Handsome_Devil

Of course but people will have been talking, agents checked to see if there's interest and so on. There's no way a club on a stinking run these days bins their manager without the slightest idea of who might be able/willing to take over regardless of what they then put out in the papers about starting a process.

Based on nothing at all, they've been flirting with Ross for weeks who has strung them along waiting on Aberdeen but having been KB'd from Pittodrie has now said 'ok then...'. Utterly bizarre timing unless they have a plan but Dundee have been a basket case for the vast majority of my time following Scottish football so who knows.

Having finally stumbled onto an XI which put in a performance and won, it would be madness to make unenforced changes now but sadly I can see GA doing just that. Unless Aberdeen get their new manager in before Saturday I think we'll sneak it by the odd goal.

The guaranteed European group stage pay-out completely changes the risk/reward ratio for investment at the clubs who think they 'should' be third. There's certainly a chance for someone to establish themselves as best of the rest again and be competitive in the cups even if an actual title challenge is fantasy.

I never like making fun of opposition fans for their mile out comments because we've all been there ourselves but that is indeed glorious. And why wouldn't you expect that to happen to Gallagher on occasion? With the exception of late 2019 and one game in Belgrade it's been his level his whole career.

I've lurked here for ages and this is a question interesting enough to prompt a first post in about a decade so cheers for that. I don't know but I'd guess two things: 1) Goodwin has been at St Mirren since summer 2019, approaching three years which is a good stint anyway but with the pandemic seems like a lifetime. There's a sense he's due to move on. Alexander in contrast has had 13 months and while he did a good job salvaging a car crash in the first half of that, with the summer clear out and rebuild it seems like he's hardly got started. 2) Given Goodwin lifted St Mirren from relegation strugglers on their first season back, there's the impression that expectations are different like you say. Goodwin was praised for St Mirren's best season in a while last year, if a Motherwell manager lost two semis to non-OF sides and threw away the top six there'd be folk with pitchforks and burning torches outside FP. Whether that's fair or not a different matter ofc. But aye, it is curious how some managers just become flavour of the month for whatever reason. FWIW if you assume Goodwin is dreaming of the Celtic job, he must surely know he's got almost no chance of going there straight from St Mirren. Aberdeen at a low ebb has its risks but all in all he'd surely consider it a good in between step.

It's one thing supporting a small club who rarely win things and usually struggle but another thing completely supporting the equivalent of the Washington Generals as a stooge team which simply provides opposition for someone else. If the choice is between vanishing outright and that, I wouldn't be that fussed if we died. But anyway, there is no chance it will come to that. We have so many players out of contract next summer we will be able to drastically cut the wage bill so we're not looking at a failure of business, just a temporary, if substantial, cashflow problem. And there's no reason why between fans fundraising and selling a couple of better players, we shouldn't be able to bridge that. Afterwards, we do what everyone else does, sign the best players we can afford and see where we end up - there's then no reason to think we won't then maintain our historical position of bobbling around in 6th-10th, especially as others have existing large debts to manage and no crack at Europe this year to help ease the problem.

The SPL clubs have kicked them out because of money - they fear long-term they'll lose their fans die if they let them back in - and the SFL will use money to make their decision too. The SFL could help out the SPL (if the Sky one season away thing is true) by dropping them into the First but why should they? If they go down to the Third 80-90 per cent of SFL clubs will get at least two visits from Rangers and there will be the wet dream of a three-year television deal which can be spread around everyone - and at the budget several of these clubs work on you only need a small amount to make a massive difference. If the SFL wants to let them into the First, of course some jiggery pokery can be done but it will take an almighty bribe from the SPL to get it. A share of the current television deal and another promotion spot would seem the absolute minimum they should be looking to get and given the soon to be state of the SPL clubs, I'm not convinced they'll be willing to stump up. In that case the SFL as a whole stands to gain a lot more with Rangers going into the Third Division than falling over themselves to help the very SPL which was set up to shaft them in the first place.

We've already included £250k (again, the worst case scenario) of Euro money n our budget for next season so we need to make more than that to start making up for the loss/retention of Rangers. And the other point about us having cut players, we needed to shave 200k from the budget to make things match up given our existing income. That will now be less, barring a miracle, regardless of how the Rangers thing pans out.

Not an unreasonable conspiracy theory but I think the mess at Rangers is so big they're fucked anyway (for next season at least). The stuff about the bank accounts and allegedly not knowing about the required tax deposit is absolutely farcical.

Perhaps a month ago yes, this outcome was beginning to look possible but your point in general is 100 per cent spot on. If Rangers - the players, former players, former directors, fans, administrators, everyone - had came out and said sorry we screwed you over, we're in deep shit, please help us and we'll help change the game for good afterwards, they'd have been fine. There would obviously have been some fans staying in the hang 'em high brigade but there would at least have been a debate. The attitude of Rangers has been a major nail in their coffin. We can only hope the SFL finish the completely after the SFA appeal panel suspends them.

So that's Hibs, United and Hearts confirmed as no with Motherwell effectively sure to follow. Inverness hinting towards no too while Celtic and Aberdeen will probably come down on that side shortly. It's effectively done...once it becomes clear five will vote no, the scramble to join the bandwagon will be incredible.

First instinct - ahahahahahahahaha! Second - Rangers to England, AGAIN? Ain't going to happen, yawn, move on. But again shows how little regard they have for Scottish football. More interesting tomorrow is the SFA likely announcing when the appeal tribunal will meet.

Rather obviously, that's not actually Chick Young!

They can appeal the fact the decision has been sent back to the Appeal Tribunal and not a first Judicial Panel (or even thrown out altogether, actually). In other words, appeal the fact that should they AT suspended/expel them they will have no further right of appeal.

You don't need to pay the fee to vote? What's it for then!? But fair enough, I guess that may persuade people to hang around in an attempt to get rid of the current board. I doubt anyone will call Derek Weir a liar, it's hardly a surprise he'll point out the impending financial hardship. I suspect a combination of two and three is the likely outcome.

I don't think you can ask people to invest and become the talent pool for the board then completely ignore such a strong feeling. Most people may be paid up in the initial fee but they won't cough up the yearly sub needed to vote and will not bother turning up to whatever meetings there are to take things forward. You obviously have your crowd, I have mine and the vast majority of them will be chucking Motherwell if we roll over completely on this one regardless of having paid the fee already. £300 is not a lot to write off compared to the thousands I've spunked on the club before and the thousands I would otherwise spend in the future.

Will still be the old board who go to the meeting. I think the plan is to gradually give the Society more influence in the months ahead but it's not going to happen immediately.

Good luck proving that...and even if it's true, do you think squirrelling away some turnstile money is comparable to abusing a tax scheme to the tune of tens of millions and then simply not paying £15m of PAYE, VAT etc?

If Rangers are playing with a limited team (which would seem likely) and are mid-table thanks to a 20 point deduction there is no chance - none at all - Rangers will sell out away ends at a minimum of £25 to watch meaningless games which are on telly. The first difference between Rangers and other clubs - rightly or wrongly - is others negotiated a legal deal with their creditors while you guys were forced to shut down. I've repeated this (stolen) line before because I love it so much but if you were a joiners you'd be on Watchdog. The other difference (and you can question whether it's a valid sporting theme or not) is no other club has brought the game into disrepute by systematically defrauding the public purse.

We'll agree to differ on that one. But the Well Society is ripped up over night if they vote yes and I think that's concern number one at Fir Park.

Not unreasonable but as much as losing Rangers fans is bad financially, it's far from fatal. It's the television deal which is the defining factor of how much shit hits the fan and until we know how much sky will cough up and what the potential rearrangement of the prize money will be, it's best guess time. Or rather worst guess time since regardless of the final number it certainly won't be pretty.

Aside from the fact you shouldn't sell integrity, there's a strong case that keeping a crippled Rangers in the league won't make much money either. Rangers fans will, quite rightly, not pay extortionate prices at Easter Road, Fir Park etc to watch their side play friendlies (and I'm not even convinced they'll bother with season tickets) so that's that income gone and Sky will almost certainly demand to renegotiate the contract given the product has become a procession. And a procession which may even have the 'crown jewels' of the OF games devalued if Rangers fans aren't turning up.

I'd assume the SFL television deal which would suddenly seem so attractive to channels would ensure everyone benefits to some extent.

Plenty of fans are thick, hypocritical and utterly unrealistic - the clubs are quite right to spell out the situation in black and white.