Sign in to follow this  
tm4tj

Coronavirus - Season on hold

Recommended Posts

...and those in charge of this task force for reconstruction (self preservation) are...representing the two clubs at the bottom of the premiership.

You couldn't make it up, no one would believe it.

  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolute joke if hearts do t go down rotten all season same as Patrick deserve all they get simply for been gash! Budge is as much of a clown as the owner of super coop the bigoted dug just take what u deserve u old boot your team were gash all season ! Hopefully she'll come for Robbo to try bail her out of the championship ! Whole things shady as fcuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, DWH said:

The fact that Ann Budge is anywhere near this committee is, no matter which club you support, just plain wrong.

Scottish football continues digging the hole.............................

Really hope they get their arses sued................................don't care who by.

If most of the major players get what they want it then leaves Rangers championing an appeal if they follow up on their smoking gun claim. They're not shy of a legal battle albeit King has gone but would it stop prize money being paid out in the top league until any legal challenge was concluded. Ironically with the biggest overheads outwith Celtic they can ill afford to wait for prize money. I'd be surprised if the authorities don't have a disclaimer in place to ensure payments kill any likelihood of legal proceedings. 

Share this post


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

I hope I have to eat my words but simply cannot see reconstruction happening. Firstly, 11 out of 12 premiership clubs have to vote in favour and secondly the current premiership clubs need to give up sponsorship money to accommodate a bigger league. What Dundee hope to gain by changing their vote is simply beyond me.

I completely agree. ICT benefiting from reconstruction would be amazing. However I simply can't see it happening with a required 11-1 vote to carry it and TV money then being split between more clubs. The one immutable truth that can be drawn from last week's vote is money is everything to Scottish clubs, even sporting integrity can go hang when it comes to the crunch. 

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

Wouldn't be surprised to see a 16 team SPL next year.

You could well be right. It would give us a better chance of staying up too if it happens. 

What would happen to the split as there would be 30 games in two rounds. Would the top 8 and bottom 8 only then play each other once after a split?

That would leave 26 teams. Promote Brora and Kelty and have a 16 14 14 set up?

After the last week, anything could happen!

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Alan Simpson said:

Absolute joke if hearts do t go down rotten all season same as Patrick deserve all they get simply for been gash! 

Partick beat us home and away.....

  • Funny 1

Share this post


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

Partick beat us home and away.....

Fat lot of good that did them then.

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, cif73 said:

I completely agree. ICT benefiting from reconstruction would be amazing. However I simply can't see it happening with a required 11-1 vote to carry it and TV money then being split between more clubs. The one immutable truth that can be drawn from last week's vote is money is everything to Scottish clubs, even sporting integrity can go hang when it comes to the crunch. 

The last time there was a vote was it not Aberdeen and Ross County that voted against?  Although Roy Macgregor is wanting everyone to work together I would not trust him!

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, IBM said:

The last time there was a vote was it not Aberdeen and Ross County that voted against?  Although Roy Macgregor is wanting everyone to work together I would not trust him!

It was Ross County and St Mirren that voted down reconstruction last time. 

  • Thanks 1
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, cif73 said:

I completely agree. ICT benefiting from reconstruction would be amazing. However I simply can't see it happening with a required 11-1 vote to carry it and TV money then being split between more clubs. The one immutable truth that can be drawn from last week's vote is money is everything to Scottish clubs, even sporting integrity can go hang when it comes to the crunch. 

If the increase in the number of clubs resulted in Rangers and Celtic playing each other less that 4 times a year, then not only would restructuring mean more clubs to share the money,  but there would probably be less money to share.  The amount of TV money is dependent on viewing figures and the harsh reality is that more people tune in to watch The Rangers play Celtic than ICT play Livingston.  

In reality I can't see all but one of the current Premiership sides voting for a significant increase in the size of the division although increasing it to 14 might actually work well.  If the split occurred after each team had played each other home and away (i.e. after 26 matches) then a top 6, bottom 8 split would allow each team to play the other teams in their sections once more both home and away.  This would mean that the top 6 would play a further 10 games for a total of 36 and the bottom 8 would play  a further 14 for a total of 40.  The beauty of this is that you avoid the somewhat unfair inevitability of the current system where some teams will play one or two teams 3 times away and only 1 at home and vice-versa.Splitting it 7:7 so that all play 38 games would also work but the 6:8 split means that there is less chance of problems with fixture congestion for the top teams who may be involved both in Europe and in the latter stages of the cup competitions.

If there is any chance of getting 11 of the Premiership sides to agree to this then surely it is now.  The Rangers have come out very strongly indeed that it is morally wrong to vote to relegate a club.  By rejecting an increase in the number in the Premiership, they would, in effect, be voting to relegate Hearts.  Of course, it is not beyond the realms of possibility the The Rangers would stab Hearts in the back but they would now be under huge moral pressure to support such a proposal.  The proposal would mean that no club was relegated following an incomplete season and that, surely is right and proper.

There is a real opportunity for some sanity to emerge from all this mess.  But this is the SPFL we are talking about and therefore I very much doubt that sanity will prevail. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Robert said:

Partick beat us home and away.....

I saw both games and they were good for it.

Much more galling for them though is the fact that, in a highly competitive league, they were bottom by only 2 points with a game in hand. Their game in hand was because of their good run in the Tunnocks Caramel Wafer Challenge Cup. I think it would be a complete travesty if they were relegated.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, cif73 said:

I saw both games and they were good for it.

Much more galling for them though is the fact that, in a highly competitive league, they were bottom by only 2 points with a game in hand. Their game in hand was because of their good run in the Tunnocks Caramel Wafer Challenge Cup. I think it would be a complete travesty if they were relegated.

As much as I dislike Partick and Ian Mccoll I agree with you.

Share this post


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

If the increase in the number of clubs resulted in Rangers and Celtic playing each other less that 4 times a year, then not only would restructuring mean more clubs to share the money,  but there would probably be less money to share.  The amount of TV money is dependent on viewing figures and the harsh reality is that more people tune in to watch The Rangers play Celtic than ICT play Livingston.  

In reality I can't see all but one of the current Premiership sides voting for a significant increase in the size of the division although increasing it to 14 might actually work well.  If the split occurred after each team had played each other home and away (i.e. after 26 matches) then a top 6, bottom 8 split would allow each team to play the other teams in their sections once more both home and away.  This would mean that the top 6 would play a further 10 games for a total of 36 and the bottom 8 would play  a further 14 for a total of 40.  The beauty of this is that you avoid the somewhat unfair inevitability of the current system where some teams will play one or two teams 3 times away and only 1 at home and vice-versa.Splitting it 7:7 so that all play 38 games would also work but the 6:8 split means that there is less chance of problems with fixture congestion for the top teams who may be involved both in Europe and in the latter stages of the cup competitions.

If there is any chance of getting 11 of the Premiership sides to agree to this then surely it is now.  The Rangers have come out very strongly indeed that it is morally wrong to vote to relegate a club.  By rejecting an increase in the number in the Premiership, they would, in effect, be voting to relegate Hearts.  Of course, it is not beyond the realms of possibility the The Rangers would stab Hearts in the back but they would now be under huge moral pressure to support such a proposal.  The proposal would mean that no club was relegated following an incomplete season and that, surely is right and proper.

There is a real opportunity for some sanity to emerge from all this mess.  But this is the SPFL we are talking about and therefore I very much doubt that sanity will prevail. 

I can see a 6:8 working. I had also thought about the busier cup/European schedule that the bigger teams typically have and how it might help address that. The lack of home/away symmetry with 3 games against opponents pre-split is also a fair point. If they treated this structure as one-season only, then the bottom 8 leading to 3 relegated teams might make the post-split fixtures a less desperate free for all for survival. I suspect any reconstruction is unlikely to be for one season anyway given the upheaval. Here's hoping.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless there has been some shady deal behind the scenes, I can't see Partick taking the SPFL's acceptance of Dundee's changed vote lying down.  There are 3 issues here.

The first is the obvious one of whether the rules allow for a club to retract their vote and to subsequently vote differently.

The second is whether the rules allow for information about how the vote is going to be released before all clubs have voted.

The third is perhaps more intriguing.  Remember that the 5pm deadline was merely a request and as per the rules there is actually a 28 day deadline.  Dundee submitted their revised vote after the requested 5pm deadline.  If Dundee's retraction and subsequent revised vote is accepted by the SPFL as legitimate, then surely it is open to any other club also to inform the SPFL to consider their vote as "not cast" and then subsequently submit a changed vote at any time within the 28 hours deadline.  So, for instance, if Ayr United decided that the subsequent discussions were not to their liking and they felt they had been duped by the SPFL, they could change their mind in 3 weeks time thereby causing the motion to fall after all!  It follows therefore that given the precedent of the changed Dundee vote, the SPFL should not be taking any actions in implementing the result of the vote until the 28 days are up.

The coronavirus pandemic is an unprecedented event and places clubs and their employees in real financial difficulty. The SPFL's failure to apply a bit of basic common sense and separate payments to clubs from wider issues of final positions and possible restructuring is quite mind boggling.  There is an easy solution to this which would find the support of the vast majority of the Scottish football community.  Instead the SPFL find themselves facing demands for an external inquiry and the possibility of legal challenge.  

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

If Dundee's retraction and subsequent revised vote is accepted by the SPFL as legitimate, then surely it is open to any other club also to inform the SPFL to consider their vote as "not cast" and then subsequently submit a changed vote at any time within the 28 hours deadline

I've seen an extract of the SPFL rules on social media that say a No vote could be retracted but a Yes vote couldn't. 

As you've alluded in the rest of your post, one could drive a bus through the rules surrounding the vote and how that vote was then administered.

Only in Scottish football. 

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really wonder if this will go as far as UEFA (Yes I've said that a lot related to dubious decisions), there's something...off...about the entire thing. What would prompt a club who voted no, have photographic evidence of voting no, to ask the SPFL to not count their vote, and change their mind and vote yes? And why would a club be able to take back a no vote, but not be allowed to take back a yes vote? Sounds like Rangers were right about the bullying claim, and it feeling like being held at gunpoint.

Trying to avoid slapping on the tinfoil hat here, but there is definitely something going on at the SPFL HQ that the UEFA Officials would LOVE to have a look at.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's fans singing too loud, offensive banners or using smoke bombs UEFA will prove to be as effective as the chocolate fireguard.

Corruption and voting irregularities are a touchy subject within UEFA in recent years. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole thing has been a farce its all well and good the SPFL conducting an internal enquiry but that will go no where. The vote was flawed as has been discussed and Dundee have surely been promised something under the table to change their minds. 

On restructuring I like Kingsmills idea but the only thing that has a chance of passing the ridiculous 11-1 voting system (that needs scrapping for all the interest in Scottish football) is this 14 team league that has been proposed. As Doofers Dad said a 6/8 split would leave an inbalance of number of games with the top 6 on 36 and bottom 8 on 40 but it works well to meet all the criteria to get it through.

1. 4 old firm games - whether you like it or not Sky pay for those games mainly and reducing the number will in all likelihood reduce the TV deal.

2. More finance to lower clubs - playing an extra 4 matches in the bottom 8 will guarantee two extra home games which is two more games of income for those smaller clubs

3. Higher clubs play less matches - fixture congestion is a major gripe so should keep them content 

4. gets rid of the current split imbalance.

5. it stops relegation and will allow Kelty and Brora into the system the fairest way

The 11-1 vote makes me nervous but i think restructuring has to happen otherwise Scottish football could be ripped apart by legal battle after legal battle so even if some self centred Prem teams don't want to thin out their dough they may have to to now overt all out civil war. The interesting thing goes back to Dundee? What have they been promised to change their vote because only a 16 team league would mean they gain promotion and I cant see that so what made them change course at the last minute? Whats for sure this mess is far from done  

  • Confused 1

Share this post


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

The interesting thing goes back to Dundee? What have they been promised to change their vote because only a 16 team league would mean they gain promotion and I cant see that so what made them change course at the last minute?

Maybe the fact that, without Hearts, Dundee Utd and ICT, Dundee should be red hot favourites to get promoted next season. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any reconstruction will be short term and we will be back to the current setup within a year or two at best. No chance the teams in the top flight will want to share their prize money with any more clubs if they can help it.

Could we find ourselves in a similar position to Dundee from a few years back dropped into the top flight at relatively short notice and scrambling to assemble a squad capable of keeping us up?

  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Robert said:

Partick beat us home and away.....

Wev no been great either at times tbh! They're not bottom of the table coz they're world beaters my man I thought they'd be going for the play offs serves them right going down big club like that should be in a title race like ourselves but it's not happened for either of us!

  • Disagree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wonder if they'll replace Robbo if we and I do t think we will go up in a reconstructed league his record against higher league clubs speaks for itself absolutely abysmal ! Could be our only shot at it don't wanna go up and be whipping boys! Robbo oot beg Yogi to come back although I have heard Coop the dugs wanting Coisty and Durranty in the dugout pronto! Watty Smith as director of fitba! 

  • Disagree 2
  • Confused 1
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, IBM said:

As much as I dislike Partick and Ian Mccoll I agree with you.

I tend to be in agreement with you but, on this occasion, only half agree.

I quite like Partick!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most likely thing Dundee have been offered is a large backhanded or enhanced 2nd parachute payment in a league without Inverness or Dundee Utd or hearts. Plus some lucrative friendlies. That will keepnteir bank balance ticking over as a 16 league prem is a step to far.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • FB_caley_thisle_online_970x90.jpg

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.