cyderspaceman Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 My view (guesswork admittedly) is that they all believe that SEVCO will NOT survive in Division 3 (either due to lack of income or Christopher Green walking). This would explain the panic vis-a-vis a Division 1 vs Division 3 placement, Think he has it spot-on there and they are desperate to somehow get them on life-support as quickly as possible.I must admit I don't want any club to actually go out of business.I know they have a lot of bad fans but they also have a lot of good,same as any other club,and Cheerful Charlie is not going to spend money to keep them going for 3 seasons making massive losses. IMO the number of "bad fans" at a Rangers home game would have outnumbered the home support and possibly even total gate at any SPL match (bar you know who). If that sounds like a back handed compliment to TTFKAR, it's not meant to be. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted July 15, 2012 Author Share Posted July 15, 2012 Tomorrow is going to bring absolutely nothing more than whats already happened Maybe it'll bring an announcement on Dundee or Dunfermline becoming Club 12, and when the cockwomble is leaving. Would be nice if they could actually tell us what is happening with Sky TV and all the other corporate sponsors... and I mean actually tell us, as in the truth. I'm not holding my breath. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Henry Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Reread the original post. It was about SFL fans, no mention of an SFL board. The SFL gans have every Right to feel proud of their clubs actually taking a decision that our SPL clubs continuosly shirked. Or do you disagree with that? If so, why? The SPL clubs rejected - for whatever reason - Rangers application. It was then passed to the SFL clubs, who did the same, in spite of pressure from Regan, Doncaster et al. Both sets of clubs have done the same thing. You can't say the SPL clubs shirked it, because they didn't. Well, Killie did. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If it is all the SPL chairmen meeting tomorrow: Does advance notice have to be given for a specific motion - e.g. admitting newco to the SPL? If such a motion was proposed and deemed valid what would be the majority required and would oldco still have a vote? With regards to the second question, I know the original vote need to be 8-4 in favour but many organisations have rules whereby if a decision on a matter has already been taken and someone wants a further vote then a higher majority is required. One further point, many folk including myself gave Michael Johnstone a hard time for abstaining in the original vote, I think Gilmour's statement has given Johnstone some credibility back. To sjc: yes was at the game, over 10,000 for a pre-season friendly is not to shabby. The scoreline flattered United a bit but it wasn't the best of games IMO. You got a wee niggling doubt, Granny? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If it is all the SPL chairmen meeting tomorrow: Does advance notice have to be given for a specific motion - e.g. admitting newco to the SPL? If such a motion was proposed and deemed valid what would be the majority required and would oldco still have a vote? With regards to the second question, I know the original vote need to be 8-4 in favour but many organisations have rules whereby if a decision on a matter has already been taken and someone wants a further vote then a higher majority is required. One further point, many folk including myself gave Michael Johnstone a hard time for abstaining in the original vote, I think Gilmour's statement has given Johnstone some credibility back. To sjc: yes was at the game, over 10,000 for a pre-season friendly is not to shabby. The scoreline flattered United a bit but it wasn't the best of games IMO. They have already stated that this meeting will see the result of who club 12 are being decided, whether it is Sevco, Dundee or Dunfermline or an SPL with 11 members is yet to be seen. If it's not Dundee or Dunfermline that's me done with the senior game. If it is Dun* then I am satisfied justice has been done as far as the Sevco question goes and it's time to wipe the slate for all other clubs, regardless of their politicking, and for the leadership of our game to be replaced so that we can move forward with the long required reforms. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 The SPL clubs rejected - for whatever reason - Rangers application. It was then passed to the SFL clubs, who did the same, in spite of pressure from Regan, Doncaster et al. Both sets of clubs have done the same thing. You can't say the SPL clubs shirked it, because they didn't. Well, Killie did. All but one of the SFL clubs shirked it by not making Sevco apply alongside Spartans and Cove, but no-one should hold the fact they wanted to cash in on Sevco's crowds and name because justice has almost been served. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 One further point, many folk including myself gave Michael Johnstone a hard time for abstaining in the original vote, I think Gilmour's statement has given Johnstone some credibility back. It could well yet turn-out that the reason Johnstone abstained, and Weir resigned from SPL Board, was in opposition to the grand stitch-up being concocted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 You got a wee niggling doubt, Granny? I know you're fishing. However, no I don't have any doubts about the outcome but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Johnstone/Gilmour/Cameron proposed a motion. I am interested in the mechanism and if oldco still have a vote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I won't believe Sevco aren't in the SPL until FIFA 13 comes out. Aye, and even when it does come out and they're not there, there will be some on here saying "oh hold on, they've still to patch it!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyrshireTon Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 All but one of the SFL clubs shirked it by not making Sevco apply alongside Spartans and Cove, but no-one should hold the fact they wanted to cash in on Sevco's crowds and name because justice has almost been served. Can't agree - why vote in Spartans and make the SFL numbers up to 31? Leaves them well stumped if Newco is put back in the SPL - "Um, sorry Spartans, we're one club too many now - you're not allowed in after all" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 It could well yet turn-out that the reason Johnstone abstained, and Weir resigned from SPL Board, was in opposition to the grand stitch-up being concocted. I think you could be spot on. I wonder if the full story will ever come out? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 or an SPL with 11 members This would be against their own rules and, surely, 1998 Agreement requiring SPL expands to 12 from 2000 on. One also struggles to see what it achieves bar losing gate income + leaving Newco in limbo. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This would be against their own rules and, surely, 1998 Agreement requiring SPL expands to 12 from 2000 on. One also struggles to see what it achieves bar losing gate income + leaving Newco in limbo. What it would achieve is the SPL winning the dummy spitting contest and killing the Scottish game, for me at least. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdeep Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 What are the odds tomorrow that just before the SPL meeting Neil receives a message from Stuart as follows Stuart: Hi Neil. How's it going. Just wanted to let you know we in the SFA have had a little glitch with the Sevco registration issue. Although they have been accepted in principle to the SFL. Not sure we can resolve in the next 14 days so maybe looking at a delay in moving them into SFL3. Can you live with a suspension of Sevco for a year and a plan to merge the SPL/SFL and expand the Scottish Premiership to 14 next year. Neil: Well Stuart we were keen to see this through on the basis of sporting integrity but in the interests of the wider footballing community we will just have to live with this. It couldn't happen could it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1888bhoy67 Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 Maybe it'll bring an announcement on Dundee or Dunfermline becoming Club 12, and when the cockwomble is leaving. Would be nice if they could actually tell us what is happening with Sky TV and all the other corporate sponsors... and I mean actually tell us, as in the truth. I'm not holding my breath. Me neither, which is why i said there will be nothing new from what we already know. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The big chair Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 This would be against their own rules and, surely, 1998 Agreement requiring SPL expands to 12 from 2000 on. One also struggles to see what it achieves bar losing gate income + leaving Newco in limbo. Wouldn't promoting two teams or failing to relegate one also be against the rules? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) I know you're fishing. However, no I don't have any doubts about the outcome but I certainly wouldn't be surprised if Johnstone/Gilmour/Cameron proposed a motion. I am interested in the mechanism and if oldco still have a vote. OK, gotcha. Proposition, maybe. Acceptance, no way. For the record, I agree. I must admit to having no fkn idea about oldco's rights, votes, or existence, liquid,solid or gaseous or otherwise. That lawyer guy, Di Stefano reportedly buying oldco shares. What's that about? Two 'rangerses'? Fucksake, none is bad enough. I actually raised that possibility, ages ago, on this thread. Then there's this Rangers FC Group Ltd was used by Mr Whyte to take over Rangers FC plc in May 2011.The company, which is registered in London, is currently the subject of litigation from club administrators Duff and Phelps, who are pursuing the businessman and his former lawyers Collyer Bristow for more than £25m.On Friday, documents lodged with Companies House revealed that the Registrar of Companies is seeking to dissolve group, which owned the 85% stake in the club bought from Sir David Murray for £1 last year. It's a big confusarama to me. But I'm not sure I want the entertainmant to end eta I am now aware of Di Stefano's prior involvement with Dundee. Edited July 15, 2012 by cyderspaceman 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stagmaster Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 I can't see them turning face and allowing Sevco into the SPL. Doncaster et al may seem like idiots but they are not that daft. It wouldn't surprise me if they attempted a stitch-up with SPL 2 (consisting the 5 who went against the majority and possibly another 5 who were on the fringes - i'm sure there must have been some). Personally, that would be enough for me to cease my interest in Scottish football while Doncaster, Regan, Longmuir etc. are in office. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 If it is all the SPL chairmen meeting tomorrow: Does advance notice have to be given for a specific motion - e.g. admitting newco to the SPL? If such a motion was proposed and deemed valid what would be the majority required and would oldco still have a vote? With regards to the second question, I know the original vote need to be 8-4 in favour but many organisations have rules whereby if a decision on a matter has already been taken and someone wants a further vote then a higher majority is required. One further point, many folk including myself gave Michael Johnstone a hard time for abstaining in the original vote, I think Gilmour's statement has given Johnstone some credibility back. To sjc: yes was at the game, over 10,000 for a pre-season friendly is not to shabby. The scoreline flattered United a bit but it wasn't the best of games IMO. Agree with that, especially the second half, which I spent most of the time laughing at the Dundee fans getting slightly irritated especially when the police waded in 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 15, 2012 Share Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) Should 'Off the Ball' podcast not have been updated by now? I missed the first hour. Still showing last week's as latest. eta it's up now Edited July 15, 2012 by cyderspaceman 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.