parsforlife Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 I'm sure someone like hibeejibee or skyline drifter will have the specifics but my general understanding is premiership clubs can't dictate to the rest of the league if the majority of lower league clubs are against it, however if a change is proposed only 2 premiership clubs need to vote against it to stop it happening. In other words, if the bigot brothers aren't happy no change can happen. However if they want change themselves a lot more clubs are needed to stop it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 I'm sure someone like hibeejibee or skyline drifter will have the specifics but my general understanding is premiership clubs can't dictate to the rest of the league if the majority of lower league clubs are against it, however if a change is proposed only 2 clubs need to vote against it to stop it happening. If it's an issue for the Premiership only that's the case. Hence Rangers and Celtic voting for their own interests and putting an end to what the other 10 want. When it's an issue like this it's one club one vote and it needs to pass through 4 stages. Final one being 32 out of 42. Sure I read this from a HibeeJibee post. 11 clubs say naw then it's adios to this, for now anyway. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsforlife Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 My understanding is that the 'premiership only' part of the rule is only an informal thing. With the premiership clubs promising not to interfere if they aren't effected.I think if 11 clubs vote against this it's stopped.However it also would be stopped if say Ross county and St. Johnstone were to vote against even if everyone else voted for it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted June 30, 2017 Share Posted June 30, 2017 My understanding is that the 'premiership only' part of the rule is only an informal thing. With the premiership clubs promising not to interfere if they aren't effected.I think if 11 clubs vote against this it's stopped.However it also would be stopped if say Ross county and St. Johnstone were to vote against even if everyone else voted for it. My understanding too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 Not really - bit of a blinkered approach that would be to decision making. Yeah I agree in a sense. I'm not saying in all decisions but in something like Colt teams where your fan base seem overwhelmingly against it. It should be by far the main factor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 17 hours ago, parsforlife said: I'm sure someone like hibeejibee or skyline drifter will have the specifics but my general understanding is premiership clubs can't dictate to the rest of the league if the majority of lower league clubs are against it, however if a change is proposed only 2 premiership clubs need to vote against it to stop it happening. In other words, if the bigot brothers aren't happy no change can happen. However if they want change themselves a lot more clubs are needed to stop it. When it comes to important matters that's my understanding. When SPFL was formed they adopted a composite of the SPL rules (11-1 voting) and SFL rules (75% voting) and added an extra layer for Premiership+Championship clubs; there are 3 vote 'stages' with thresholds 11-1, 17-22 and 32-42 and I've definitely seen that arrangement quoted in press before. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted July 1, 2017 Share Posted July 1, 2017 When it comes to important matters that's my understanding. When SPFL was formed they adopted a composite of the SPL rules (11-1 voting) and SFL rules (75% voting) and added an extra layer for Premiership+Championship clubs; there are 3 vote 'stages' with thresholds 11-1, 17-22 and 32-42 and I've definitely seen that arrangement quoted in press before. Or as I quoted way back early in this thread 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marshmallo Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 Only a friendly but social media suggests that Rangers under 20s with a sprinkling of first team players lost to Tynecastle FC yesterday. Tynecastle play in the East of Scotland league. -1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Born To Run Posted July 9, 2017 Share Posted July 9, 2017 2 hours ago, Marshmallo said: Only a friendly but social media suggests that Rangers under 20s with a sprinkling of first team players lost to Tynecastle FC yesterday. Tynecastle play in the East of Scotland league. Yup. Hyndman, Forrester and O'Halloran all played from what I've read. The supporters of this idea will say it's just a pre-season kick about, so we'll need to use another poor year (hopefully) in the Irn-Bru Cup as proof of how bad this concept is... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peternapper Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Was up at the club today to get this years season ticket. Made a point of having a word with the chairman about this subject before buying one. Obviously cannot say what was said in a private conversation about the clubs position on this but will say after saying my position would be not to buy a ticket if the club were definitely in favour of letting this happen I was happy with the reply I got & am a season ticket holder again. Have said all along that its totally unfair for a few clubs to be allowed more than one team in the league when after many years with no chance to progress to league status the pyramid now allows that to happen Edinburgh City being an example, would they have made it into the league if the lower divisions ended up with 5 or 6 Colt teams taking up places. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bully Wee Villa Posted July 11, 2017 Share Posted July 11, 2017 Clyde are his (or her) team, so I'll assume them. Another one to the good guys list - great work Clyde, I won't begrudge you the three Betfred Cup points you'll take from us in a few weeks [emoji4] Confirmed Good Guys Arbroath Albion Rovers Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Queen of the South... ...and Peterhead, by the sound of it. Great bunch of lads. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted July 12, 2017 Share Posted July 12, 2017 I did suggest what all 40 other (or more) clubs should throw support behind it by announcing their intention to field a Colt team if two others do first. Finding room for between 42 and 74 new teams would hopefully cause a few heads to explode, thus saving the league the money from paying severance, whilst also seeing the idea ripped up fairly quickly. On the subject of your Chairman, and specifically your club, obviously your trust of his words is based more on his actions in the past being for the benefit of the club.....its one thing clubs being ballsy about it like Clyde were in 2012, but for every one of us (and i'm firmly on one side of an all out war among us), there's a Stenny, a Cowden etc looking to shaft the rest of us in the back. You're very lucky to get five minutes with your Chairman also, sounds like he values your input as a paying supporter. I can say that a copy of Cowden's response will be published in their programme on Saturday 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted July 13, 2017 Share Posted July 13, 2017 On 7/12/2017 at 01:41, Cowden Cowboy said: I can say that a copy of Cowden's response will be published in their programme on Saturday Cowden's good guys? I'm a bit disappointed in St Mirren as a club moving to fan ownership hasn't had any engagement of fans on their preference. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted July 14, 2017 Share Posted July 14, 2017 12 hours ago, Elementary Penguin said: Going by the Clyde example of the model, you've been fucking had, mate. No malice intended here, but has Gilmour's part in actually helping Craig Whyte becoming involved in purchasing/stealing a team in the SPL been lived down yet? He fairly hurried his decision to get tae, did he not!! I really ought to already know, but both our clubs have had a lot on. I'm not overlay sure of all the goings on in regards to that if I'm honest? Although I am delighted with the state Rangers were left in and the mess the new club potentially could be in now. If Gilmour had a hand in bringing them down... Good! I only wish it was permanent. Horrible club with some trully horrible fans (not all) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Brazil Forever Posted July 18, 2017 Share Posted July 18, 2017 On 12/07/2017 at 01:41, Cowden Cowboy said: I can say that a copy of Cowden's response will be published in their programme on Saturday Unfortunately I missed out on buying a programme. Andy,can you please put Cowden's response on this thread for all to see? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Minertaur Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Cowden are indeed good guys. Programme states that they would not support Colts coming into the structure. I've not got a copy of the programme so can't post it but hopefully somebody will! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Minertaur Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 As if by magic I now have the text from the programme - Quote Thank you for your recent e-mail and accompanying letter on this subject. The Board of Cowdenbeath FC have considered the matter and I can reply on the club’s behalf as follows: Firstly, I can advise that it would not be Cowdenbeath FC’s intention to enter a Colt team into the League pyramid. Secondly, we can provide feedback from our perspective on the outline proposal. There is a need to strike a balance where possible between what is appropriate for Cowdenbeath FC and what is for the good of the game in Scotland. If we look at the disadvantages/advantages as detailed in the paper sent to us we don’t disagree that there is possibly potential merit in younger players being exposed to playing against stronger, more experienced players on a regular basis albeit there is no barrier to any club playing players aged 17-21 in their first team in the first place. If we look at the advantages listed, the first 4 items are all positives for the few larger clubs who are likely to be willing and able to field a Colt side on the basis envisaged – which of course is rather in line with the overall Project Brave ethos. The final two advantages listed which might have more relevance to clubs such as Cowdenbeath FC are less than compelling – further ventilation in the League pyramid is not really being achieved by allowing existing League clubs to field a second team in the Pyramid structure. Rather true ventilation will be better achieved by resolving the anomaly whereby the juniors stand outwith the Pyramid – clubs such as our neighbours Kelty Hearts might indeed set an example that does lead to true ventilation. Then it is suggested that larger colt teams may attract a reasonable support – there is no evidence to suggest this from last year’s Irn-Bru Cup and other than an Old Firm colt derby we don’t perceive this as being very likely especially when matches are taking place at the same time as the Club’s 1st XI. The disadvantages listed are all moot. The nascent pyramid/Lowland League arrangements are making progress and could be derailed by a diversion away from the basic aim of opening up the National leagues to more clubs via a pathway system. Colt teams would dilute the competition and obstruct clubs moving up and down the pyramid. Again in League One or Two if Colt teams were to win the title it would mean comparatively little to the parent club but would deprive a community of the thrill of its club being champions. Then if Colt teams occupied say 3 out of 6 of the top positions in League One or Two that implies that a club finishing in seventh place could possibly end up winning promotion in a play-off. 10 team Leagues are not at all suitable for Colt teams – we believe in Spain and Germany that leagues where colt teams can gravitate to have at least 18 clubs. It is also fairly simple to glean that in respect of the viewpoint of the paying customer/the Scottish football fan that supporters of the larger clubs which may choose to run such Colts sides may well be broadly in favour as their own sides will never play against a colt team in all likelihood whilst the vast majority of fans of clubs in League One or Two would react adversely to what they would perceive as an imposition – they do not view their club as being in the business of providing a development platform for other clubs. Thus we would not support Colt teams being admitted to the Pyramid – it presumably remains possible for Colt teams to play in the East of Scotland League as they have done in the past but they should not advance beyond that level. The old ‘C’ Division of the late 1940s/early 1950s of course mixed 2nd XI’s and 1st Xi’s and was not a great success. The replacement of the Development League by a Reserve League might help matters albeit may not be a panacea. More player loans rather than less may be part of the solution – it might help develop a player more if he is removed from the club conveyor belt of just progressing through the ranks with the same team-mates but rather goes out on loan and out of a ‘comfort zone’ to learn of the challenges and realities that say part-time professionals face in a less cossetted environment. Anyway, hopefully the foregoing provides some food for thought and no doubt there will be a range of viewpoints in the feedback you receive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Minertaur Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 On 6/27/2017 at 20:56, Sonsteam of 08 said: Clyde are his (or her) team, so I'll assume them. Another one to the good guys list - great work Clyde, I won't begrudge you the three Betfred Cup points you'll take from us in a few weeks Confirmed Good Guys Arbroath Albion Rovers Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Queen of the South Excited to see The Blue Brazil make the hallowed list 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Vojáček Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 Confirmed Good Guys Arbroath Albion Rovers Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Queen of the South Cowdenbeath 28 minutes ago, The Minertaur said: Excited to see The Blue Brazil make the hallowed list Happy to oblige. Who else have I missed? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazil85 Posted July 19, 2017 Share Posted July 19, 2017 27 minutes ago, Sonsteam of 08 said: Confirmed Good Guys Arbroath Albion Rovers Dunfermline Athletic Clyde Queen of the South Cowdenbeath Happy to oblige. Who else have I missed? That's 20% of clubs outside the top flight confirmed to be against Colt teams. What's the voting percentage required to knock the idea out the park? Must be pretty close. Also good to see no confirmed W*nkers below the top flight. I think the SPFL should be coming out once and for all admitting this idea is completely off the table due to lack of interest. 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.