Florentine_Pogen Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Much as I applaud the sentiments, this was FAR, FAR too longwinded. Arbroath managed to say as much covering the coherent points in a more concise fashion. With the clock ticking down, those opposing the attempted SFA/SFL carve up have to keep it to the point so people will read (and understand their arguments), especially if it is reiterating points already made days earlier. A statement that loses the reader by the sixth oversized paragraph is as bad as no statement at all. Have some sympathy for your readers Clyde, you're not delivering academic papers. Disagree. The resolutions concocted by Doncaster and Regan have been so constructed in order that any 't' not crossed or any 'i' not dotted by the SFL clubs shall be pounced upon to assist SpivCo back in. Clyde have responded with a statement which, by necessity, needed to be detailed and comprehensive. The very complaint you have regarding long windedness is the very scenario that Regan & Doncaster are hoping to engender within the SFL clubs voting. Edited July 12, 2012 by Florentine_Pogen 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBairn Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I'll put this post as two simple bullets, to see if this is the scenario anyone thinks will actually happen here... • SPL clubs only voted 'no to newco in SPL' because they were all in cahoots with Donkeymaster, Regan, and Longmuir to see Sevco in Div 1. • Plan looks like going tits-up. SPL clubs will therefore simply stick Sevco back in the SPL. Sorry, no matter what has happened since Feb 14 to astound and amuse me in equal measure - I'm not buying this! didn't the SFA say that if Newco were voted into the SPL that they would have refused to give them a licence to play football? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Why is everyone getting hysterical now, then? Relax everyone! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Am I the only one who thought the SPL Clubs voted with integrity, sans one, while everything that has played out since has been gerrymandered by panicking SFA/SFL/SPL officials? The SFL clubs will likely vote alike and Newco will be in the third, and reform will still happen and we won't all be killed. So when Killie are asked to vote on Monday (after the SFL have said No to Newco in the SFL1 or no to Newco in the SFL completely) to admit Dun* or Newco. What way are they going to vote? Using Killie as an example but the same can be said for others such as Saint *, ICT, Motherwell etc. There is a vast difference in being without revenue for a year and being without revenue for 3. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broken Algorithms Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 didn't the SFA say that if Newco were voted into the SPL that they would have refused to give them a licence to play football? Think that was Regan posturing, and it turned out to be shite. He was making statements to justify his job. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Old Northerner Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I'll put this post as two simple bullets, to see if this is the scenario anyone thinks will actually happen here... • SPL clubs only voted 'no to newco in SPL' because they were all in cahoots with Donkeymaster, Regan, and Longmuir to see Sevco in Div 1. • Plan looks like going tits-up. SPL clubs will therefore simply stick Sevco back in the SPL. Sorry, no matter what has happened since Feb 14 to astound and amuse me in equal measure - I'm not buying this! I'm more inclined to think that an SPL2 scenario would emerge. I see voting NewCo 3/4s of the way up an existing structure and voting NewCo into a 'new' structure as two quite different ways of achieving the same end. I'm sure that some SFL clubs might vote no to the first but, down the line, still be very interested in the second 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Disagree. The resolutions concocted by Doncaster and Regan have been so constructed in order that any 't' not crossed or any 'i' not dotted by the SFL clubs shall be pounced upon to assist SpivCo back in. Clyde have responded with a statement which, by necessity, needed to be detailed and comprehensive. The very complaint you have regarding long windedness is the very scenario that Regan & Doncaster are hoping to engender within the SFL clubs voting. This, precisely this. The SFA/SPL plan needs to be picked apart forensically and nobody has done this better so far than the Clyde guys. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBairn Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Disagree. The resolutions concocted by Doncaster and Regan have been so constructed in order that any 't' not crossed or any 'i' not dotted by the SFL clubs shall be pounced upon to assist SpivCo back in. Clyde have responded with a statement which, by necessity, needed to be detailed and comprehensive. The very complaint you have regarding long windedness is the very scenario that Regan & Doncaster are hoping to engender within the SFL clubs voting. Agreed. Clyde's statement was lengthy as it HAD to be to ensure the wording of the proposal was properly broken down and understood by all to be the joke that it is. Well done Clyde. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustyarabnuts Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Any club swithering over the decision must be uncertain whether the bribe is high enough. "What if we make it 16 SPL clubs and a car and £50,000 and a holiday to the Maldives?" Thats it they've got me with the holiday in the maldives 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBairn Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Think that was Regan posturing, and it turned out to be shite. He was making statements to justify his job. It's something else he'd need to backtrack on for Newco to be allowed back in to the SPL if the vote goes against them though. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) I'll put this post as two simple bullets, to see if this is the scenario anyone thinks will actually happen here... • SPL clubs only voted 'no to newco in SPL' because they were all in cahoots with Donkeymaster, Regan, and Longmuir to see Sevco in Div 1. • Plan looks like going tits-up. SPL clubs will therefore simply stick Sevco back in the SPL. Sorry, no matter what has happened since Feb 14 to astound and amuse me in equal measure - I'm not buying this! It was the SFL that were to be paid for it, not buy it! The price being the £1,000,000 for the TV rights and the settlement agreement. Edited July 12, 2012 by strichener 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 It's something else he'd need to backtrack on for Newco to be allowed back in to the SPL if the vote goes against them though. Come on now, no backtracking required.....it will be that we just move forward in a different direction and that just happens to be 180 degrees from the one we were going in but no backtracking here son..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Flash Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Disagree. The resolutions concocted by Doncaster and Regan have been so constructed in order that any 't' not crossed or any 'i' not dotted by the SFL clubs shall be pounced upon to assist SpivCo back in. Clyde have responded with a statement which, by necessity, needed to be detailed and comprehensive. The very complaint you have regarding long windedness is the very scenario that Regan & Doncaster are hoping to engender within the SFL clubs voting. Could they not just break it down into Do you want A Sevco to be admitted to Third B Sevco to be admitted to First following the reconstruction arranged between SPL, SFA and SFL C Sevco not to be admitted to the SFL. If A, B or C gets 51% of the votes, then that is adopted. If none gets 51% then the one with the lowest votes drops out and it becomes a choice between the remaining two. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nofixedability Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I'll put this post as two simple bullets, to see if this is the scenario anyone thinks will actually happen here... • SPL clubs only voted 'no to newco in SPL' because they were all in cahoots with Donkeymaster, Regan, and Longmuir to see Sevco in Div 1. • Plan looks like going tits-up. SPL clubs will therefore simply stick Sevco back in the SPL. Sorry, no matter what has happened since Feb 14 to astound and amuse me in equal measure - I'm not buying this! What other scenario explains why Dundee or Dumfermline are not currently in the SPL? The SPL fans on here crowing over their sporting integrity compared to some of the innocent 'diddy' teams are boak inducing, who do you think pays Doncaster's wages and set shis remit? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
castilla Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Was doing fine up to "unless". What I don't get still is why the Dunfermline/Dundee issue is being discussed along with this. This should have been settled the minute the SPL said no to Sevco. There is no link between the two issues now. It leaves them the option to re-admit Rangers to the SPL, if the SFL don't play ball. I'm not kidding, I think they are devious enough. Regan and Doncaster should be dismissed. BUT, who is going to dismiss them ? The sporting hypocrites in the SPL, who have landed the SFL in this mess ? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JBKillie Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Surely the negotiating stance that the SFL should take is that, yes, re-organisation of the leagues is necessary, but it is something that needs reasoned negotiation over a sensible period. Therefore, they should propose heads of terms of such re-org to the SFA and SPL that they (SFL) will admit Sevco to SFL3 on condition that the SPL and SFA accept their terms (in writing). If no agreement, then Sevco don't get a place in the SFL at all. As my school fitba coach used to say, "Attack is the best form of defence."! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
H_B Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Surely the negotiating stance that the SFL should take is that, yes, re-organisation of the leagues is necessary, but it is something that needs reasoned negotiation over a sensible period. Therefore, they should propose heads of terms of such re-org to the SFA and SPL that they (SFL) will admit Sevco to SFL3 on condition that the SPL and SFA accept their terms (in writing). If no agreement, then Sevco don't get a place in the SFL at all. As my school fitba coach used to say, "Attack is the best form of defence."! I'm up for this approach as well now. Let's play chicken... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthBank Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Great to see the majority of SFL clubs coming out to say 'Sevco to 3rd Division'. Bear in mind though that this is immaterial. They WILL be in the 1st next season- " unless the Board shall have to its satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the Board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game, how it is structured, how it is governed and how it is financed, whereupon the Board shall be authorised to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the First Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13." You quote Resolution 2 but Clyde's comment are ... We see Resolution 2 as a matter of trust and it would take a change of personnel and attitude for us to be confident that David Longmuir would be entering discussions with a group of people committed to a collaborative process in a spirit of genuine partnership.In the current circumstances our only decision could be to vote against Resolution 2. Resolution 2 is up for vote. A No vote scuppers the proposal. Sorted! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MattBairn Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Could they not just break it down into Do you want A Sevco to be admitted to Third B Sevco to be admitted to First following the reconstruction arranged between SPLI, SFA and SFL C Sevco not to be admitted to the SFL. If A, B or C gets 51% of the votes, then that is adopted. If none gets 51% then the one with the lowest votes drops out and it becomes a choice between the remaining two. Unless they have the other applicants applications to the 3rd they can't vote for A. It should be whether or not they can get into the first. When/if that fails there is nothing to stop them applying the 3rd with Spartans etc. (personally I think their application to the 3rd should also fail as per Airdrie Utd in 2002 but that's another discussion ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
strichener Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Surely the negotiating stance that the SFL should take is that, yes, re-organisation of the leagues is necessary, but it is something that needs reasoned negotiation over a sensible period. Therefore, they should propose heads of terms of such re-org to the SFA and SPL that they (SFL) will admit Sevco to SFL3 on condition that the SPL and SFA accept their terms (in writing). If no agreement, then Sevco don't get a place in the SFL at all. As my school fitba coach used to say, "Attack is the best form of defence."! and as is the current way of voting in Scotland, insist on proportional representation so the SFL has 70% of the representatives. That'll f**k em. 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.