Jump to content

SPFL Shambles


dummiesoot

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply
4 minutes ago, eejay the dj said:

I only wonder what brought Rangers to silence and the way they are behaving now 🤔

Accepting that their chances of success were slim to none when clubs voted against them. The board made a big dent into how the SPFL operates but still unable to crack it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I still think that Hearts have the stronger case. Kicked out of the league as a consequence of a rigged vote (I would pay to watch that challenge in court), financial damage etc.

Our case was more governance issues and perhaps more tenuous. Just a guess on my part as I am not a lawyer.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BlueKnight87 said:

Reconstruction was never on the cards. It's the same everytime the subject is brought up. 

Budge can either take this to the courts or accept hearts in the championship.  

Only one way to pass a resolution. Link it to money clubs are due and desperate for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

The reason to bother is because how can a Board give credible options, with a preferred one, without costing them out?  Talking about tens of millions and the figures shouldn't have been calculated? Come on. 

You don't think the spfl should have provided for each option the financial, contractual and sporting costs and risks? I'd say that's disingenuous of a Board with 42 equal members not to do exactly that. Wonder why the English calculated it.

I'm not saying it's not financially a worse off option, either for clubs with their own revenues or for the spfl with theirs. But it's been described as some huge chasm of difference when it may be no such thing. Its bemusing why for all the talk it's not clearer what the gulf, if any, actually is.

It does seem Robertson was aware, maybe the other Board members were too. Are Rangers right or wrong that this wasnt highlighted as a risk to all member clubs? If wrong, we're daft claiming it in the dossier. If we're right, then the spfl have masked figures to help their preferred option succeed. 

I'm not actually suggesting n&v stacked up as the best option for any club or the spfl. But it mightnt have been as bad an option as presented by the spfl, and perhaps shouldn't have been  dismissed as readily given arguably it is stronger in a sporting merit context than PPG with relegations, where clubs are worse off as a direct result.

Your first paragraph sums it up for me.  Potential options become very clear once a £ value is put against each of them.  If I was a member club, you’d better believe I’d want to see the figures before I’d make a decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, The hustler said:

SPFL don’t have enough money for the amount of compo hearts (&others) would need

They certainly don't now they have pissed away 7m. 

Either they appease hearts which means trying to force through league reconstruction. Or they go to court something I'm sure Doncaster and co want to avoid at all costs. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, DMax399 said:

Your first paragraph sums it up for me.  Potential options become very clear once a £ value is put against each of them.  If I was a member club, you’d better believe I’d want to see the figures before I’d make a decision.

Course you would.

You'd look at what the impact was from the spfl for various options, marry them up against those impacts on your own club, and use that to base your decision. If it's only financial issues your answer is determined. If you're considering sporting issues,  goodwill factors then the financial figures help shape your decision combined with these other factors that are relevant to you / your club.

Yet we're led to believe they're not important. Given how the 10m undisclosed risk came to subsequently be highlighted the genuine comparable figures for each option were very much required.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eejay the dj said:

Jambos fans will be apoplectic if comp package is agreed 

They want recon or court . I think the vote could still go through .They are good at rigging votes 

 

God knows, they've had the practice!

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

The reason to bother is because how can a Board give credible options, with a preferred one, without costing them out?  Talking about tens of millions and the figures shouldn't have been calculated? Come on. 

You don't think the spfl should have provided for each option the financial, contractual and sporting costs and risks? I'd say that's disingenuous of a Board with 42 equal members not to do exactly that. Wonder why the English calculated it.

I'm not saying it's not financially a worse off option, either for clubs with their own revenues or for the spfl with theirs. But it's been described as some huge chasm of difference when it may be no such thing. Its bemusing why for all the talk it's not clearer what the gulf, if any, actually is.

It does seem Robertson was aware, maybe the other Board members were too. Are Rangers right or wrong that this wasnt highlighted as a risk to all member clubs? If wrong, we're daft claiming it in the dossier. If we're right, then the spfl have masked figures to help their preferred option succeed. 

I'm not actually suggesting n&v stacked up as the best option for any club or the spfl. But it mightnt have been as bad an option as presented by the spfl, and perhaps shouldn't have been  dismissed as readily given arguably it is stronger in a sporting merit context than PPG with relegations, where clubs are worse off as a direct result.

You are spot on. I still cannot understand how we (or any team as members) haven't had a copy of the independent enquiry carried out by Deloitte.

More so, it was NOT the SPFL board right to decide what was the best option for its member teams, their role was to provide options and give pros/ cons for each option. The decision for what option to take should have been the clubs. As a multi million pound orgabisation, they must record all of their decisions and provide an audit trail to show they acted in the best interest of the clubs. Surely this must have been provided, if not it should be requested so it can be reviewed. As a member club, they cannot stop us asking for it and more importantly, they most provide it. You want an extension then you get quotes and weigh up what you are getting for each price. If you want a boiler then you qet quotes, carry out research and see what best suits you. Fuck, even buying a lawnmower you'd google where was the cheapest and who has the best deal.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The hustler said:

SPFL don’t have enough money for the amount of compo hearts (&others) would need

Well maybe if the SPFL stopped paying some people exorbitant salaries  , expenses and bonuses that they really dont deserve , that organisation may stop finding itself perpetually destitute 

Link to post
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, MacBoyd said:

That French judgement surely gives them hope?

More likely to bottle it if they get a bit of compensation.  Which then opens a new can of worms as to other clubs fighting against this as the spfl pot of money is by and large destined for those other clubs.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the Hertz do take legal action surely the courts would have to suspend the league coz how could they start it without knowing what clubs are actually in the league before it starts.

Could the SPFL be stringing wee budgie along and by the time it could come to court the SPFL could turn round and go " ach well but we've already started"

Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, southcoastbear said:

If the Hertz do take legal action surely the courts would have to suspend the league coz how could they start it without knowing what clubs are actually in the league before it starts.

Could the SPFL be stringing wee budgie along and by the time it could come to court the SPFL could turn round and go " ach well but we've already started"

No chance mate if hearts go to court I doubt we'll see football start before September.

It won't happen tho they'll probably be given compo and scum fc will pay 2/3million for that wee left back

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, GersInCanada said:

I still think that Hearts have the stronger case. Kicked out of the league as a consequence of a rigged vote (I would pay to watch that challenge in court), financial damage etc.

Our case was more governance issues and perhaps more tenuous. Just a guess on my part as I am not a lawyer.

 

With what is happening in other leagues, i'd agree with you. 

It also make you wonder if this was taken into account by the SPFL when they decided calling the season and deciding on PPG was the only proposal open to clubs to vote on? IF they failed to consider it, then that is a major failing on how they came to their decision. As i said in a previous post, everything decided at the SPFL should be recorded with a clear audit trail that can be followed. All it takes is for us (would make us look like big bad Rangers), Hearts or Thistle to ask for this evidence and the answers should be there for all to see. 

Failing that and Hearts do have the bottle (IMO they don't) to go to court, it will all be out in the open. Hence why the SPFL will throw as much as the can to get them to accept relegation.

Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Blue Nosed Babe said:

If this goes to court, Rangers may yet get what they want. Just now we are trying to show we want to be fair etc which makes us better than every other club.

In the background however, our ultimate aim still remains.

Do you know something? You always seem optimistic that Rangers are still working in the background when Robertson didn't sound so assured when interviewed last week.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Upcoming Events

    • 25 May 2024 14:00 Until 16:00
      0  
      celtic v Rangers
      Hampden Park
      Scottish Cup

×
×
  • Create New...