Colt team proposal

[sonsism]

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/local-sport/rangers-celtic-colts-would-exciting-24049218

 

Never saw that one coming… 

[roman_bairn]

It's no happening. 

Anyone still believe that this isn’t going to happen eventually due to our self interested ‘democratic’ approach to decision making?....

[Ballboy]

11 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Anyone still believe that this isn’t going to happen eventually due to our self interested ‘democratic’ approach to decision making?....

Keep having a vote till you get the result you want.    Or the good old fashioned vote for whoever gives you the most money.   

[The Moonster]

8 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Anyone still believe that this isn’t going to happen eventually due to our self interested ‘democratic’ approach to decision making?....

You've honestly no fucking clue what you're on about. 

[DA Baracus]

24 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Anyone still believe that this isn’t going to happen eventually due to our self interested ‘democratic’ approach to decision making?....

Everyone gets a vote. Everyone votes. Decision is carried by majority.

In what way is that not democratic?

[roman_bairn]

Everyone gets a vote. Everyone votes. Decision is carried by majority.
In what way is that not democratic?

Ah, so it’s a straight 50% vote needed to carry it through then?
Otherwise it’s not a democracy....

[roman_bairn]

25 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

You've honestly no fucking clue what you're on about. 

Em, it’s not me who’s stating that there is absolutely no chance of this happening.

lets see......

[DA Baracus]

14 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Ah, so it’s a straight 50% vote needed to carry it through then?
Otherwise it’s not a democracy....

For the votes taken last season yes, it was a majority decision.

Incidentally, if you think everything that requires a vote must have 50% of the votes (although surely it should be 51%) or it 'isn't democracy', I have some potentially upsetting news about political elections for you.

[The Moonster]

Literally doesn't understand what democracy means. 

[super-son]

He's a fud. Still salty about them not getting promoted last year and still doesn't know what a democracy is.

[roman_bairn]

He's a fud. Still salty about them not getting promoted last year and still doesn't know what a democracy is.

Yet another loser who takes to posting insults rather than come up with anything meaningful....

[Sergeant Wilson]

12 minutes ago, roman_bairn said:

Yet another loser who takes to posting insults rather than come up with anything meaningful....

Meaningful...like an independent commission for football with no accountability and with no identified source of funding?

[Dylangt7]

1 hour ago, DA Baracus said:

Everyone gets a vote. Everyone votes. Decision is carried by majority.

In what way is that not democratic?

I think the European Super League debacle proves that everyone doesnt get a vote and the current model isnt as "democratic" as those continue to argue.

Brining it closer to home, every time a debatable decision is made in the Scottish leagues, especially recently in the crisis Some promoted, some relegated, others not,

no playoffs, inconsistent covid rules punishments, winners declared, null and void etc...Its always thrown back that its a member organisation and "The Clubs Decided".

 

For me thats NOT the "clubs" deciding. Thats club owners. 1 (generally) male man over the age of 60. Who, in the main have proven to be self-interested business men that have little consideration for "sporting integrity" (I know!) in general.

Little consideration for fans (see a season of watching youtube football at the same price as being there, mostly)

Little consideration for players (see the 3 game a week / 22 games season) 

Making up the rules as they go along, voting based solely on self interest.

That's not "clubs" deciding - I'd be shocked if 10% of fans, players and club staff support any one the recent decisions noted above.

 

We move from one shambles to another in football. Its time we had a different Club ownership model and improved the standard and governance of leagues (while maintaining them as Member run)  as this excuse that "well the clubs voted for it" can no longer be accepted. Its similar to just saying ah well its always been like that, lets no bother changing it.

 

[The Moonster]

Just now, Dylangt7 said:

I think the European Super League debacle proves that everyone doesnt get a vote and the current model isnt as "democratic" as those continue to argue.

Brining it closer to home, every time a debatable decision is made in the Scottish leagues, especially recently in the crisis Some promoted, some relegated, others not,

no playoffs, inconsistent covid rules punishments, winners declared, null and void etc...Its always thrown back that its a member organisation and "The Clubs Decided".

 

For me thats NOT the "clubs" deciding. Thats club owners. 1 (generally) male man over the age of 60. Who, in the main have proven to be self-interested business men that have little consideration for "sporting integrity" (I know!) in general.

Little consideration for fans (see a season of watching youtube football at the same price as being there, mostly)

Little consideration for players (see the 3 game a week / 22 games season) 

Making up the rules as they go along, voting based solely on self interest.

That's not "clubs" deciding - I'd be shocked if 10% of fans, players and club staff support any one the recent decisions noted above.

 

We move from one shambles to another in football. Its time we had a different Club ownership model and improved the standard and governance of leagues (while maintaining them as Member run)  as this excuse that "well the clubs voted for it" can no longer be accepted. Its similar to just saying ah well its always been like that, lets no bother changing it.

 

Fans are able to pressure their own clubs into voting in any way they wish them to, like every fan in the country did so when Rangers were being parachuted back into the leagues. If fans don't feel strongly about an issue to raise it with their board then the board will make a decision based on what is best for the club.

What are you proposing instead of member clubs voting for things?

[Sergeant Wilson]

3 minutes ago, Dylangt7 said:

I think the European Super League debacle proves that everyone doesnt get a vote and the current model isnt as "democratic" as those continue to argue.

Brining it closer to home, every time a debatable decision is made in the Scottish leagues, especially recently in the crisis Some promoted, some relegated, others not,

no playoffs, inconsistent covid rules punishments, winners declared, null and void etc...Its always thrown back that its a member organisation and "The Clubs Decided".

 

For me thats NOT the "clubs" deciding. Thats club owners. 1 (generally) male man over the age of 60. Who, in the main have proven to be self-interested business men that have little consideration for "sporting integrity" (I know!) in general.

Little consideration for fans (see a season of watching youtube football at the same price as being there, mostly)

Little consideration for players (see the 3 game a week / 22 games season) 

Making up the rules as they go along, voting based solely on self interest.

That's not "clubs" deciding - I'd be shocked if 10% of fans, players and club staff support any one the recent decisions noted above.

 

We move from one shambles to another in football. Its time we had a different Club ownership model and improved the standard and governance of leagues (while maintaining them as Member run)  as this excuse that "well the clubs voted for it" can no longer be accepted. Its similar to just saying ah well its always been like that, lets no bother changing it.

 

But how? What we have now is after years of being painted in to a corner.

You would actually need existing, or new, clubs to form a different organisation.

[Dylangt7]

14 minutes ago, The Moonster said:

Fans are able to pressure their own clubs into voting in any way they wish them to, like every fan in the country did so when Rangers were being parachuted back into the leagues. If fans don't feel strongly about an issue to raise it with their board then the board will make a decision based on what is best for the club.

What are you proposing instead of member clubs voting for things?

I've not proposed anything yet, just trying to get to people to acknowledge that that the football club ownership model  AND the governance of Leagues is horrendous from a sporting point of view and that there must be a better way. I'm also not as confident that fans feeling strongly changes anything in Football.

I guess I am also challenging the notion that its even "member clubs"  voting for things. I would imagine in the majority of cases there was no board meeting input (never mind any fan representation input) prior to any of these decisions / votes. to me the club is much more than 1 board member.

I acknowledge that in Dumbartons case, the Supporters Trust probably did have input to the board, who then voted, Given that the actual owners live in Belize : )  

But how many Sons fans disagree with the 22 games or even playing the season at all behind close doors and yet thats what gets voted for anyway....

Dumbarton, Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool Chelsea etc ...all just prove that you can have as much fan representation at board meetings as you want, when the real decisions are made

they are not involved*

*(that's no disrespect to the Sons Trust etc, but the club changed hands last week and they probably knew about 5 minutes before everyone else as they were asked to update the official website) 

 

[haufdaft]

Suddenly the pyramid system isn't so important to some Lowland League teams

[roman_bairn]

Meaningful...like an independent commission for football with no accountability and with no identified source of funding?

You see, you asked me a question and I outlined the principles of a way to address the current concerns making it clear that a full review would be needed fully bottom out. However you keep throwing these ‘undefined elements’ out there to try to fan the flames as if that’s are things that could not be resolved in drawing up a charter.
Carry on defending what you think is true democracy if you like.
Ps. To the poster who thought he was being clever the pointing out the voting systems of the UK as some confirmation. When you turn up to vote today remember to let them know your name and address with no documentary evidence and mark your vote IN PENCIL. [emoji3]

[Dylangt7]

34 minutes ago, Sergeant Wilson said:

But how? What we have now is after years of being painted in to a corner.

You would actually need existing, or new, clubs to form a different organisation.

Why? are we saying that there are certain things the current member clubs cant or wont vote for out of self interest? 

The German model of club ownership changed in 1998, its still the same clubs in the same league?

We change league structure constantly in football, not sure why this would be a problem.

 

The whole argument feels similar to when your whole fanbase knows its time for your manager to go, you get the people who come along and say

"well who are you suggesting we replace them with..." its a nick picking fear of change. Its not my job to come up with the a new manager, I just know when the current one is no longer suitable.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[The Moonster]

3 minutes ago, Dylangt7 said:

I've not proposed anything yet, just trying to get to people to acknowledge that that the football club ownership model  AND the governance of Leagues is horrendous from a sporting point of view and that there must be a better way. I'm also not as confident that fans feeling strongly changes anything in Football.

I guess I am also challenging the notion that its even "member clubs"  voting for things. I would imagine in the majority of cases there was no board meeting input (never mind any fan representation input) prior to any of these decisions / votes. to me the club is much more than 1 board member.

I acknowledge that in Dumbartons case, the Supporters Trust probably did have input to the board, who then voted, Given that the actual owners live in Belize : )  

But how many Sons fans disagree with the 22 games or even playing the season at all behind close doors and yet thats what gets voted for anyway....

Dumbarton, Man Utd, Arsenal, Liverpool Chelsea etc ...all just prove that you can have as much fan representation at board meetings as you want, when the real decisions are made

they are not involved*

*(that's no disrespect to the Sons Trust etc, but the club changed hands last week and they probably knew about 5 minutes before everyone else as they were asked to update the official website) 

 

It's kind of a problem when people shout "THIS DOESN'T WORK" but can offer absolutely no solutions as to how things should then work. If there must be a better way then someone must be able to tell me what it is. 

You don't think fan pressure ensured Rangers started in the 3rd Division in 2012? You don't think fan pressure caused some EPL clubs to do an embarrassing climb down from the ESL? You don't think fan pressure causes managers to lose their jobs every season? Fan opinion matters and can easily change things.

The board are directors, either appointed by democratic process or appointed by the club owners, to make decisions for the clubs (like any other company). They can't ask absolutely everybody their opinion on absolutely every matter, they need to make decisions based on information available to them - some of that information won't be possible to put into the public domain for discussion with fans. I think fans should own a controlling stake in their club but not every club has been able to reach that point. 

The 22 game thing is a prime example why fans can't be asked to resolve every issue. Dumbarton were probably quite happy to only play 18 games but with other clubs saying they want 22 (or in some cases *cough* Danny Lennon *cough* wanted 27 games), board members need to reach a sensible compromise. If each club put that decision to a fan vote we would not have reached a conclusion - you'd have Falkirk fans steadfastly wanting 18 games, Partick wanting 22, Forfar wanting 22 and go knows how many other different answers. 

Our owners are no longer registered in Belize, thankfully that band of charlatans have left the building. We're Norwegians now. Dumbarton is a strange situation (or was) in regards to our owners. They owned the club but didn't have anyone on the board and took no interest in any of the running of the club. They sold the club on to new buyers and they really didn't have to/want to include us in those discussions.