Gordon EF

Yeah, I thought about something like that. If we "null and void" promotion etc, give everyone some points handicap based on current points totals. Stranraer start on 0, everyone else starts on the points difference between them and Stranraer / 2 or something.

How about we promote and relegate in situations where the top team form the league below has a greater points advantage over 2nd place than the points disadvantage of the 10th placed team has over 9th place. Dundee Utd up / Hearts down because 14 > 4 Raith and Partick stay where they are because 1 < 2 Cove up / Stranraer down because 13 > 8 Edit: Wait, that's dumb. Clubs are getting rewarded for big for being far behind second bottom in that scenario. If (top team's points gap / bottom team's points gap) > 1, then have promotion and relegation.

Could easily just say that Raith are only 1 point ahead of Falkirk but there are 24 points to play for. 24 >>> 1 therefore the uncertainty of that last quarter is much greater than the certainty form the first 3.

East Fife and ICT - Scottish football's good guys.

Are Forfar more deserving of a League One place than Edinburgh? Or QoS (who are marginally less pish than Partick) more deserving of a Championship place than Falkirk (who have been marginally more pish than Raith)? Who goes into which league isn't decided by what some random guy on the internet reckons. It's decided by who earns what. Raith haven't earned promotion and Partick haven't earned relegation.

In theory, you could keep the prize money exactly the same as it is right now. So in a 16 team Premier, the club finishing in 15th place would receive exactly as much cash as the club finishing 3rd in the Championship does right now. I'm not totally sure i buy that as the reason for rejecting expanded leagues.

Can we all stop talking about null and void as if we're going to send some wee guy round to erase all evidence this season ever existed? What N&V means, in practice, is that the season is called to an end, payments are made either on final positions or league average, there is no promotion, no relegation, no play-offs and no championships handed out. Next season would start with the same teams in the same leagues.

If it was me, I'd vote yes to 2 up / 0 down and no championships awarded.

Nope.

Looks like it was East Fife, Falkirk and Stranraer who voted against the proposal in L1/2 then.

is there a rule about which rules can be changed and which rules can't be changed? And can that rule be changed?

Imagine watching Neil Doncaster playing poker. It'd be glorious. Like my pal who decided to call one round then show us all his cards whilst looking into our eyes to "see our reactions". He didn't understand how moronic a tactic that was despite multiple explanations. He did understand when he lost the round.

I genuinely don't want to keep butting head with Raith fans over this so don't consider this an attack on Raith for their fans. Of course the majority of clubs voted Yes to last week's proposal and for most of them, it's because they knew they'd get the positional-based payments due to to them that will ease financial difficulties. The problem a lot of people have with this is precisely that conflation of deciding championships / promotion / relegation together with payment. It means that you could see this as something close to a bribe - vote for our proposal on how to end the leagues and you get your money. Don't and you won't. Shaft Hearts, Partick and Stranraer for cash. Everyone knows you can be dishonest whilst saying things that are true. We're not kids, we all understand that. It's the reason the phrase 'the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth' exists. The reason people see Bill Clark as dishonest here is because he's pushing that conflation of payments and promotion. Of course he wants that prize money, the same way chairmen at Falkirk, East Fife and Forfar do. But it's clear that, primarily, he wants to push through the issue of promotion for Raith inside that financial issue. I don't blame him for that. It's what I'd do in his position, it's what the vast majority of us would do. But it's a bit silly to pretend that's not the case. This isn't a court of law, we don't need to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that's the case or put him through a lie detector test. it's human nature, we all know that's the case because that is exactly what everyone would do in that situation.

That's absolutely pathetic. Happy to stay under someone's else's boot as long as others are under theirs.

Would make coronavirus worth it IMO.

I like it.

They do under the current rules. But the current rules also say, for example, clubs in 2nd-4th positions in League One go into a play-off and each club plays every other club home and away twice. What i'm saying is, if clubs can vote to change some rules, what's stopping them voting to change others?

What's to stop them changing that through a vote?

I don't know how much has been paid to any clubs. But clearly, as the implication is that voting yes to this week's proposal means a cash release, there's cash to release. Honestly, it doesn't matter a huge deal how the payment is structured. If there is serious danger of clubs going to the wall without prize money before the summer then first priority should absolutely be getting that money to clubs. Everything else can be dealt with after as it's simply not as urgent as the money issue. Any competent leadership of any organisation working in good-faith would realise this and sort the immediate issue of prize money first. Once clubs are in a less precarious financial position, then other issues can be dealt with. To attempt to conflate all these issues and threaten clubs with not receiving their own money unless they vote for a particular proposal on how to end the season is an absolute disgrace and they SPFL should have been roundly told to f**k off by the clubs and sort out the money issue first.

It's not ideal. It's a fudge to say that promoting Falkirk is less unfair than relegating Partick Thistle. Practically, it makes sense to stop at 2, rather than 4. 2nd place would only be promoted as a practical fix that allows the vote to pass.

Pay out whatever proportion of the minimum prize money the SPFL has right now for each league.

Well obviously there are none. That's what i'm taking issue with.

No money for anyone unless you all swallow the first proposition put forward sounds great too obviously.

Aye Douglas Park sounds like a sensible guy. Of course, not quite as good as his little brother, New Douglas Park.

Actually I'm coming round more and more to the promote 2, relegate none and prepare for a constricted 2020/21. Because I'm a stubborn pedant, I'm not in favour of awarding championships but I think 2 up / 0 down has a lot of merit. In terms of fairness, clubs going up without having technically earned it is one thing, but clubs going down without actually deserving it is another. This stops that. It gives us scope to alter 2020/21 how we see fit and it gives us the summer to figures out if we're actually serious about reconstruction before 2020/21 starts. Of course if we go back to 12-10-10-10 for 2021/22, that'll mean two automatic relegations from League Two at the least. That's bound to set a few arses wobbling down there.