GunnerBairn Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 That's 29 clubs though, is it not? I thought only Stranraer voted to keep them out altogether? Or was it Clyde? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellbhoy Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Looks like Mr Green didn't get the result he was promised and the powers will have one last push on Monday. If it's still Div3, will he decare that the whole deal is off (per the confidential part of the agreement with D&D?) and walk away or will he start planting spuds? If he walks, what then for RFC? OH I forgot about that juicy piece of info there.If the newco is not as close to or in the SPL will Greeny do walking away ?. Will Greeny sell up Ibrox's assets to any Rangers minded consortium for a quick buck ?.£11 million ?. Are we gonna get another laugh off the orcs panicking if Green says he's not interested if the newco is playing in the bottom league ?. Cheers WBR for that . 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLip69 Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 IIRC there was a report to the effect that it was Greens presentation to the SPL that swayed a few against supporting Rangers, and now Clyde are saying it was Greens words to them that ensured a united stand by the SFL chairmen against supporting Rangers in SFL1. Makes you wonder exactly what Greens agenda is. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Or was it Clyde? Their announcement beforehand said they'd (reluctantly and with concerns) vote 'Yes'. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Leighton Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Where is the list of clubs who never voted for Sevco not to be admitted to the SFL at all. We should be taking action against all clubs who never voted for Sevco to be refused and to apply again alongside the likes of Spartans and Cove. If we are going to have a witch hunt let's do it properly. Can you explain in simple terms why it is unimportant to know the chairmen / teams who decided to vote against sporting integrity? These people have shown absolute disrespect to their own customers and have thumbed their nose at the 'tartan summer' zeitgeist. Sevco to SFL3 is unsatisfactory but it is realpolitik. While they might be a bit of a mess off-field, it is likely to resolve - someone will buy Green out now they're worth little and have dodged the debt - and they have massive potential to be successful again. Their absolute loss would have gone against common sense far more than what the combined chief executives wished for... However, Sevco to SFL1 shits all over the history of our national game as it effectively says: "go bust? expect only a demotion - provided you are one of the two most successful clubs in Scottish football history". Sevco had acquired the assets, something iirc Airdrie United had not done when they unsuccessfully applied to replace Airdrieonians. A newco with assets should go in at the bottom. Only SELF INTERESTED GREED would vote against sporting integrity for money. So I ask again: can you explain in simple terms why it is unimportant to know the chairmen / teams who decided to vote against sporting integrity? Edited July 14, 2012 by Jim Leighton 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) That's 29 clubs though, is it not? I thought only Stranraer voted to keep them out altogether? Yes but if justice was to be followed through to it's rightful conclusion then only Stranrear did the right thing. In case you never picked me up from the lack of emotes my last post was aimed at letting everyone know how spiteful and vengeful the mob has become. We have not gotten full justice yet but most of us agree to some concessions, Sevco in Div3, yet the majority are willing to punish clubs who did the same and gave concessions. Who are we to judge on those clubs when we have failed ourselves to settle for an outcome short of total justice? The attitude of talks of boycotts etc for clubs who are not Sevco is what is going to kill Scottish football, not loss of revenue from punishing the one who deserves the punishment. As things stand I am happy justice has been served and I believe we all need to get behind every team in Scottish football so what we, as fans, have achieved is not wasted. We have the greatest ever chance to take our game back and there are some who just want to do more damage. If Sevco are slipped further up the leagues than they are in the coming days then I shall walk away from the senior game but until such a time I believe we all need to help each other. ICT fans will demand answers from Kenny Cameron and if we are not satisfied we will do what is needed, fans who do not agree with their own clubs' actions will do the same, we do not need to look for scapegaots when we have dealt with the actual perpetrator. Edited July 14, 2012 by stonedsailor 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaz FFC Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 So my router decides to pack in on Thursday and I now have no wifi and have to use mobile internet to view this thread. Talk about fucking timing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Can you explain in simple terms why it is unimportant to know the chairmen / teams who decided to vote against sporting integrity? These people have shown absolute disrespect to their own customers and have thumbed their nose at the 'tartan summer' zeitgeist. Sevco to SFL3 is unsatisfactory but it is realpolitik. While they might be a bit of a mess off-field, it is likely to resolve - someone will buy Green out now they're worth little and have dodged the debt - and they have massive potential to be successful again. Their absolute loss would have gone against common sense far more than what the combined chief executives wished for... However, Sevco to SFL1 shits all over the history of our national game as it effectively says: "go bust? expect only a demotion - provided you are one of the two most successful clubs in Scottish football history". Sevco had acquired the assets, something iirc Airdrie United had not done when they unsuccessfully applied to replace Airdrieonians. A newco with assets should go in at the bottom. Only SELF INTERESTED GREED would vote against sporting integrity for money. So I ask again: can you explain in simple terms why it is unimportant to know the chairmen / teams who decided to vote against sporting integrity? It is unimportant because Sevco are where they should be (almost) justice was done. The only people who need to know are the fans of the clubs who's chairmen voted the way of self interest and greed, they can deal with their chairmen. It could also be said that electing Sevco into division three was done out of self interest and greed. They got their place at the expense of Spartans or Cove so if action is to be taken it should be taken against every SFL club with the exception of Stranrear. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Albino Rover Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Now the dodgy dealings are all but through and justice is all but confirmed, I'm primarily interested in the football. What standard of player will this new club approach? And will players still relish the chance to join them or will some of these lads have a bit of principle? I remember when Livingston were in Division 3 a few years back they couldn't afford their stadium (even had charity collectors for the club fund at games) but still paid a full-time squad of ex-SPL players and poached the cream of the division on their promotion. I fear Rangers will do the same thing. And if they don't, some teams in the division have the beating of that lot, my eye's on Annan, actually. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain_Sensible Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Is Stewart Gilmour basically saying that St Mirren's business plans make no provision for the possibility of relegation? Hysterical nonsense from him and that Highland twat. You're a bit dim, aren't you? St. Mirren have relegation clauses written into player contracts. Thus, if St. Mirren were to be relegated, the players would be on First Division salaries. As St. Mirren haven't been relegated then the players are on SPL contracts. The issue for Stewart Gilmour is that he was on the verge of getting all his cash back, plus interest, on his shares. Now, that hasn't just been blown away, he now faces putting his hands in his pockets again. I have no sympathy for him. He was willing ti cash in his shares at the expense of his fellow shareholders. The destruction of Rangers is far more important than Stewart Gilmour's personal wealth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Their announcement beforehand said they'd (reluctantly and with concerns) vote 'Yes'. We have led everyone a merry dance here. Rangers will be back in the spl on monday due to us highlighting the wrongs of a div 1 entry. Charles will then repay the remainder of our nlc debt and we will begin our rush back up the leagues to join our Glasgow brethren. Whoowhaha its worked a treat. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBairn Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) I remember when Livingston were in Division 3 a few years back they couldn't afford their stadium (even had charity collectors for the club fund at games) but still paid a full-time squad of ex-SPL players Another elephant revealled. Can Sevco even afford to run and maintain Ibrox in Div3? Infact can they categorically guarantee that they can fulfil all their fixtures this season? So many unanswered questions remain. Edited July 14, 2012 by GunnerBairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghead ranter Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Yes but if justice was to be followed through to it's rightful conclusion then only Stranrear did the right thing. In case you never picked me up from the lack of emotes my last post was aimed at letting everyone know how spiteful and vengeful the mob has become. We have not gotten full justice yet but most of us agree to some concessions, Sevco in Div3, yet the majority are willing to punish clubs who did the same and gave concessions. Who are we to judge on those clubs when we have failed ourselves to settle for an outcome short of total justice? The attitude of talks of boycotts etc for clubs who are not Sevco is what is going to kill Scottish football, not loss of revenue from punishing the one who deserves the punishment. As things stand I am happy justice has been served and I believe we all need to get behind every team in Scottish football so what we, as fans, have achieved is not wasted. We have the greatest ever chance to take our game back and there are some who just want to do more damage. If Sevco are slipped further up the leagues than they are in the coming days then I shall walk away from the senior game but until such a time I believe we all need to help each other. ICT fans will demand answers from Kenny Cameron and if we are not satisfied we will do what is needed, fans who do not agree with their own clubs' actions will do the same, we do not need to look for scapegaots when we have dealt with the actual perpetrator. well said. It's time to let go. The need to know who the 5 are should be for nosiness only. Hounding such a small minority by a large group is unnecessary. If the supporters of those 5 clubs want to take issue with their own boards, so be it, but supporters of other clubs would do Scottish football a far better service if they let go and moved on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broccoli Dog Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 In today's comedy news 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergeant Wilson Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 SEV-CO, WHEREVER THEY MAY BE THEY ARE OWNED BY A CHARLIE GREEN THEY HAVEN'T WON A CUP, HAVEN'T WON A LEAGUE THEY ARE GONNAE GET PAWNED BY A CHARLIE GREEN We'll call you. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WBR Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 Looks clear cut to me. It reads the Thistle Board voted unanimously against Sevco in to Div1. That decision was then applied at the Hampden vote and the vote carried. Does carrying a vote to a meeting mean the same as applying that vote? The statement reads like a story that stops before the point of voting at the SFL meeting. I'm not sure if the terminology is just unfamiliar to me or if it's a "clever" use of words. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Leighton Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 It is unimportant because Sevco are where they should be (almost) justice was done. The only people who need to know are the fans of the clubs who's chairmen voted the way of self interest and greed, they can deal with their chairmen. It could also be said that electing Sevco into division three was done out of self interest and greed. They got their place at the expense of Spartans or Cove so if action is to be taken it should be taken against every SFL club with the exception of Stranrear. Sevco are where they are. Justice would appear to have been done. However, if more chairmen had voted along the lines of Accies, QOS etc, then justice would not have been done. Many chairmen have voted with their hearts on this, not their heads. A vote from the heart was what the majority of supporters demanded, if only because anything else would be an admittance that Scottish Football only exists for the benefit of the Old Firm. The 'Newco to SFL1' was was all about saving the collective arses of the SPL sides, who had made a terrible series of commercial decisions. It's not about Armageddon or Death To Scottish Football. It's about chairmen who budgeted for a meagre sum of TV money (meagre because they had given the Old Firm a hefty wedge of it) and without it they were shitting bricks. Where does the money go? Into the pocket of average journeymen from Colchester willing to play for a grand a week. These 4th rate mercenaries will now hopefully bugger off as they do little to improve our game. We cannot be England and shopping in that market is akin to a tramp trying to buy his tea in Waitrose, combing through the bargain bin come closing time. Away supporters need to know who voted against sporting integrity simply because they will travel to watch their team, perhaps buy a programme, pie etc, pay in... all to the benefit of the away team if it's a league game. All for one and one for all! Or as the chairmen of the 'quislings' would put it: "All for one and each man for himself!" Greed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBairn Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 In today's comedy news A man of action, he's only gone and done it! But what ideas are in that skull of his? He looks creepy too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GunnerBairn Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 (edited) Does carrying a vote to a meeting mean the same as applying that vote? The statement reads like a story that stops before the point of voting at the SFL meeting. I'm not sure if the terminology is just unfamiliar to me or if it's a "clever" use of words. Well the way I read it was that they had a meeting at Firhill which was a unanimous NO to Div1. A representative from Partick then attended the Hampden vote and voted as per Particks wishes. The vote was then carried, ie the voting of Proposal 2 was completed. The result of Proposal 2 matched Partick's decision. That's my own take without the jargon. Edited July 14, 2012 by GunnerBairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Itwiznaeme Posted July 14, 2012 Share Posted July 14, 2012 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.