Jump to content

Court It Is Then


Bobbyhouston
 Share

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Ok I get that , but why were the abstained votes counted as a No , if there was an ambiguity about they shouldn’t have been counted at all .

They weren’t counted as No.

They were counted as “Not yes”.

Decisions don’t require “more Yeses than Nos”.

They require a minimum number of Yeses of each type.

An abstention is not a Yes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

It should never have got to this stage , what a job Neil Doncaster has done ! , Ian Maxwell isn’t much better as his remit is to oversee Scottish Football of which PTFC are one of his member clubs .

Both blazer boys have failed IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

They weren’t counted as No.

They were counted as “Not yes”.

Decisions don’t require “more Yeses than Nos”.

They require a minimum number of Yeses of each type.

An abstention is not a Yes.

 Ok , why is it a No then ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the Articles of Association of the SPFL, certain decisions have to be taken by way of an "ordinary resolution". An ordinary resolution is only adopted if all three of the following conditions are met:

  • at least 75% of the Premiership clubs support it (9 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Championship clubs support it (8 of 10)
  • at least 75% of the teams in Leagues One and Two support it (15 of 20)

It therefore follows that if a decision requiring an ordinary resolution is opposed by any of:

  • four or more Premiership clubs
  • three or more Championship clubs
  • six or more League One and Two clubs

Then the proposal fails. It doesn't matter how many or how few Clubs "abstain" on the proposal: it cannot pass.

Other decisions can only be taken by way of a qualified resolution. For example, a qualified resolution is needed for certain types of league reconstruction (including those that affect the total number of teams in the SPFL pyramid and those that involve a change to the financial distribution of prize-money). A qualified resolution is only adopted if:

  • at least 90% of the Premiership clubs support it (11 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Premiership and Championship clubs support it (17 of 22)
  • at least 75% of the clubs in all four divisions support it (32 of 42)

This means that if any of the following happens for a qualified resolution:

  • two or more Premiership clubs oppose a proposal
  • six or more Premiership and Championship clubs oppose a proposal
  • eleven or more SPFL clubs oppose a proposal

Then the proposal therefore cannot pass. As before, it does not matter how many or how few clubs abstained: if any of these categories have sufficient levels of opposition, the proposal cannot be adopted.

Abstentions are irrelevant. They are merely "not Yes (yet)".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

They weren’t counted as No.

They were counted as “Not yes”.

Decisions don’t require “more Yeses than Nos”.

They require a minimum number of Yeses of each type.

An abstention is not a Yes.

Abstensions votes in the spfl are counted as yes votes according to neil Doncaster

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

They weren’t counted as No.

They were counted as “Not yes”.

Decisions don’t require “more Yeses than Nos”.

They require a minimum number of Yeses of each type.

An abstention is not a Yes.

Except that this want a vote - it was like a pre election poll which we all know can end up totally opposite of the actual vote 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Abstensions votes in the spfl are counted as yes votes according to neil Doncaster

What on earth are you talking about? He has never said that.

2 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

Except that this want a vote - it was like a pre election poll which we all know can end up totally opposite of the actual vote 

They took a straw poll of clubs to find out if it was worthwhile bothering to put forward a formal resolution. Reconstruction likely would have needed a qualified resolution.

Since more than 2 Premier clubs, more than 5 Premier and Championship clubs, and more than 11 SPFL clubs indicated that they would vote against reconstruction, they realised any qualified resolution would not be adopted, so they dropped it.

Perfectly reasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

What on earth are you talking about? He has never said that.

They took a straw poll of clubs to find out if it was worthwhile bothering to put forward a formal resolution. Reconstruction likely would have needed a qualified resolution.

Since more than 2 Premier clubs, more than 5 Premier and Championship clubs, and more than 11 SPFL clubs indicated that they would vote against reconstruction, they realised any qualified resolution would not be adopted, so they dropped it.

Perfectly reasonable.

Are you really Neil Doncaster? :thinking:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

What on earth are you talking about? He has never said that.

They took a straw poll of clubs to find out if it was worthwhile bothering to put forward a formal resolution. Reconstruction likely would have needed a qualified resolution.

Since more than 2 Premier clubs, more than 5 Premier and Championship clubs, and more than 11 SPFL clubs indicated that they would vote against reconstruction, they realised any qualified resolution would not be adopted, so they dropped it.

Perfectly reasonable.

As there has been no club so far who has come out and declared that they voted against then we've only got Doncaster's word that his "straw poll" was accurate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Under the Articles of Association of the SPFL, certain decisions have to be taken by way of an "ordinary resolution". An ordinary resolution is only adopted if all three of the following conditions are met:

  • at least 75% of the Premiership clubs support it (9 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Championship clubs support it (8 of 10)
  • at least 75% of the teams in Leagues One and Two support it (15 of 20)

It therefore follows that if a decision requiring an ordinary resolution is opposed by any of:

  • four or more Premiership clubs
  • three or more Championship clubs
  • six or more League One and Two clubs

Then the proposal fails. It doesn't matter how many or how few Clubs "abstain" on the proposal: it cannot pass.

Other decisions can only be taken by way of a qualified resolution. For example, a qualified resolution is needed for certain types of league reconstruction (including those that affect the total number of teams in the SPFL pyramid and those that involve a change to the financial distribution of prize-money). A qualified resolution is only adopted if:

  • at least 90% of the Premiership clubs support it (11 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Premiership and Championship clubs support it (17 of 22)
  • at least 75% of the clubs in all four divisions support it (32 of 42)

This means that if any of the following happens for a qualified resolution:

  • two or more Premiership clubs oppose a proposal
  • six or more Premiership and Championship clubs oppose a proposal
  • eleven or more SPFL clubs oppose a proposal

Then the proposal therefore cannot pass. As before, it does not matter how many or how few clubs abstained: if any of these categories have sufficient levels of opposition, the proposal cannot be adopted.

Abstentions are irrelevant. They are merely "not Yes (yet)".

In this instance they weren’t irrelevant, the SPFL came out and told us publicly that the vote was 16 for Yes and 26 for No , there was absolutely no transparency who voted for what .

From what we are being told it is now getting broken down to 16 Yes votes 14 No and 12 abstentions.

We’re dealing with an organisation who has shown no transparency, if Doncaster had shown the same resolve for reconstruction as he did for calling the Leagues, Scottish Football wouldn’t be in the shambles it is just now.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scotty said:

As there has been no club so far who has come out and declared that they voted against then we've only got Doncaster's word that his "straw poll" was accurate.

This isn't true.

Raith Rovers' chairman has confirmed they voted against reconstruction.

Ross County's chairman was clearly speaking to the Daily Record ahead of the vote indicating their opposition to reconstruction.

The clubs' representatives in the Championship as a whole were clearly more than happy to tell Kheredine Idessane how they voted. We can therefore also say with reasonable confidence that Ayr, Alloa, Queen of the South and Dundee declined to vote for reconstruction, in the knowledge that this was the last chance saloon (albeit admittedly we can't say for sure whether they outright voted against or merely abstained).

If just one other Premier League team voted against reconstruction, or if all of Ayr, Alloa, Queens and Dundee actively voted against it, or if, across the Championship, League One and League Two a further nine clubs (beyond Ross County and Raith Rovers) opposed it, the proposals had zero prospect of success.

I don't think it is unrealistic, for example, for us to conclude that one of the following happened:

  • one or more of Dundee United, Hamilton, St Mirren, Hibs, St Johnstone, Livingston, Motherwell, Kilmarnock, Aberdeeen, Rangers or Celtic voted against reconstruction
  • most if not all of Ayr, Alloa, Queens and Dundee voted against reconstruction
  • Cove Rangers and some other League 1 and 2 teams voted explicitly against reconstruction
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

In this instance they weren’t irrelevant, the SPFL came out and told us publicly that the vote was 16 for Yes and 26 for No , there was absolutely no transparency who voted for what.

No they didn't.

They said that only 16 clubs voted in favour, and that this would be insufficient to pass a resolution. Plainly that is correct as a matter of basic arithmetic.

They did not say that 26 clubs voted for no.

You are wrong.

Quote

From what we are being told it is now getting broken down to 16 Yes votes 14 No and 12 abstentions.

Yes, this appears to be what has been briefed more fully to the press.

If indeed there have been 14 No votes that means the proposal was definitely dead. It wouldn't matter if the 12 abstentions all broke in favour of yes: that would give you a result of 28 to 14.

28 of 42 Clubs is only 66.66% of them. That is short of what is required for a qualified resolution. Very probably on all three counts: it is likely that the 14 consists of more than one Premiership club and that it consists of more than five Premiership and Championship clubs. And self-evidently it consists of more than 10 SPFL clubs.

Quote

We’re dealing with an organisation who has shown no transparency, if Doncaster had shown the same resolve for reconstruction as he did for calling the Leagues, Scottish Football wouldn’t be in the shambles it is just now.

I'm not sure if the SPFL is actually allowed to state publicly which Clubs have voted which way (as in they cannot legally do so).

Edited by Woodstock Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

What on earth are you talking about? He has never said that.

They took a straw poll of clubs to find out if it was worthwhile bothering to put forward a formal resolution. Reconstruction likely would have needed a qualified resolution.

Since more than 2 Premier clubs, more than 5 Premier and Championship clubs, and more than 11 SPFL clubs indicated that they would vote against reconstruction, they realised any qualified resolution would not be adopted, so they dropped it.

Perfectly reasonable.

Check sportsound 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I'm not sure if the SPFL is actually allowed to state publicly which Clubs have voted which way (as in they cannot legally do so).

They didn't vote. Doncaster took a "straw poll" and decided a vote wasn't necessary! Who, apart from us on here is saying that 12 clubs abstained? Doncaster?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No they didn't.

They said that only 16 clubs voted in favour, and that this would be insufficient to pass a resolution. Plainly that is correct as a matter of basic arithmetic.

They did not say that 26 clubs voted for no.

You are wrong.

Yes, this appears to be what has been briefed more fully to the press.

If indeed there have been 14 No votes that means the proposal was definitely dead. It wouldn't matter if the 12 abstentions all broke in favour of yes: that would give you a result of 28 to 14.

28 of 42 Clubs is only 66.66% of them. That is short of what is required for a qualified resolution. Very probably on all three counts: it is likely that the 14 consists of more than one Premiership club and that it consists of more than five Premiership and Championship clubs. And self-evidently it consists of more than 10 SPFL clubs.

I'm not sure if the SPFL is actually allowed to state publicly which Clubs have voted which way (as in they cannot legally do so).

They made the vote public on the last resolution. hence we got Dundeegate .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, scotty said:

They didn't vote. Doncaster took a "straw poll" and decided a vote wasn't necessary! Who, apart from us on here is saying that 12 clubs abstained? Doncaster?

Sorry, you're being conspiratorial here.

If the numbers made available to the press were not accurate (i.e. you are right and at least 16 clubs abstained and fewer than 11 clubs indicated opposition) then you would expect that the Clubs would have said so and said so in pretty trenchant terms.

The consultation exercise clearly asked clubs to express a preference. If (as seems perfectly plausible) 14 clubs expressed opposition in that exercise, reconstruction is dead. That's not a "fix". That's just maths.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

They made the vote public on the last resolution. hence we got Dundeegate .

No they didn't. They published how many had voted each way for each of the three criteria an ordinary resolution must meet.

It was deduced that it was Dundee who voted a specific way because of the public statements of it and other clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Under the Articles of Association of the SPFL, certain decisions have to be taken by way of an "ordinary resolution". An ordinary resolution is only adopted if all three of the following conditions are met:

  • at least 75% of the Premiership clubs support it (9 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Championship clubs support it (8 of 10)
  • at least 75% of the teams in Leagues One and Two support it (15 of 20)

It therefore follows that if a decision requiring an ordinary resolution is opposed by any of:

  • four or more Premiership clubs
  • three or more Championship clubs
  • six or more League One and Two clubs

Then the proposal fails. It doesn't matter how many or how few Clubs "abstain" on the proposal: it cannot pass.

Other decisions can only be taken by way of a qualified resolution. For example, a qualified resolution is needed for certain types of league reconstruction (including those that affect the total number of teams in the SPFL pyramid and those that involve a change to the financial distribution of prize-money). A qualified resolution is only adopted if:

  • at least 90% of the Premiership clubs support it (11 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Premiership and Championship clubs support it (17 of 22)
  • at least 75% of the clubs in all four divisions support it (32 of 42)

This means that if any of the following happens for a qualified resolution:

  • two or more Premiership clubs oppose a proposal
  • six or more Premiership and Championship clubs oppose a proposal
  • eleven or more SPFL clubs oppose a proposal

Then the proposal therefore cannot pass. As before, it does not matter how many or how few clubs abstained: if any of these categories have sufficient levels of opposition, the proposal cannot be adopted.

Abstentions are irrelevant. They are merely "not Yes (yet)".

So, with regard to the qualified resolution rules above, if (say) Rangers and Celtic vote "no"  and the other 40 vote "yes" then 5% of the clubs voting nullify the other 95%. This must be the most bizarre application of democracy anyone's ever heard of. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, a f kincaid said:

So, with regard to the qualified resolution rules above, if (say) Rangers and Celtic vote "no"  and the other 40 vote "yes" then 5% of the clubs voting nullify the other 95%. This must be the most bizarre application of democracy anyone's ever heard of. 

It's far from a perfect system, but you do realise that actually yes it is more democratic and protective of smaller clubs than the alternative you're probably calling for?

Let's just imagine, for example, that the threshold for an ordinary resolution to pass was simply:

  • a simple majority of SPFL members (i.e. 22 of the 42 clubs); or even
  • a simple majority of voting SPFL members

You could end up with a situation where the SPFL can adopt a resolution that would (say) end the seasons prematurely and determine final placings on points average, and relegate the team in 10th place in each division, without a single Championship or League One club supporting it.

The voting structure combats this potential for abuses of power by two distinct mechanisms, neither of which are alien to the voting structures of a Limited company.

The first is to say "let's have supermajorities". Straight away this makes it harder for (say) 7 Championship clubs to impose something detrimental on another 3, or for 8 Premier League clubs to impose something detrimental on another 4, or for 14 League One and Two Clubs to impose something detrimental on the other 6.

The second is to say "let's require the vote to be consistent across the four divisions". So with an ordinary resolution the Premier League clubs cannot impose something on the Championship clubs, the Premier and Championship cannot impose something on the League One and Two Clubs, and vice versa.

Now is the scheme still skewed in favour of the Premier League? Absolutely. The 90% rule for qualified resolutions lets any two top-tier clubs kill off major league reconstruction, for example. It should also be noted, however, that it gives much more power to Championship clubs than to League One and Two clubs: because they can veto something more easily and because the League One and Two numbers are combined.

But at the end of the day, if you didn't have the requirement for supermajorities or for discrete votes in the different tiers, you would be giving more power to those seeking to screw over a small handful of clubs in the way we have seen just now; not more.

Without supermajorities, just for the sake of example, the Premiership and Championship could vote tomorrow to abolish promotion and relegation to and from League One, or even to abolish Leagues One and Two.

Edited by Woodstock Jag
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, scotty said:

As there has been no club so far who has come out and declared that they voted against then we've only got Doncaster's word that his "straw poll" was accurate.

Certainly after listening to Sportsound this afternoon, the Peterhead chairman was surprised that it ended up that way , seemingly the dialogue from the Clubs was that there was a need for reconstruction for fairness.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, a f kincaid said:

So, with regard to the qualified resolution rules above, if (say) Rangers and Celtic vote "no"  and the other 40 vote "yes" then 5% of the clubs voting nullify the other 95%. This must be the most bizarre application of democracy anyone's ever heard of. 

And that’s where the problem lies 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Under the Articles of Association of the SPFL, certain decisions have to be taken by way of an "ordinary resolution". An ordinary resolution is only adopted if all three of the following conditions are met:

  • at least 75% of the Premiership clubs support it (9 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Championship clubs support it (8 of 10)
  • at least 75% of the teams in Leagues One and Two support it (15 of 20)

It therefore follows that if a decision requiring an ordinary resolution is opposed by any of:

  • four or more Premiership clubs
  • three or more Championship clubs
  • six or more League One and Two clubs

Then the proposal fails. It doesn't matter how many or how few Clubs "abstain" on the proposal: it cannot pass.

Other decisions can only be taken by way of a qualified resolution. For example, a qualified resolution is needed for certain types of league reconstruction (including those that affect the total number of teams in the SPFL pyramid and those that involve a change to the financial distribution of prize-money). A qualified resolution is only adopted if:

  • at least 90% of the Premiership clubs support it (11 of 12)
  • at least 75% of the Premiership and Championship clubs support it (17 of 22)
  • at least 75% of the clubs in all four divisions support it (32 of 42)

This means that if any of the following happens for a qualified resolution:

  • two or more Premiership clubs oppose a proposal
  • six or more Premiership and Championship clubs oppose a proposal
  • eleven or more SPFL clubs oppose a proposal

Then the proposal therefore cannot pass. As before, it does not matter how many or how few clubs abstained: if any of these categories have sufficient levels of opposition, the proposal cannot be adopted.

Abstentions are irrelevant. They are merely "not Yes (yet)".

Very good post. Out of interest do you know where the situation in that one of the leagues can unilaterally change the number of games in a season is covered in the rule book?  ( and what else they can change in this fashion )

Edited by One t in Scotland
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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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