niall Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 If Rangers / Newco were denied entry to the SPL and relegated to Div 3 then Sky TV would walk away, or offer a fraction of the money on offer just now. So apart from the loss of TV revenue, lolz sky wouldn't walk away, they, along with espn/bbc/etc would put an offer in that would reflect that they wouldn't be getting their prized "4 old firm games" a season. The Irish and welsh leagues have TV deals, so why would a Rangers-less SPL not get one? Maybe this would help the entire SPL get their houses in order and reduce the reliance on TV money (on a slightly less drastic scale than the ITV digital collapse did in england). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelboy Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Lets be honest about this the SPL needs Rangers in it, so of course a newco will be voted in, with the financial and points penalties applied as appropriate, its all about money and nothing else. If Rangers / Newco were denied entry to the SPL and relegated to Div 3 then Sky TV would walk away, or offer a fraction of the money on offer just now. So apart from the loss of TV revenue, every other SPL club would suffer as well, in motherwells case the loss of around 5 or 6k ticket sales 2 possibly 3 times a season at £25 a time thats approx 200 to 250k lost income, not to mention catering / hospitality etc. So if that is repeated over the other 9 Clubs (celtic excepted) and combined with reduced or no Tv money then the SPL will lose tens of millions each year, at this time it has no sponsor in place for next season either !!! So yes Rangers / Newco need to be penalised but not at the expense of the other teams, which is what would happen if they were not in the SPL. I hope Motherwell vote yes to these proposals as they go a long way to protecting our clubs income and survival. this just shows how aware all the other 11 clubs are that they need rangers in the league from a financial point of view. as i've said in the other thread i can't see what benefits this scenario has for rangers over going to division 3. if they're not going to win the league or play in europe what is the value to them of being in the spl? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tottenmfc Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Lets be honest about this the SPL needs Rangers in it, so of course a newco will be voted in, with the financial and points penalties applied as appropriate, its all about money and nothing else. If Rangers / Newco were denied entry to the SPL and relegated to Div 3 then Sky TV would walk away, or offer a fraction of the money on offer just now. So apart from the loss of TV revenue, every other SPL club would suffer as well, in motherwells case the loss of around 5 or 6k ticket sales 2 possibly 3 times a season at £25 a time thats approx 200 to 250k lost income, not to mention catering / hospitality etc. So if that is repeated over the other 9 Clubs (celtic excepted) and combined with reduced or no Tv money then the SPL will lose tens of millions each year, at this time it has no sponsor in place for next season either !!! So yes Rangers / Newco need to be penalised but not at the expense of the other teams, which is what would happen if they were not in the SPL. I hope Motherwell vote yes to these proposals as they go a long way to protecting our clubs income and survival. The 10k supporters that you claim would be lost averaged over 19 home games works out just over 500... a number that may be lost every week anyway if people are disillusioned with the SPL being a joke league with no sporting integrity. Conversely, the lack of Rangers and potentially improved competition may mean average crowds rise by a few hundred and offset the missing Rangers support, that's even before you factor in that we have extra expenses for policing etc. for Rangers games. As for the TV money, a deal would still exist, granted on reduced terms but without Rangers the potential is there to change the voting structure and force a better deal for all the supposed 'diddy' teams to ensure a fairer split. I suppose what I'm trying to say is... GET SHOT OF THEM AND LET THEM ROT! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 as i've said in the other thread i can't see what benefits this scenario has for rangers over going to division 3. if they're not going to win the league or play in europe what is the value to them of being in the spl? tottenmfc has hit the nail on where the benefit is (not to mention sponsorship etc money for Rangers). If Rangers choose the 3rd Division, then the SPL they leave behind will be so different from the one they find. Voting rights, commerical agreements, financial split, maybe even league size will be far more in the hands of the other clubs and not the Old Firm. Also Rangers have no right to join the Third Division. Nor do the SPL have a right to force them there. Rangers share in the SPL cannot be automatically moved to the SFL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigshinyhead Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Lets be honest about this the SPL needs Rangers in it, I'd have said the same thing a few weeks ago, not now though. Regardless of what happens, the SPL will be a one horse race for the foreseeable. It won't be a better spectacle just because one of the diddy teams is called Rangers although that may make it more attractive on paper to Sky or whoever. My understanding of the 'Rebel 10' position is that a newco Rangers won't get voted back in without change to the voting structure, etc so it would seem that the 'Rebel 10' really are in a position of power as long as they hold their nerve and stick together. Which they seem to be doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spiderpig Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 As for the TV money, a deal would still exist, granted on reduced terms but without Rangers the potential is there to change the voting structure and force a better deal for all the supposed 'diddy' teams to ensure a fairer split. I suppose what I'm trying to say is... GET SHOT OF THEM AND LET THEM ROT! The new £80 million 5 year deal agreed between the SPL and Sky starting season12/13 is dependant on both of the ugly sisters being in the SPL, they have negotiated a get out clause if this is not the case http://sport.stv.tv/football/scottish-premier/rangers/301353-spls-sky-tv-deal-dependent-on-glasgow-clubs-involvement/? So no Rangers / Newco and the SPL's finances are fecked, companies like Sky see the ugly sisters as the only marketable asset in Scottish football. I dont know how much TV money Motherwell get per season but i would hazzard a guess and assume its a significant chunk of the budgeted income...so the SPL vote will be dominated by money concerns, Turkey's don't vote for christmas so the Blue ugly sister will get voted back in to the SPL. Of course all this assumes that they will be liquidated and not exit administration via a CVA. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Nowhere does that article say there would be no Sky Deal. Just the one agreed won't be in place. And even then it is only STV "understands" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burn_Broomfield Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 I brought this up a wee while ago. Such a contract can't be legally binding as it would breach competition rules. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted April 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 I can't believe there are still people who believe that Sky Sports, who have a TV deal in place to show Cliftonville against Donegal Celtic, wouldn't bother with any TV deal to show the likes of the Edinburgh Derby simply because Rangers were no longer in the SPL. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tottenmfc Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 People are obviously quick to believe Neil Doncaster and the ridiculous media scare stories, of course there would still be a deal to be done if sky / espn get out of the current deal that's on the table. Maybe wouldn't be worth £16m quid a season and instead might be £10m (random figure I'd say would be realistic) a season but a less top heavy distribution of that would lessen the blow to non-old firm teams and clubs would have to adjust budgets and get back to developing homegrown players which I'd say would be no bad thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Agreed. Another point if any club has made their budget dependent on TV revenue despite what happenened to Setanta then they deserve to die a horrible death if for some reason our TV deal goes tits up! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Casagolda Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 I brought this up a wee while ago. Such a contract can't be legally binding as it would breach competition rules. No it wouldn't breach any rules, it simply means that Sky have the right to cancel their contract with the league if Rangers and Celtic aren't part of it. If either of them are relegated the SPL would continue but the TV contract associated with the league may be voided. Agreed. Another point if any club has made their budget dependent on TV revenue despite what happenened to Setanta then they deserve to die a horrible death if for some reason our TV deal goes tits up! Are you thick? TV revenue accounts for around a third of income for Motherwell, probably more this season if we finish 3rd and have had no significant cup runs. To say clubs shouldn't be relying on this revenue is idiotic. Cup monies would also diminish without Rangers existence. The Setanta deal didn't collapse because of extravagant money spent on showing the SPL, it was the money they spent on acquiring EPL games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Whats the consequences for cheating like fuck then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onthefringes Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 If you were Dundee, Falkirk, sHamilton or the likes - why would you put yourself through the unfair pain of attempting to win promotion from that choker of a league when all you have to do is apply for admittance? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 It's really sad, I know and we'll all be skint and life won't be the same (boo hoo hoo etc) - but these cheating c***s need to be jettisoned to fuck. So Ms Dempster will it be a season ticket or an acoustic guitar for me this year? And would I be able to get my Well Society money back? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GrahamH Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Don't know about getting money back but I fear there may be a few standing orders cancelled if they get off lightly. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jay Posted April 13, 2012 Author Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 And would I be able to get my Well Society money back? Must admit, I'm beginning to regret paying my membership in the one go now... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 People talk about losing fans if Rangers get back in. But fans would also be lost if we have to downsize considerably, having dire football and expensive prices will make fans walk away too. Catch 22 it is. I think it's infair to threaten to never come back. It's not as cut and dry as choosing 'money or fans', there's a lot of things to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siebsbarmyarmy Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Whose to say the fitba would be dire!!!! More youth would get a chance. I thought the football was dire when we paid the big money to players. Fuck Rangers and all the supposedly bring!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dennyc Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 SteveDiggle raises a good point as usual. There are two separate issues that must be addressed. 1. Rangers financial situation 2. Rangers flaunting of SPL Contract regulations (cheating in other words) All the current talk seems to be focused on (1) and the various penalties that should be imposed for going down the Administration or Liquidation routes. These penalties relate only to the financial difficulties that Rangers have got themselves into and in no way take into account the (as yet unproven) flaunting of SPL rules regarding contracts and under the counter payments to players. Many clubs have encountered or will encounter financial problems so it is a good idea to clarify once and for all what sanctions would apply. We may all have different views on the penalties that should be imposed but the introduction of firm guidelines is a sound idea. But what of (2) the alleged breach of Contract regulations? Some sort of punishment must be dished out if Rangers are found to have disregarded the rules by which we were all meant to play. I fear that any "cheating" will be ignored completely by the SPL Board as everyone gets caught up in the Newco situation. It's clear that Rangers...old or new...will feature in the SPL next year so how about a further 20? point deduction for each of the next two years if contract misconduct is proven. If Rangers take the huff and elect to apply to the SFL and work their way back up, so be it. But the penalty should still be applied when they eventually play their way back up. I think I am correct in saying that the SPL (or perhaps the SFA) instructed an enquiry into the Contract allegations. Wonder why we have heard nothing more on that front. Anyone care to bet that........New Company....Slate wiped clean...Carry on chaps with a meaningless 10 point penalty. The best that will happen is that the Diddy teams stick together and force through new voting rules and a fair distribution of cash based on League position as a condition of allowing Rangers to remain in the SPL . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Martin Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Whose to say the fitba would be dire!!!! More youth would get a chance. I thought the football was dire when we paid the big money to players. Fuck Rangers and all the supposedly bring!!! There seems to be a misconception that youth is free. Clubs need to be able to pay competitive wages or else the good youth players will be off at the first chance. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 There seems to be a misconception that youth is free. Clubs need to be able to pay competitive wages or else the good youth players will be off at the first chance. Where would they go? Thanks to the current economy, there are many more players looking for professional contracts than available slots at clubs. It is still very much a buyers' market, and at a club like ours, getting the chance to play first team football at 18 or 19 is a better deal than 100 quid a week extra in your back pocket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Diggle Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Punishment must be a direct answer / response to the rules being broken Punishment must not be a response to how other SPL teams would be affected if the appropriate punishment is handed out Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weeyin Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 Punishment must be a direct answer / response to the rules being broken Punishment must not be a response to how other SPL teams would be affected if the appropriate punishment is handed out Agree with that. If Rangers are found guilty of cheating, I'd relegate them to Div 3 and fine the newco the equivalent of the loss of TV revenue to be distributed amongst the affected SPL teams. Simple if somewhat unenforcable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wellfan1984 Posted April 13, 2012 Report Share Posted April 13, 2012 There seems to be a misconception that youth is free. Clubs need to be able to pay competitive wages or else the good youth players will be off at the first chance. So what is different from now then? If a player with even a sniff of talent that is able to do it at very big League 1 side and above will leave quick style now. TV deal or no TV deal (which there would be one anyway). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.