PL season to restart 19th june

[The Dude 20,026]

 

27 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

Like I said, every other league is finding a way.

 

2 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

I never said we were the ONLY country.

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, bluenoz said:

I never said we were the ONLY country but Belgium & France are hardly the majority or the norm yet you continue to use them as an example instead of looking at all the countries (and more) that was posted earlier and explore the options they are using.

There is no norm.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

21 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I do have an open mind. I've also spoken to folk at clubs who have all said voiding it was never an option as nobody backed it.

And its never been fully explained why. Always due to insurmountable issues, catastrophic costs, sporting merit etc. The kinda stuff that is still causing problems after the vote that was meant to avoid the catastrophe in the game we are still seeing.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

And its never been fully explained why. Always due to insurmountable issues, catastrophic costs, sporting merit etc. The kinda stuff that is still causing problems after the vote that was meant to avoid the catastrophe in the game we are still seeing.

Ask Rangers why they were opposed to null and void.

These things are causing problems but to a lesser extent than it would have been had thing been voided.

[Robmc1 4,741]

17 minutes ago, The Dude said:

It was spoken about and there was no support for it so didn't go any further.

I was of the impression it was only spoken about by the SPFL board who obviously never rolled it out as a viable option to the member clubs (no prize for guessing why). Was it not muted to cost money in potential pay- backs, whilst of course forgetting to mention the route they engineered was costing up to £10 million. If this was not the case then I stand corrected...

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Robmc1 said:

I was of the impression it was only spoken about by the SPFL board who obviously never rolled it out as a viable option to the member clubs (no prize for guessing why). Was it not muted to cost money in potential pay- backs, whilst of course forgetting to mention the route they engineered was costing up to £10 million. If this was not the case then I stand corrected...

Clubs all discussed it too. Both formally and informally in the various whatsapp groups etc. Claims from sponsors, ticket holders, broadcasters, hospitality punters etc was a massive part of it.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Ask Rangers why they were opposed to null and void.

These things are causing problems but to a lesser extent than it would have been had thing been voided.

I'm including Rangers in my criticism that no one has explained why. Im unlikely to get a reply from them so dont think I'll bother. You were the one speaking to clubs and lawyers, surprised you don't know why the detail isnt available or isnt being distributed. 

How so re lesser extent? If we dont know definitively what n&v would have resulted in, how can it be clear theres less issues the way it has been resolved.

Threats to sue, demands for chief execs etc to be suspended, the league set up unresolved, threats of risk to the value of 10m lingering in the air, 30% of clubs dissatisfied and seeking independent investigation, final payments not issued to clubs til weeks after the vote, etc etc.  By fuck n&v must have had some sting in its tail to be worse than all that.

[Robmc1 4,741]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Clubs all discussed it too. Both formally and informally in the various whatsapp groups etc. Claims from sponsors, ticket holders, broadcasters, hospitality punters etc was a massive part of it.

No worries, I was unaware any formal discussion had taken place regarding this from the clubs...

[Robmc1 4,741]

2 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

  By fuck n&v must have had some sting in its tail to be worse than all that.

🙂👍

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

I'm including Rangers in my criticism that no one has explained why. Im unlikely to get a reply from them so dont think I'll bother. You were the one speaking to clubs and lawyers, surprised you don't know why the detail isnt available or isnt being distributed. 

How so re lesser extent? If we dont know definitively what n&v would have resulted in, how can it be clear theres less issues the way it has been resolved.

Threats to sue, demands for chief execs etc to be suspended, the league set up unresolved, threats of risk to the value of 10m lingering in the air, 30% of clubs dissatisfied and seeking independent investigation, final payments not issued to clubs til weeks after the vote, etc etc.  By fuck n&v must have had some sting in its tail to be worse than all that.

The specific detail isnt available (in part) due to confidentiality agreements in contracts. Putting comercially sensitive information out there isn't a great move by club, leagues or even the sponsors/broadcasters.

According to one club chairman, his club were facing the prospect of having to refund a full season's worth of ST money, sponsorship, hospitality money etc - and there was no clarity on how (or even if) the SPFL would be in a position to pay out the remaining amount of prize money.

 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

Just now, Robmc1 said:

No worries, I was unaware any formal discussion had taken place regarding this from the clubs...

No formal discussion ever took place. Simply the SPFL looking to railroad a decision they had already taken through.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

2 minutes ago, Robmc1 said:

No worries, I was unaware any formal discussion had taken place regarding this from the clubs...

I'm sure it was said that 5 options were negatively presented, almost glossed over and effectively condemned by the spfl, whilst their preferred option was super dooper cherry on top stuff. It seemed like there was little formal discussion, though may have been in the paper sent to clubs some stated they had insufficient time to properly review.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

2 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The specific detail isnt available (in part) due to confidentiality agreements in contracts. Putting comercially sensitive information out there isn't a great move by club, leagues or even the sponsors/broadcasters.

According to one club chairman, his club were facing the prospect of having to refund a full season's worth of ST money, sponsorship, hospitality money etc - and there was no clarity on how (or even if) the SPFL would be in a position to pay out the remaining amount of prize money.

 

And yet we know now about the 10m risk. We've never even heard from sponsors and broadcasters if they deemed n&v different to the concluded manner we have had ffs. No one knows, no one asks, yet it is seen as a line in the sand for n&v as an option.

So contracts stipulate in some manner refunds for n&v but not for cessation and termination as otherwise concluded? Sounds like more scare stories but I'd genuinely love to have that clarified if true. Why is it theres huge risk by n&v argued or intimated yet zero conclusive evidence either as standalone or compared to PPG.

 

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

And yet we know now about the 10m risk. We've never even heard from sponsors and broadcasters if they deemed n&v different to the concluded manner we have had ffs. No one knows, no one asks, yet it is seen as a line in the sand for n&v as an option.

So contracts stipulate in some manner refunds for n&v but not for cessation and termination as otherwise concluded? Sounds like more scare stories but I'd genuinely love to have that clarified if true. Why is it theres huge risk by n&v argued or intimated yet zero conclusive evidence either as standalone or compared to PPG.

 

Because the season has ultimately been completed (albeit truncated) rather than outright cancelled.

Some of the contracts do see clubs on the hook one way or the other although the amounts will vary based various different factors. There have been plenty clubs who have had to hold talks directly with their various commercial partners to try and work out deals that are best for all parties as clubs are acutely aware that many of these companies are suffering the same financial hardship as they are.

Don't know if you watched that interview I posted earlier with the Lowland League chairman but he gives a wee bit of insight into it as well.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

20 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Because the season has ultimately been completed (albeit truncated) rather than outright cancelled.

Some of the contracts do see clubs on the hook one way or the other although the amounts will vary based various different factors. There have been plenty clubs who have had to hold talks directly with their various commercial partners to try and work out deals that are best for all parties as clubs are acutely aware that many of these companies are suffering the same financial hardship as they are.

Don't know if you watched that interview I posted earlier with the Lowland League chairman but he gives a wee bit of insight into it as well.

Nah I'll go have a look when I'm not sitting at my work desk kidding on I'm working 😂.

Answer me this. If you were to write a blog just now explaining why n&v was not a viable option for scottish clubs to even have vote on as an option, do you believe you would have the detail required or would it be conjecture/ heresay/ theory based in nature?

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Nah I'll go have a look when I'm not sitting at my work desk kidding on I'm working 😂.

Answer me this. If you were to write a blog just now explaining why n&v was not a viable option for scottish clubs to even have vote on as an option, do you believe you would have the detail required or would it be conjecture/ heresy/ theory based in nature?

Strictly speaking it would be hearsay as I've not seen the specific contracts myself but the sources for the information are beyond reproach - and tbh, even if I had people would still shout it down as being agenda driven bollocks (like they did with my interview with the Falkirk chairman a few months ago when he confirmed the plan was to declare the season and award titles).

 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Nah I'll go have a look when I'm not sitting at my work desk kidding on I'm working 😂.

Answer me this. If you were to write a blog just now explaining why n&v was not a viable option for scottish clubs to even have vote on as an option, do you believe you would have the detail required or would it be conjecture/ heresy/ theory based in nature?

Null and void meant no winners and no losers. I have yet to see anything that ending the season the way it was ended would have made any difference to broadcasters, sponsors etc. 

Whole arguement saying otherwise is simply a smokescreen.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

1 minute ago, GersInCanada said:

Null and void meant no winners and no losers. I have yet to see anything that ending the season the way it was ended would have made any difference to broadcasters, sponsors etc. 

Whole arguement saying otherwise is simply a smokescreen.

Cant disagree 👍

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, GersInCanada said:

Null and void meant no winners and no losers. I have yet to see anything that ending the season the way it was ended would have made any difference to broadcasters, sponsors etc. 

Whole arguement saying otherwise is simply a smokescreen.

Ive heard it directly from club chairmen. One of the same ones who has been threatening action against the SPFL. Any idea why he'd be putting a smokescreen up for the SPFL? 

[GersInCanada 7,775]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Ive heard it directly from club chairmen. One of the same ones who has been threatening action against the SPFL. Any idea why he'd be putting a smokescreen up for the SPFL? 

No idea at all as I do not claim to be in the know.

Let's just say that without further proof I doubt the veracity of your post.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, GersInCanada said:

No idea at all as I do not claim to be in the know.

Let's just say that without further proof I doubt the veracity of your post.

Feel free to doubt it. It was Falkirk chairman Gary Deans who I spoke to originally and have since spoken with several more who have all said the same. The Lowland League chairman (George Fraser) was interviewed yesterday and he confirmed that his club (BSC Glasgow) have also had to have talks with their sponsors etc to do what is best for both parties.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

17 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Strictly speaking it would be hearsay as I've not seen the specific contracts myself but the sources for the information are beyond reproach - and tbh, even if I had people would still shout it down as being agenda driven bollocks (like they did with my interview with the Falkirk chairman a few months ago when he confirmed the plan was to declare the season and award titles).

 

And tbh that's my frustration with journalists that no one has investigated it fully, it's all still based on comments from others, or heresay, even if sources are credible.  Many bears hear this said about n&v, try to question it, but get nowhere. For me it's a huge issue that remains unresolved. 

I'm actually surprised that you or others havent explored it either with your Rangers leaning or someone with a Hearts one. Even just for guaranteed clicks on articles.

But we've been on this road before. I dont want to chuck my job and become a journo, so I'll just sit here doing no more than wishing someone with connections that does that job could get those answers.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,613]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Feel free to doubt it. It was Falkirk chairman Gary Deans who I spoke to originally and have since spoken with several more who have all said the same. The Lowland League chairman (George Fraser) was interviewed yesterday and he confirmed that his club (BSC Glasgow) have also had to have talks with their sponsors etc to do what is best for both parties.

Sorry, to clarify, have all those said n&v would cause huge issues, and in a way the truncating as you described it of the league wont?

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

And tbh that's my frustration with journalists that no one has investigated it fully, it's all still based on comments from others, or heresay, even if sources are credible.  Many bears hear this said about n&v, try to question it, but get nowhere. For me it's a huge issue that remains unresolved. 

I'm actually surprised that you or others havent explored it either with your Rangers leaning or someone with a Hearts one. Even just for guaranteed clicks on articles.

But we've been on this road before. I dont want to chuck my job and become a journo, so I'll just sit here doing no more than wishing someone with connections that does that job could get those answers.

Clubs aren't going to show commercial contracts to random journalists (especially not when said journalists can't actually get to clubs to see the documents in person). I can ask every club in the country to provide me copies of their sponsorship agreements and every single one will refuse.  They'll only let out what they want to get out.

Same with the SPFL and their broadcast deals. I've been VERY limited in what I've been able to do as I've been furloughed since April 1st so haven't even been able to access my work email account etc.

Let me put it this way to you, if the N&V stuff was all just made up bollocks to rush through awarding the title to celtic, do you think Rangers would have used the likes of 4lads or H&H to back that up and blow the SPFL's story out the water?

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Sorry, to clarify, have all those said n&v would cause huge issues, and in a way the truncating as you described it of the league wont?

It would cause issues either way but truncating would be to a much lesser degree than N&V.