Ugly Sisters gang up on the rest of the SPL

[Gatecrasher]

When guys like this run it!

THE chairman of the Scottish Premier League has urged Scotland’s elite clubs to end their bickering and work collectively to improve the state of the top end of the game or risk damaging it beyond repair.
to improve the state of the top end of the game or risk damaging it beyond repair.
Ralph Topping yesterday urged the group of 12 to move forward as 12 and avoid being distracted by battles which he believes splinter parties cannot hope to win. He described the move of the ten non-Old Firm clubs to push for change by holding talks without the involvement of Celtic and Rangers as “not the smartest thing”.
Topping told The Scotsman: “I cannot underplay it. The 12 most powerful men in Scottish football have the future of the game in their hands. We have to focus on the way out.”
Although the Old Firm have been excluded from recent rounds of talks regarding changes to the SPL, Topping hopes all top Scottish clubs can play a part in rebuilding the SPL’s reputation and avert what he described as “atrophy”.
He has urged all 12 clubs to be conscious of the need to attract sponsors and other outside investment sources as they prepare to gather on 12 April for a specially-convened general meeting at Hampden Park. Top of the agenda is a proposal from the ten non-Old Firm clubs to change the voting structure, where, at present, a majority of 11-1 is required to make landmark decisions. The sticking point is that the change to voting structure is itself one of these landmark decisions. Rangers, although currently in administration, look set to disappoint those clubs who felt they might be persuaded to consent to change given their currently straitened situation. “If you are looking to persuade someone to change their mind then I suppose not having them at the discussion is not the smartest thing,” said Topping. He believes it would be “helpful” if Duff and Phelps, the Ibrox club’s administrators, declared their hand in public.
While sympathetic to the need for each club to seek to maximise their earnings, Topping considers the issue of the re-distribution of television money to be a red-herring at such a critical time. Instead, the preoccupation should be with ear-marking ways to increase the amount of money in the pot rather than arguing over dividing up the current, diminishing sum.
“They have a right to discuss it [the change to the voting structure],” he said. “But what they have to remember is that they voted for it. That’s almost forgotten. They voted for it, now they don’t want it. In business, as in life, accept the parameters and focus on what can be delivered within the parameters.”
Kilmarnock’s Michael Johnston has become the latest chairman to speak out in public when criticising the lack of democracy in the SPL. Peter Lawwell, the chief executive of Celtic, described the breakaway meeting held by the ten non-Old Firm clubs as “divisive” and not in the best interests of Scottish football. He also generated surprise by agreeing to look again at a proposed idea for a top league comprising 14 clubs.
“I would say this to the guys: for goodness sake make your mind up,” said Topping, who has held the non-executive post of chairman of the SPL since replacing Lex Gold in 2009. “Decide upon it and make it work.”
The Clydesdale Bank, the SPL’s current title sponsors, step away at the end of next season and a new television deal hinges on the participation of both Rangers and Celtic. Although the situation at Rangers “has yet to fully develop”, Topping is clearly alert to the Old Firm’s status as a financial mother lode for Scottish football.
“When you look at it, there is a lot of income flows through those two clubs,” he said. “They attract a lot of attention and they have a big fan base. They are our ambassadors in Europe year in, year out. It would be foolish to not recognise the contribution of the Old Firm and look at their football needs in terms of the scale of their operation.”
According to Topping, the image of the SPL has to be protected at all costs. He is concerned also by the threat of government intervention.
“There is a hell of a lot of emotion being brought out and old scores being settled – that adds to the negativity towards the game,” he said.
“And at some point we are going to see the government get involved. You can have a partnership [with the government] but the last thing we want is the government saying we are going to sort this out, we are coming in and we are going to do an investigation. The last thing you want is that degree of scrutiny.
“Look at the last few months; we have had wages not being paid to payers, HMRC challenges to SPL clubs, Uefa judgments on fans’ behaviour, altercations with the government over sectarianism, the exit of Scottish clubs from Europe – the league is remarkably adept at attracting negative publicity.
“That makes it difficult for sponsors to align themselves with a product where they risk brand damage.
“We have a great propensity for not just shooting ourselves in the foot – we blast away at both feet.”
Topping’s view is supported by Henry McLeish, whose review of Scottish football has led to significant improvement being made to the Scottish Football Association. McLeish has been working with the SPL since the end of last year as he attempts another “revamp” on the scale of the on-going reform of the SFA. “This is phase two,” the former First Minister said yesterday. “The 12 club chairmen are in a pretty powerful position – with that power and authority comes enormous responsibility. The SFA are now powering ahead. There are a lot of positive things happening. And the SFL are doing a lot of innovative things,
“But what needs to happen in the SPL is this: 12 chairmen and their clubs who are under enormous pressure need to be involved in a collective modernisation of the game.”


http://www.scotsman.com/news/spl-chairman-urges-12-clubs-to-end-bickering-and-work-together-1-2197888

:rolleyes:

[Keith_M]

Yet another that thinks that the majority of clubs should just kow tow to the OF. How dare they want something different. Yes, they voted for the current situation, but now they've decided it's a bad idea and want it changed. How is that so wrong?


He also seems to be annoyed that the government has stepped in to punish sectarianism. Maybe if the football authorities, like the SPL, had tackled it before there would be no need for the government to step in.


Presumably he's yet another that thinks 40,000 people in a crowd of 50,000 singing sectarian songs is a "minority" but that ten out of 12 football clubs can be called the "rebel 10" and not "the majority".



EDIT: Decided to post this as a comment on the article......

[Saorsa]

Rather a long winded way of saying tae the other ten they should just keep bending over and taking it up the jacksie fae the old squirm.

Edit: which at least half of them probably will end up doing sadly. I suspect all we will end up with is a lot of hot air followed by a lot of broken glass as the collective bottles of the mealy mouthed crash AGAIN.

[PeeKay]

I totally agree with the first sentence but it should be addressed to the OF who have repeatedly shown that they don't give a flying 4X about the rest of Scottish football. Sad thing is that sooner or later the majority of the 10 will ultimate fall back into line.

[Part/Time Supporter]

Yet another that thinks that the majority of clubs should just kow tow to the OF. How dare they want something different. Yes, they voted for the current situation, but now they've decided it's a bad idea and want it changed. How is that so wrong?



:agree:

Daft logic. It would be like a politician saying that because most people voted for the Tories in 2010, Cameron should stay in power for as long as he likes.

The first thing the ten should do if they gain more power is sack Topping and Doncaster. No original thoughts come from them and they just parrot OF talking points.

[JeMeSouviens]

That is about the most depressing article yet. Sweep it all under the carpet ... get the Huns back in ... mustn't have any negative publicity now.


Ralph Topping, 58, is Chief Executive of William Hill PLC, one of the UK’s largest bookmakers, where he is responsible for strategic direction and the day-to-day management and profitability of the Group's operations. Ralph was born and raised in West Lothian and worked in the shadows of Hampden Park in his first job with William Hill in the early 1970s.

Wonder who he supports then? :rolleyes:

[hibbymac]

“They attract a lot of attention and they have a big fan base. They are our ambassadors in Europe year in, year out. It would be foolish to not recognise the contribution of the Old Firm and look at their football needs in terms of the scale of their operation.” ...........................

......................... The last thing you want is that degree of scrutiny.
“Look at the last few months; we have had wages not being paid to payers, HMRC challenges to SPL clubs, Uefa judgments on fans’ behaviour, altercations with the government over sectarianism, the exit of Scottish clubs from Europe – the league is remarkably adept at attracting negative publicity.
“That makes it difficult for sponsors to align themselves with a product where they risk brand damage.


All seems a bit contradictory to me, apart from Hearts, who have been late paying players and HMRC (but they have been paid), which other teams in the SPL have been "attracting negative publicity" and "risking brand damage" ......ehhhh, The Old Firm ?

Old Firm mouthpieces beginning to sweat a bit??

OFGTF

[GordonHFC]

Rangers have been caught cheating and in any other form of business they would have been sacked. Let's call the Glasgow FA's bluff and all resign from the league and give them the two years notice we need to and watch them squirm. Who else would have them, certainly not England. We forget that even if the English FA allowed them to join their leagues the police certainly wouldn't allow their filth to run loose around their country week in and week. Let's have the bollocks once and for all to rid our country of this **** for good.

[Sylar]

Yet another that thinks that the majority of clubs should just kow tow to the OF. How dare they want something different. Yes, they voted for the current situation, but now they've decided it's a bad idea and want it changed. How is that so wrong?


He also seems to be annoyed that the government has stepped in to punish sectarianism. Maybe if the football authorities, like the SPL, had tackled it before there would be no need for the government to step in.


Presumably he's yet another that thinks 40,000 people in a crowd of 50,000 singing sectarian songs is a "minority" but that ten out of 12 football clubs can be called the "rebel 10" and not "the majority".



EDIT: Decided to post this as a comment on the article......


Brilliant summary of the situation :agree:

[Purple & Green]

That is about the most depressing article yet. Sweep it all under the carpet ... get the Huns back in ... mustn't have any negative publicity now.


I agree B - that article says to me that Rangers are going to face the bare minimum sanctions when they get found guilty of all the SPL charges at them, and then go into liquidation.

That guy would finish the SPL off if he was in charge of the process.

[Pretty Boy]

That is about the most depressing article yet. Sweep it all under the carpet ... get the Huns back in ... mustn't have any negative publicity now.



Wonder who he supports then? :rolleyes:

Hibs I believe.

[Vini1875]

I think the 10 will back down. The one thing that is true in the article is that the OF should be included in discussions and told how the other chairman feel. It is way past time that these guys stood up to the OF and they are not going to do it holding private meetings and releasing anonymous statements. Like or not the OF will remain in Scottish football.

The one thing that sticks out for me is the over used phrase "for the good of Scottish football" no-one seems truly interested in that they all want what is best for themselves.If there is one thing that unites all clubs it is their total self interest.

[Diclonius]

Hibs I believe.

Yep. One of our own letting us down. :grr:

[Part/Time Supporter]

I think the 10 will back down. The one thing that is true in the article is that the OF should be included in discussions and told how the other chairman feel. It is way past time that these guys stood up to the OF and they are not going to do it holding private meetings and releasing anonymous statements. Like or not the OF will remain in Scottish football.

The one thing that sticks out for me is the over used phrase "for the good of Scottish football" no-one seems truly interested in that they all want what is best for themselves.If there is one thing that unites all clubs it is their total self interest.

The OF have held private meetings for years. Why is it now a bad thing to have private meetings when the other clubs do it? I don't remember anyone in the media or the SPL bemoaning their private meetings.

[.Sean.]

Ralph Topping is a Hibs fan.

[Saorsa]

That is about the most depressing article yet. Sweep it all under the carpet ... get the Huns back in ... mustn't have any negative publicity now.:agree:

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b168/jamie1971/SPL.jpg

[blindsummit]

Ralph Topping is a Hibs fan.

Hibs fan or not, his comments are a total disgrace, and indicate the lengths the establishment is going to go to to protect their beloved Ugly Sisters. Scottish football is rank rotten to the core. I had to laugh at the bit about having to support the OF as they are our representatives in Europe! Only because they deny those places to other clubs because of their cheating and stealing! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.





and breathe........... :greengrin

[Saorsa]

Hibs fan or not, his comments are a total disgrace, and indicate the lengths the establishment is going to go to to protect their beloved Ugly Sisters. Scottish football is rank rotten to the core. I had to laugh at the bit about having to support the OF as they are our representatives in Europe! Only because they deny those places to other clubs because of their cheating and stealing! Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.





and breathe........... :greengrin:agree:

I'm really hoping for UEFA tae find a way tae get themselves involved in this situation as there is absolutely nae will on the part of the authorities that run the game in this country tae dae the right thing when it comes tae punishing the OF.

[Brebners Bookie]

Sorry to disagree with you all but i dont think what he is saying is all that bad. To an extent i think he is playing devil's advocate a bit.
Some of the points he has made are valid. Like it or not the OF have to be considered as they bring more money to the game than we do, was it the smartest thing not inviting rangers+celtic to the meeting?

I think his main point was that he is not against change or re-distribution of money but that things like sponsorship cannot be totally disregarded by doing these things, otherwise we will all have a fair share of sweet FA.

I don't personally agree with all he says but i can see where he is coming from.

As for his point "for goodness sake make your mind up and make it work" who can argue with that? All this needs to be sorted soon.

"12 chairmen and their clubs must be involved in a collective modernisation of our game" Doesn't sound like someone determined to keep the status quo.

For what its worth he is a big hibs fan, so all this OF lackie talk just sounds paranoid.

[snooky]

Ralph Topping is a Hibs fan.

FFS, the "Return of the Body Snatchers" has come true.

I give up! :brickwall

[HFC 0-7]

Sorry to disagree with you all but i dont think what he is saying is all that bad. To an extent i think he is playing devil's advocate a bit.
Some of the points he has made are valid. Like it or not the OF have to be considered as they bring more money to the game than we do, was it the smartest thing not inviting rangers+celtic to the meeting?

I think his main point was that he is not against change or re-distribution of money but that things like sponsorship cannot be totally disregarded by doing these things, otherwise we will all have a fair share of sweet FA.

I don't personally agree with all he says but i can see where he is coming from.

As for his point "for goodness sake make your mind up and make it work" who can argue with that? All this needs to be sorted soon.

"12 chairmen and their clubs must be involved in a collective modernisation of our game" Doesn't sound like someone determined to keep the status quo.

For what its worth he is a big hibs fan, so all this OF lackie talk just sounds paranoid.

You say that he isnt against re distributing the monies, however, he does say that we should stop arguing over the redistribution of tv monies and start looking at ways to increase the pot. Leaving the old firm out of the meeting was not a bad thing IMO, they do it to us as they have meetings themselves. Put it this way, if we were to invite Rangers and Celtic to the meeting and say to them we want to stop giving you as much money and have more to ourselves, we also want to change the voting structure to stop you guys having what you want. How far would that have got?

The other 10 have had their meeting, the OF dont like it one bit. i think thats a good thing, it showed they are not getting it their own way. The meeting of 10, IMO, would have been done so they all decide on the best way forward, iron out anything clubs may be unsure about, then involve the other teams so that they can put their case forward with the 10 agreeing.

regarding the bit in bold above, yes he probably does want to modernise the game, but it will be in the same way as before, the OF having all the power and the other 10 getting the scraps. It will just be another case of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Ralph Topping and the rest of the stooges are plums, afraid to do the right thing and upset Glasgow media. The meeting of the 10 has probably got them scared as they will be worrying about how they can sweep things under the carpet now.

[SloopJB]

I think the lowly ten should make a statement by agreeing a world first sponsorship deal for all SPL clubs apart from Rangers and Celtic who can do their own thing.
That way ensures an even distribution of funds between the clubs and is a show of solidarity.
In what is becoming a clear fight between the glasgow two, with the SPL and SFA beaks acting as impartial referees, and the ten wee teams I would suggest the sponsor could, nay, should be the makers of K Y Jelly.

[cad]

Yet another that thinks that the majority of clubs should just kow tow to the OF. How dare they want something different. Yes, they voted for the current situation, but now they've decided it's a bad idea and want it changed. How is that so wrong?


He also seems to be annoyed that the government has stepped in to punish sectarianism. Maybe if the football authorities, like the SPL, had tackled it before there would be no need for the government to step in.


Presumably he's yet another that thinks 40,000 people in a crowd of 50,000 singing sectarian songs is a "minority" but that ten out of 12 football clubs can be called the "rebel 10" and not "the majority".



EDIT: Decided to post this as a comment on the article......





:spammy: Cracking post Sir ,take a sweetie oot the jar .

[Eyrie]

The Huns administrators have just confirmed that they will join their friends at Celtc in opposing any attempt to have a more democratic voting structure for the SPL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17528654

Time for the other ten clubs to show some solidarity and inform them that either the rule goes or the rest of us do. Sky can have 36 Ugly Sister games a season in the new look SPL, and the rest of us can form a new league of ten in the SFL.

[Spike Mandela]

The Huns administrators have just confirmed that they will join their friends at Celtc in opposing any attempt to have a more democratic voting structure for the SPL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17528654

Time for the other ten clubs to show some solidarity and inform them that either the rule goes or the rest of us do. Sky can have 36 Ugly Sister games a season in the new look SPL, and the rest of us can form a new league of ten in the SFL.

Only becomes a bargaining chip if they go into liquidation and request re-entry to SPL really.

[SloopJB]

The Huns administrators have just confirmed that they will join their friends at Celtc in opposing any attempt to have a more democratic voting structure for the SPL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17528654

Time for the other ten clubs to show some solidarity and inform them that either the rule goes or the rest of us do. Sky can have 36 Ugly Sister games a season in the new look SPL, and the rest of us can form a new league of ten in the SFL.

Yeah, read it earlier.
Now there is a wedge being driven between the clubs. All out war, no negotiation.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

If things don't change with this opportunity they'll never have a better one, they'd be as well just locking the doors and chucking the keys away.

I really don't think the authorities/powers that be realise the strength of feeling amongst non-OF fans.

[I'm_cabbaged]

Time for the ten clubs to resign and join the SFL, fek the two of them.
If that can be done ;)

[1875 NO 1]

The Huns administrators have just confirmed that they will join their friends at Celtc in opposing any attempt to have a more democratic voting structure for the SPL.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17528654

Time for the other ten clubs to show some solidarity and inform them that either the rule goes or the rest of us do. Sky can have 36 Ugly Sister games a season in the new look SPL, and the rest of us can form a new league of ten in the SFL.

Correct.

One man we should be lobbying is Rod Petrie. He needs to know we are hacked off and we want change. He is in dream land if the Old Firm will change things so they loose out. He needs to get Aberdeen and Gorgie Tramps on side and threaten a breakaway league and have the balls to go through with it.

[SteveHFC]

Time for the ten clubs to resign and join the SFL, fek the two of them.
If that can be done ;)

:not worth
:top marks

[down the slope]

Correct.

One man we should be lobbying is Rod Petrie. He needs to know we are hacked off and we want change. He is in dream land if the Old Firm will change things so they loose out. He needs to get Aberdeen and Gorgie Tramps on side and threaten a breakaway league and have the balls to go through with it.

R P will vote for whatever gives us more cash plain and simple , how is it a team in administration gets to vote anyway ?.

[Matt92]

If things don't change with this opportunity they'll never have a better one, they'd be as well just locking the doors and chucking the keys away.

I really don't think the authorities/powers that be realise the strength of feeling amongst non-OF fans.

The sickening thing is though that they DO realize how much we loathe them and really couldn't give a rubber duck about what happens to them, but they choose to ignore it, as a majority of the SPL chairmen and members are basically pro-OF and don't give a flying about anyone else: as long as we are there for them to leech of and big them up then they really don't care how much it damages our clubs, as long as we can supply and help the OF. :bitchy:

There is no league in the world so blatently one-sided to specific teams, its disgusting, either our changes go or we go. Watch the fatcats quirm when they realize how serious we are. Lawell and co will be on their knees. :aok:

[Onceinawhile]

But they hate each other right...

[Eyrie]

I wonder who's up for it?

Hibs? Probably, given Petrie's comments on that TV programme a few weeks back.
Hearts? Agent Romanov would love to put one over the Glasgow Mafia.
Aberdeen? Given their love for Rangers, Milne isn't daft enough to sign his own death warrant.
Dundee Utd? No love lost there after the ticket problems.
Dunfermline? Similar, with a blatant attempt to buy them off.
St Johnstone? Brown believes in the integrity of the game.
St Mirren? May just be p'd off enough by the takeover rumour.
Kilmarnock? Their chairman is quoted in the article.

Maybe I'm being overly optimistic in my assessments, but it just leaves Motherwell and Inverness.


But they hate each other right...
All the way to the bank.

[Kato]

But they hate each other right...

It's a veneer of hate between the clubs so they can set their respective fans at each others throats and cash in. They care for no-one other themselves and for nothing other than profit. Always been the same which is why the are called the Old Firm.

The games bust here. The weighted voting system and stifling competition doesn't even work for the OF. They'd be better letting other clubs grow, give them some good games and they'd soon improve in Europe.

They won't swallow that however as everything is short-termism with them.

[greenginger]

Only becomes a bargaining chip if they go into liquidation and request re-entry to SPL really.



Not really, they could be kicked out if the get caught with the double contracts inquiry, or they can even be voted out for being in administration.
Unfortunately, it would require a 90% vote in favour but it would be worthwhile excercise to call a Special General Meeting to vote on Rangers expulsion. It would send a message to everyone connected with football the strength of feeling for change.
It would also force Celtic into coming to their rescue which would cause outrage amongst their fans and prove once and for all that Celtic are anti - football and anti - democracy.

[Hibs Class]

I suspect a lot of fans of all clubs will hold off season ticket renewals on the back of this announcement. I certainly will be as we need change and we will seldom have a better chance, and I've little interest in another season of this skewed bigoted status quo.

[John_the_angus_hibby]

Time for the ten clubs to resign and join the SFL, fek the two of them.
If that can be done ;)

This!! God I despise those two clubs.


Sent from another universe!

[Jack]

Their owner was found not to be a fit and proper person. The spokesman for the Barren Knights likewise. I doubt if the administrators have applied to the SPL / SFA.

So how have they got a vote at all?

[One Day Soon]

They are a cancer which has been destroying the game from the inside for decades.

If the rules and set up don't change after what we have been witnessing then I'm afraid it becomes transparently obvious that the Scottish game is as rigged as professional wrestling. If that is the case there is literally no point in our continuing to hand over our money and give our time to watching games.

[Kaiser1962]

Time for the ten clubs to resign and join the SFL, fek the two of them.
If that can be done ;)


I am not sure what this would achieve. Will there not be 10 clubs currently in the SFL who would then be promoted and eagerly step into the gap? The ten would then have no chance of effecting change from the outside.

That said the 11-1 requirement is an embarassment.

[mca]

They are a cancer which has been destroying the game from the inside for decades.

If the rules and set up don't change after what we have been witnessing then I'm afraid it becomes transparently obvious that the Scottish game is as rigged as professional wrestling. If that is the case there is literally no point in our continuing to hand over our money and give our time to watching games.



Btw - The scottish half leg trouser wearing brigade has also been going for decades ..


Aye - we all knew all along that scottish fitba is dodgy !! - most of the masons have been or / are refs or sfa etc ..:agree:

[PatHead]

Why don't the "ten" say they will vote down the Sky deal if Celtic and Rangers don't change the voting structure. Would hurt OF more than the rest as they get the most money from it anyway!

[blackpoolhibs]

R P will vote for whatever gives us more cash plain and simple , how is it a team in administration gets to vote anyway ?.

I spoke to Rod on Saturday, and said the games being changed and not at 3pm on a saturday was killing the game. He agreed, and said we as in Hibs voted against the current deal, but the majority voted for it.

[Geo_1875]

I suspect a lot of fans of all clubs will hold off season ticket renewals on the back of this announcement. I certainly will be as we need change and we will seldom have a better chance, and I've little interest in another season of this skewed bigoted status quo.

Unfortunately that does not hurt our clubs enough to bring about change. They will assume that most of us will renew eventually and they might save a bit on the giveaways for early renewal. Personally I think the only way to make them understand the strength of feeling is by organised protest against OF pisstaking. They and the media might be able to ignore our rants when they are hidden away on Hibs.net or the Evening News website but maybe a public demonstration or something organised for matchdays might make them all take notice.

[Steven_Hibs]

Rangers have been caught cheating and in any other form of business they would have been sacked. Let's call the Glasgow FA's bluff and all resign from the league and give them the two years notice we need to and watch them squirm. Who else would have them, certainly not England. We forget that even if the English FA allowed them to join their leagues the police certainly wouldn't allow their filth to run loose around their country week in and week. Let's have the bollocks once and for all to rid our country of this **** for good.

:top marks:agree:

[johnbc70]

Interesting headline on back page of Scotsman tomorrow http://twitpic.com/925umn

[NAE NOOKIE]

What a sad ugly sisters apologist that guy is. Hibbies wanting to bale out the current buns, Hibbies telling us its daft to finally stand up to the OFs stranglehold on the game off and on the park. What the hell is going on !!!

If he is holding up the OF as the shining example to the rest of the world of what Scottish football stands for then heaven help us all. Just about every example he gives of the bad things happening to our game over the last few years were caused by rangers and to a lesser extent celtic.

As for government involvement, both FIFA and UEFA have rules regarding government interference in football affairs.

The only thing that football administrators and journalists should have to say about the current SPL voting system is 'why the hell did the clubs vote for such an undemocratic system in the first place?' To say that its too late to change it now and that the 10 clubs should give up trying is crass.

Due to the OFs inability to see past their own self importance this situation is fast developing into something it was never intended to be.

The SPL is an organisation ( league ) of 12 clubs. To have 2 of those clubs dictating to the other 10 what does and doesnt happen within that league and taking a huge slice of the money earned by that organisation is against the principle of open and fair competition. This is what the SPL is supposed to offer to the supporters of ALL clubs at the start of each season. If that is not the case then the supporters of 10 out of 12 clubs are frankly being cheated.

The OF will always be the two most powerfull clubs in the game due to their artificially inflated support and they should be able to benefit from the money and ability to attract outside investment which that attracts. But the truth is that that isnt enough for them, they have to neuter their already weak competitors by hogging money from a TV deal which was negotiated by and for the whole of the SPL.

The biggest truth which is now clear to see is ( though we always knew it anyway ) that Celtic and Rangers are one entity. They are like the two extremes of Communism and Facism, diametrically opposed, but the end result is exactly the same when they gain contol. Totalitarianism with no place for democracy or opposition.

The ugly sisterswill NEVER give up their stranglehold on Scottish football unless drastic action is taken to at least loosen their grip.

Because of this the only course of action I can now see is for the 10 to threaten to resign from the SPL and join up with the SFL to form a 16 team Scottish Premiership. If the OF dont come round in a given period of time then that threat should be carried out.

Yes that may mean the end of the SKY deal and clubs having to cut their cloth accordingly for a number of years, but if that is the case then so be it. We could negotiate a new TV deal, which with an even distribution of the cash may mean that most clubs may not be affected as badly as they may think at the moment.

STUFF THE OLD FIRM !!!

In fact from now on when they do visit ER the songs we sing should not be "we hate celtic" or "we hate rangers", but "we hate that old firm", dont even give them the honour of having their clubs name mentioned, just lump them together as one entity coz thats what they are.

GGTT 10

[Sylar]

Btw - The scottish half leg trouser wearing brigade has also been going for decades ..


Aye - we all knew all along that scottish fitba is dodgy !! - most of the masons have been or / are refs or sfa etc ..:agree:

May I point you in the direction of the following:

www.kerrydalestreet.co.uk

[SurferRosa]

Interesting headline on back page of Scotsman tomorrow http://twitpic.com/925umn

never have i wanted a newspaper headline tae be more true.....:pray:

[SteveHFC]

Interesting headline on back page of Scotsman tomorrow http://twitpic.com/925umn

Hopefully that happens :top marks:top marks:top marks:top marks

[TrickyNicky]

I spoke to Rod on Saturday, and said the games being changed and not at 3pm on a saturday was killing the game. He agreed, and said we as in Hibs voted against the current deal, but the majority voted for it.

I think they would be happy to fight over the scraps, the other clubs have been beaten into submission and The Jambo fuds...well, who knows, who cares !!

Is his moustache as big in real life as it is on the telly?
What else did you ask him - I know you must've !!

[blackpoolhibs]

I think they would be happy to fight over the scraps, the other clubs have been beaten into submission and The Jambo fuds...well, who knows, who cares !!

Is his moustache as big in real life as it is on the telly?
What else did you ask him - I know you must've !!

I also asked him about a reduced season ticket, one that could cover games that are not changed. The computers says no. :rolleyes:

The tache is looking a bit grey these days, needs a wee bit of boot polish imo. :greengrin

[phantom]

The only thing that football administrators and journalists should have to say about the current SPL voting system is 'why the hell did the clubs vote for such an undemocratic system in the first place?' To say that its too late to change it now and that the 10 clubs should give up trying is crass.


Is my memory cheating me or was this very issue a major discussion point when the SPL was originally set up? My memory is that the OF basically forced the other clubs to accept this voting structure in order to proceed with the SPL. They always insisted on keeping control and dangled a not-that-fat cash carrot of extra TV money being dribbled down to the remainder of the SPL. There was no real option to vote against the 11-1 system as the OF would never have allowed it. It was always about protecting their interests.

Anyone else remember this?

[stoobs]

Interesting headline on back page of Scotsman tomorrow http://twitpic.com/925umn

Its up online now

http://www.scotsman.com/news/spl-tv-deal-gang-of-ten-could-quit-league-over-votes-reform-1-2199629

[offshorehibby]

To be honest i was always annoyed the SPL agreed to 11/1 vote in the first place. Deep down they have only themselves to blame.
The only way out this problem is for the 10 to have the bottle to resign from the current league.

[HKhibby]

:agree:

Daft logic. It would be like a politician saying that because most people voted for the Tories in 2010, Cameron should stay in power for as long as he likes.

The first thing the ten should do if they gain more power is sack Topping and Doncaster. No original thoughts come from them and they just parrot OF talking points.

You just cant see beyond the end of your nose there in the north of england just like scotland as a whole!, because he is a conservative! (check the definition of "tory"!), so you all just jump on the bandwagon! like sheep! and cant think for yourself either!, its also called jealousy! it always has been...anywhere north of the midlands! with a big chip on their shoulder about the south!...stop and think where it is that creates the wealth for the UK as a whole! not the north of england or scotland for sure! now that is down to alot of reasons!...it does creat wealth but not a quarter as much as the south and london in particular creates and keeps the uk going!!! 3 places in particular!....canary wharf!...finacial services and banking!...the city of london...finacial services and banking!...where the main bank is!...heathrow airport....import/export, cargo etc... etc... major hub for aviation!...so think about they are ripping you off!, the coal etc... from there has long gone! was not profitable! thats why it comes from Russia and China etc.. far cheaper and created jobs!, and the east european workers you have!....taking your jobs away!...yes all down to "New Labour" that one!! great years 1997-2010!!....i think not!

[TrickyNicky]

Its up online now

http://www.scotsman.com/news/spl-tv-deal-gang-of-ten-could-quit-league-over-votes-reform-1-2199629

Wow!

Interesting times ahead for Scottish football!

A complete overhaul is required but who could be trusted to do it fairly, there are so many individual agendas here!

[HibeesLA]

You just cant see beyond the end of your nose there in the north of england just like scotland as a whole!, because he is a conservative! (check the definition of "tory"!), so you all just jump on the bandwagon! like sheep! and cant think for yourself either!, its also called jealousy! it always has been...anywhere north of the midlands! with a big chip on their shoulder about the south!...stop and think where it is that creates the wealth for the UK as a whole! not the north of england or scotland for sure! now that is down to alot of reasons!...it does creat wealth but not a quarter as much as the south and london in particular creates and keeps the uk going!!! 3 places in particular!....canary wharf!...finacial services and banking!...the city of london...finacial services and banking!...where the main bank is!...heathrow airport....import/export, cargo etc... etc... major hub for aviation!...so think about they are ripping you off!, the coal etc... from there has long gone! was not profitable! thats why it comes from Russia and China etc.. far cheaper and created jobs!, and the east european workers you have!....taking your jobs away!...yes all down to "New Labour" that one!! great years 1997-2010!!....i think not!

I think you missed the analogy.

[Tha Cabbage Kid]

To be honest i was always annoyed the SPL agreed to 11/1 vote in the first place. Deep down they have only themselves to blame.
The only way out this problem is for the 10 to have the bottle to resign from the current league.

a few years back. was there not something like this that the clubs wanted to resign from the league but had to give some sort of 4 years notice?? i cant for the life of me remember what it was but i remember something like this. and what happened?

[IWasThere2016]

Hibs I believe.

He is a lifelong Hibee :agree:

Sounds too like the Radge for me in assuming the position for the OF to roger us again! :wink: :greengrin

OF GTF :bye:

[Kaiser1962]

To be honest i was always annoyed the SPL agreed to 11/1 vote in the first place. Deep down they have only themselves to blame.
The only way out this problem is for the 10 to have the bottle to resign from the current league.


I dont think that the "other" clubs expected the voting pattern to develop like it has i.e. the OF always voting together.

The second point I fail to see what resigning from the current league would achieve.

[HUTCHYHIBBY]

Wow, that was some political rant from HKHibby that spectacularly missed the point of the post he quoted.

[Pretty Boy]

You just cant see beyond the end of your nose there in the north of england just like scotland as a whole!, because he is a conservative! (check the definition of "tory"!), so you all just jump on the bandwagon! like sheep! and cant think for yourself either!, its also called jealousy! it always has been...anywhere north of the midlands! with a big chip on their shoulder about the south!...stop and think where it is that creates the wealth for the UK as a whole! not the north of england or scotland for sure! now that is down to alot of reasons!...it does creat wealth but not a quarter as much as the south and london in particular creates and keeps the uk going!!! 3 places in particular!....canary wharf!...finacial services and banking!...the city of london...finacial services and banking!...where the main bank is!...heathrow airport....import/export, cargo etc... etc... major hub for aviation!...so think about they are ripping you off!, the coal etc... from there has long gone! was not profitable! thats why it comes from Russia and China etc.. far cheaper and created jobs!, and the east european workers you have!....taking your jobs away!...yes all down to "New Labour" that one!! great years 1997-2010!!....i think not!

I have no idea of you're at the wind up or not but every one of your posts over the last couple of days has had me in stitches.

Thanks for that.

[greenginger]

a few years back. was there not something like this that the clubs wanted to resign from the league but had to give some sort of 4 years notice?? i cant for the life of me remember what it was but i remember something like this. and what happened?



Spl Rule 12.1 Clubs have to give 2 full seasons notice if they wish to leave the League. Also, once notice is given the Club can't change its mind and withdraw its resignation without the League's approval.

[JeMeSouviens]

Imo, the 10 don't need to quit the league.

The Huns are going bust. The Killie chairman made some pretty blatant overtures to NewHuns on the radio on Saturday, scrap the 11-1 and we'll let you back in. The Hunministrators have called the 10's bluff. All the 10 need to do is block NewHuns entry. Celtic can't block the voting change on their own.

There's no way that NewHuns should be allowed anywhere other than Div3 of the SFL (if they'll have them). They will be a new entity with absolutely no legal connection to the current Rangers. This gives the rest of the SPL a pragmatic reason to do the right thing.

SPL10 - JFDI !! :agree:

[Green Man]

a few years back. was there not something like this that the clubs wanted to resign from the league but had to give some sort of 4 years notice?? i cant for the life of me remember what it was but i remember something like this. and what happened?

It was about 10 years ago, the 10 non-OF clubs announced they were quitting the SPL. They ended up backing down, I can't remember what reason was given but it may have been a small concession by the OF? I just remember being delighted when the first announcement was made and disappointed with the second one.

Edit: It was when the OF vetoed the SPL TV plan. Couple of links:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/3026070/Old-Firm-shaken-by-SPL-revolt.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/scottish-premier/3031914/Renegade-10-to-resign-from-SPL-in-vote-protest.html

The resignations were withdrawn when some of the voting rules were changed from 11-1 to 8-4 or 10-2. It seems that some change was made to the distribution of TV money at the time as well.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/scot_prem/2683577.stm

[SQHib]

Imo, the 10 don't need to quit the league.

The Huns are going bust. The Killie chairman made some pretty blatant overtures to NewHuns on the radio on Saturday, scrap the 11-1 and we'll let you back in. The Hunministrators have called the 10's bluff. All the 10 need to do is block NewHuns entry. Celtic can't block the voting change on their own.

There's no way that NewHuns should be allowed anywhere other than Div3 of the SFL (if they'll have them). They will be a new entity with absolutely no legal connection to the current Rangers. This gives the rest of the SPL a pragmatic reason to do the right thing.

SPL10 - JFDI !! :agree:

What worries me is the details for how the voting for letting a newhuns in would pan out ? According to the bbc sport website this is the process :

If Rangers went out of existence, what would be the next move?

The new company would have to apply to join the Scottish Premier League.

As per article 11 of the SPL's rules, the six-man board would then vote on whether to approve the share transfer from the club formerly known as Rangers to the 'Newco'.

If the vote is 'yes' then the new club would be brought into the top 12.

Who are the six-man board?

The SPL board comprises chairman Ralph Topping, chief executive Neil Doncaster, Eric Riley of Celtic, Stephen Thompson of Dundee United, Derek Weir of Motherwell and Steven Brown of St Johnstone.

All six are entitled to vote on the election of a new club to the SPL.

The vote requires a majority decision, not a unanimous one and no other clubs get to vote on the decision, only the board.

Any new owners of Rangers would also have to meet the Scottish Football Association's 'fit and proper person' test.

Now , it woulsd seem all 12 clubs DO NOT get a vote in fact get NO say !! Its down to the six man board and if 4 of them vote yes the newhuns are back in - look who is on the board - from that I reckon they have three definite votes in Topping and Doncaster from the SPL and also Celtic ( despite their public posturing). I reckon Thomson of Dundee Utd would oppose leaving just the Well and Saintees reps - one of them folds and newhun 2012 walks straight back in - how convenient !!

only the SPL could put in place a stifling 11 - 1 majority rule for instigating any change and yet also put in a process where only 4 clubs vote on the biggest decision affecting scottish football probaly in its whole history !!

[JeMeSouviens]

What worries me is the details for how the voting for letting a newhuns in would pan out ? According to the bbc sport website this is the process :

If Rangers went out of existence, what would be the next move?

The new company would have to apply to join the Scottish Premier League.

As per article 11 of the SPL's rules, the six-man board would then vote on whether to approve the share transfer from the club formerly known as Rangers to the 'Newco'.

If the vote is 'yes' then the new club would be brought into the top 12.

Who are the six-man board?

The SPL board comprises chairman Ralph Topping, chief executive Neil Doncaster, Eric Riley of Celtic, Stephen Thompson of Dundee United, Derek Weir of Motherwell and Steven Brown of St Johnstone.

All six are entitled to vote on the election of a new club to the SPL.

The vote requires a majority decision, not a unanimous one and no other clubs get to vote on the decision, only the board.

Any new owners of Rangers would also have to meet the Scottish Football Association's 'fit and proper person' test.

Now , it woulsd seem all 12 clubs DO NOT get a vote in fact get NO say !! Its down to the six man board and if 4 of them vote yes the newhuns are back in - look who is on the board - from that I reckon they have three definite votes in Topping and Doncaster from the SPL and also Celtic ( despite their public posturing). I reckon Thomson of Dundee Utd would oppose leaving just the Well and Saintees reps - one of them folds and newhun 2012 walks straight back in - how convenient !!

only the SPL could put in place a stifling 11 - 1 majority rule for instigating any change and yet also put in a process where only 4 clubs vote on the biggest decision affecting scottish football probaly in its whole history !!

The above is a PR fiction put out by Neil Doncaster, abetted by compliant thickos like Chick Young.

The reality, as pointed out by greenginger on the "Rangers in admin" thread, is that the SPL board direct the club going bust to transfer its share to another club. However, the SPL board do not decide who the new club should be, that is decided by a vote of all the member clubs and requires a 90% majority (ie. 10-1). Read Clause 14 of the SPL articles of association, I've quoted it on the other thread.

[SQHib]

The above is a PR fiction put out by Neil Doncaster, abetted by compliant thickos like Chick Young.

The reality, as pointed out by greenginger on the "Rangers in admin" thread, is that the SPL board direct the club going bust to transfer its share to another club. However, the SPL board do not decide who the new club should be, that is decided by a vote of all the member clubs and requires a 90% majority (ie. 10-1). Read Clause 14 of the SPL articles of association, I've quoted it on the other thread.


Saw that - thanks for the clarification - silly me trusting the bbc weege sports pages :rolleyes:

[greenginger]

What worries me is the details for how the voting for letting a newhuns in would pan out ? According to the bbc sport website this is the process :

If Rangers went out of existence, what would be the next move?

The new company would have to apply to join the Scottish Premier League.

As per article 11 of the SPL's rules, the six-man board would then vote on whether to approve the share transfer from the club formerly known as Rangers to the 'Newco'.

If the vote is 'yes' then the new club would be brought into the top 12.

Who are the six-man board?

The SPL board comprises chairman Ralph Topping, chief executive Neil Doncaster, Eric Riley of Celtic, Stephen Thompson of Dundee United, Derek Weir of Motherwell and Steven Brown of St Johnstone.

All six are entitled to vote on the election of a new club to the SPL.

The vote requires a majority decision, not a unanimous one and no other clubs get to vote on the decision, only the board.

Any new owners of Rangers would also have to meet the Scottish Football Association's 'fit and proper person' test.

Now , it woulsd seem all 12 clubs DO NOT get a vote in fact get NO say !! Its down to the six man board and if 4 of them vote yes the newhuns are back in - look who is on the board - from that I reckon they have three definite votes in Topping and Doncaster from the SPL and also Celtic ( despite their public posturing). I reckon Thomson of Dundee Utd would oppose leaving just the Well and Saintees reps - one of them folds and newhun 2012 walks straight back in - how convenient !!

only the SPL could put in place a stifling 11 - 1 majority rule for instigating any change and yet also put in a process where only 4 clubs vote on the biggest decision affecting scottish football probaly in its whole history !!

It is not Article 11 that applies to liquidated Clubs, it is Article 14.

The share of the liquidated club goes to whoever the SPL. in a General Meeting approve to be given the Share. Approval must be by a "Special Qualified Resolution " with 83% in favour. It is not in the juridicition of the SPL Board.

[Twa Cairpets]

You just cant see beyond the end of your nose there in the north of england just like scotland as a whole!, because he is a conservative! (check the definition of "tory"!), so you all just jump on the bandwagon! like sheep! and cant think for yourself either!, its also called jealousy! it always has been...anywhere north of the midlands! with a big chip on their shoulder about the south!...stop and think where it is that creates the wealth for the UK as a whole! not the north of england or scotland for sure! now that is down to alot of reasons!...it does creat wealth but not a quarter as much as the south and london in particular creates and keeps the uk going!!! 3 places in particular!....canary wharf!...finacial services and banking!...the city of london...finacial services and banking!...where the main bank is!...heathrow airport....import/export, cargo etc... etc... major hub for aviation!...so think about they are ripping you off!, the coal etc... from there has long gone! was not profitable! thats why it comes from Russia and China etc.. far cheaper and created jobs!, and the east european workers you have!....taking your jobs away!...yes all down to "New Labour" that one!! great years 1997-2010!!....i think not!

and the prize! for the most!... unnecessary exclamation marks!!... and ellipsis... in a sentence! goes to!... HK Hibby!

[McD]

The hypocrisy that spews forth from Peter Lawell really is quite stunning.

He criticises the 'rebel 10' as being disrespectful and divisive by having meeting without the OF.

Meanwhile, Celtic have openly discussed atlantic leagues, moving to the english premiership, and only just a few weeks ago were talking about moving to english league one.

The man is so brass-necked its a wonder he can turn his head, but no doubt some sychophantic 'tic fan like jack regan will be along to tell us that its their god given right, they're oppressed by the establishment blah blah.

[offshorehibby]

The second point I fail to see what resigning from the current league would achieve.

With the current system the OF will not vote for change. The only way i can see round this is to resign, even if it's to call the OF's bluff.

[s.a.m]

The above is a PR fiction put out by Neil Doncaster, abetted by compliant thickos like Chick Young.

The reality, as pointed out by greenginger on the "Rangers in admin" thread, is that the SPL board direct the club going bust to transfer its share to another club. However, the SPL board do not decide who the new club should be, that is decided by a vote of all the member clubs and requires a 90% majority (ie. 10-1). Read Clause 14 of the SPL articles of association, I've quoted it on the other thread.

Which reminds me....on the radio on Saturday, a caller was talking about the previous, threatened withdrawal of 10 clubs from the Spl, and was looking for clarification about the details. CY's reply went along the lines of, "oh yeah - I remember that. Didn't the 10 hand in their notices or something - I can't remember what that was about, or why it didn't go ahead." Given that it's one of the topics of the moment, does it not just sum up the lack of interest that the media has in the majority of the Scottish footballing structure, that he doesn't remember this? Or bother to look it up??
:grr:

[green glory]

The 10 resigning en-masse will leave the OF with nowhere to play effectively. England doesn't want them and as for European or Atlantic leagues, that's just fantasy. So where would that leave them? Screwed.

[TrickyNicky]

and the prize! for the most!... unnecessary exclamation marks!!... and ellipsis... in a sentence! goes to!... HK Hibby!

Mild mannered janitor mah erse !!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7Ic-WAlyhA

[hibsforeurope]

I might be wrong but do teams not need to have audited acounts in to the SPL/SFA by the 31st March to be elligable to play in the following SPL league season? If this is the case there is no way Rangers will have these done and would need the support of the 11-1 majority to be specially reinstated to the league. This stance buy their administrator could blow up big time in their face, hopefully.

It has certainly made the huns more disliked, if that was at all possible.

[Part/Time Supporter]

I might be wrong but do teams not need to have audited acounts in to the SPL/SFA by the 31st March to be elligable to play in the following SPL league season? If this is the case there is no way Rangers will have these done and would need the support of the 11-1 majority to be specially reinstated to the league. This stance buy their administrator could blow up big time in their face, hopefully.

It has certainly made the huns more disliked, if that was at all possible.

No, that rule is just for European football.

Although curiously los Yambolinos were allowed to play in Europe this season despite not lodging their accounts until early May.

[Bad Martini]

You just cant see beyond the end of your nose there in the north of england just like scotland as a whole!, because he is a conservative! (check the definition of "tory"!), so you all just jump on the bandwagon! like sheep! and cant think for yourself either!, its also called jealousy! it always has been...anywhere north of the midlands! with a big chip on their shoulder about the south!...stop and think where it is that creates the wealth for the UK as a whole! not the north of england or scotland for sure! now that is down to alot of reasons!...it does creat wealth but not a quarter as much as the south and london in particular creates and keeps the uk going!!! 3 places in particular!....canary wharf!...finacial services and banking!...the city of london...finacial services and banking!...where the main bank is!...heathrow airport....import/export, cargo etc... etc... major hub for aviation!...so think about they are ripping you off!, the coal etc... from there has long gone! was not profitable! thats why it comes from Russia and China etc.. far cheaper and created jobs!, and the east european workers you have!....taking your jobs away!...yes all down to "New Labour" that one!! great years 1997-2010!!....i think not!

Sorry, but you missed the e in create :aok:

:na na:

Im off to work out why our esteemed leader (unelected as such, but in charge anyway, with two power sharing parties who were also not jointly elected, yet who still disassemble the country) is so against Scottish Independence when the south has so much going for it. PS I dinny like Labour either. :greengrin

Damn pesky Northern scrounging getts. :cb

...and regards the point of the thread, OFGTF.

ENDOF

[Matt92]

The 10 teams with real fans, lets up sticks, merge with first division and make a 20-team league with the same format as the Barclays Premier league.
The Old Firm can then choke without a league, with all the British leagues rejecting them, and we will have peace, competition, and equity for all.

I am so sick and tired of the hypocrisy if those two, they have been publicly mouthing off for years about how awful we all are, and how they want to leave. Well how about we leave and let you deal with it you ****. Burn in hell.

[johnbc70]

I say resign and let Celtic and Rangers play each other every week in a league of 2, see how they enjoy that.

In the news today another reason why we would be better off without them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17535376

[Hibs Class]

I say resign and let Celtic and Rangers play each other every week in a league of 2, see how they enjoy that.

In the news today another reason why we would be better off without them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-17535376

Lawell also thinks the 10's actions risk marginalising Scottish teams in Europe. If it meant doing without this kind of story

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17539283

then that may not be a bad thing either.

[Kaiser1962]

The 10 resigning en-masse will leave the OF with nowhere to play effectively. England doesn't want them and as for European or Atlantic leagues, that's just fantasy. So where would that leave them? Screwed.


But would ten other clubs from within the SFL not just step into the structure already established and the ten who have resigned be the ones left with nowhere to go?

I accept that change is required, particularly over voting, but I fail to see how resigning from the SPL will help.

[Jack]

But would ten other clubs from within the SFL not just step into the structure already established and the ten who have resigned be the ones left with nowhere to go?

I accept that change is required, particularly over voting, but I fail to see how resigning from the SPL will help.

With all due respect the competition in that SPL would be even worse than it is just now and IIRC none of their grounds are SPL compliant.

[Andy74]

Lawell also thinks the 10's actions risk marginalising Scottish teams in Europe. If it meant doing without this kind of story

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17539283

then that may not be a bad thing either.

The rest of us are already marginalsised in Europe. Perhaps we can become less so if we can start to compete at our own level. The Irish teams seem to do alright and Maribor had less resources than us.

[Kaiser1962]

With all due respect the competition in that SPL would be even worse than it is just now and IIRC none of their grounds are SPL compliant.

Nobody outwith the other half of the OF has been within 20 points of the winner for years anyway so would it make a lot of defference? The ground issue would be easily navigated given that 10 clubs resigned and I also feel that clubs like Dundee or Livingston would jump at the chance to play in the SPL.

[NORTHERNHIBBY]

No doubt when the Old Filth heard that the other ten clubs were holding clandestine meetings and had intentions to look after their own interests, their first thought was to sue for infringement of copyright.

[NAE NOOKIE]

But would ten other clubs from within the SFL not just step into the structure already established and the ten who have resigned be the ones left with nowhere to go?

I accept that change is required, particularly over voting, but I fail to see how resigning from the SPL will help.

If the SFL / SFA refused to form a new league to include the 10 ex SPL clubs it would be the most astonishing decision in the history of European football.

It would in effect be an admission that the old firm are Scottish football, in which case we would be as well to disband Scottish professional football alltogether.

Because the OF will not budge over the voting system the only course of action left to the 10 is to resign which would effectively end the SPL as an entity. That is how resigning will help, because in that scenario the OF will have no loaded voting system to use for their own self interest.

[blackpoolhibs]

If the SFL / SFA refused to form a new league to include the 10 ex SPL clubs it would be the most astonishing decision in the history of European football.

It would in effect be an admission that the old firm are Scottish football, in which case we would be as well to disband Scottish professional football alltogether.

Because the OF will not budge over the voting system the only course of action left to the 10 is to resign which would effectively end the SPL as an entity. That is how resigning will help, because in that scenario the OF will have no loaded voting system to use for their own self interest.

I personally cant see why the 10 rebel clubs :greengrin are dithering, they have absolutely nothing to lose.

they could resign, start a new league and invite the old firm back in, but with a fairer set up. Where would they go if they declined?

I get the feeling more and more clubs know the games finished in its present format, and they need to take back control of the game. ***tifino why they are waiting?:confused:

[Kojock]

they could resign, start a new league and invite the old firm back in, but with a fairer set up. Where would they go if they declined?

Exactly start our own league. Tell the SFA & SPL to GTF and set up a new governing body. They old farts at the SFA would be filling their incontinence pants just at the thought.

[blackpoolhibs]

Exactly start our own league. Tell the SFA & SPL to GTF and set up a new governing body. They old farts at the SFA would be filling their incontinence pants just at the thought.

:agree: I dont see a problem, we hold all the aces here?

[Kaiser1962]

Exactly start our own league. Tell the SFA & SPL to GTF and set up a new governing body. They old farts at the SFA would be filling their incontinence pants just at the thought.


:agree: I dont see a problem, we hold all the aces here?


I see lots. However it would appear I am in the minority on this one.

[blackpoolhibs]

I see lots. However it would appear I am in the minority on this one.

Surely you dont see a problem in a fairer voting system?

[Eyrie]

I've thought long and hard about the problems that Scottish football would have if the normal clubs left the SPL for the SFL and the Ugly Sisters had only each other to play with (insert your own incest jokes). Here's the comprehensive list -

1. Much reduced TV money.
2. Erm ......

OK, I'm convinced - let's ditch them. But I'll settle for being nice and agreeing to let them stay in exchange for a fairer voting system (9-3).

[cad]

I've thought long and hard about the problems that Scottish football would have if the normal clubs left the SPL for the SFL and the Ugly Sisters had only each other to play with (insert your own incest jokes). Here's the comprehensive list -

1. Much reduced TV money.
2. Erm ......

OK, I'm convinced - let's ditch them. But I'll settle for being nice and agreeing to let them stay in exchange for a fairer voting system (9-3).



In some way shape or form the devious b......s would manipulate the 3rd vote ,dont give them an option of any kind ,get them tae .... .

[Kaiser1962]

Surely you dont see a problem in a fairer voting system?


Post #84 on this thread.

No I dont.

But do you not think the likes of Livi, Dundee or Falkirk would jump at the chance of replacing us and the SPL, with the OF in place, would continue as before, more or less?

Change is required but in order to be effective it has to be won from within. IMO.

[NAE NOOKIE]

In some way shape or form the devious b......s would manipulate the 3rd vote ,dont give them an option of any kind ,get them tae .... .

Yer right .... But I've had a great idea to combat that.

Why dont they have a system where the one with the most votes wins. Ken like if 7 oot o' 12 vote for something. Sorry I'm just being daft now :greengrin

[Caversham Green]

Post #84 on this thread.

No I dont.

But do you not think the likes of Livi, Dundee or Falkirk would jump at the chance of replacing us and the SPL, with the OF in place, would continue as before, more or less?

Change is required but in order to be effective it has to be won from within. IMO.

The SPL is a company made up of the 12 clubs, rather than a division within the Scottish football set-up. They expel one club every year and invite another club to join. If the 'breakaway 10' leave they are in effect winding up the SPL, not leaving 10 spaces in it. The OF and Div 1 clubs would then have to start up a new SPL-type league which would entail the SFL clubs resigning from their league. It could be done, but it all gets a bit messy. I also wonder if Dundee might not prefer derbies with United rather than visits from the OF. Likewise Ross County with ICT and Aberdeen, Raith with Dunfy etc.

I say rip it up and start again.

[greenginger]

The SPL is a company made up of the 12 clubs, rather than a division within the Scottish football set-up. They expel one club every year and invite another club to join. If the 'breakaway 10' leave they are in effect winding up the SPL, not leaving 10 spaces in it. The OF and Div 1 clubs would then have to start up a new SPL-type league which would entail the SFL clubs resigning from their league. It could be done, but it all gets a bit messy. I also wonder if Dundee might not prefer derbies with United rather than visits from the OF. Likewise Ross County with ICT and Aberdeen, Raith with Dunfy etc.

I say rip it up and start again.


Not necessary, I say. There will be enough evidence to expel Rangers from the SPL and without their " partner " Celtic would be powerless to halt any changes.

There must be unity and resolve in the other 10 clubs or nothing changes.

[blackpoolhibs]

Post #84 on this thread.

No I dont.

But do you not think the likes of Livi, Dundee or Falkirk would jump at the chance of replacing us and the SPL, with the OF in place, would continue as before, more or less?

Change is required but in order to be effective it has to be won from within. IMO.

THIS



The SPL is a company made up of the 12 clubs, rather than a division within the Scottish football set-up. They expel one club every year and invite another club to join. If the 'breakaway 10' leave they are in effect winding up the SPL, not leaving 10 spaces in it. The OF and Div 1 clubs would then have to start up a new SPL-type league which would entail the SFL clubs resigning from their league. It could be done, but it all gets a bit messy. I also wonder if Dundee might not prefer derbies with United rather than visits from the OF. Likewise Ross County with ICT and Aberdeen, Raith with Dunfy etc.

I say rip it up and start again.



:agree:

[JeMeSouviens]

If the 'breakaway 10' leave they are in effect winding up the SPL, not leaving 10 spaces in it.

Correct. And guess what? You can't wind up the SPL without 11 of its members being in favour. Hence the 10 would have to resign from the league and serve out 2 years' notice.

Still think we should hang fire, then when the Huns liquidate*, Celtic will be powerless to stop the voting change.

*provided we have the cojones to block NewHuns from entering the SPL.

[greenginger]

Correct. And guess what? You can't wind up the SPL without 11 of its members being in favour. Hence the 10 would have to resign from the league and serve out 2 years' notice.

Still think we should hang fire, then when the Huns liquidate*, Celtic will be powerless to stop the voting change.

*provided we have the cojones to block NewHuns from entering the SPL.


After the Hun's liquidation there will only be 11 SPL members and for New-co Hun to get back in would require a Qualified Resolution in favour of them rejoining.

That is at least 10 votes of the remaining 11 in favour of the Cheats . I don't think thats going to happen.

I don't know what happens in the event that there is no agreement of who replaces the Liquidated Huns. SPL of 11 won't work ?

[cad]

Yer right .... But I've had a great idea to combat that.

Why dont they have a system where the one with the most votes wins. Ken like if 7 oot o' 12 vote for something. Sorry I'm just being daft now :greengrin



Yer getting a bit radical are ye no :greengrin

You will be wanting all the TV money next .

[Kaiser1962]

The SPL is a company made up of the 12 clubs, rather than a division within the Scottish football set-up. They expel one club every year and invite another club to join. If the 'breakaway 10' leave they are in effect winding up the SPL, not leaving 10 spaces in it. The OF and Div 1 clubs would then have to start up a new SPL-type league which would entail the SFL clubs resigning from their league. It could be done, but it all gets a bit messy. I also wonder if Dundee might not prefer derbies with United rather than visits from the OF. Likewise Ross County with ICT and Aberdeen, Raith with Dunfy etc.

I say rip it up and start again.


Are we winding it up or resigning from it though?

I dont disagree with the overall mantra of BH and others but I do not think this is going to be anywhere near as smooth as some appear to be suggesting.

[blackpoolhibs]

Are we winding it up or resigning from it though?

I dont disagree with the overall mantra of BH and others but I do not think this is going to be anywhere near as smooth as some appear to be suggesting.

Nothing is actually running very smooth now Kaiser, and to be honest imo the game in Scotland is as good as dead.

A radical rethink is needed, with a fairer distribution of wealth, plus the reserve league brought back. Saturday 3pms and probably summer football too. There's probably much more, especially with youth football and having one body running the show. Where we are now is driving folk away in droves.

And if this means hitting the old firm where it hurts money wise, with a different share of funds, maybe even some sort of gate share, then if they actually want better competition, not just spouting rubbish, then these sort of things have to happen.

the start has to be a fairer voting structure, who in their right mind would vote against that?

I think we know the answer to the last question dont we?:rolleyes:

[Spike Mandela]

Yer right .... But I've had a great idea to combat that.

Why dont they have a system where the one with the most votes wins. Ken like if 7 oot o' 12 vote for something. Sorry I'm just being daft now :greengrin

A majority verdict is sufficient enough in Scottish courts but not good enough in the SPL.:rolleyes:

So good enough to decide if someone is guilty of murder but not good enough to decide how to share money in the SPL.

[Kaiser1962]

Nothing is actually running very smooth now Kaiser, and to be honest imo the game in Scotland is as good as dead.

A radical rethink is needed, with a fairer distribution of wealth, plus the reserve league brought back. Saturday 3pms and probably summer football too. There's probably much more, especially with youth football and having one body running the show. Where we are now is driving folk away in droves.

And if this means hitting the old firm where it hurts money wise, with a different share of funds, maybe even some sort of gate share, then if they actually want better competition, not just spouting rubbish, then these sort of things have to happen.

the start has to be a fairer voting structure, who in their right mind would vote against that?

I think we know the answer to the last question dont we?:rolleyes:



There is not much wrong with any of that BH.

The TV revenue is not that drastic in the overall sheme of things. In 2010 Celtic finished second, 18 points ahead of Dundee United in third. United also won the cup that year and posted their biggest income of the new century.

SPL TV revenue boosted Celtic's income by just over 3% yet did the same to United's by nearly 26%. So who would the loss of the TV deal hurt more?

Gate share? Not sure how you would resurrect that one but it's worthy of discussion, as are all the points you mention.

I do think that penalties for running up debts that cant be paid should be more draconian as they are in the world outside football. A 10 point penalty is absolute nonsense IMO.

If we, and the others, do resign I dont see how we can then have a say in how the SPL functions and I do believe that it will continue without us, as it would without the OF, however messy that might become I do not believe it would be insurmountable.

First things first though and deal with the voting debacle. We have an opportunity to do this now as the Hun is wounded, mortally IMO, leaving their sectarian twin isolated. But lets force change from within.

[Green Man]

Re: Sharing gate money. I'm aware that this was done in the past. Are there countries in which it still happens, or is it the norm worldwide for the home team to keep all gate receipts?

[offshorehibby]

There is not much wrong with any of that BH.

First things first though and deal with the voting debacle. We have an opportunity to do this now as the Hun is wounded, mortally IMO, leaving their sectarian twin isolated. But lets force change from within.

I can't see how you are going to achieve this within the present structure. The only way this is going to happen is if the hun do go into liquidation.

[Caversham Green]

Are we winding it up or resigning from it though?

I dont disagree with the overall mantra of BH and others but I do not think this is going to be anywhere near as smooth as some appear to be suggesting.

I would say both. If ten out of the twelve member clubs leave the SPL effectively ceases to exist. I don't know what the wording of the constitution is, but it would have to change to encompass the two biggest clubs plus (by definition) the second best group of 10 clubs in Scotland - that is not a premier league. They would also have to redraft the rules regarding ground capacity and seating. The second-best ten might even want to re-negotiate voting rules before joining and they couldn't be sure all ten would accept the invitation if the 'splinter group' set up an alternative league. Then there's the question of promotion/relegation - does the promoted team come from the second division or one of the 'rebels'? In any case it couldn't claim to be Scotland's top league, because ten of the best twelve clubs aren't in it.

It seems much easier to agree to a change to what is in any case a fairer and more logical voting structure.

[Caversham Green]

I can't see how you are going to achieve this within the present structure. The only way this is going to happen is if the hun do go into liquidation.

I have a feeling Duff & Phelps are acting outwith their powers in voting one way or the other. This is effectively a political vote concerning the structure of Scottish football, not a commercial one concerning the income of Rangers FC and I would argue that D&P have neither the capacity nor the authority to make a decision in that area.

[Halifaxhibby]

Just did a few rough calculations regarding this sky deal, £80 million over 5 years works out at £16 million per club(thats if the money was divided equally), or £3.2 million a season, over a 38 game season amounts to £84,210 a game. Seems a lot but we'd only need to stick another 4210 on the gate each week to cover that(at say £20 a head), think that 4210 is probably comparable to the amount of ST holders and other regular followers we've lost in the last few seasons,

Why can't the magnificent 10 go to the bbc or stv and try and punt a few games to them as well? In the age of digital telly where itv2,3,4 all regularly show football maybe sky isn't the only answer.

A more competitive league would quickly attract more interest, and with limited tv access surely we'd have more games on sat at 3pm where more punters would show up.

[John_the_angus_hibby]

Just did a few rough calculations regarding this sky deal, £80 million over 5 years works out at £16 million per club(thats if the money was divided equally), or £3.2 million a season, over a 38 game season amounts to £84,210 a game. Seems a lot but we'd only need to stick another 4210 on the gate each week to cover that(at say £20 a head), think that 4210 is probably comparable to the amount of ST holders and other regular followers we've lost in the last few seasons,

Why can't the magnificent 10 go to the bbc or stv and try and punt a few games to them as well? In the age of digital telly where itv2,3,4 all regularly show football maybe sky isn't the only answer.

A more competitive league would quickly attract more interest, and with limited tv access surely we'd have more games on sat at 3pm where more punters would show up.

Yes but 4210 extra bums on seats are quite a lot for the likes of ICT etc. They would have to vote for all of this. The economics are a lot different for other clubs. That will be the problem when clubs are looking taking such a risk...financially they understand the status quo. They may not like it, but how many will roll the dice?


Sent from another universe!

[Caversham Green]

Just did a few rough calculations regarding this sky deal, £80 million over 5 years works out at £16 million per club(thats if the money was divided equally), or £3.2 million a season, over a 38 game season amounts to £84,210 a game. Seems a lot but we'd only need to stick another 4210 on the gate each week to cover that(at say £20 a head), think that 4210 is probably comparable to the amount of ST holders and other regular followers we've lost in the last few seasons,

Why can't the magnificent 10 go to the bbc or stv and try and punt a few games to them as well? In the age of digital telly where itv2,3,4 all regularly show football maybe sky isn't the only answer.

A more competitive league would quickly attract more interest, and with limited tv access surely we'd have more games on sat at 3pm where more punters would show up.

You need a new calculator - £80m between 12 clubs is £6.67m per club or £1.33m per year. That makes your point stronger though.

[IWasThere2016]

Nothing is actually running very smooth now Kaiser, and to be honest imo the game in Scotland is as good as dead.

A radical rethink is needed, with a fairer distribution of wealth, plus the reserve league brought back. Saturday 3pms and probably summer football too. There's probably much more, especially with youth football and having one body running the show. Where we are now is driving folk away in droves.

And if this means hitting the old firm where it hurts money wise, with a different share of funds, maybe even some sort of gate share, then if they actually want better competition, not just spouting rubbish, then these sort of things have to happen.

the start has to be a fairer voting structure, who in their right mind would vote against that?

I think we know the answer to the last question dont we?:rolleyes:

:top marks There must be CHANGE :agree:

[Moulin Yarns]

Re: Sharing gate money. I'm aware that this was done in the past. Are there countries in which it still happens, or is it the norm worldwide for the home team to keep all gate receipts?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The technology now allows an accurate count of the number of folks attending who suopport each team.

As an example:

St Mirren come to Easter Road with 100 fans, they pay £2200 at the gate, so they get that amount, less the expenses of having staff to take the money stewarding etc so St Mirren get, for the sake of argument £1800 from the gate receipts. If they had brought 1000 fans they would have paid £22000, les the expenses so would go away with £21600.

It isn't rocket science. The more fans you have, the more gate money you should get. Yes the infirm would get a larger proportion than most, but as a fan, you know that going to away games you are not lining the pockets of other teams. surely that is n't too difficult to put in place.

[greenginger]

I would say both. If ten out of the twelve member clubs leave the SPL effectively ceases to exist. I don't know what the wording of the constitution is, but it would have to change to encompass the two biggest clubs plus (by definition) the second best group of 10 clubs in Scotland - that is not a premier league. They would also have to redraft the rules regarding ground capacity and seating. The second-best ten might even want to re-negotiate voting rules before joining and they couldn't be sure all ten would accept the invitation if the 'splinter group' set up an alternative league. Then there's the question of promotion/relegation - does the promoted team come from the second division or one of the 'rebels'? In any case it couldn't claim to be Scotland's top league, because ten of the best twelve clubs aren't in it.

It seems much easier to agree to a change to what is in any case a fairer and more logical voting structure.

Spl Rule C12.1 Clubs must give full two seasons notice if they wish to quit the league or they are liable for any losses and expenses incurred by the League.

[greenginger]

I have a feeling Duff & Phelps are acting outwith their powers in voting one way or the other. This is effectively a political vote concerning the structure of Scottish football, not a commercial one concerning the income of Rangers FC and I would argue that D&P have neither the capacity nor the authority to make a decision in that area.


Interdict them to prevent them voting at the General Meeting and push through the changes inspite of Lawell's threats.

Of course, Duff and Phelps will claim changing the rules will make it harder to sell the club so they should be allowed to vote.

[Caversham Green]

Spl Rule C12.1 Clubs must give full two seasons notice if they wish to quit the league or they are liable for any losses and expenses incurred by the League.

That caters for individual clubs leaving the league but it doesn't really cover the vast majority of clubs deciding they no longer want to compete in it. What do the rules say about a resolution to wind the league up?

[Caversham Green]

Interdict them to prevent them voting at the General Meeting and push through the changes inspite of Lawell's threats.

Of course, Duff and Phelps will claim changing the rules will make it harder to sell the club so they should be allowed to vote.

:agree:


The counter to D&P's argument should be that if they vote the wrong way RFC will not be playing against 10 of the top 12 clubs in the country, which would probably be fatal to the club - at best they should abstain.

[Hibs Class]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The technology now allows an accurate count of the number of folks attending who suopport each team.

As an example:

St Mirren come to Easter Road with 100 fans, they pay £2200 at the gate, so they get that amount, less the expenses of having staff to take the money stewarding etc so St Mirren get, for the sake of argument £1800 from the gate receipts. If they had brought 1000 fans they would have paid £22000, les the expenses so would go away with £21600.

It isn't rocket science. The more fans you have, the more gate money you should get. Yes the infirm would get a larger proportion than most, but as a fan, you know that going to away games you are not lining the pockets of other teams. surely that is n't too difficult to put in place.


It might be possible but I don't see as at all desirable, other than for the OF. I suspect that most fans who don't travel to away games do so for many reasons other than lining the home teams' pockets. I think that making such a change would just widen the gap even further between the OF and the rest, at a time when we should be looking to narrow it.

[Hibercelona]

I just want the SPL to hurry up and die in all honesty.

Then clubs that can be ersed, can start a fresh new league, free of bigots, corruption and SKY money.

Money doesn't benefit a club when they have nothing to gain from it in the first place.

[Eyrie]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. The technology now allows an accurate count of the number of folks attending who suopport each team.

As an example:

St Mirren come to Easter Road with 100 fans, they pay £2200 at the gate, so they get that amount, less the expenses of having staff to take the money stewarding etc so St Mirren get, for the sake of argument £1800 from the gate receipts. If they had brought 1000 fans they would have paid £22000, les the expenses so would go away with £21600.

It isn't rocket science. The more fans you have, the more gate money you should get. Yes the infirm would get a larger proportion than most, but as a fan, you know that going to away games you are not lining the pockets of other teams. surely that is n't too difficult to put in place.
Kilmarnock are talking about giving at least half of Rugby Park over to Celtc next week because this will maximise their revenue from the game. Under your proposal the smaller teams would lose such income, and thus be less competitive. It's a non-starter.

Far better to split the gate money 90:10 if you don't want the home team to keep the lot.

[Moulin Yarns]

Kilmarnock are talking about giving at least half of Rugby Park over to Celtc next week because this will maximise their revenue from the game. Under your proposal the smaller teams would lose such income, and thus be less competitive. It's a non-starter.

Far better to split the gate money 90:10 if you don't want the home team to keep the lot.

In your scenario we would give a larger proportion to St Mirren for the 100 fans, so we would lose out. I'm trying to point out that it is actually possible to pay clubs relative to the fans who turn up, if Killie want to give 10000 tickets to Celtc then they lose income compared to encouraging their own fans. No need for % gate receipts. IMHO of course.

[Ozyhibby]

I think all home teams should keep the money for the first 15,000 fans through the door to pay for the upkeep of the stadium. After that it should be a 50/50 split. That's my unbiased opinion.

[Kaiser1962]

I would say both. If ten out of the twelve member clubs leave the SPL effectively ceases to exist. I don't know what the wording of the constitution is, but it would have to change to encompass the two biggest clubs plus (by definition) the second best group of 10 clubs in Scotland - that is not a premier league. They would also have to redraft the rules regarding ground capacity and seating. The second-best ten might even want to re-negotiate voting rules before joining and they couldn't be sure all ten would accept the invitation if the 'splinter group' set up an alternative league. Then there's the question of promotion/relegation - does the promoted team come from the second division or one of the 'rebels'? In any case it couldn't claim to be Scotland's top league, because ten of the best twelve clubs aren't in it.

It seems much easier to agree to a change to what is in any case a fairer and more logical voting structure.


Not to far away with any of that although I would think that by resigning they are effectively saying they no longer want to be part of it as opposed to winding up the SPL. Just my thoughts.

In total agreement with the last bit and it is the way to go. IMO.

[Caversham Green]

Not to far away with any of that although I would think that by resigning they are effectively saying they no longer want to be part of it as opposed to winding up the SPL. Just my thoughts.

In total agreement with the last bit and it is the way to go. IMO.

I don't know what the rules about winding up are (probably 11-1 voting :rolleyes:) so I was probably wrong to use that term - and greenginger makes the point about a two-season lead time for resignation, but I do think the resignation of 10 clubs makes the SPL unworkable. I wouldn't be surprised if the OF (Lawwell in particular) were arrogant enough to try a bit of brinksmanship though.

[Caversham Green]

Kilmarnock are talking about giving at least half of Rugby Park over to Celtc next week because this will maximise their revenue from the game. Under your proposal the smaller teams would lose such income, and thus be less competitive. It's a non-starter.

Far better to split the gate money 90:10 if you don't want the home team to keep the lot.

Way way back when I was a trainee I worked on the 'audit' of a couple of lower league clubs. IIRC the rule then was that the away club got the higher of a fixed fee or (something like) 30% of the gate receipts. It strikes me as perfectly logical as without the away side there would be no game and therefore no receipts, while the home club deserves a bigger share of the pot to cover staffing expenses etc. With the predominance of season tickets there would have to be some sort of formula in place, but it seems much fairer than the current system to me.