southview Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 McDougall and Rankine have, predictably, put the SFL under pressure with their ridiculous comments today. I just hope that the SFL have found their backbone and don't buckle under the pressure.I'm with most of the folk on here in that a points deduction is the only realistic punishment relative to the crime committed. Had this all unfolded six weeks ago then relegation would have been more suitable. Totally agree. If today was July 1 I'd be all for Livi's relegation to the third division. However, as we debate, the managers are preparing for a particular opponent and any changes to the fixture list at this stage would make SFL look like a local amateur/pub league. Leckie's column in the Sun today says relegation should be the decision and that any "short term disruption" will be for the benefit of the game "long term" and will ensure the SFL retains its credibility. I don't agree. I think the SFL will only partially recover some of their credibility this afternoon as they have been shown up over the Livi issue. The fact that McDougall/Rankine were able to call the shots at the meeting last week was merely the icing on the cake. He's right on one thing though. Whatever decision is come to will not please everyone. I felt last week that we wouldn't here owt before 4pm and I think that will be same again this week. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubertube Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 What seriously?Every game your mob have ever won in the last few years,the league cup final,playing in europe,signing players from your fellow competitors etc etc was on the back of spending money you never had,whether it was massone,flynn,keane or whoever, your club had no intention of paying at the end of the day! If thats not riding roughshod its very fucking close!!! correct. *boycott livi* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southview Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Maybe worth a separate thread then sometime next week, would have to try and make it a sticky or something so that other fans from other divisions/forums could take part. By that time this thread should be sinking fast on p.3 after "Livi's" inevitable reprieve today, and thinking on rule changes and how football is governed/ how the leagues are composed should take place on another thread I think.... Good stuff. I don't think they will get away scot-free. I reckon they will be deducted points at the very least. As I've already said, the SFL will feel that they need to be seen doing something even though they were happy to be shafted by McDougall/Rankine/McGruther last week. I wonder how many phone calls/emails Longmuir has had from club officials following his "business plan" revelation last week 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 How many from here sent him angry emails on the subject? (I would have done but I was moving house ) One other thing that's bothered me, under what auspices did MacDougall, Rankine, Nixon and Peter Johnson address the SFL meeting last week? The only one who *technically* had anything to do with the football club- as interim manager- was McGruther. Why did the meeting not throw the other shysters out on their ear? that's another nasty precedent set. Any businessman can now pitch up to meetings like these and claim to be the saviour of whichever club is breathing their last, simply to convince the slow witted SFL membership that nothing should be done. Massone was complaining about it outside the meeting last week and it was one of two things he got right- the other was to judge that he could hold out for more money from the ruling triumvirate. In saying that, with the club in an insolvency process, Massone simply became a creditor and had no right to be there either. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John MacLean Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Wel, it's the simplest and easiest way to be seen to be acting decisively by doing nothing. If Massone can be seen as the root of the problem the S.F.L. can be seen to be the ruling body who acts by bringing in MacDougall and Rankine. and sweeping away the corrupt swarthy man. Safeguarding the morals of Scottish Football by bringing a Club with a long and proud history back into the ownership of some fine Scottish benefactors and away from the evil the clutches of Johhny Foreigner? Never trust a swarthy man. Disgusted of Pie and Bovril. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flyingscot Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 What seriously?Every game your mob have ever won in the last few years,the league cup final,playing in europe,signing players from your fellow competitors etc etc was on the back of spending money you never had,whether it was massone,flynn,keane or whoever, your club had no intention of paying at the end of the day! If thats not riding roughshod its very fucking close!!! Spot on. It would have been easy for us to continue paying big money for players and chase success. Instead we spent years in D1 paying our way and accrued debt paying for new stands to even qualify for the SPL. We did what most people would do- sold something, in this case out ground to pay the debt. Livi simply spent, spent, spent and then said we can't pay it back. If someone did something so stupid on a credit card they'd be blacklisted- and going bankrupt means you can't get a current account for at least 6 years! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ubertube Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Spot on. It would have been easy for us to continue paying big money for players and chase success. Instead we spent years in D1 paying our way and accrued debt paying for new stands to even qualify for the SPL.We did what most people would do- sold something, in this case out ground to pay the debt. Livi simply spent, spent, spent and then said we can't pay it back. If someone did something so stupid on a credit card they'd be blacklisted- and going bankrupt means you can't get a current account for at least 6 years! correct *boycott livi* 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 How many from here sent him angry emails on the subject? (I would have done but I was moving house )One other thing that's bothered me, under what auspices did MacDougall, Rankine, Nixon and Peter Johnson address the SFL meeting last week? The only one who *technically* had anything to do with the football club- as interim manager- was McGruther. Why did the meeting not throw the other shysters out on their ear? that's another nasty precedent set. Any businessman can now pitch up to meetings like these and claim to be the saviour of whichever club is breathing their last, simply to convince the slow witted SFL membership that nothing should be done. Massone was complaining about it outside the meeting last week and it was one of two things he got right- the other was to judge that he could hold out for more money from the ruling triumvirate. In saying that, with the club in an insolvency process, Massone simply became a creditor and had no right to be there either. If they're there on McGruther's invite as preferred bidders, I don't see a big problem with it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John MacLean Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 I've been away from this thread for a wee while now and this has, perhaps, been answered elsewhere. I apologise if it has. I'm interested in Ged Nixon's role in the new brave world of financial probity at Livingston Football Club. If my recollection is correct he will assume the rule of the CEO. He has also, through his involvement with the Livi Trust, been described as a "fans' spokesperson". Will he be filling his new role as a representative of the Livi Trust? If so, is his position democratically accountable to the membership of the Livi Trust? If he isn't filling the role as a representative of the Livi Trust will there be directly elected Trust representation on the Board of Livingston? I see great potential for Trusts to play significant roles in the running of football clubs. I'm concerned also though that people can use their Club's Trust as a platform to elevate themselves into a position of power at their club. I'm not suggesting that this is the case at Livingston and would welcome confirmation that it isn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 I've been away from this thread for a wee while now and this has, perhaps, been answered elsewhere. I apologise if it has. I'm interested in Ged Nixon's role in the new brave world of financial probity at Livingston Football Club. If my recollection is correct he will assume the rule of the CEO. He has also, through his involvement with the Livi Trust, been described as a "fans' spokesperson". Will he be filling his new role as a representative of the Livi Trust? If so, is his position democratically accountable to the membership of the Livi Trust? If he isn't filling the role as a representative of the Livi Trust will there be directly elected Trust representation on the Board of Livingston? I see great potential for Trusts to play significant roles in the running of football clubs. I'm concerned also though that people can use their Club's Trust as a platform to elevate themselves into a position of power at their club. I'm not suggesting that this is the case at Livingston and would welcome confirmation that it isn't. Ged Nixon was reluctant to take up the post until he had assurances that there would be Trust representation - it will be another person though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nowhereman Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) I think we are 90% there. As Stuart pointed out earlier. Airdrie only existed on paper at the time. Indeed it was given as a reason for the non-election to Div 3 earlier that month. So they shares and the league place were purchsed, not transferred to another member club. But rule 21.7 doesn't refer to a member club, only to a club. The rules are quite specific in sometimes refering to a member club and sometimes to a club. Airdrie United may not have been playing in any sort of league at the time but they were undoubtedly a 'club' That is why I said that the effect of Clydebank changing their name to Airdrie United was to transfer their league place to another club Edited August 5, 2009 by Nowhereman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sludden123 Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Not sure if this has been brought up already? but of all the big bookies only W-Hills are offering odds on the Ross County v's Livvy game on Saturday. Do they know something we don't? http://www.oddschecker.com/football/scotti...ston/win-market 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacWatt Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 (edited) From Edinburgh Evening News..... "Sources at the club believe league bosses have bowed to pressure from other clubs to hammer Livingston for their troubles. But the consortium has assured the Evening News the bond – and a business plan – was in place by the deadline of 3pm yesterday and the new "provisional" board will appeal any further penalty. The threat of a ten-point deduction is causing major problems for the investors, who could still pull the plug on the rescue deal as the demands have prevented the consortium from paying the players this week. "We are extremely concerned about this," said provisional chairman Gordon McDougall. "Last week at Hampden, we were given the green light to remain in Division One and the possibility of further sanctions were withheld. We then received a letter stating we had to submit a business plan and the bond, which is in place to ensure we can satisfy 18 home games based on £40,000 a game. "I understand where they are coming from as we've been in administration twice but this is new people in here now. "I hope they understand our position. We will have to spend a fortune to get this club back on its feet and are more than willing to put the money down on the table on the condition there is no further penalty. "If there are any other penalties, we will appeal them." I just hope 'sources at the club' are right and that the SFL clubs have decided to hammer LIVI and to hell with the blackmailers. Edited August 5, 2009 by MacWatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsd Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 The club meeting has been cancelled due to objections of a less than min 14 day notice period by a majority of clubs. SFL are going ahead with a decision today without their input nonetheless. Isn't it the League Management Committee that are meeting today? Representation from Airdrie United, Albion Rovers, Ayr United, Alloa Athletic, Arbroath, Partick Thistle along with Malcolm Mackay and Jim Leishman. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCL Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Not many livi fans replying today,think they've took the mini-bus to Hampden again? Some of us have work to do 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyrshireTon Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Too early for any news - I'd imagine the consortium are sitting on wee chairs in a corridor waiting to be invited into the big room whilst the SFL tuck into a 4 course lunch. Probably only getting to the main course now. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Isn't it the League Management Committee that are meeting today?Representation from Airdrie United, Albion Rovers, Ayr United, Alloa Athletic, Arbroath, Partick Thistle along with Malcolm Mackay and Jim Leishman. Jim Leishman should *not* be party to any discussion on this let alone be in a position to influence a decision either way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monster Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Isn't it the League Management Committee that are meeting today?Representation from Airdrie United, Albion Rovers, Ayr United, Alloa Athletic, Arbroath, Partick Thistle along with Malcolm Mackay and Jim Leishman. Oh great. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MCL Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Regarding the required bond...I wonder if the thinking behind this is .... Livi put up £720,000 which the SFL hang on to. That equates to £20,000 per league game. After each game has been played, the SFL then release £20,000 back to the club. This ensures a steady cash flow for the whole season. Now if these guys are serious about investing in Livi and have the money (which they claim they do), I cannot see what the problem would be.A large portion of this released cash could then be paid directly to creditors to help clear the debts (and who I would hope would be agreeable to such a repayment proposal) , with wages and other club expenses being met from revenue generated by the club throughout the coming season. Any surplus cash generated would also go to outstanding creditors.. If they do go tits ups the SFL would then distribute the cash amongst the remaining 9 teams to cover their loss of revenue on a basis of who they had and had not played up to the point when they went out of business They claim to have the money, they claim they're gonna repay the debts. This proposals works unless they don't actually have that sort of cash, in which case they're back to square fucking one anyway... That's pretty much how I see it. The bond isn't a penalty in itself as it will be paid back if Livi complete the season. I think it will be a points deduction which will be appealed but the appeal won't have any affect on the season starting. The amounts of points will be reduced on appeal but will still be harsh enough to almost ensure relegation. Probably 20 point penalty reduced to 15 on appeal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bsd Posted August 5, 2009 Share Posted August 5, 2009 Jim Leishman should *not* be party to any discussion on this let alone be in a position to influence a decision either way. Aye, you couldn't make it up. I hope our representative does the right thing and votes accordingly. If it is who I think it is then I don't think there will be much sympathy for Livi. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.