itzdrk Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 speaks volumes when sevco are no longer the bad guys 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Buddie Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 I don't see why there's all the surprise in this. It's obviously been the plan all along if the CVA was accepted that the punishment would be demotion to SFL1 with guaranteed promotion back tp the SPL after 1 season. This is just another way of effecting the same result post-liquidation. If Sevco end up in Div 1 the thing to watch for is "helpful" referees, we know it has been bad enough in the past, God knows how bad it could get if winning the SFL 1 is to be a certainty, colluded to by SFA, SPL, and SFL. We'll need to keep a statistical survey going on the penalty awards to Sevco and the goals disallowed for their opponents. A lot of comments have been made, particularly by Traynor that the SPL clubs could survive 1 season without "Rangers" ( he still doesn't get the fact that they are no more), but not 2, so s far as Doncaster is concerned, 1 season in the wilderness is a price worth paying. On a fair and level playing field I can'tsee them getting back in one season with the quality of player they are likly to have. A few comments haove been made abut the transfer ban. That surely is a dead donkey, as it was deemed illegal, so another punishment must be applied if they wish to keep their history and "no entry" to the SPL was not a punishment for bringing the game into disrepute, that was for going into liquidation. Still a lot of loose ends to be tied up, and I think John Yorkston could be holding a couple of aces close to his chest in the form of "valid legal" objections. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBairn Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 (edited) The meeting is scheduled for 11am. So by the time they've done the formalities of starting the session, you're looking at 11.30 before any real presentations are done. And theres a buffet lunch after the meeting. So if that's as late as say 2pm (and there will be some hungry chairmen by that point), then that's only a couple of hours to debate and vote on such a huge decision. If they vote yes to Newco they're no better than pigs in a trough. Edited July 7, 2012 by GunnerBairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mon_The_Fife Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 What club from divisions 2 and 3 will be promoted to make way for the bigot cheats? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 Spot on here. I was also thinking SFL3 and the story ends. But we now need to banish this cancerous pollop from the anus of Scottish Football once and for all! In the SFL's defence though, "proposal 2" does leave room for considerable manoevre and leverage - the SFL hold all the power here; although it would mean going against all the votes of your members. As you say, a very dangerous game. Banish Newco, let's do it and consign them to history! No to proposal i) (stick yer proposal ii) back up each other's orifaces) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Highland Dogma Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 So essentially its fan power Clyde and raith and tommo against the dark side. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 What club from divisions 2 and 3 will be promoted to make way for the bigot cheats? bigot cheats airdrie & stranraer 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tryfield Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 Looks like the SFL will be screening their received Tweets. I tried to vent my spleen, to no avail. https://twitter.com/OFFICIAL_SFL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Waldo Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 interesting regarding fiorentina and shows other countries have similar problems. Leeds Utd were formed in 2007 but didn't have to start again in bottom league. I wonder what La Liga would do if debt ribben Barca or Real went bust? Nothing to do with us my Rangers supporting friend. Darlington FC went into Liquidation. Google what happened to them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beachbum Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 It would appear that the SFA, SPL and SFL are in bed with Rangers - nothing new there, then. John Brown tells all and sundry that he's seen a document that places Rangers in Division 1 and this is followed by McCoist's lofty words the other day accepting life in SFL3. Fits the Rangers' mantle - why tell the truth when a lie will do. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 something very interesting (possibly) from OTB was Alex Thomson mentioning the big tax case i just assumed due to liquidation this was no longer of relevance? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wokcomble Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 What club from divisions 2 and 3 will be promoted to make way for the bigot cheats? Does that mean that some SFL clubs can't vote because of conflicting interests ? If clubs deny sevco entry, and Dundee go the the SPL, does that mean certain other clubs could well get promoted, and if so, are they eligible to vote ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beachbum Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 something very interesting (possibly) from OTB was Alex Thomson mentioning the big tax case i just assumed due to liquidation this was no longer of relevance? I think the big tax case is going after Murray and Whyte. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 Pedro @grumpyyoungman1If the SFL clubs want to show this General Meeting for the farce that it is they should all send their mascots. Retweeted by Wings Over ScotlandExpand Reply Retweet Favorite 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 I think the big tax case is going after Murray and Whyte. ah yes sorry i think they said that had a nap after it so i must have forgot that 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBairn Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 On further thought, a no vote to Proposal 1 will stop them from playing in the League 'via direct parachute / shoehorn' method. Presumeably, at that point Sevco would still have the right to apply to join SFL3 along with the rest. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Araminta Moonbeam QC Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 RTC poster saying that one club can propose amendments, 20 others must agree wording/content - board then no power to stop the amendments being voted on. Here's hoping Turnbull proposes an amendment reading 'Get tae...' 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart. Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 This is a metaphor for my feelings on the whole situation. Pain, effort, brief success and ultimate failure while providing amusement to onlookers. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Only A Game ! Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 something very interesting (possibly) from OTB was Alex Thomson mentioning the big tax case i just assumed due to liquidation this was no longer of relevance? Didnt HMRC say that the side benefit of them voting against the CVA was that the Newco can start afresh, free from the liabilities and debt of the OldCo. Unless that view has changed or was misinterpreted or BDO have a cunning plan to pull the rug from under Newco's feet and effectively blow them out of he water by tearing up the transfer of assets, then it would appear that it isnt relevant. Funnily enough its dropped right off the radar of the SPL and the SFA as well, as has dual contracts, non payment of PAYE etc etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fozzie Posted July 7, 2012 Share Posted July 7, 2012 RTC poster saying that one club can propose amendments, 20 others must agree wording/content - board then no power to stop the amendments being voted on. Here's hoping Turnbull proposes an amendment reading 'Get tae...' Well spotted! Genius! 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.