Printable View
Any other team than Dundee finishing second and I suspect this wouldn't have even been an issue. The SPL are desperate to have as many selling points for this season as possible and, in that respect, a Tayside derby makes perfect financial sense.
Yet again, money talks...
I disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve20
It was a normal season in the 1st division and Dundee didn't do enough to gain promotion.
On the other hand, Dunfermline were last in a league that included a team who have been shown to have cheated for years, included players they didn't/couldn't pay for and in reality weren't in a position to pay any wages. Had it not been for their administrators' stalling tactics, they wouldn't even have finished the season.
Dunfie for me. :aok:
Even though I don't agree with that, I can see why some people might think that way so fair enough. I just don't like a league that you can finish last and stay in it. Dundee up!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
In fact, have a play off match between the two teams.
its happened more than once. if there is only 11 teams in the league how can they be last? rangers are out so effectivly they are the religated team.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve20
How can they be last? Well, in a 12 team league last season they finished 12th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Tha Cabbage Kid
Yes, it's happened before. I didn't agree with it then and I don't agree with it now. Just my opinion. No doubt Dunfermline will get to stay up.
Dunfermline should be allowed back in.
As it turns out they were relegated from a league that was harbouring a cheating club, that is now no longer with us.
They haven't been shown to be cheating in 2011/12. However, they are alleged to have cheated in previous seasons. That suggests that all clubs relegated in previous seasons have a right to be considered for reinstatement.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoltonHibee
They played players they couldn't pay for.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
They paid high wages instead of their PAYE/NI liabilities.
Any other business would have been forced into liquidation immediately. This was delayed in RFC's case to allow them to complete the season.
That's not the case. The administration process would have been the same for any other business in RFC's situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by Peevemor
Dunfermline please.
Dunfermline.
Stephens bakeries do the catering.
Steak Bakes are totally ACE.
Yup - we cannae bang the drum about sporting integrity then ignore relgeation. The Pars are doon. The Dees should be up. END OF.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve20
I'm beginning to wonder if either team will replace Rangers for the this coming season.
The focus is very much on where Sevco will go and this is the focus up until July 13th.
Any decision to reinstate one or t'other will surely be met with a challenge from the unsuccessful party, thus further delaying the process?
I sincerely have doubts as to whether this sorry mess can be fixed in the next 4-5 weeks.
Has to be Dundee. Less petrol money needed. Bloke I know who follows the Pars said to me that he wasn't to fussed about going down, and that with derbies to look forward to against Raith and Falkirk, and a team that might start winning, it would bring more fans out than they currently get.
i do agree the it would possibly be better having dundee in the spl with the derby. just dont think its right to have them. they didnt win the first division so therefore dont get promoted.
it should be dunfermline in my opinion.
are dundee a better team in any case?
should be Dunfermline for me but hope it's Dundee
Should definitely be Dunfermline
When Aberdeen finished bottom, but dodged the drop due to a very convenient deal that re-jigged the SPL, they stayed in. Dunfermline finishing bottom is not a strong enough reason for them not staying in.
Dundee have "plenty of previous" when it comes to administration, but never got relegated in their time for this, adequate balance now would be deny them the convenient jump up, they have not merited.
mon the Pars :agree:
Rubbish - they took a 25 point deduction second time around. At any other point that would have meant relegation, but they did their talking on the park, 23 games unbeaten and stayed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sumner
Its almost as bad as saying the huns should be in the SPL because they won trophies :wink:
Dunf on the other hand came last in the league. Their position is being taken by Raith.
If Raith couldnt come up (a-la falkirk and stadium requirements) then Dunf should stay. Thats not the case however.
Why should a team who failed to stay in the league, be given a second bite at the cherry, when the rules state that the 2nd position team, there on merit, should be promoted?
'Mon the Dee :greengrin
Sorry J, but that's just lies.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
i imagine raith would be absolutely delighted if that was the case :cb
ross county wouldn't be very pleased though :)
Just somebody in the SPL make a bloody decision and let the team chosen prepare for the bloody season. Season starts in 4 weeks for god's sake.
Shocking dithering as usual by Doncaster and co.:rolleyes:
My memory might be playing tricks but someone on here did quote the rulesQuote:
Originally Posted by The Story So Far...
dohQuote:
Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875
:agree:Quote:
Originally Posted by Spike Mandela
The rules suggest neither club has an automatic claim, hence the uncertainty. They effectively rule against Dunfermline, as they were relegated from the league, thus making them ineligible for participation in the SPL but there is absolutely nothing which states second place in the first division comes up in the event of a space opening up as a result of a club ceasing to exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by jonty
There's a small group of folks on here who seem to believe there is something steadfast in the rules which makes this an easy decision, but whenever I've asked them to provide a copy of the rule nothing has been forthcoming.
If such a clear and unambiguous rule existed, there wouldn't even be a discussion about "Who should replace Rangers?".
Never mind what an absolute mess they have made over the huns fiasco, to still not have any idea who will replace them is a joke, a joke of a league and a joke of the clowns in charge of it. :rolleyes:
Well, whenever I'm dahn sahff in bootiful Essex I try and watch these guys playing. What about them? I'll chip in for the train fair for the team travelling up to matches...
http://www.catholicutd.co.uk/
:flag: :faf:
They played players they could afford to pay. They played players that they could not afford to pay for. Cheating in my bookQuote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
So that would apply to every season over the last 10 or so years. Like I say, that would open the door for every other club that has been relegated during that time to ask to be reinstated.Quote:
Originally Posted by BoltonHibee
Then again, that might get us an 18 team league :greengrin
Rangers should have been put to the bottom of the league die to their miss-management. Dunfermline should stay up as they would then be 2nd bottom. If we had finished bottom I'm sure we would have been arguing for this.
I think this would have been the case had they gone into liquidation before the season's end.Quote:
Originally Posted by goldenhibby
The fact that it happened in the closed season is where the confusion stems from.
How about the BNP 5 a sides team? I know the Huns currently have 6 players but a sub might be required, otherwise a perfect fit.Quote:
Originally Posted by LancsHibs