Jump to content

Conference League Good Guys List


Ray Patterson

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Pyramid Watcher said:

I agree that they should be open with their fans, but not with some random who emails them out of the Blue.

Not sure if you're deliberately not getting this point, but the email response is along the lines of "we won't publish our response" rather than "we're not telling you in particular".

Surely you can see the difference? Maybe they worded their response poorly if you know something we don't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, virginton said:

If someone wants to make claims on a public forum then they need to support them with actual evidence. Otherwise we can file that claim in the bin where it belongs.

Who are these 'knowledgeable people' - and how has their power apparently been diminished to the point where Cowdenbeath's gormless board now suddenly think that the coast is clear to vote in the way that they really wanted to do all along?

You're fooling next to no-one. 

 

Because these are insiders in the game who understand the politics, the regulations and try and use clever strategy rather than mouthing off publicly - and lots of folks are talking and working together below the radar.  Meantime keep chuntering away as usual trying to create a commotion 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, GallowayBlue said:

Not sure if you're deliberately not getting this point, but the email response is along the lines of "we won't publish our response" rather than "we're not telling you in particular".

Surely you can see the difference? Maybe they worded their response poorly if you know something we don't?

If I take it from my position, if someone contacted me out of the Blue, I’m not sure I would have responded to them at all. However, they did,, and I thought their response was commensurate with the random enquiry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Because these are insiders in the game who understand the politics, the regulations and try and use clever strategy rather than mouthing off publicly - and lots of folks are talking and working together below the radar.  Meantime keep chuntering away as usual trying to create a commotion 

They just fell for the no vote and done deal spiel that Maxwell and your League Chairman were doling out without getting questioned. Plenty others did the same but it's really not something to be proud of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Pyramid Watcher said:

If I take it from my position, if someone contacted me out of the Blue, I’m not sure I would have responded to them at all. However, they did,, and I thought their response was commensurate with the random enquiry.

I tend to agree. I would have ignored it too.

I just think the response they did give suggests that they are not going to be open and honest with their actual fans, which I don't think is ideal.

I suppose if the Spartans fans don't care then it's a non-issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

They just fell for the no vote and done deal spiel that Maxwell and your League Chairman were doling out without getting questioned. Plenty others did the same but it's really not something to be proud of. 

I am afraid you are wrong they are a bit more clued in than that -but hey convince yourself you’ve got it all sussed and are the master of strategy.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

I am afraid you are wrong they are a bit more clued in than that -but hey convince yourself you’ve got it all sussed and are the master of strategy.  

You really think that the SFA could have forced in a Conference league for 23/24 without a vote? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

You really think that the SFA could have forced in a Conference league for 23/24 without a vote? 

They likely have the capacity to create such a league without a vote - better to make sure there was a vote and let the debate stretch out and start to snowball opposition rather than just allow a dash for it.  Doubt though they could have pulled matters together to create a league from scratch in an abbreviated time scale.  But again smart folks don’t telegraph their strategies and also realise there can be many twists and turns.  They also try and build alliances rather than criticise others who in essence are on the same side 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

They likely have the capacity to create such a league without a vote - better to make sure there was a vote and let the debate stretch out and start to snowball opposition rather than just allow a dash for it.  Doubt though they could have pulled matters together to create a league from scratch in an abbreviated time scale.  But again smart folks don’t telegraph their strategies and also realise there can be many twists and turns.  They also try and build alliances rather than criticise others who in essence are on the same side 

The SFA Articles of Association are free for anyone to view.  Which particular articles cover the scenario that allow the SFA to create a new league without membership approval, or approval of other leagues, and to slot it into the league structure with promotion/relegation to/from it?   Remember the West of Scotland League could not be considered part of the Pyramid until the membership passed it at AGM. The same applied to the existing North Caledonian League which was approved at the same AGM.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

They likely have the capacity to create such a league without a vote - better to make sure there was a vote and let the debate stretch out and start to snowball opposition rather than just allow a dash for it.  Doubt though they could have pulled matters together to create a league from scratch in an abbreviated time scale.  But again smart folks don’t telegraph their strategies and also realise there can be many twists and turns.  They also try and build alliances rather than criticise others who in essence are on the same side 

There are a couple of ways that a new league can be created should the current resolution fail.

If the vote is "No", but there is a majority of SPFL clubs voting in favour, then I think we could see the SPFL create a new league within their own structure, which they are free to do (rubber stamped by the SFA).  It would no doubt include invitees from B Teams and LL/HL clubs, but would see a closing of ranks among the SPFL clubs to the detriment of the rest of the pyramid.  It would of course be a non starter if no teams accepted the invitation, as SPFL clubs have rejected B Teams on their own in the past.

The alternative method is for a new league/company (made up of invitees and B Teams) to apply to the SFA Board for recognition. It would then be for the SFA to fit them into the pyramid at an appropriate level, based on the standard of the clubs involved.  Again, if no-one accepts the invite then it is a non starter.

The SFA's articles 18 and 21 would apply.

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/media/1819/articles-of-association.pdf

 

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

There are a couple of ways that a new league can be created should the current resolution fail.

If the vote is "No", but there is a majority of SPFL clubs voting in favour, then I think we could see the SPFL create a new league within their own structure, which they are free to do (rubber stamped by the SFA).  It would no doubt include invitees from B Teams and LL/HL clubs, but would see a closing of ranks among the SPFL clubs to the detriment of the rest of the pyramid.  It would of course be a non starter if no teams accepted the invitation, as SPFL clubs have rejected B Teams on their own in the past.

The alternative method is for a new league/company (made up of invitees and B Teams) to apply to the SFA Board for recognition. It would then be for the SFA to fit them into the pyramid at an appropriate level, based on the standard of the clubs involved.  Again, if no-one accepts the invite then it is a non starter.

The SFA's articles 18 and 21 would apply.

 

I don't think either of these Articles give the SFA Board the over riding power to create a new league without the approval of the membership. If they think it does, then it's a very big gamble to go against a vote at AGM.  They won't do it otherwise you're into the territory of legal challenges and votes of no confidence etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Kelty Hearts - Good Guys!

twitter.com/KeltyHeartsFC/status/1665050649380175872

 

SPFL Conference League

 

Kelty Hearts Football Club can confirm the club will be voting NO in the upcoming SPFL Vote regarding a new Conference League at tier 5.

Following discussion between the board, committee and supporters at todays open meeting the decision has been to vote against the proposed introduction of a new league at Tier 5 directly below the SPFL League Two and above the Scottish Lowland and Highland Football Leagues.

Kelty Hearts Sporting Director Craig Reynolds on the SPFL Proposal. “After today’s discussions with the board members, committee and fans, Kelty Hearts have decided against the idea aimed at the new conference league. As a club we have been on a long journey to get to where we are and we feel putting another league in doesn’t seem the right decision to do at this moment in time. We are all for player development but a league where you can finish 6th and be relegated or finish 5th and be promoted isn’t right for sporting integrity. While we understand the case for B teams, we believe that there’s other ways to improve Scottish football, such like larger leagues, reserve leagues and more loan players from the so called bigger teams, as well as a more open pyramid system and fairer financial allocation throughout the SPFL.”

Article by Kelty Hearts Football Club –  Permission to use quotations from this article online is only granted subject to appropriate source credit and hyperlink to KeltyHearts.co.uk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's no point in explaining this. According to Cowdenbeath fans and Cowdenbeath fans only, we are all too stupid to understand the reasons and they knew what they were doing all along...

Everyone else seems to think differently but that's because we are not as intelligent as them 😂

Edited by Spyro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

 

I don't think either of these Articles give the SFA Board the over riding power to create a new league without the approval of the membership. If they think it does, then it's a very big gamble to go against a vote at AGM.  They won't do it otherwise you're into the territory of legal challenges and votes of no confidence etc.

Why do you say that when you and others clearly had no idea what the articles said in the first place?  What is your actual basis for saying the Board can’t make such a decision without going to a vote?  And isn’t it a better strategy therefore to seek to have it subject to a vote rather than just having an immediate confrontation where such a course of action might have just been implemented? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Spyro said:

There's no point in explaining this. According to Cowdenbeath fans and Cowdenbeath fans only, we are all too stupid to understand the ressons and they knew what they were doing all along...

Everyone else seems to think differently but that's because we are not as intelligent as them 😂

But they maybe did read the articles rather than just pretending they understood them like some on here 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Spyro said:

There's no point in explaining this. According to Cowdenbeath fans and Cowdenbeath fans only, we are all too stupid to understand the reasons and they knew what they were doing all along...

Everyone else seems to think differently but that's because we are not as intelligent as them 😂

Better to just leave this and focus on what matters - getting as much promotion to the No campaign as possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cowden will be voting no, and have always chosen for the good of the game when it has come to voting.

The same can’t be said for some other clubs in previous votes and probably in this vote, so maybe channel your anger at more deserving cases instead of trying to point score probably because of who cowdens chairman is . 
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Why do you say that when you and others clearly had no idea what the articles said in the first place?  What is your actual basis for saying the Board can’t make such a decision without going to a vote?  And isn’t it a better strategy therefore to seek to have it subject to a vote rather than just having an immediate confrontation where such a course of action might have just been implemented? 

You do realise that I've not just suddenly discovered that the Articles of Association exist? but neither do I know them off by heart, don't be so pompous.

How about you enlighten us as to the procedure the SFA Board will follow to implement the league in the event of a No vote, and which specific parts of the AoA allow them this power?

Edited by Burnieman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Burnieman said:

You do realise that I've not just suddenly discovered that the Articles of Association exist? but neither do I know them off by heart, don't be so pompous.

How about you enlighten us as to the procedure the SFA Board will follow to implement the league in the event of a No vote, and which specific parts of the AoA allow them this power?

Ah the old get other folks to do all the donkey work approach. A guy on here sets out how such a league could be created under the articles.  As far as I can see you unilaterally have then decided with no supporting rationale at all that the SFA Board itself can’t use the articles highlighted to bring in a new league - where does it say that requires a members vote?  Be very specific as a poster on here loves to say.  Or maybe acknowledge that there are other valid viewpoints as regards how best to handle this matter.  Enough said though tonight.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...