Itwiznaeme Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I'm assuming the big money signings are not to win the 3rd or 2nd, rather they're to make sure they stay in the proper cups long enough to be drawn against Celtic. If so, a new manager should have been their top priority before new players! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 No, but five did vote Yes and I thought we'd narrowed it down to those clubs. I have missed many pages on here recently so I could have missed the outing of the five. Were Montrose the final one? I hope you are right as I've always liked Forfar. Hamilton = public "Yes" QotS = public "Yes" Falkirk = "Yes", won't directly say Forfar/Montrose = no clear statements Everyone else said before/after vote that they'd vote/voted "No", but conceivably someone might've fibbed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted July 31, 2012 Author Share Posted July 31, 2012 I think their 'big name' signings are to encourage take up of STs, to plan ahead of the impending transfer embargo, and to stoke up the Sevco support into backing Green. In this instance, I don't buy into some conspiracy theory about them knowing hasty reconstruction is happening just for their benefit. I think they will do a Portsmouth and implode twice mind you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Connolly Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Hamilton = public "Yes" QotS = public "Yes" Falkirk = "Yes", won't directly say Forfar/Montrose = no clear statements Everyone else said before/after vote that they'd vote/voted "No", but conceivably someone might've fibbed. I have a niggly feeling that Airdrie United may be involved somehow.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaffenThinMint Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Hamilton = public "Yes" QotS = public "Yes" Falkirk = "Yes", won't directly say Forfar/Montrose = no clear statements Everyone else said before/after vote that they'd vote/voted "No", but conceivably someone might've fibbed. Albion Rovers said they were voting "Yes" because they wanted to keep the derby with Airdrie for money, then when the shitstorm blew up after the vote, they claimed along with Brechin City they'd voted "no" because it was what the fans wanted. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwiznaeme Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I think their 'big name' signings are to encourage take up of STs, to plan ahead of the impending transfer embargo, and to stoke up the Sevco support into backing Green. In this instance, I don't buy into some conspiracy theory about them knowing hasty reconstruction is happening just for their benefit. Yes, it is definitely a sales pitch, a big gamble on the part of Green's consortium who need supporters regularly turning up at Ibrox to watch the cheating b*****ds. I think they will do a Portsmouth and implode twice mind you. I do too, the cheating b*****ds (club and supporters) have mostly negative experiences ahead of them for a very long time to come. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owsley Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Hamilton = public "Yes" QotS = public "Yes" Falkirk = "Yes", won't directly say Forfar/Montrose = no clear statements Everyone else said before/after vote that they'd vote/voted "No", but conceivably someone might've fibbed. Then Falkirk are even worse than us if they haven't had the guts to own up. Very suspicious from the Angus duo too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I have a niggly feeling that Airdrie United may be involved somehow.... They say they voted no, but Ballantyne was heavily involved in drafting the proposal put to The SFL Chairmen by The Board. They were originally going to abstain, if they did vote no it was only once it was obvious the proposal wasn't being accepted and they followed the crowd. I have to say I'm not convinced one way or the other. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
loonapick Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 1343764617[/url]' post='6484852']Then Falkirk are even worse than us if they haven't had the guts to own up. Very suspicious from the Angus duo too. This is what I got as a response. Can't believe David would lie. Forfar Athletic were one of the 25 clubs who voted against the package offered to accommodate Rangers in SFL1. Not without a lot of thought and soul searching I can assure you and we are worried about the financial implications moving forward. Season tickets are available by postal application. Thanks. David McGregor Secretary 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Booker_d Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 In the days before the vote I heard it was a definite that dumbarton were going to vote yes. Did they release any statements about what they did? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
54_and_counting Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 There is also a 2 year notice period to quit the SFL. If Green is signing these guys on the promise that they'll be back in the SPL next year then he's a brave man. and what if we are "promoted" more than 1 division, as im sure dundee didnt resign from the SFL 2 years ago in the hope they made it to the SPL 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) and what if we are "promoted" more than 1 division, as im sure dundee didnt resign from the SFL 2 years ago in the hope they made it to the SPL Point 3 of the matters SFL clubs voted on Friday 13th July was allowing Dundee/Dunfermline permission to resign without 2yrs notice. Yes - said "No". http://www.dumbartonfootballclub.com/news/?mode=view&id=4040 Edited July 31, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Umbungo1874 Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 and what if we are "promoted" more than 1 division, as im sure dundee didnt resign from the SFL 2 years ago in the hope they made it to the SPL Promoted more than one division, more chance of a year out for 10 years of cheating 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fife Saint Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I was discussing Sevco with a colleague today and we were discussing, how would it be possible for Rangers to be MORE dead? Even if no SFA membership had been granted, we'd have heard all sorts of shite about the club being dormant. So I put it to PnB, how could Rangers be MORE dead? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoonsLad Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Did we ever find out who that was? I reckoned Clyde. Didn't Forfar vote Yes along with Accies, QoS, Falkirk and one other? Wait a minute - I have heard this before, but I was sure, positive we did the right thing and said no to the cheating gits being in the first division! Have I totally missed what happened? Did Forfar vote yes to letting them in the first division??!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 I think I know what they are up to - hoping that by creating such a wildly imbalanced side running up cricket scores every week, the SFA and SFL will be "forced" to reform the leagues and punt them back into the top division. That is where the cunting plan falls to the ground. Not 'fixed'; just 'changed' 'cos they are indeed c***s. c***s c***s c***s c***s cuuuunts total cuunts Cuuuuunts total c***s Would you like some spam with your cuuunts? c***s and chips? Viking c***s, ****! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wunfellaff Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Saw about the only normal thing on OrcTalk there Usual quotes though, he is only 46, could do a job sort of thing 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Claymores Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Has everyone listened to this?..............Someone impersonating a potential investor and getting 20 minutes of 'gems' out of Inram Ahmed..............genuinely Ahmed. Absolutely hilarious http://inyourfacejournalism.blogspot.co.uk/#!/2012/07/meet-sevco-director-imran-ahmed.html (apols if old news, but it was new to me!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 Traynor blaming the SFA for exaggerating the projected financial problems, then went on to state that he thinks several clubs will face severe problems this season. Why is this man still polluting the airwaves with his nonsensical shite? He really is a joke. Poor guy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kildog Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 (edited) I was discussing Sevco with a colleague today and we were discussing, how would it be possible for Rangers to be MORE dead? Even if no SFA membership had been granted, we'd have heard all sorts of shite about the club being dormant. So I put it to PnB, how could Rangers be MORE dead? Nuke them from space. It's the only way to be sure. 'scuse my paraphrasing. Edited August 1, 2012 by kildog 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.