Reverend Maynard Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Is a representative from Sky going to be attending the spl meeting today, to clarify their position on the current contract, and what they would do given certain future scenarios? If not, why not? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bairn4Life Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) I want to see rangers thrown out the league for creating a culture of cheating at the boardroom level that has lasted decades and proven very fruitful for them. Since the creation of the spl it has been dominated by rangers who've won the majority of the trophies available in that time. I'd rather see my team cut its costs and play in a fairer competition. If we got relegated i'd still support them in the first division etc. Thing is though, when newco rangers get voted back in, I won't stop supporting my team and will still go to games with the same frequency I do now. Maybe get to about a third of games in a season. For me its always been about cheering on my club and entertainment. I get a buzz out of football that I don't think would change even if a newco rangers are allowed back in. I'm sure there are a lot of people in the same boat as me, but there are a lot of people who will walk away. No doubt they'd be tarred as 'idiots' by traynor et al, but I have respect for people who take this stance, it can't be easy walking away from your club. Would be ironic if it turned out that allowing the newco rangers back in was actually what 'killed Scottish football' You say that but, really, whats the point? Your playing against opposition with an unfair advantage gained from cheating the game, cheating you as a taxpayer and sanctioned by the ruling authorities. There's no excitement or thrill in that, its going through the motions waiting for the inevitable outcome. If this isnt dealt with fairly and per current rules, I really am finished with Scottish football, its a pointless exercise setup to cater for two clubs at the expense of the quality of our game, our league, our youth and our national team. Its funny, as im writing this, i dont feel angry as i probably should, i just feel apathy and almost an acceptance that, well, we all knew they would worm their way out of it anyway, because, lets face it we all did. Its just, to see it actually come to fruition, it almost confirms your darkest fears and suspisions about those running the game and their motives. Edited May 7, 2012 by Bairn4Life 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Is a representative from Sky going to be attending the spl meeting today, to clarify their position on the current contract, and what they would do given certain future scenarios? If not, why not? No, they'll probably just send some wee lassie with a note telling the "chairmen" how to vote. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeTeeJag Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) Oh dear. You do realise the ultimate prize in the SFL is promotion to a league where "NO other teams have a hope of winning the league, and never will"? In effect you are slogging along to join the big clubs slogging along. True, but at least at the moment I dont follow a club that the OF tell to jump and we ask "how high?" Edited May 7, 2012 by PeeTeeJag 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Owsley Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 I feel apathetic too. Days ago I was so angry it was not helping my health but now, I'm just ready to walk away from scottish football even although my club will have played no part in the vote (I know we would vote to keep them in anyway). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reverend Maynard Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Everyone is second guessing what sky will do if there is/ isn't a newco in the spl. Until that is clarified, how can they make in informed decision? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarreZ Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 The reason Sky have not said what will happen is that they will continue but want to appear that they wont should Rangers be kicked out. I cant really believe its not obvious to all the chairmen, its a pitiful amount for what they pay compared to what they receive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
archie guevara Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Oh dear. You do realise the ultimate prize in the SFL is promotion to a league where "NO other teams have a hope of winning the league, and never will"? In effect you are slogging along to join the big clubs slogging along. Yeah, that looks like a shit prize at the moment as one home win for the Pars has proven. I'm happy in the diddy 1st Division. Wouldn't be happy in the 2nd, so my life revolves around being content with 6th place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tadénator Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) Who is voting on this again? Is it the chairmen of each of the SPL clubs or just the 4 man SPL board? And is it just a majority decision? Edited May 7, 2012 by Tadénator 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeTeeJag Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 I think you are not seeing the worst case scenario, clubs have players on contracts, thoses contracts can't just be broken as revenue drops, those wages must be honoured (at worst). Loyalty bonus and sign on fees....oops. Staged transfer fees commitments sitting on the books due to go out...oops. Bank debt authorised on future income....oops. Cutting your cloth broadly means means selling players, getting the contract commitments off the books. It's not exactly a vibrant transfer market out there, all the scottish clubs (Celtic maybe less so) will be in the same nae-money boat - so you rely on selling to the lower tiers of the english league. Cutting cloth has the capacity to turn into touching cloth pretty quick. The SPL chairmen have a choice and it's not about sporting integrity etc, its become benefactors and invest in their club to cover the obligations they have untl their club can rebalance on a new footing (punish rangers), or don't (keep rangers going in the spl). Some can, but won't want to, some can't. So after all, it turns out that in the short term atleast, spl does need rangers - certainly when faced with the prospect of dipping into their pockets. It's unfortuate state of affairs, but thats the reality today, right now. Eventually the OF will find a way to leave the SPL and do you know what, hell mend the other teams in the SPL. It will serve them right for playing fast and loose living on hand outs from tv and the OF. Every club in the SPL must surely look at the coming season and plan for the worst. Relegation could affect anyone outside the OF so they must work out what to do if it happens. This is no different. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeeTeeJag Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Really? Fuxxake go and read this thread from the start. I meant before it became common knowledge once rankgers went into administration. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Handsome_Devil Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Who is voting on this again? Is it the chairmen of each of the SPL clubs or just the 4 man SPL board? And is it just a majority decision? Today will be everyone - it's league proposals rather than the specific transfer of the Rangers share. When the latter happens it will be the (six person) board, unless they succeed in chucking it off to the whole SPL to avoid responsibility. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hirop Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Every club in the SPL must surely look at the coming season and plan for the worst. Relegation could affect anyone outside the OF so they must work out what to do if it happens. This is no different. you would think wouldn't you. but it's not one team facing a drop in revenue for possibly as little as one year before getting back to suck the teet of TV\OF - it's 10 of them, and not for one year, for a number of years until the business model works again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p&b is a disgrace Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 I want to see rangers thrown out the league for creating a culture of cheating at the boardroom level that has lasted decades and proven very fruitful for them. Since the creation of the spl it has been dominated by rangers who've won the majority of the trophies available in that time. I'd rather see my team cut its costs and play in a fairer competition. If we got relegated i'd still support them in the first division etc. Thing is though, when newco rangers get voted back in, I won't stop supporting my team and will still go to games with the same frequency I do now. Maybe get to about a third of games in a season. For me its always been about cheering on my club and entertainment. I get a buzz out of football that I don't think would change even if a newco rangers are allowed back in. I'm sure there are a lot of people in the same boat as me, but there are a lot of people who will walk away. No doubt they'd be tarred as 'idiots' by traynor et al, but I have respect for people who take this stance, it can't be easy walking away from your club. Would be ironic if it turned out that allowing the newco rangers back in was actually what 'killed Scottish football' ...and it wouldn't change if your team were playing in a lower league. Why not email your chairman and let him know that you'd rather see the team cut its cloth and play in a fairer competiton than continue in a corrupt & rigged competition. Convinvce him to resign from the SPL and apply to rejoin the SFL. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 (edited) Did anyone know before this all kicked off that SKY had a clause in its contract which said it had to have 4 OF games? As Alex Thomson has already pointed out, that will be the whole thing screwed when a Rangers full of kids and hasbeens fail to make the top 6 at the split. Cue Sky claiming the SPL have broken the terms of the contract and they don't need to pay out what was agreed. Cue lengthy and expensive court case from SPL to try and get the money, meanwhile the clubs find themselves worse off than had they agreed to tell Rangers to piss off and take their medicine in the first place. Their contract doesn't demand 4 OF games, that's become a tabloidesque oversimplication: it requires both to be in the division (to create potential for 4 OF derbies + 34 OF away games) else they can renegotiate or, ultimately, walk. Only possible grey area is whether they could (and would want to) pay X% less if 4th OF derby didn't materialise, but it's not going to result in widespread legal wrangles, nor reduce it heavily even if so. But it's not been explicitly confirmed anywhere the price is in anyway reliant on Derby 4. Edited May 7, 2012 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makepeace Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 any news? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sting777 Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Miller, 65, is registered as a member of the Republican party. That will cause a few heart attacks within the knuckledragger brigade...lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Granny Danger Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Those aren't actually quotes from Bill Miller though, are they? No they are quotes from a man that Miller has given financial support to. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrismcarab Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 Won't it be ironic when the Rangers and west coast media sycophants display mock outrage and side with the fans. The media. 'circus' will do a u turn faster than duff and phelps to suddenly start reporting the opposition, after the vote goes through of course. Or am I dreaming. Again. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbornbairn Posted May 7, 2012 Share Posted May 7, 2012 The Daily Retard strikes again 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.