SPFL Covid questions to clubs

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Surely we plan for whats in the current rules, ie for us 38 games, then put in a threshold ie 30 games and decide now what happens before or after thats reached? By a definitive date.

Seems like they do anything but make a decision.

That's what they asked the clubs if they wanted. Clubs are the ones who have to make the decision (at the behest of the clubs). None of them afaik have come up with any firm proposals after voting down giving the SPFL exec powers - which ironically would have given them the power to make a decision to pass to clubs to vote on. This is where it all falls down. SPFL pass to clubs, clubs pass it back with no real answer and demand answers, SPFL pass it back to them for answers etc etc.

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,601]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That's what they asked the clubs if they wanted. Clubs are the ones who have to make the decision (at the behest of the clubs). None of them afaik have come up with any firm proposals after voting down giving the SPFL exec powers - which ironically would have given them the power to make a decision to pass to clubs to vote on. This is where it all falls down. SPFL pass to clubs, clubs pass it back with no real answer and demand answers, SPFL pass it back to them for answers etc etc.

Start with end date beyond which season cant extend.  Agree on threshold levels of games played that season can be concluded. Those should be easier to agree before deciding what happens before / after threshold met. Yet these seem not to have been asked of clubs.

Sort out the structure, then look at the means of concluding league rather than the cluster fuck of asking for agreement how to conclude whilst walking on shifting sand.

[Bad Robot 21,132]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

That's what they asked the clubs if they wanted. Clubs are the ones who have to make the decision (at the behest of the clubs). None of them afaik have come up with any firm proposals after voting down giving the SPFL exec powers - which ironically would have given them the power to make a decision to pass to clubs to vote on. This is where it all falls down. SPFL pass to clubs, clubs pass it back with no real answer and demand answers, SPFL pass it back to them for answers etc etc.

Their questions needed detail as in thresholds but they weren’t really that interested and wanted the executive powers first and foremost so ultimately they could do what they wanted and when IMO

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

Their questions needed detail as in thresholds but they weren’t really that interested and wanted the executive powers first and foremost so ultimately they could do what they wanted and when IMO

Thresholds would be set by clubs voting on them.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Start with end date beyond which season cant extend.  Agree on threshold levels of games played that season can be concluded. Those should be easier to agree before deciding what happens before / after threshold met. Yet these seem not to have been asked of clubs.

Sort out the structure, then look at the means of concluding league rather than the cluster fuck of asking for agreement how to conclude whilst walking on shifting sand.

They should but so far there hasn't been anything close to it.

Those questions are supposed to be an idea as to how to sort out the structure. The SPFL can't just impose them and need to meet the thresholds of clubs backing them. Until they have any sort of idea of what clubs actually want in the event the season is halted - and none have been that forthcoming - it's all a shit show.

 

[Bad Robot 21,132]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Thresholds would be set by clubs voting on them.

 

There was no reason why the threshold question couldn't be asked and answered just now but they want the power to go against any vote they don’t agree with and take it out the hands of the clubs.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Bad Robot said:

 

There was no reason why the threshold question couldn't be asked and answered just now but they want the power to go against any vote they don’t agree with and take it out the hands of the clubs.

It has been. Clubs can't agree. You seem to have it backwards. They wanted exec powers first and now the power is explicitly in the hands of the clubs.

[Bad Robot 21,132]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

It has been. Clubs can't agree. You seem to have it backwards. They wanted exec powers first and now the power is explicitly in the hands of the clubs.

So how many games were proposed to finish the season?

[Hadron Collider 30,765]

Should the Scottish cup final go ahead from last year?  They have no problem with this it seems. Cunts. 

[Colin Traive 22,694]

Clearly the clubs have to vote for a solution (and how we get there, when does it kick in etc) but, even in a democracy, there is room for leadership.

Doncaster is too busy keeping the right side of Liewell to offer anything resembling leadership.

He is not fit to run the local bowling club and, in the current climate, his salary of circa 400k is an obscenity.

[Howsitgoing 4,281]

There’s no reason why this shit show couldn’t be done by the SFA. SPFL are a waste of money and a waste of time, get rid and force people,in the SFA to do their fucking jobs. They’re are corrupt as the SPFL but at least it puts more money into Scottish football. The SFA should be responsible for getting sponsorships, enforcing rules etc. SPFL can be disbanded. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,601]

28 minutes ago, The Dude said:

They should but so far there hasn't been anything close to it.

Those questions are supposed to be an idea as to how to sort out the structure. The SPFL can't just impose them and need to meet the thresholds of clubs backing them. Until they have any sort of idea of what clubs actually want in the event the season is halted - and none have been that forthcoming - it's all a shit show.

 

Yet I just think the spfl are negotiating back to front. Get the small agreements concluded, build up to the harder stuff. They're trying to get the big hits in place 1st and wondering why there's no progress. They're trying to get the meat on the bone when there's no bone 😁

[The Dude 20,026]

4 minutes ago, Howsitgoing said:

There’s no reason why this shit show couldn’t be done by the SFA. SPFL are a waste of money and a waste of time, get rid and force people,in the SFA to do their fucking jobs. They’re are corrupt as the SPFL but at least it puts more money into Scottish football. The SFA should be responsible for getting sponsorships, enforcing rules etc. SPFL can be disbanded. 

The SFA have never run the domestic league in Scotland. Ever. 

[magic8ball 27,901]

5 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Yet I just think the spfl are negotiating back to front. Get the small agreements concluded, build up to the harder stuff. They're trying to get the big hits in place 1st and wondering why there's no progress.

Just like last year when they forced the lower leagues to end and set a precedent for the Premiership 

[The Dude 20,026]

26 minutes ago, Bad Robot said:

So how many games were proposed to finish the season?

There wasn't a specific number put to them yet. 

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, magic8ball said:

Just like last year when they forced the lower leagues to end and set a precedent for the Premiership 

Thats not close to what happened though. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,601]

Just now, magic8ball said:

Just like last year when they forced the lower leagues to end and set a precedent for the Premiership 

Yep. Just posted as much on the other thread.

They broadly set their stall out then chip away til its achieved. Throw league position money at it, only offer their selected options to vote on, bully and coerce.

Nul and void is their preferred outcome. All that's unclear is their means of achieving it whilst being, ahem, impartial 😂

[The Dude 20,026]

7 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Yet I just think the spfl are negotiating back to front. Get the small agreements concluded, build up to the harder stuff. They're trying to get the big hits in place 1st and wondering why there's no progress. They're trying to get the meat on the bone when there's no bone 😁

They need to get clubs to let then call the season early otherwise a threshold is moot. Tbh, judging from the way I've seen a few clubs operate, some still have their head in the sand about the prospect of another shutdown. 

[The Dude 20,026]

2 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Yep. Just posted as much on the other thread.

They broadly set their stall out then chip away til its achieved. Throw league position money at it, only offer their selected options to vote on, bully and coerce.

Nul and void is their preferred outcome. All that's unclear is their means of achieving it whilst being, ahem, impartial 😂

Wasn't it the only fair option according to many, many posters on here? 

[Bad Robot 21,132]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

There wasn't a specific number put to them yet. 

and I’ll repeat there was no reason why this question couldn’t have being asked and answered without the need for them to have the executive power 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,601]

Just now, The Dude said:

They need to get clubs to let then call the season early otherwise a threshold is moot. Tbh, judging from the way I've seen a few clubs operate, some still have their head in the sand about the prospect of another shutdown. 

I'm they need to agree leagues can't go beyond certain dates. They then get agreement that if the league can't be completed by then, then a means of conclusion needs to happen. Then determine after how many games in the leagues clubs think its fair for a league to be considered concluded by a means to be agreed.

Then look at reaching agreement on what that method is after x no of games, or what happens if X no of games isn't reached.

Smaller bites to build the framework.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Bad Robot said:

and I’ll repeat there was no reason why this question couldn’t have being asked and answered without the need for them to have the executive power 

It was asked AFTER clubs voted down them having exec power. 

[SeparateEntityMyArse 53,601]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Wasn't it the only fair option according to many, many posters on here? 

Yes, but it wasn't permitted for a multitude of reasons that we've gone over a million times. Then a new methodology was set in PPG.

Now it seems N&V is on the table, and PPG isn't necessarily the precedent that it should be if there was any type of integrity.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

I'm they need to agree leagues can't go beyond certain dates. They then get agreement that if the league can't be completed by then, then a means of conclusion needs to happen. Then determine after how many games in the leagues clubs think its fair for a league to be considered concluded by a means to be agreed.

Then look at reaching agreement on what that method is after x no of games, or what happens if X no of games isn't reached.

Smaller bites to build the framework.

Thats what they've asked. (the date the league can't go past is already set because of the Euros). 

 

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Yes, but it wasn't permitted for a multitude of reasons that we've gone over a million times. Then a new methodology was set in PPG.

Now it seems N&V is on the table, and PPG isn't necessarily the precedent that it should be if there was any type of integrity.

PPG isn't the precedent because its not what strictly happened last season. When the league ended, PPG wasn't the prescribed solution in the rules but needed a vote. So the methodology to end the season was clubs voting on solutions.