Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Lenziejag

How do we vote today

Recommended Posts

18 minutes ago, Fawlty Towers said:

Let's hope the questionnaire mentioned in this article does not have to be sent as an attachment in an e-mail:

https://news.stv.tv/sport/lower-league-clubs-back-october-start-amid-demotion-warning?top

 

I hope the Jags complete & submit, them ask for it to be withdrawn and then re-submit with a different answer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

I'm not too sure how Div One & Div Two clubs can give a preferred start date to their leagues when the date crowds are allowed back remains unknown.

The gentleman from Peterhead on Sportsound on Saturday said, Peterhead would not mothball. He wanted to be back playing in October, but they could not play behind closed doors. So who knows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, Fawlty Towers said:

Now it appears you can decide not to play in a cup competition and get paid for the privilege:

https://news.stv.tv/sport/scottish-league-cup-may-be-voluntary-to-enter-next-season?top

So Doncaster can now threaten L1 clubs with relegation and propose league reconstruction if clubs don’t comply with his views. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, lady-isobel-barnett said:

We should abstain.

 

17 hours ago, BowenBoys said:

Anarchist!

Granarchist!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I might have missed it, but what happens if a club starts but can’t finish ?

This is where we need football authorities who have an overall concern for the professional (and amateur) football game in Scotland. In order for the league to start there needs to be some levelling out of the finances in the game. For 80 something per cent of the prize money to go to the top 12 clubs and the rest shared amongst the remainder is fine if you can accept that during a crisis you will allow some of your clubs to go to the wall. There needs to be some targetting of money towards any club which finds itself struggling after the season starts or no club will be able or willing to start a season which may kill them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, scotty said:

This is where we need football authorities who have an overall concern for the professional (and amateur) football game in Scotland. In order for the league to start there needs to be some levelling out of the finances in the game. For 80 something per cent of the prize money to go to the top 12 clubs and the rest shared amongst the remainder is fine if you can accept that during a crisis you will allow some of your clubs to go to the wall. There needs to be some targetting of money towards any club which finds itself struggling after the season starts or no club will be able or willing to start a season which may kill them.

So .... that is what is not going to happen (even if it probably should)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

I might have missed it, but what happens if a club starts but can’t finish ?

Then Doncaster makes up a new rule followed by a dodgy vote. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lenziejag said:

I might have missed it, but what happens if a club starts but can’t finish ?

Thistle get relegated to ensure that club survives

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said:

So .... that is what is not going to happen (even if it probably should)

Oh, I know that. But it's nice to hope!  ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Lenziejag said:

I might have missed it, but what happens if a club starts but can’t finish ?

It depends on the competition. It's another case of the Premiership's rules having a different legal basis than the Championship, League One and League Two ones.

In short, though, I think the precedent is that their games are all wiped from the record, and they are treated as having finished bottom of their respective league for that year, before being expunged completely from the SPFL.

These issues came up when Gretna died. One of the reasons they were given a loan was to help them to complete their fixture list.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your earlier argument was that the SPFL Board couldn't make a loan to a club in case the club went belly up and they were saddled with a bad debt. How does that square with Grenta who did go belly up presumably leaving the SPL a creditor. Did they ever get their loan back?  

Edited by a f kincaid

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, sandy said:

I hope the Jags complete & submit, them ask for it to be withdrawn and then re-submit with a different answer.

But only after a few phone calls!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, a f kincaid said:

Your earlier argument was that the SPFL Board couldn't make a loan to a club in case the club went belly up and they were saddled with a bad debt. How does that square with Grenta who did go belly up presumably leaving the SPL a creditor. Did they ever get their loan back?  

No. Gretna went bust while owing the SPL money. That cost was then absorbed by the member clubs.

That's literally why the SPFL was concerned about providing clubs with a line of credit beyond the minimum prize-money to which they would have been entitled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No. Gretna went bust while owing the SPL money. That cost was then absorbed by the member clubs.

That's literally why the SPFL was concerned about providing clubs with a line of credit beyond the minimum prize-money to which they would have been entitled.

Why couldn’t there have been a % cap or a worst possible scenario on league placings to release funds ? Wouldn’t have involved securities as it wasn’t loans but actually the Member Clubs prize money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Why couldn’t there have been a % cap or a worst possible scenario on league placings to release funds ? Wouldn’t have involved securities as it wasn’t loans but actually the Member Clubs prize money.

I feel like I'm repeating myself here but I'll try once more:

(1) If you paid out based on "worst possible finish" hardly any money would have been distributed to all but the very top ranked clubs in each league (it's hardly as though Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Motherwell and Dundee United were the clubs most desperate for cash)

(2) A percentage cap on payments would still have run the risk of over-payments, and would have paid out such small amounts as to be as good as useless for the clubs (mostly in the lower leagues) who actually said they needed prize-money paid out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I feel like I'm repeating myself here but I'll try once more:

(1) If you paid out based on "worst possible finish" hardly any money would have been distributed to all but the very top ranked clubs in each league (it's hardly as though Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Motherwell and Dundee United were the clubs most desperate for cash)

(2) A percentage cap on payments would still have run the risk of over-payments, and would have paid out such small amounts as to be as good as useless for the clubs (mostly in the lower leagues) who actually said they needed prize-money paid out.

Ok in these extraordinary times , you’re been pretty good at telling us all what you can’t do ,  tell us what you would have done re financial payments to clubs , possibly should take into account these are very different times .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Ok in these extraordinary times , you’re been pretty good at telling us all what you can’t do ,  tell us what you would have done re financial payments to clubs , possibly should take into account these are very different times .

My personal preference would have been for reconstruction to have been dealt with as part of the original resolution, though that would have meant passing a qualified resolution instead of an ordinary resolution. This would have meant:

  • prize-money could be paid out in full
  • reconstruction could probably have been agreed to more easily on a temporary basis
  • no club would have been disadvantaged by relegation based on part of a season (though other clubs would have been denied play-off opportunities, for example, so it's still not perfect)

Clearly there wasn't the support of the members for that.

So, unfortunately, the next best thing would have been a motion that disapplied SPFL Rules C. 19 and 20 (i.e. those providing for automatic relegation and promotion between the leagues). This would have been an inferior solution because it would have lost the support of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, and probably some other clubs too who would think it was essentially "unfair" in a sporting sense not to reward those teams. Whether or not those people are right, it is clear that not enough clubs would have voted for that proposal. That was essentially the John Nelms proposal that was never formally tabled. It is notable that none of the clubs in favour of reconstruction put that forward as a starting point: it didn't have the votes.

Failing that, I think the resolution should have included as part of it an explicit solidarity payment to relegated clubs, howsoever structured. But again, none of the clubs proposed this when the resolution was put forward, so it was never voted on.

Which leaves you with what happened. Policy-wise suboptimal but ultimately a decision the SPFL members legally could take.

Edited by Woodstock Jag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

It depends on the competition. It's another case of the Premiership's rules having a different legal basis than the Championship, League One and League Two ones.

In short, though, I think the precedent is that their games are all wiped from the record, and they are treated as having finished bottom of their respective league for that year, before being expunged completely from the SPFL.

These issues came up when Gretna died. One of the reasons they were given a loan was to help them to complete their fixture list.

What if more than 1 fail to complete the fixtures ? Which team gets relegated ? 
 

These issues should be spelt out before the clubs vote. After all Doncaster has already threatened clubs if they don’t vote to restart 

Edited by Lenziejag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lenziejag said:

What if more than 1 fail to complete the fixtures ? Which team gets relegated ? 

Probably the last one to stop playing, as punishment pour encourager les autres. You might think it should be the first, but not in SPFL land.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I feel like I'm repeating myself here but I'll try once more:

(1) If you paid out based on "worst possible finish" hardly any money would have been distributed to all but the very top ranked clubs in each league (it's hardly as though Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Motherwell and Dundee United were the clubs most desperate for cash)

(2) A percentage cap on payments would still have run the risk of over-payments, and would have paid out such small amounts as to be as good as useless for the clubs (mostly in the lower leagues) who actually said they needed prize-money paid out.

Do you have the figures for each club ? As in how much they had already received and how much they got in the final payment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

My personal preference would have been for reconstruction to have been dealt with as part of the original resolution, though that would have meant passing a qualified resolution instead of an ordinary resolution. This would have meant:

  • prize-money could be paid out in full
  • reconstruction could probably have been agreed to more easily on a temporary basis
  • no club would have been disadvantaged by relegation based on part of a season (though other clubs would have been denied play-off opportunities, for example, so it's still not perfect)

Clearly there wasn't the support of the members for that.

So, unfortunately, the next best thing would have been a motion that disapplied SPFL Rules C. 1 and 2 (i.e. those providing for automatic relegation and promotion between the leagues). This would have been an inferior solution because it would have lost the support of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, and probably some other clubs too who would think it was essentially "unfair" in a sporting sense not to reward those teams. Whether or not those people are right, it is clear that not enough clubs would have voted for that proposal. That was essentially the John Nelms proposal that was never formally tabled. It is notable that none of the clubs in favour of reconstruction put that forward as a starting point: it didn't have the votes.

Failing that, I think the resolution should have included as part of it an explicit solidarity payment to relegated clubs, howsoever structured. But again, none of the clubs proposed this when the resolution was put forward, so it was never voted on.

Which leaves you with what happened. Policy-wise suboptimal but ultimately a decision the SPFL members legally could take.

Lots of your points are pertinent especially the solidarity payment to relegated clubs , but it basically comes down to the governance of the SPFL to make sure they applied “ duty of care “ to all its member clubs to make sure they weren’t adversely affected.

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×