Cowden Cowboy

No I debated its pros and cons like any balanced and sensible person rather just than knee jerk reject because it came from the Old Firm.

Never happened and Cowden have voted this down three times and were firmly against it a few months ago - so why do you feel the need to peddle a myth ?

Callum was on loan at Airdrie from Dunfermline last season. Dunfermline then released him and Accies signed him

?

This is really a stereotype/loose use of language. Worst case scenarios are by definition almost always unviable and would see you just shut up shop. In the real world you might draw up a range of scenarios which are sensitised and then settle on one which includes some pessimistic assumptions in relevant areas. Then you will have some contingency planning built in. You are looking for a realistic plan in difficult circumstances not something that tells you you are goosed from day one unless you wish to take a shut down option.

Nobody in their right mind would use a worst case scenario as their budget - rather they might make some pessimistic assumptions in some budget areas. Worst case scenarios are usually non viable. In this situation a worst case scenario might say be full wages for a season, no crowds for a season, two tests a week for a season, minimal advertising, sponsorship, hospitality, merchandise revenue and little or no fan donation/fund raising, plus much reduced Spfl/Sfa payments. Start out with that budget and you wouldn’t bother signing any players or starting a season

How do loans work in respect of testing requirements, etc, if they are effectively with 2 different clubs at the same time (eg for training)

No most normal people don’t rake about in these looking for missing votes from regular correspondents - they just say we don’t seem to have your vote yet?

That is in the £500 to £5000 range set out in the rules and is more or less what would have been expected

the Published SFA Judicial Panel Protocol sets out the normal range of fines for each offence. In this case £500 for a lower end offence, £2500 for mid range and £5000 for upper end. It does allow for a max of £500k but fines in normal situations usually are in the low to high end range. They might go £10k given the seriousness here but wouldn’t be surprised to see normal range applied

They will most likely get a small fine - say £5k that is around standard for such an offence.

Isn’t red a very bright colour?!

The objection was to red and black (Rangers) socks not red socks which Cowden have used many times over the years

It is to even out the vagaries of cup draws as unlike in the league or 2-legged cup ties there is no corresponding away fixture.

Split gate will surely still be in place for cup ties - nothing to do with away fans being present or not

Reality is Falkirk win more matches generally in championship than they do in premier. Fans like seeing their side winning thus premier is boring because they don’t see many wins

And like the Colts idea?

In reality in this type of vote the spfl board gets to try and persuade clubs to vote yes and support their proposal - thus what happened with Dundee

Whether chairmen knew the 28 day rule or not it was clearly explained in the paper work sent out - which was not some weighty 100 page plus tome as some seemed to suggest

The sanction for this is set out as £500 (lower end offence), £2500 (mid range) and £5000 (top end). There is a theoretical max of £0.5m/expulsion but to me it seems likely a £2.5k to £5k fine for the 2 clubs and then the circus moves on

L2 clubs aren’t generally terrified of the clubs below - but If relegated they see a structure below the SPFL which has little or no financial underpinning so their existing business model is virtually wrecked if you don’t bounce back in 1 but key competitors then have models based on folks injecting cash. If you were an advocate for change though then you should already have understood some of these dynamics - that’s the problem reconstruction is driven by one dimensional ideas and outlooks with no understanding of key issues of many of the other parties.

No because folks driving it mainly saw it from their own perspective. Thus you see Ann Budge trying to get a 14 and saying to the rest just do what you like. Or trying to foist Colts onto Lower League clubs despite it being knocked back more than once - there is no attempt to address lower league clubs issues just spin about the advantages of colts coming in. The pyramid play off situation means that relegation is catastrophic in all likelihood for L2 clubs as no proper funding has been injected into the pyramid outside the Spfl. Lower league clubs have seen all the extra money now available in League position fees burned up in increased player wages due to the trapdoor. Clubs don’t want less home games but splits aren’t that popular nor is playing teams 4 times. Clubs Short sightedly don’t want to lose out on their share of the pie. Daft regionalisation ideas are put forward with no grasp of Scottish geography. It’s a bit more difficult than just saying it would be plain sailing if 2 years hence. It actually needs people who understand all the angles as viewed by 42 disparate clubs and needs leadership in delivering something that gets enough votes

You are completely wrong in saying clubs don’t want change. The problem is there is no coherent structure that a majority will be able to get behind as very few clubs have completely common viewpoints which renders matters extremely complex

No

Usually but not always - can remember games involving Airdrie and Blackpool where score stood SPFL rules state - All Official Matches shall be of 90 minutes' duration, with two equal halves of 45 minutes, but any Official Match which, from any cause whatever, falls short of 90 minutes' duration may be ordered to count as a completed fixture or to be replayed in full as the Board may in its absolute discretion determine.