Gordon EF

All anyone can do is speculate but there's at least a decent chance that if the financial and practical aspects were separated, some clubs might have voted differently and that the financial aspect was a general push in the direction of a Yes vote for all clubs. Take that away and there's at least a few clubs who might have been likely to vote differently. But yeah, it's not possible to say if there would have been enough to change the outcome.

It's not about that. It started with a long and winding tear stained rant about how shite Scottish football is which included a specific claim about the old firm being "humiliated" every time the faced decent opposition. That is blatantly a load of pish.

I'm sure you didn't realise this but by some weird coincidence, your two suggestions have ever so slightly moved the dividing line so that Clyde end up in the new second tier. What a stroke of luck. Presumably Forfar and Cove could go f**k themselves in these scenarios?

I'd imagine there isn't really much possibility of them 'taking' any support from anyone other than Cowdenbeath. I've no idea what crowds they had in the juniors but my guess is they'll be getting that plus the usual sort of add on you'd see when any club is winning games, winning leagues, making relatively big signings and generating a bit of an air of excitement.

To be fair, they just don't need it. They can effectively afford to buy a place in the league but foregoing prize money next season.

I've wanted 14-14-14 before all this mess happened and yes, East Fife would obviously be a beneficiary in happening to be on the right side of the line when the season stopped. I want 14-14-14 because to me it strikes a good balance between smaller leagues where things can be competitive and larger leagues where you're not playing everyone 4 times. I'd favour a split after 2 rounds. I think it's work with two automatic promotion / relegation spots and a play-offs. I'll be honest, for me, this is a bit of an opportunity to get the structure i'd like to see anyway. If East Fife were in Clyde's position, I'd still want it as, even though it would mean a financial hit to crowds next season, it's the structure i'd want if i didn't know what side of the line East Fife would fall on. And we'd have a good chance of promotion over the next season or two. I'd also be happy if we moved to this structure for 2021/22 and used next season to decide who went into what league.

Well, yeah. It's a hypothetical question. We all know that that potential shifting of goal posts disadvantages Clyde.

Genuine question for Clyde fans here. If we'd proposed going 14-14-14 for 2020/21 at the start of the 2019/20 season, would you have supported that? So if you knew you'd get into the Championship with a top 6 finish?

You don't believe Deloitte then because they were appointed by the SPFL? Deloitte may well have given an honest answer but when the question was set by the SPFL, it doesn't really pass the first hurdle of scepticism does it?

What were Clyde fans saying about the vote to relegate Partick?

And? In terms of "sporting integrity", they're not being shafted any more than the 9 other teams who were in play-off spots when it all ended.

HL / LL winners have exactly the same chance of promotion as any team who finishes in a play-off place. We've effectively already voted to null all play-offs so Kelty aren't being shafted any more than Montrose or Cowdenbeath were by choosing not to expand the number of teams in the SPFL for next season.

i wonder if 14/14/16 with two automatic relegations from now on would encourage a few clubs to support it. There's a valid point about the HL and LL becoming potentially enormously lopsided. If a couple of HL teams were to make it up and the LL floods with ex-SPFL and ex-junior teams, the population differences could make them significantly different strengths. Personally I'd still love to see it. It would be on the condition of the HL implementing a full pyramid capability and the LL opening up similarly at their lower end.

it depends what happens after those two clubs are added though, doesn't it. If Kelty and Brora were added and then we switched back to 42 the following season, that means two automatic relegation spots the following year. There's no point in pretending that isn't a significant difference for clubs in L2 than just letting in two more clubs.

So tough to win a league when you get enough cash to buy half a team from two levels above. Aye, alright.

What the f**k are you talking about? The claim was that "every time Celtic play a decent European side they get humiliated". The fact that Celtic not only avoided humiliation or even defeat but beat the second best team in Italy home and away is more than enough to refute the hysterical, tear-stained claim from the OP. I'm not interested in claiming Celtic could win the Champions League and absolutely nothing about the fact I stated suggests I am.

Absolutely, that is true. And if that was the point being made, I'd agree with it. It wasn't though.

I'm not trying to say Celtic are some world class side. The OP said they get humiliated every time they play decent opposition. Clearly that is utter shite. Anyone who's given the League One forum a cursory glance this season will know that a certain section of Falkirk fans are in some kind of deep state of melancholy about their club and part of their way of dealing with that is to have this viewpoint that everything is pish. It is absolutely no coincidence that of all the clubs in League One, it's Falkirk who have their worst side in over a generation. As someone said, this is the kind of stuff you hear from fans of clubs who're down in the dumps (relatively speaking). Montrose fans, who're watching their best side in a generation, funnily enough, have a much brighter outlook on things. If any Falkirk fan is feeling like this and wondering whether it's just cos Falkirk are pisher than they have been since flares were in fashion, be under no illusion... it is.

Celtic beat Lazio, who're 1 point off the top of Serie A, home and away this season.

First off, I don't give a shit if McGlynn's doing whatever sort of work he can and wants to do. I'm sure plenty of people on furlough are doing some bits and pieces. it's not exactly difficult to see what the problem is, in principle, with people on furlough carrying on working though. Companies are taking government money on the understanding that their employees cannot work. If companies are taking the money and still having employees work, it's essentially fraud. I'm sure all McGlynn is doing is, as you say, watching games and thinking about his squad for next season. It's maybe a bit on the line but no sensible person's going to give a f**k about that and HMRC certainly aren't.

I'm not naive enough to think it's not how people will think but is it not exactly this type of thinking that has created a lot of the problems we're trying to fix? The OF want 4 fixtures per season and a skewed prize fund distribution because it's best for them. Screw the rest and screw a competitive league. The rest of the Premier clubs toe the line in the hope that the scraps they get give them enough of an edge over slightly smaller clubs who already find it tough to get into the top league due to the structure of the play-offs etc. And just keep that going down and down. League One and Two clubs don't want to open up automatic relegation form L2, the LL don't want to open up too much movement between them and the pyramid below them. Really what clubs should be doing is looking to design a league structure as if they didn't know which part of it they'll end up in. Because you might know where you'll be next season but you've no idea where you'll be in 5, 10 years.

Probably because it's not true.

Thinking more than one season ahead? What is this witchcraft?

Reply - "Replying to your messages asking what I'm doing. What are you doing?" Catch the dumb c**t in an infinite loop.

Not if the principle was against unfair relegation, and their promotion gets round that.