DeeTillEhDeh Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 According to the BBC article it’s 9-3 required in the Premiership, which I think they’ve got spectacularly wrong. 11-1 because it affects financial payments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanislav Petrov Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 3 minutes ago, johnnydun said: What was illegal about it? I’m not surprised you are defending Mr Nelms. -4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Just now, Stanislav Petrov said: I’m not surprised you are defending Mr Nelms. What was illegal about it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 So there was no quid-pro-quo for the £50k each, but Mr Doncaster feels duty bound to write to all clubs offering them yet another opportunity to find a way to keep Hearts in the top league. If you ask often enough...…………... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesM82 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Just now, DeeTillEhDeh said: 13 hours ago, Zing. said: According to the BBC article it’s 9-3 required in the Premiership, which I think they’ve got spectacularly wrong. 11-1 because it affects financial payments. And because it adds two teams to the league (Kelty and Brora). The only type of proposal that would need a 9-3 vote in the Premiership (rather than 11-1) would be if they came up with some combination that kept the SPFL membership at 42 and the financial split was unchanged. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Just now, SouthLanarkshireWhite said: So there was no quid-pro-quo for the £50k each, but Mr Doncaster feels duty bound to write to all clubs offering them yet another opportunity to find a way to keep Hearts in the top league. If you ask often enough...…………... By asking again, if Hearts ridiculously take them to court, they can say they exhausted every option. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthLanarkshireWhite Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Just now, johnnydun said: By asking again, if Hearts ridiculously take them to court, they can say they exhausted every option. Well I am exhausted watching it. A lot of effort for one (2) clubs benefit. Remember any reconstruction was supposed to see no losers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
resk Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I do like the tactic of simply predicting lots of different scenarios so I can then come back on and smugly say 'I told you so' if one of them happens.It is an ace tactic. A close relation of the "I've been saying for years that..... [some lame opinion about fitba]" approach. As if the other anonymous VL's reading it are going to go through your entire posting history / interrogate your pals who you drink with on Saturdays, in order to verify that yes, you are the ultimate Scottish fitba soothsayer. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanislav Petrov Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 5 minutes ago, johnnydun said: What was illegal about it? The Nelms emails Johnny. Lobbying for cash. Alea iacta est. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BFTD Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 1 minute ago, SouthLanarkshireWhite said: Well I am exhausted watching it. A lot of effort for one (2) clubs benefit. Remember any reconstruction was supposed to see no losers. We're at the point now where, no matter which league they end up playing in, Hearts are undeniably losers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Green Day Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 (edited) 9 minutes ago, JamesM82 said: And because it adds two teams to the league (Kelty and Brora). The only type of proposal that would need a 9-3 vote in the Premiership (rather than 11-1) would be if they came up with some combination that kept the SPFL membership at 42 and the financial split was unchanged. I read the BBC guff as they want 17 indicative "yes" clubs (Prem and Champ) in order to take it to a real vote. At that point they need the 19 clubs to vote yes (11 and 8 ) Edited June 11, 2020 by Green Day 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 1 minute ago, Stanislav Petrov said: The Nelms emails Johnny. Lobbying for cash. Alea iacta est. The only die that is cast is the death of Hearts legal challenge. I take it you have proof of wrongdoing? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony Wonder Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I genuinely don't want a permanent 14 team top flight, I think it's pish. However, I reserve the right to piss myself laughing if it happens. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC92 Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 11 minutes ago, johnnydun said: By asking again, if Hearts ridiculously take them to court, they can say they exhausted every option. It quite clearly wouldn't be ridiculous to take legal action, given that it's been successful (so far) in France and Belgium. Presumably their league bodies were confident they were on sound footing as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 A 14 team league, if thought about logically and not with blinkers on, is obviously too many. The largest small league that is workable is what we have now, 12. If that is to be increased, the only acceptable number of teams would be 18, as both 14 and 16 are unworkable. But the problem with 18 is that we wouldn’t have a Sky deal as they wouldn’t accept only two Celtic v Rangers league matches per season. So we are stuck with the 12 team league. Anyone that can’t see that a 14 or 16 team league is unworkable belongs to the population in the country inhabited by the Emperor and his new clothes. 16 works in terms of avoiding an uneven split (like a 7-7, 6-8 or 8-6) - the main problem is that bottom half clubs lose 2 games against the Old Firm or one game if they are in the top half. It would actually be 3 Rangers vs Celtic games in a 16 team league (a split after 30 games and 7 games post-split). There would also be the issue of an uneven number of home and away games - but that is a problem in the current setup as well. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonD Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 I can see it being 16 teams the season after next as Hearts finish bottom again and push for another reconstruction. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnydun Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Just now, GordonD said: I can see it being 16 teams the season after next as Hearts finish bottom again and push for another reconstruction. A 16 team Championship? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 Johnny was having a laugh at the maroon pound nonsense. Had a quick look at Dundee's last reported accounts and thought sheesh, they certainly are in need of somebody's pound. If the ground is in the hands of somebody local with the club's interests at heart, then that's good.Try googling Tim Keyes you moron. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeeTillEhDeh Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 The Nelms emails Johnny. Lobbying for cash. Alea iacta est. You are on very dangerous ground here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eez-eh Posted June 11, 2020 Share Posted June 11, 2020 10 hours ago, Pet Jeden said: So, by that logic You would reward the team below just as much as the team above it? You would happily award the Premier league title jointly to Celtic and Rangers? The Championship jointly to Dundee Utd and Inverness? Yes, there is an inherent contradiction with that logic and with the Hearts position. To be fully consistent, maybe Hearts should be arguing for null and void. But anyhow, there is a practical difference between not rewarding a team (not promoting) and actually punishing a team (relegating). Absolutely none of that is what I said, but of course you know that. The current state of play - while shite for the relegated clubs - deals in absolutes. Those finished in automatic promotion places go up, those who finished in automatic relegation places go down. Changing to 14-10-10-10 means you then start promoting some clubs who finished in a play-off place but not all, which is another can of worms. You’re entitled to argue that that’s still preferable to relegating clubs - and you might be right - but Dundee, Ayr, Airdrie, Montrose, Elgin and Cowdenbeath would still have every right to feel aggrieved. I doubt any of aforementioned clubs would start whinging like Ann Budge has, although it would be very apt if they did. 2 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.