hellbhoy Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Once the costs of staging the games is covered, I'd be perfectly happy for the clubs to hand over the lot. These fixtures shouldn't be about the participating sides making money. Parachute payments should not exist. It's like giving the relegated club a bonus for failing ffs. The money they earned from their final league placing in the Premiership should be enough to help them readjust in the lower division for the coming season IMO. It could be seen as financial doping so the other clubs in the lower division are already at a disadvantage with spending power, nice idea but hardly practical under the current financial climate the game is in. The money should come from the main sponsorship deals the SPFL penned for the upcoming season and the money the clubs make from the play off's should ideally help them in the next campaign as a bonus for reaching the play off's. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pozbaird Posted May 6, 2015 Author Share Posted May 6, 2015 Po-tae-toe or po-tah-toh is what we are doing here Poz. At points we are both correct and other times there is a differing of opinion. Have a look at the BBC website under "live scores" the lower league play off's are categorised as "Scottish League One" & "Scottish Championship". In the League One results there are 3 League Two clubs ?, two of these clubs at least won't be playing in League One next season and never played a single League One league fixture this season. So how can they be playing League One fixtures ? My position is that the leagues have already played their quota of competitive league fixtures and the Championship league itself has finished and has now changed into another type of league fixture that is in a knock out format that does not affect their league standing, goals scored for and against and so on. So they are league fixtures, but they aren't division fixtures that affect the clubs table standings so therefore cannot be part of the league campaign of 36 games if you get my reasoning. Fair enough.... but can you show me where I said 62% voted for..... Arghhhhh! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Fair enough.... but can you show me where I said 62% voted for..... Arghhhhh! See if this works Poz ? When the real Rangers went bust and after all the votes cast in the old SFL association to bitch slap the cloned version into the old Third division in a count back showed that !, out of all the 42 senior clubs around 62% of all clubs or just less than 2/3rds actually voted to kick the B'stard of an abomination down to the lowest division by virtue of an SFL vote. I'm sort of sure that some clubs voted to let them into the old First Division and hence why the magic number of 62% of all the votes cast including the old SPL vote as a sum total of all votes to allow them into any league. So brings us around in a full circle for the benefit of cnuty No8, 62% or just under 2/3rds of all senior clubs voted NO to allow his new club into the Old 1st Division. I'm 62% sure on this although being just less than 2/3rds sure looks a better option here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
No8. Posted May 6, 2015 Share Posted May 6, 2015 Aw this just gets worse for you the more you press on this subject, you are having a fucking nightmare here and are all over the place like a headless chicken. So you have gone from proclaiming 2/3rds voted NO to voted YES ???, if that was the case then Scotland would be an independent nation. This is the last I'm pressing on this as other posters are getting fed up of you making a cnut out of yourself. I did post where you posted 62% so deal with it you demented fuckwit. The last time you are mentioning it as you fucked up...simpleton. I don't give a f**k about other posters getting bored....either quote where I said '62% voted No' or apologise. It shouldn't be too difficult simpleton. You never quoted it as I specifically never said it. What I said was only just over 1/3rd of the electorate voted yes. 2/3rds of the electorate didn't vote Yes. Neither of these statements are even remotely close to saying '62% voted No' ... You know I actually think you are so thick you can't even see where you fucked up. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akredz Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Where's Mr X with the "get this pish 62% argument out of here" irrelevancy banhammer when you need him? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paramour Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 The last time you are mentioning it as you fucked up...simpleton. I don't give a f**k about other posters getting bored....either quote where I said '62% voted No' or apologise. It shouldn't be too difficult simpleton. You never quoted it as I specifically never said it. What I said was only just over 1/3rd of the electorate voted yes. 2/3rds of the electorate didn't vote Yes. Neither of these statements are even remotely close to saying '62% voted No' ... You know I actually think you are so thick you can't even see where you fucked up. ^ ^ ^ Definitely not bovvered. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 The last time you are mentioning it as you fucked up...simpleton. I don't give a f**k about other posters getting bored....either quote where I said '62% voted No' or apologise. It shouldn't be too difficult simpleton. You never quoted it as I specifically never said it. What I said was only just over 1/3rd of the electorate voted yes. 2/3rds of the electorate didn't vote Yes. Neither of these statements are even remotely close to saying '62% voted No' ... You know I actually think you are so thick you can't even see where you fucked up. No 2 is losing the plot....lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Bar 62. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I agree with you fully that the play off's are part of the SPFL competitions. But I believe that the league campaign itself consists of 36 fixtures and then the league has finished but there are still SPFL & SFA competitions to play out to end the season. A league game when played will affect the clubs points tally, possible position in the league, goals for and against etc etc etc, none of the play off fixtures will affect the league table in any form and really can't be deemed a league fixture any more can it ? The clubs have now entered into a new competition will is still part of the season but the league has finished. You could say the same after the split in the Premiership. Points gained in the lower 6 do not affect positions in the top 6. Twice now, I think, ICT finished in 7th with a points total greater than 6th. Does this mean that there are two competitions in the Premiership post split? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cyderspaceman Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 See if this works Poz ? When the real Rangers went bust and after all the votes cast in the old SFL association to bitch slap the cloned version into the old Third division in a count back showed that !, out of all the 42 senior clubs around 62% of all clubs or just less than 2/3rds actually voted to kick the B'stard of an abomination down to the lowest division by virtue of an SFL vote. I'm sort of sure that some clubs voted to let them into the old First Division and hence why the magic number of 62% of all the votes cast including the old SPL vote as a sum total of all votes to allow them into any league. So brings us around in a full circle for the benefit of cnuty No8, 62% or just under 2/3rds of all senior clubs voted NO to allow his new club into the Old 1st Division. I'm 62% sure on this although being just less than 2/3rds sure looks a better option here. Oh, HB! They were not 'kicked down" , they were "allowed in". I know it's hard to stick to the truth when all (or lots) around you are shouting lies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weirdcal Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Bar 62.Should be ban 62. Christ this is tedious. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
topcat(The most tip top) Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 These are the clubs that are showing the early signs of being financially fucked. So fucked they're willing to take a gamble on red or black. Are you going to tell the Hibs support that? I think it will be better coming from you 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Koop Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 How many sleeps? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Are you going to tell the Hibs support that? I think it will be better coming from you It's cool. They love me down Leith way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aofjays Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Nice one sevco: http://www.rangers.co.uk/news/headlines/item/9203-club-statement-on-ticketing 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 I have always said Scottish Fitba is worth a fiver a match Can I change Teams? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 Naw I object to the reek of pish stained breeks. Boo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 TICKETS for the SPFL Premiership quarter-final play-off match against Queen of the South at Ibrox on Sunday, May 17 are now on sale.[/size]The Club is pleased to announce that after careful consideration tickets for the above match are priced at £5 across the board.[/size]Several pricing structures, including allowing season-ticket holders free admission with other fans paying between £5 and £20, were studied but it is believed the most favourable option for the Club and its supporters is a flat price of £5.[/size]This means the Club can cover the costs of staging the match – between £70,000 and £80,000 – and at the same time comply with the SPFL rule, which demands a 50% levy from gate receipts after VAT (but not the Club’s costs) has been deducted. The cost to the Club of allowing season-ticket holders free admission would have been substantial after accounting for the levy that would be due to the SPFL.[/size]Despite media speculation never at any time did Rangers state it would not adhere to SPFL rules and the Club believes that setting this flat fee should meet with the approval of all concerned. [/size]The £5 ticket price for all will ensure as many supporters as possible can back the team and should we progress to the next stage of the play-offs our pricing policy will not change.[/size]Tickets go on general sale from 2pm today (Thursday, May 7) and season-ticket holders can purchase their own seats until Sunday, May 10. Bar 72 and Section MLF season-ticket holders should note smartcards for this match will be activated automatically.[/size] A sensible approach from Rangers and one that even the bralters can't find fault with. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacksgranda Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 A sensible approach from Rangers and one that even the bralters can't find fault with. Give us time... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AberdeenBud Posted May 7, 2015 Share Posted May 7, 2015 That does seem rather sensible and conciliatory. 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.