Not sure what you're getting at. If the SFL are trying to circumvent their own rules... whether they're sensible rules or not.... surely that is an issue that has to be addressed, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Printable View
Not sure what you're getting at. If the SFL are trying to circumvent their own rules... whether they're sensible rules or not.... surely that is an issue that has to be addressed, no?Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Of course you are right.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
I am just so hacked off with the whole situation I wish we could just rip up the whole rule book and let common sense prevail. I am close to the point of not caring anymore beyond continuing to follow and support Hibs.
You're not the only one, of course. But it's only by pointing out the inconsistencies and lies that are peddled that some sort of justice can be achieved.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
It is relevant if there's nothing in the rules to bump up teams if there is a vacancy. It explicitly says they can deal with things as they like when someone ceases to be a member.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Dundee, or Ross county, meet the criteria of ceasing the be members do they can put rangers in div 1.
No it doesn't. See the Constitution that i posted earlier. 94 2.2, I think. It's quite explicit in terms of a new team filling a vacancy, which Sevco areQuote:
Originally Posted by VickMackie
Could you make post up a video of yourself saying that in a ''Wheeltappers and Shunters Social Club'' stylee?:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O-KrzEeh5R4
Quiet when the turn's on, puhlease!!Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
:greengrin
When you put them both together it looks like you're correct. Rule change it is then!Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
... which is what Longmuir said on Friday would need to happen.Quote:
Originally Posted by VickMackie
What worries me, though, is that clubs like Clyde don't seem to know the rules. Maybe Mr. Thomson could point that out to them. :greengrin
Although its understandable that each club won't have high powered lawyers dissecting every rule for a loophole.Quote:
Originally Posted by CropleyWasGod
They could all chip in for a lawyer to fight back against stuff being forced on them. However, they all don't see the game going in the same direction so that would be difficult.
In an attempt to explain the apparent conflict between the two rules:
Rule 94 2.2 gives a specific ruling that any vacancy occurs in the bottom league, there is a vacancy, therefore it is in SFL 3.
Rule 94.3 is a catch-all to cover unforeseen circumstances - it gives the board discretion to deal with the situation of a club being expelled, resigning etc in whatever way it thinks fit - that does not refer to the vacancy, because that has already been dealt with in a prior rule. Possible circumstances that it could deal with are if one of the resigning team had been in a promotion/relegation position (between SFL leagues) the board would decide what team would be promoted/relegated in its place. Or, if a team had been found to be paying players outside their contracts and expelled as a result the board could decide whether to expunge that club's results for the previous season - possibly affecting final league positions - or leave things as they were. The vacancy is still specifically in Div 3 because Rule 94 2.2 says so.
On Clyde's statement I got the feeling that they were reporting what they had been told but were cynical about it - I think there was a 'this is news to us' type of comment within their statement.
After reading this comment and re-reading the Clyde statement you may well be right. In fact I think you are. Good analysis, I stand corrected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caversham Green
According to this Scottish Football League chief executive David Longmuir is expecting Rangers to be in Div 1 next season.
http://www.football.co.uk/rangers/lo...s2682118.shtml
The vast majority of Ibrox fans favour a fresh start in the bottom tier after last week's failed bid to remain in the Scottish Premier League.
However, the First Division looks the likely destination after Scottish Football Association chief executive Stewart Regan claimed that dire financial consequences meant he could not allow Ally McCoist's side to resume life in Division Three.
Longmuir expects to meet with Regan and Scottish Premier League chief executive Neil Doncaster over the next few days before the decision about Rangers newco is taken by the SPL board, on behalf of its members, who would then look forward to a package of reforms which are likely to include the re-introduction of play-offs and changes to the distribution of finances and votes.
Can't believe Doncaster is acting alone. He must have approval of the various SPL boards. We must all contact Hibs to demand if they agree with this action. In addition other fans must contact heir clubs and say likewise. What would be the best email address to write to?Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNo But
I think I'm actually past that point primarily due to the blatant impartiality of muppets in charge of this "Carry On Rangers" comedy, straight out of Pinewood Studios. :yawn:Quote:
Originally Posted by marinello59
Doncaster is just the messageboy and he is working with the full knowledge of the SPL boards and the SFL Board and the SFA. Here are the men who run Scottish football so you could start with any of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by PatHead
http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish....cfm?page=2560
One of them is very familiar though he has two hats to wear so it's hard to be to critical of this stance to date.
Thanks will work on a letter tomorrow.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Baldmans Comb
If this goes down like I think it will then Doncaster, Regan, Longmuir et al won't know what's hit them. There's no way they'll walk away from this unscathed.
Has the SFA acted according to its core values?
- We are open, honest and trusted to do the right thing, in a manner that reflects the highest standards of integrity
- We are dynamic, enthusiastic and proactive in delivering the highest standards of performance
- We act in a business-like, responsive and correct manner
- We involve, engage and listen, treating everyone in a considerate and dignified manner
- We work together as a team, behaving in an equitable and inclusive manner
- We are excited and enthused by all that we do
- We are driven and committed to excel in all aspects of quality and service
Guys a muppet! 'Aye lets give the cheaters a second chance, while the smaller clubs who've played by the rules can go **** themselves'. Speaks as if the old firm are the only clubs involved in scottish football, really doesnt have a clue.:rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBean
The financial consequences of not admitting Rangers to Division One have been computed, rather inaccurately, but has anyone calculate to cost of admitting them to Division One in terms of loss of support to SPL and SFL clubs. The former are all short term costs, the latter are long term.Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNo But
I initially voted with the minority on this poll saying that I would continue to support the game. That was based on an assumption that if the SFL decided to vote a Rangers entity into Division One, that was their concern. However given the blackmail being employed by the corrupt Scottish Football establishment, I have decided to call it a day. This has gone on for far too long
I have a season ticket for next season which I will not be collecting. I will not be back at any match in Scotland.
Maybe if the SFL clubs stage a revolt and block the move I may reconsider. It will probably be restricted to attending Dunfermline or Raith Rovers matches.
The fact that the Authorities were prepared to risk the destruction of Scottish Football to accommodate a toxic club who have lied and cheated their way to numerous titles and cups is beyond belief. The fact that it was against the views expressed by the vast majority of supporters of all clubs makes it doubly concerning.
Those responsible are no longer worthy of our support. They will lead Scottish Football to its demise in its current form.
Enough is enough.
Excellent statement from the club. No doubt now as to the views held by the those in boardroom at ER. Almost as good as Mad Vlad's rant last week. So as a club Hibs are saying, "**** the Huns, get the ***** into SFL3, Duncaster and Regan are a pair or corrupt ****s." Well said Hibs, I am glad you have made your stance totally clear.
Quote:
Originally Posted by YehButNo But
That statement is from the supporters club, not the actual club.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lungo--Drom
Hibs have said nothing as the matter is now out of their hands.
I truly detest that idiot with a passion.Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBean
Absolutely shameful.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
I had to stop reading his drivvle after a paragraph or so. What an absolute eejit, no clue or morals and as long as idiots like this can have "their" say in the West of Scotland driven Media, then I still stand on my principles of not paying attention to it...Quote:
Originally Posted by MacBean
Until you point my attention to it :greengrin
While any decent person would thoroughly disagree, I suspect that Regan, Longmuir and Doncaster will perversely consider that they are acting within core values 1 and 3.Quote:
Originally Posted by hibs0666
Considering RFC made a huge PR disaster by not apologising for their previous misdeeds and instead trying to blame all and sundry for a predicament that only they as a club/company are responsible for, I can only assume Burley is not very bright if he feels that calling people 'nonentities' and 'muppets' will benefit his/their cause in any way ... surely some of his "friends" must have pointed out to him that this article was anything but a good idea? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by EdinMike
In publishing this, the Daily Drivel only confirms what a poor excuse for a newspaper it really is...