Cowden Cowboy

They did consult Cowdenbeath though

Because I know precisely what happened with Cowdenbeath and because I can read what Elgin City write on their websitee

Peterhead said they hadn't as I recall but you implied they attended a meeting with 9 other clubs and both folks from yes - not nine other clubs as you said

Or accurate to be more precise. You state that 10 clubs sat down collectively for a meeting with both of the old firm guys. That never happened - you can read Elgin City's website for an inkling how matters came about in their case for example. Maybe you think like Donald Trump the truth is just being pedantic? It helps credibility though if you are arguing a case to actually stick to the facts rather than assumptions.

it doesn't say that all the clubs sat down together at the same time or in the same location with the Celtic and Rangers reps - because such a meeting didn't happen

There wasn't

where and when did this alleged presentation take place?

0

No

I agree re the £15k but I would not just accept that challenge cup experience re away support will just translate through to away fan attendance in league 2 games - the old firm will really push to get these tickets sold and market their colt teams to their fans - they want this to be a success. So you may find that they do shift their tickets. If though you are modelling and you assume less than 250 away fans (could possibly be more of course) will attend then that should be in your model. Maybe it will depend on their team's performance. It's hard though to criticise the business case put forward by the Old Firm by putting up a model full of holes which is just as easily shown to be critically flawed - the £90k gate income of course being the most prominent matter. If Old Firm inflated a figure in their case by 3x then they would be pilloried.

But doesn't your model postulate higher crowds v b teams as I suggested above 520 v 500?

Difficult to see when blinkered - but have a nice day

Yes your logic is badly flawed and partial

I don't get your maths - aren't Berwick saying that the £15k is a bit more than 50% of current budgeted gate admissions figure so currently gate admissions are expected to be around £30k not £90k? How are the 6 games v old firm producing reduced 'other matchday sales' due to reduced crowds when your model suggests these games will produce higher crowds than average - 520 v 500?

Many ex-pros call for all sorts of things indeed some will think this colts proposal is a great idea - I am not sure being guided by their views is a panacea. Your further comments aren't relevant to the point I made - you have decided that reserve leagues are fundamental to the improvement of the Scottish game based on no more evidence than says the colts idea would meet that need. It seems all you need is a couple of ex-pros filling airtime and that is the solution for our game. Me I am a believer that after under 18 we should just have reserves but I don't claim to know that will make all the difference

You are though suggesting that the solution to the long term development lies not at this level of football but at the elite level, and to the successful re-establishment of reserve leagues. That is a huge assumption that reserve leagues will be the solution for long term development - no more evidence for that than for the colts! It's just an alternative which may or may not work better

No date set for a vote - these are consultations

Member clubs of the SFA should indeed be supporting the broad aims of the SFA that goes with membership of the SFA

I read your comments and didn't respond same as I didn't to most posters on here - I didn't ignore it but equally there is no requirement for me to respond. To be factual there was some evidence of sorts put forward in the previous outline proposal. It is a pilot that is proposed - the point of a pilot is to test if a theory works and has legs. Thus if it helps young players develop and in time more make the grade and do well for Scotland then that is clearly a potential positive - the key word being potential. Having a poor national side and teams struggling in Europe has a direct and indirect knock on effects on the funds that come into Scottish football some of which percolate down the League. I am not sure the Challenge Cup experience is negative for the Old firm colts - they have concluded the opposite - An inference can easily be made that a couple of cup matches against mixed opposition is less worthwhile than a sustained league campaign where one would assume the Old Firm would also actively market and promote this to their support and seek their buy in.

Well there have been some on here already and why would you know without hearing them?

I am not sure there is such a thing as an overwhelming minority!? Minority views should still be heard and welcomed

Shouldn't those in favour also contact the club with their views?

It will be Rangers and Celtic fans supplying the £15k with the two clubs underwriting any shortfall per game

Well I guess the conclusion is that loaning them out to lower league clubs isn't delivering the desired end product so an alternative plan is mooted which might indeed work better in terms of overall development - or it might not. Try something different though is a call made by fans all the time so difficult to be that critical of the basic idea. However, just looking at it in that one dimensional way is ignoring the many downsides which many will feel outweigh the potential positives.

No you are not correct