Tannadeechee
-
Posts
1,033 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Tannadeechee
-
-
3 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
We do know that it's possible to play football in July in countries worst hit than Scotland have ben though. They were able to do that because they didn't;t rush to end the league.
Did every other business just shut down because the Scottish gov said we might be in lockdown until January? "Well they said January so I may as well just close the doors. What's the point." No they planned for different outcomes, which is what the SPFL should have done.
They shut down because they were.ordered.by government to do so.
1 -
14 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
Amazing Scotland is so unique.
So, let's get this straight what you are saying is...
Scottish football should have ignored the fact there were clubs begging.for.something to.be done to release cash
On top of that situation Scottish football,.in a.country behind Spain & Italy etc in COVID, should have ignored Government rules and player and staff safety.amd played football.
They should have played football at a time the situation was still being researched.
At a time the public were being told not to travel
At a time non essential shops were ordered to close
At a time hospitals were under emergency footing (7 of my other Half's colleagues contracted it due to as it turns out stupidity of two members of the public)
At a time schools were closed.
While of of this is going on at behest of Government, SPFL should have gone "f**k you" to. Holyrood and carried on regardless?
2 -
2 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
An d the Danish, Greek, Finnish, Turkish, Russion, English lower leagues Portugeuse, Norwegian, Swedish.. even the fecking US is about to start playing and they're the worst hit of all!
Again THEY HAVE DIFFERENT GOVERNMENTS AND AS SUCH THE POPULATIONS IN THESE COUNTRIES HAVE TO LIVE BY DIFFERENT RULES FROM US!
sorry to everyone else for shouting.
0 -
Just now, 8GamesToGo said:
Their hands weren't bound in March/April. That's my point. There were other options.
They were as initially they were talking about lockdown lasting till January!
The clubs were asking for money as they couldn't afford to run. There were a multitude of reasons,.but as they don't fit your point of view, or why you'd like to happen they are ignored.
0 -
1 minute ago, 8GamesToGo said:
I know. My point is did the SFA/SPFL push and prepare to get games played behind closed doors sooner like other countries. or did they push for an August start for the new league? I think we all know the answer.
They were told no. They were only allowed to start training a few weeks ago. Only been allowed to tackle since last Monday. They have been asking to play friendlies and told no.
You are asking the.same question and being told same answer,.Scot Gov has said NO.
0 -
17 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
Werder Bremen didn't get the job done on the pitch. They were going down 4pts behind. Guess what, they played to a finish and got themselves out of it. That's all there is to it. Kind of how football is supposed to work.
Germany wasn't hit as bad as us. Germany's GOVERNMENT allowed them to play. Scot, N.I. authorities have not. What happens in Germany is completely and utterly irrelevant.
Germany speak German, why don't we?
Germany drives on the right, why don't we?
Answers to both those questions is the same as the football question, we are different countries,.different laws, different situations, different authorities.
4 -
@8GamesToGo here is the current situation as per SFA (not SPFL) regarding ALL football.
Obviously this may change on Thursday when clubs may get permission to play friendlies and may get the go ahead to start new season on 1st August. As it stands, now Tuesday 7th July we are not allowed by Scot Gov to play football.
0 -
“The Joint Response Group can now confirm that ministers have formally approved full contact training for Scottish Premiership clubs from tomorrow, Monday June 29.
“We would therefore encourage clubs to inform all team staff as soon as possible to facilitate the updated guidance, and clarify that the approval for full contact training is inclusive of all Phase 4 requirements outlined in the Joint Response Group Return to Training protocols reissued on Friday.
“Ministers have underlined that this return to full contact training is subject to observing public health measures, including testing.”
0 -
1 minute ago, 8GamesToGo said:
So how have other leagues managed it? Including in countries much worse hit.
Could it possibly be because there was a will in those countries to play to a finish and not a rush to end the league early?
What like France, Belgium, Netherlands N.I. English league 1 and league 2.
0 -
2 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
I've been following everything very closely obviously.
I genuinely would like to see where it says definitively that we could not have started playing a week or so ago? I am honestly happy to be proven wrong as I can't find where it says that.
All I see is the SPFL deciding they wanted to start August 1st and they've been working with the gov to try to make that happen. I see nothing that this was a result of the SPFL being told way back in March that August 1st would be the earliest date for football to return.
That would put the Scottish gov out of step with almost every country in Europe, including countries hit much harder.
Scot Gov is out of step with down south.
As you see here SPFL website, states subject to Scottish Government approval.
0 -
1 hour ago, C4mmy31 said:
not competitive matches.....
Exactly, they STILL do not have permission to start on 1st August yet, it's only a plan.
It must be really difficult to be a football fan, yet be completely ignorant of any news that effects football from Scot Gov, UEFA, SFA, SPFL, clubs and any other official body. Is even more amazing in this day and age of not just newspapers & TV, but internet, social media etc. It is astounding and to me it begs the question are the really a football fan?
2 -
26 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said:
They could have voted against voting titles for themselves and pushed to end the league by, you know, playing games. The Scottish Government has allowed professional sport to take place since June 22nd. If the SPFL had held off clubs could have prepared safety protocols etc and have been ready to restart. 20 or more leagues aorund the world - not all just big rich leagues - have done that.
Hearts and Thistle have every right to go to court, just like all the other leagues that ended early in Belgium, France and Holland. And it's not like they kept it secret. We've been banging on about doing it for 3 months! What were D Utd and Raith doing those three months? Did it not occur to them this could impact them and maybe they should gett behind reconstruction and try to persuade fellow clubs to do that too instead of just joining the mass pile-on onto Hearts and Thistle?
There are consequences to actions and decisions. Just like a consequence of us dicking around with Craig Levein too long was us being bottom when football stopped, a consequence of the poor decisions by the SPFL supported by other clubs is the court case and associated ramifications for other clubs.
Absolute rubbish. Scot Gov only gave permission for contact training from Monday 6th July.
Other countries around the world have different governments and therefore different rules, hence why they have been allowed to play.
"they should gett behind reconstruction and try to persuade fellow clubs to do that too"
Maybe Ann Budge could have done this. Picked up the phone and chatted to lower league clubs to try and get support, because she didn't. Maybe if she'd spoken with clubs reconstruction may have taken place as the plan behind the headline 14-10-10-10 was rubbish. She was the one put in charge of the reconstruction group.
There is no mass pile on on Hearts. Many clubs have been disadvantaged, some far more than others.
Also if ICT, Hearts & Rangers hadn't tried to void the leagues, they might also have had more support.
1 -
Just now, DAVIDB69 said:
Sky were meant to have 48 games , folks on other sites say they have 61 as a settlement for the lost games last season. So 13 free games.
Funnily enough sky have overloaded august with 13 games in what is a dead month now, as they won’t have any English football to showIs that to cover the League Cup? Who had rights to that for this season?
0 -
2 minutes ago, Aylo vanal said:
They called the league far too early, stupidly quick. As far as I'm aware didn't make people aware of the potential costs of doing so, had they of done maybe they would've waited longer and weighed the cost up against just playing the games.
When would the he's have been played? We are in July and are not allowed by Scot Gov to play games. August 1st STILL isn't confirmed. Clubs are asking for permission from Scot Gov to play friendlies.
When would games have been played?
1 -
3 minutes ago, Aylo vanal said:
It's cost us the best part if £10m to end the league by having to repay the tv companies and give sky loads if free games.
It hasn't. The figures were worked out earlier on in this thread and it is less than half of that. If the league hadn't finished, we would have been due Sky a very large amount due to the new contract starting this season not starting when it should and not having the games they should have had, potentially.
What free games do Sky have? If you mean the BCD games wouldn't they have negotiated the same type of deal if the leagues had some how been able to finish?
1 -
- Popular Post
7 hours ago, 500ClubCraig said:Glad to have got such a warm welcome.
I was making the point that whilst multiple clubs are blaming each other - “Doncaster, nobody seems to be laying the blame at his door yet the farcical resolution forced through by him and his SPFL Board is the reason Scottish Professional Football is in this mess. “
Wasn’t having a go at any other clubs specifically, don’t agree with most of the sentiment on JKB at present but can see how the strength of feeling there has got to this point.
The SPFL clubs pay ND in excess of £7k per week and should be expecting a whole lot more than he has delivered.
As for me making racial remarks? Not aware that I had and certainly never purposely did so.
Whatever the outcome of Arbitration the game as a whole has a very challenging period ahead as does the whole of society, how well and how quickly Scottish Football heals these wounds could prove critical.
You see the problem with that is this as you haven't read the many,many pages of this thread....
A resolution was put to the clubs
Resolution was from the board (made up of club reps from Prem to League 2)
The board toolk soundings prior to making this resolution from clubs
All clubs had a vote
An extremely large number voted for the resolution (81%)
A very small number voted against it (19%)
If the voting structure was across all clubs rather than Prem, Champ and then League 1& 2, Dundee's vote would have been irrelevant (It isn't and it wasn't).
Votes to be in by Friday was a request only, clubs had the balance.of the legally mandated 28 days to vote
SPFL screwed up by having a "no" option as only "Yes" votes count. Obviously done to make sure everyone voted.
Dundee were knobbled. Why? Why Dundee, why not one of the other no voting clubs?
Dundee's vote was in a spam folder it's a conspiracy. It wasn't it was caught by a much more complicated system. It's very common.
Aberdeen told not to vote. Not correct,. confirmed by SPFL and McCormack that Aberdeen were told it didn't matter if they voted as by that time the number of "yes" votes for premiership clubs had been reached. If Aberdeen voted "no" it couldn't change anything, "yes" would simply have been confirming what was already known.
Hearts, Partick & Stranraer aren't the only clubs affected. Approx 16 clubs (someone will correct me), lost out on potential playoff places.
Brechin have been saved! From a playoff as were another approx 7 clubs from potential relegation playoffs.
Disgraceful Raith Rovers have been promoted, it's such a shame on Kelty Hearts. Kelty who were 6pts. ahead of Bonnyrigg who had a game in hand & 5 games to go. Consistency is important.
Clubs could have done the right thing by voting for reconstruction! Problem was behind the headline grabbing 14-10-10-10 it was shit and could have damaged more clubs.
Budge needed to listen to other clubs and take onboard their thoughts. If so reconstruction could have gone ahead.
Hearts, ICT & Rangers tried to have league voided. Confirmed by 6 Championship clubs & since then BBC source Gardiner has been very quiet. This lost Budge goodwill.
Clubs are voting with self interest. So are Hearts , Partick & Stranraer.
Allowing Champions is because Hearts have shat it big style knowing they'd have Celtic (and the power behind the throne Lawell
) on their case.
We aren't allowed to play football yet by Scot Government.
UEFA has a deadline of August 3rd(I think it is) for leagues ranked below 16th. SPFL is one of those. We couldn't finish leagues, see N.I.
Countless leagues have finished the same way as us, France, Belgium, N.I., English League 1 & 2. This isn't unique to us.
That should have you caught up.
It's not a Doncaster the Great & Powerful's doing. Very difficult situation, where no matter what was done, harm would have been done to clubs. This was trying to do the minimum amount of harm possible to the least number of clubs possible. Democratic votes, could have all been voted down if so poor. Far too many clubs & Doncaster have been involved to be one person's fault. Budge though has played a blinder in having the support completely overlooking the poor play last season and the.dreadful performances this season. Your all caught up now and shouldn't need to.go over anymore debunked ideas.
Thanks
34 -
16 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:
You pay 20 then because I'm not paying.
That's fine, it's not compulsory. I'll stick in £20 anyway to cover my wee lad's ticket too.
2 -
8 minutes ago, captainkev said:
Of course it's not a revelation. Partick wouldn't be standing up for themselves if somebody else hadn't stumped up the money to do so.
English is beyond a joke now.
Partick remind me of the bloke at the of the night hiding behind their wife/girlfriend giving it "'mon then!!!"
English has been an utter disgrace throughout this. I have no issue with him having his own view, it's just his blinkered, there is no merit in anything anybody else says or does.
His back pedaling when called out on that tweet is astounding. It can only be read in one way, with one meaning.
3 -
13 minutes ago, invergowrie arab said:
Is what anyone thinking of handing over a quid of their own money should be asking.
I'm more than happy to buy match tickets and the rest but as long as this is an investment project for one individual they can put their hand in their own pocket for stuff like this.
I have no issue with it at all. The bid went in prior to the action of "those two". None have gone in since.
This bill is 3 clubs, not just United. We have 5500 approx season ticket holder. A tenner from each and that's £55000. That's a huge help, never mind what Raith & Cove fans do.
This is completely unbudgeted for. Doing the above helps out, keeps my club in a better position, helps out 2 others all the while not stuffing our budget to stay in the Premiership and run our academy.
1 -
17 minutes ago, wearedarkblue87 said:
If you're able to bid over 100k for Nisbet why are yous asking for financial help from other clubs/supporters?
We bid that prior to the court action being lodged. No bids have gone in since.
0 -
2 hours ago, craigkillie said:
This isn't correct. If the Dundee "No" voted had counted then the resolution would have failed to achieve the required proportion of votes from the Championship.But, as per Companies Act 2006 there was still the balance of the legally mandated 28 days to lodge votes. Only yes votes are required, so no votes are in effect "no vote". As such Dundee did what they, and anyone else.qho voted no, had the right to do and change that, in effect non vote, to a yes.
Where SPFL have screwed up is in having the ability to vote no,.which was unnecessary, but probably done to make sure every club returned as vote.
0 -
2 hours ago, craigkillie said:
The court action specifically asked for the relegation to be reversed, which is why those three clubs were mentioned. They chose to seek their own legal advice as a result, which they were certainly entitled to do, but which I don't think they needed to do.
After losing in court it's less clear to me why they feel they need to have representation at the arbitration. The only key point of difference they had from the SPFL at the court case was that they wanted the case thrown out completely while the SPFL asked for arbitration. With that particular motion failing, it's not clear why they feel the need to carry on with it. Why not just leave it up to the SPFL, who are going to make roughly the same argument anyway?They had this served on them too. They were specifically named as respondents in the action Hearts lodged with the court.
0 -
1 hour ago, mishtergrolsch said:
This is exactly what happens in a voting system. 81% of clubs voted to do something so the other votes do, in fact, get binned and we go with a democratic majority.
My overall point is that 81% or 79% is still an overwhelming majority.
However
Which I did overlook.
But as only yes votes count and once votes are cast those that haven't votes yes have, up until the legal mandated 28 days deadline, the ability to change their mind and vote yes.
This is exactly what Dundee did
0 -
1 hour ago, Mr. X said:
Did your club vote for reconstruction?
No United did not as the proposals were crap and badly thought out. Cove and Raith Rovers did. That is a statement from all 3 clubs from United's website. Could have been linked from Cove's or Raith's.
Did HMFC and PTFC have to specifically mention United, Cove & Rovers? Nope they could have achieved the same thing by going against SPFL only. Goes against the "no club should be harmed" mantra does it not?
10
League Reconstruction 20/21 season
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted · Edited by Tannadeechee
What part of we are not allowed to play football because Government will not allow it is difficult to understand?
I am happy to debate, you are putting forward no intelligent alternatives. Just saying what about them, what about them isn't intelligent in the slightest.
If want to debate that is fine, TRY IT. Specifics. I'll try and help you...
Clubs were struggling for cash
Clubs had been lobbying SPFL for a solution
Clubs could not afford to pay staff with no fans ie no income coming in
Government banned them (effectively) from playing.
New Sky contract complicated things, we had to start or pay penalties
If clubs weren't shut down and had to stay in training, they couldn't furlough staff.
EPL is playing behind closed doors but still have to pay very large penalties to broadcasters
As it turns out the deadline to have leagues finished for European competition is August 3rd
We do NOT have permission by Government to play football, behind closed doors or otherwise.
It was at the time suspected that lockdown would continue untill January.
Many thought we would have no football in 2020.
Hearts asked players to take wage cuts. In light of this how could they pay for the necessary arrangements to play football.
There's some starting points. Try debating them with sensible counter arguments that fit into what is and what is not allowed by our Government.