldn't. One may say that in the normal run of things, that if the current set up of 12 clubs was to be changed next season to 16 clubs, the new league would contain the current 12 SPL clubs and the top 4 in the SFL. But if Newco (or any other club in the current Div 2 or 3) demonstrated from their league and cup performances that they merited a place then it would be open to the new structure to consider that. An option might be, for instance, for the winners of Div 2 and 3 to have a play off with the winner of that having a play off against the team coming 4th in Div 1. I see no reason why there cannot be sensible and open discussion around the future of Scottish football and therefore I remain extremely sceptical about what has been going on behind the scenes and the motivations of those involved. Are people solely concerned with their own personal positions or are they wanting what is best for Scottish football? The way these new proposals have suddenly come to light and the complete absence of public consultation regarding them is simply not acceptable. Mr Cameron's angry denounciation of the SFL Chairmen's apparent rejection of the proposals suggests that he has been heavily involved in the development of these proposals and is himself swimming in murky waters. I would like to believe that Mr Cameron is a man of integrity with the best wishes of this club at heart, but in order to convince me, I need to know what is going on and what his role has been in these new proposals. His statement, whether it has been misconstrued or not, has angered a great many people and has done significant damage to this club. It is now time for Mr Cameron to tell us what is going on so that we, the paying fans of this club, can work with him and the Board to ensure we get the structural reform so desparately needed to secure the long term future and prosperity of ICT and Scottish football in general.

I think I agree with Fraz although he may think I don't! I may be totally disillusioned with our chairman tonight but the chairman is not ICT. We, the supporters are. Chairmen, managers, and players will come and go but as long as there are fans to cheer the team on there will be a club. However angry we may be with our chairman, now is not the time to stop supporting our team. Sporting integrity is not maintained by deserting your club because of a foolish statement made by the club chairman, it is maintained by staying, supporting your club and making your views known.

It's time everyone got behind Kenny Cameron .... .....and pushed him out the door.

Surely it hasn't escaped your notice that the SFL teams actually voted in their own financial self-interest? Every one of them will get 2 home sellouts against Rangers plus a likely SFL TV deal and improved sponsorship. The only people who have voted for 'sporting integrity' at the direct expense of their own self interest were ICT and 9 other SPL teams. No, it's not escaped my attention and in a previous post I made that very point in saying that this would probably more than offset the financial impact of any loss of TV money for the smaller clubs. However it is not straightforward and whilst your statement implies the smaller clubs will have a considerable windfall from having Newco in the same division, others were arguing that for Newco to be in Div 3 would spell financial disaster for these same clubs. From a financial perspective I suspect none of the clubs really knew how this would affect them financially so it would be difficult to know whether voting one way or another was in their financial interests or not. The point here is twofold. Firstly the SFA and SPL were telling the SFL clubs that it was very much in their interests both financially and structurally to put Newco in Div 1. The SFL clubs did not buy that for whatever reason. Secondly there is the point that is increasingly forgotten in all of this that Newco are a new club and new clubs join in at the bottom as a matter of principle. That's what the SFL clubs have voted for regardless of whether they accepted the arguments of Doncaster, Cameron that to do so would put Scottish football into disarray. That has to be the correct decision based on principles.

I've made 2 or 3 posts calling for Doncaster to go. I repeat that tonight, but this time he can take our Chairman with him. His statement is wrong on just about every level and, like many others I am embarrased to be associated with the club tonight. Let's look at some of the things Mr Cameron has said today. He states "Scottish football was at a crossroads today in terms of what was on the table for all clubs regarding reorganisation, financial distribution and a road map that would have taken the game forward. But this has now been thrown in to disarray by this decision" What he is saying here is that the clubs of the 3 divisions of the SFL have destroyed the opportunity to move the game forward with their vote today. He is saying it is OK for the teams in the SPL to vote for sporting integrity but nothing short of a disgrace for teams in the SFL to do so. He goes on to say "A once in a lifetime opportunity to bring forward change may well have been lost." But why? Is he saying that he and others were only prepared to discuss restructuring and other changes if Newco were placed in Division 1? Clearly if there is an appetite for change then it matters not one jot whether Newco are in Division 1, Division 3, the SPL or the Govan Sunday league. The opportunity for change is only lost if the clubs refuse to work together for that change. It really is contemptible that he is acting as Doncaster's stooge in this. There are two issues which should be competely separate. One is Newco's application to join the SFL and the other is league reconstruction. His statement also says "There was an opportunity on the table, in terms of the joint agreement tabled at today’s meeting for us all to come together and a genuine willingness to improve the game substantially over the coming years." But if there is a genuine willingness, there will still be opportunity to take things forward. What will have damaged that willingness to work together for change is not the principled vote by the SFL chairmen, but the ICT chairman having the brass neck to accuse them of putting proposals into disarray because they voted on a basis of sporting integrity just as he had apparently done earlier. What his disgraceful remarks today mean is that he hadn't the guts to vote the way he wanted but is slating the chairmen of smaller clubs for not doing his dirty work for him. Why on earth would any of the other chairmen want to work with him when he treats them with such contempt? Mr Cameron has done the game in Scotland and this club in particular a grave disservice. He should have welcomed the vote to admit Newco into the SFL and accepted the SFL Chairmen's decision to vote for entry at Division 3 level. He should then have welcomed the fact that the Newco saga was now settled in terms of where they will play this season and then called for all clubs to put that behind them and work together for the restructuring Scottish football so desparately needs. That would have demonstrated some humility and leadership. Instead he has alienated ICT from most of the other clubs and has made the task of obtaining a consensus on the way forward that much more difficult. May I suggest that the first item on the agenda for the Emergency Board meeting should the appointment of a new Chairman?

Surprised there isn't a bit of discussion about the proposals for reform issued jointly by the 3 Scottish football bodies today. Details on the BBC at http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/18795597. Many have been calling for reform for a while but there have been few sensible proposals coming from the authorities. Now they come up with this plan 2 days before the SFL decide what do with Newco's application and it appears that the ploy here is that somehow these plans are only viable if Newco go into division 1. That, of course, is absolute nonesense so hopefully these proposals will not deflect the SFL chairmen doing their duty and either not accepting a Newco application at all or insisting they go to division 3. One would have thought the authorities would have got the Newco situation sorted out first and then launched discussions regarding reform. Is there no end to the ineptness of those who run Scottish football?

Ah. I should have put one of the or thingies at the end.

If Celtic sell out the generous allocation they get in the first place at TCS is there any reason within the rules of the SPL or the TV contracts that would prevent a live feed to Parkhead where it could be watched live on the big screen? Entry money shared by both clubs could potentially boost revenues. It's a fact that football has been incredibly backward at using modern technology and there should surely be some mileage in making this facility available routinely. Of course it will put some people off going to the away matches if they could watch back home on the big screeen but many who go to away games love the atmosphere and the day out or simply live closer to the venue than they do to Inverness. For those going to watch on the big screen different audience rules could apply. With no opposition support and no match on the park what would there be to stop fans being able to have a drink whilst watching the game thereby further boosting revenue. With a bit of cash going on refreshments rather than on train fares etc, fans could end up spending less time and money but still getting a good afternoon out with more of their money actually going to the club . It would surely attract many who don't currently go to away matches. You could have a fans five a side competition running at half time and other little entertainments on the pitch for the youngsters.

Also, Sky are a commercial enterprise. Why would they say anything to anyone until they get round the negotiating table?

I can't see any reason for Celtic to get stronger. They have had a clear road into Europe for years and the demise of Rangers doesn't change that. What the demise of Rangers will mean is that they will have no real challenger for the domestic title and this, if anything will weaken them. It might lead to a strengthening of some other teams as their chances of playing in Europe improve. There may be a little narrowing of the gap domestically but I can't see anyone making an impact on Europe.

At least that will mean no more players should get injured.

Maybe with Rangers not being in the SPL next season 2 things will happen. 1. Local Rangers fans deprived of Premier league action will go along and support ICT when they play Celtic. And who knows, even when they aren't! 2. The occasional supporters who might go to watch one or other of the old firm will have no choice this year. If they want to watch ICT play a big team they only have Celtic. In addition, if we are playing a more attractive brand of football and having a bit of success we may have an increase in gates next season. No doubt I'm clutching at straws here but we just might fill both the North and Main stand when Celtic come calling. We certainly should be able to. Why can't football fans be like rugby fans and then we wouldn't need segregation and this debate would be irrelevant.

But when exactly did doubles become a game for players who aren't good enough to play singles? I remember when all the top players used to do doubles too, and would even win their singles title and then play the doubles final the same afternoon. Those were the days. And no tie-breaks either! The game has changed though and the old serve and volley game is no longer a viable tactic - even on grass. We now get the cat and mouse rallies from the back of the court which can be entertaining but it does make the game longer and more demanding of the players. The top players simply have not got the physical reserves for lengthy matches in both singles and in doubles. But a title is a title. Personally I prefer wathching the doubles and no doubt there are some players who prefer playing doubles to singles. It is not necessarily that they are not good enough to play singles, it is just that different qualities are required.

Yes, I was going to point that omission out to you but you beat me to it.

Well, we've already had an English player winning the men's doubles at wimbledon today and becoming the first Brit to win a mens doubles title for 76 years so hopefully Andy can follow suit tomorrow and get the Scots into the record books. Jonathan Marray's achievement is actually quite remarkable. He got a wildcard entry and has had 4 five set matches and has beaten 4 of the top 9 seeds in order to win the title. I've a good feeling about tomorrow. As Ronaldo says, Murray can beat Federer and has a pretty good record against him. There will be a lot of pressure on Federer as winning the title will mean he equals the record of the most ever wimbledon men's singles titles. However, whatever happens tomorrow, my nomination of sporting achiement of the week goes to the New Zealeander Bob Charles, the left handed golfer who yesterday fired a 66 in a European Senior Tour event. Charles is now 76 years old and therefore shot a round 10 less than his age! This beat the previous record for a tour round (which he held) by an incredible 5 shots. It's quite unbelievable. As I approach retirement I am happy if I shoot 9 holes in less than my age. Good on you, Bob. Whatever it is you're on, will you send me some?

I signed a one year contract in Inverness in 1975 and was looking forward to my stay. I'm still here.

Thanks for the correction. Sounds a bit unfair but if that is the way it is then it at least removes an obstacle to Newco going into division 3.

It might be reasonable to assume that in accepting Newco's application, the SFL will, at the same time, decide where they will place them. If, by that time, there is a vacancy in division 1 they may simply place them there and bow to the pressure of the SFA and the TV companies. It does not need Newco actually to apply for division 1. Of course, a further complication is that if Newco are placed in division 3, who then fills the vacancy created by either Dundee or Dunfermline moving to the SPL and then who goes from Div 3 to 2? It is not as simple as saying that the teams which lost the play off finals move up, because who is to say that the team the promoted club beat in the first round of matches would not also have beaten the runners up. They really haven't got long to sort this out and without doubt, sticking Newco in the first devision is the easy option and is what the big players in this want to happen. I think it is far from certain that Newco will be in division 3 next season. More than ever, it needs supporters to pressure their clubs to ensure that a Newco placement into Division 1 does not happen but instead to have them placed in the bottom tier.

It is certainly a very interesting statement both in what it says and what it doesn't say. It is well worth reading. There is a lot of information clearly set out about the way the TV deals would work out in various scenarios. Stenhousemuir conclude they will stand to lose £50k if Newco go into division 3 but significantly less than that if they go into division 1. Indeed they suggest they may actually be better off because this would involve a TV deal if Newco are in division 1 but not if they are in division 3. That makes sense but what I find extraordinary is that the statement makes no reference to the increased revenue the club will get from playing Newco 4 times in the season in division 3. Their share of the receipts at Ibrox will be considerable and clearly the crowd for the 2 home games will be massively boosted due to the away support taking all their allocation plus a lot of local interest in the fixture. Some additional overheads will go with this but surely the net result of all this would more than compensate for the loss of £50k TV revenue. I smell a rat. What will really threaten teams like Stenhousemuir is for the league structure to be opened up to create a pyramid structure as in England. This would be good for Scottish football as it has been in England because there are good junior sides who are, without doubt, better than many of the perenial under-achievers of the 3rd division. Perhaps the deal here is that if if Newco's bid for Division 1 is supported, there will be no radical overhaul of the Scottish game. After all, if Newco are in Division 1 this season, they are likely to be in the SPL next season - the OF will be reunited and the TV companies will be happy. And isn't that what is important here?

I note Stewart Regan is an anagram of "e Rangers tw*t".

Maybe other businesses will do better as they will get trade from all the people who stay out of town when Rangers fans come in to town.

Doncaster is not the only one who doesn't get it. In his statement, Green said he was disappointed that their application to "rejoin" the SPL had been rejected. Rangers Newco have never been in the SPL (or any other for that matter) and therefore it was simply not possible to rejoin. His statement should have said that he was disappointed the SPL chairmen had put footballing integrity first and had rejected his club's application to join a league they have absolutely no right to be a part of. Mr Green, I'm available to write your press statements if you wish - and seeing as its you, I'll waive my usual fee.

First Whyte, then Green then Brown and now Black. What a sorry picture this paints.