EdinburghPar1975

Exactly, and whilst Bennet's assertion that; ..is to me absolutely rubbish and based on nothing other than a ridiculous attempt to think 9 in a row could be stopped, I completely agree it could have been handled and dealt with a lot better than it was. As I've said before I have sympathy for all the teams relegated (but mostly Partick), but any reconstruction should be for the long term benefit of the game and not just Hearts and I just don't get that from the proposals.

No, I really don't think it could've. It wasn't to do about just fitting it in it was about the ability of the clubs in the league as a whole (not just Celtic and Rangers) to deal with the economics of taking players off furlough, extending/ rolling contracts and also having government permission to resume training weeks before playing (itself impacting the clubs ability to then pay full wages). I don't think you can even try to compare the situations North and South of the border as the economics are completely different.

..he's including decimal places...

He did consider it....then thought about it while he took a spin...and decided to stick two fingers up to all of us!

I've been drinking some of the Innis and Gunn range. Really like the Gunpowder one but usually just the 'green' cans that we have in the house. Also been drinking Hop House a bit...lockdown isn't helping Don't judge me too harshly but when I was in the states on holiday we used to get Bud Light Lime for poolside and I really liked it. As you can't get that here for some reason, any ideas of something that would be similar that could try? I had a couple of citrus IPAs but they're not quite the same? Any help appreciated!

Unreal, basically admitting that he was faced with what thousands of people have been faced with and decided to run. Still playing the 'i'm better than you' card...and 'i'm allowed to do what you're not'...still no good reason given for running up the country

What a load of bull....this is really bad. I got scared and ran away....ridiculous. His wife had a stomach bug so he went to Durham....?

I certainly hope so.....

I reckon it's all part of the overall planned approach to trying to play this out - Boris up yesterday giving us all two fingers and the 4pm Q&A today, precisely planned to get 24-48 hours to get all the stories straight. Even after this there's no way of this going away and if they manage to wriggle along for another little while i'm sure there'll be something else that'll pop up that they'll need to deny.

To be honest, that's what would worry me. I've seen it posted that the section (I think it's section 2.5) of the retention document is wildly open to interpretation and whilst it was put together quickly things like these need clarification for those using it. Given the amount of players impacted by this and the potential consequences for the clubs who don't have insurance or benefactors to bail them out if the funds need repaid, some centralised governing body needs to confirm what the govt/ HMRC think about trolling contracts where the players would likely be released when the scheme ends...

Very interesting to see that RM/ DAFC sought advice from two sources to verify what was the impacts of using the scheme. I'd be interested to hear if those clubs retaining players have had differing advice (or have sought advise externally) about the scheme and potential future impacts. Not for any gloating purposes but just to see if there is a genuine 'grey' area for this. If so shouldn't the PFA be ensuring that they have clear advice themselves from the UK Govt over using the scheme in this way in order for them to communicate to their members? Also, potentially the SFA or the SPFL (not sure whose responsibility this sort of thing would sit with) could be looking at it for the clubs as a whole... It may be one of the reasons a number of clubs down South and some up here were asking players to defer wages as opposed to using this scheme. The last thing clubs would need if they get through this would be a challenge to their use of the scheme and repayment of monies paid out. Horrible decision to have to make but in these circumstances I think probably the wisest for the security of the club

There is a reason...lack of cash coming in. Even under furlough the club will be paying part of the wages to bring it up to their full wage and as a club I very much doubt we can afford to enter into contracts where we would be paying cash out (even 20% of some wages) for an undetermined period but then having to put all the players back to 100% as soon as training was allowed again. It's a horrible decision to have to make at these times but i'm assuming some of those on the list would have been leaving at the end of the season anyway and whilst it would have been great to be able to provide additional support to players at these times clubs like ours don't have the capacity and ability to offer that option. Where I do agree with her is that there are some clubs who do have cash and could have maybe not used the furlough scheme....but there's probably only one in Scotland that could and i'd think they'll likely sell a player to try and even out the hit even they'll take from the impact of this virus.

Not sure about that. It'll depend greatly on the furlough schemes and how they are impacted. I understood that clubs were not allowed to provide new contracts to those on the scheme? Also, as soon as players undertook any club activity I thought they had to be removed from furlough. I'd be surprised if a lot of clubs signed any new contracts with players until they knew when any new season was to start and they were due to start training.

Normally i'd agree with you and he does usually come across as balanced but not once recently have I heard (for example) an opposing viewpoint from him as to why in the Championship the vote was 9-1 if there was so much unhappiness as he is claiming. He's also ran away a bit from commenting on his viewpoint on Scott Gardners comments on being 'bullied' following Ross McArthur and the Morton chairman's subsequent comments on the claims. The last few podcasts have not been balanced in my view and seem more towards trying to stoke up another argument as opposed to trying to present both sides and see why there can be differences of opinion. Seems like the world in general right now - if you don't agree with a certain viewpoint then you must be wrong/ vilified...seems to be little in the way of accepting others views may have some substance, even if you don't agree with them. Scottish football is a mess, everyone knows its completely self serving and the fact that teams voted with the SPFL doesn't mean they're all satisfied but that they probably accept that in this circumstance and in the claims that Rangers, Hearts and Stranraer made there wasn't a cast iron case to answer to. I'd love to see my own team, Dunfermline, say that when the new season has started they feel that the time for an all party review had come and look at things then as I don't want things brushed under the carpet. in an ideal world the SPFL would be initiating that and who knows, when COVID is out of the way they may well (doubtful!)

I can only speak for myself but the issue I have isn't that he may have an opposing viewpoint, more that he isn't looking into the other side of the argument and giving an overall view of what clubs are thinking about and why they didn't go with Rangers/ Hearts and Stranraer or even that his pals in Inverness may not be telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

Really don't understand how Keith Jackson continues to get columns in a paper. The Aberdeen thing was a non-story, complete semantics and rectified with no issue. As for the £7.5m 'sitting' at Hampden does he not understand/ want to understand that the cash can only be sent to the clubs when the league is officially called (which it hasn't yet) - that must have been said hundreds of times now. Tom English's assertions that close to 100% of the folk giving him grief are Celtic fans shows to me exactly what part of the issue is with him, he refusing to engage out with the bubble he is wanting to report in. If he wanted to actually get information he could try and speak to some of the teams who weren't behind the proposal and actually hear their side, but that would just be madness...but why do that when he knows the truth

The fact that 9 of the 10 Championship clubs didn't back the motion and a good number also came back on Ross McArthurs comments shows, to me anyway, how wrong SG was in his comments. Morton appear to have just given some factual back up to that. I'm assuming that by Tom English's logic that all anyone need do to stop him talking about things is just say you're thinking of taking legal action...that'll be enough for him to not pass comment/ provide a balancing view...

Does anyone know what sort of things the club are maybe looking at doing for funding if there are no crowds inside grounds this side of Christmas? I'd imagine selling season tickets with no guarantee of entry to games for some time will be only for those with disposable income who wouldn't look to call back any missed matches. I'd also have to think that live streaming of games is likely a no-no due to broadcasting issues and these would either have to be delayed broadcasts or some sort of set up is put in place to allow folks to purchase through the club as a sort of 'ticket', even then there is the shortfall in income from match day activities. I'm happy to chip in where I can but now that the season has been called, the SPFL shambles is (for the minute) complete and there is no likelihood of even training for another month or so this seems to be a pretty good time for further contingency planning to start. One thing is for sure, the next Championship Zoom call will be interesting - who invites ICT?

I don't know of any country that also has such a restrictive structure. In some ways I understand the need for not having 50/50 as things would/ could be changed almost non-stop so there needs to be a balance as to what is a percentage that would allow things to pass where they need to but would prevent unnecessary resolutions from being passed all the time. 9 - 3 seems reasonable to me but i'm assuming the reason that there is little appetite for a change is the same reason that there always is... Power and money...

….it gets rejected by the clubs. If the clubs want things to change then they should have the strength of their conviction to vote appropriately when things are raised. The first thing that they should look at changing is the 11-1 vote structure.

Exactly this for me. I didn't agree with Rangers motion and the majority of the stuff in it (or it being raised) but there are things that need to be reviewed in terms of governance and how things work in general with the SPFL. I'd hope that clubs speak with each other and look to have a sensible meeting later next season to agree what it is they want reviewed and how they can go about it. The SPFL should also be looking to hold an internal review of their processes and update the clubs of any changes. All sides need to look at what they're doing and at an appropriate time get back together and sort things out for the 'greater good'.

A bit surprised in some ways it was as high as 13 but I suppose some, like Aberdeen were clear as to why they were voting for the inquiry. Effectively 29 not in favour is a decent whack and if nothing else should hopefully allow things to move forward for a while. Unfortunately I can't see it being that way and it'll be another round off nonsense. The SPFL could possibly help things and be a little more accepting of a need to change and maybe look to appoint a new CEO and board to 'renew' things at the end of next season when things are more 'normal'??

For most of us diddy teams season tickets won't be going that well as clubs will be holding off selling them as they don't know what they're actually selling. How can you sell a season ticket for the Championship (as an example)? You 'buy' 18 home games...but what if 8 or 9 of these are behind closed doors, what do you give back to the fans - no agreement on streaming games etc. Until clubs know when things will start they can't start planning for selling 'season' tickets. I'd imagine most will need to ask fans to cough up with no expected return but as some fans don't know what's even happening with their jobs how could they afford to pay hundreds of pounds out at this time?

Latest from the Zoom meeting...

Confirmed - apologies, I quoted from within a quote