weeyin

No. there is no match fixing, bribing of referees, mafia betting scams etc. As bad as this situation is, the one thing we can rely on is that a match result is genuine (which is quite an important detail).

Naw.

Apart from one minor detail* I agree with the the majority of Green's ideas such as voting reform and more equal distribtion of revenues. So let's push ahead with them. * the one detail being newco allowed to play in the SPL which I'm sure we can exclude from the package.

Or he is pissed off that the SPL made their 'offer' to the SFL without the board being involved. Or, he really doesn't have time to commit to the fallout after the No vote is confirmed. etc. etc.

It's not really apples and oranges. The amounts may be different, but there is nothing to prevent the SPL from distributing the TV revenue on an more equal basis. The price of German football may not be directly available to the SPL or the SFA, but their financial model is one that should be copied across all European countries. IT would certainly have prevented the Rangers debacle. Again - it's not amount the amounts involved, it's about the financial models that have been adopted. The money carve up was only a small part of it. It was just the normal negotiations when the players' union collective bargaining agreement expired and had to be renegotiated. Most of the financials were agreed, there was just some dispute over one slice of the $20 billion.

The NFL and MLB over here do exactly that (albeit through slightly different mechanisms). Not because they are pinko liberal commies, but because the owners realised that by keeping teams closer to parity the increased competitiveness of the leagues brings in more spectators, which results in more tv coverage and sponsorship which results in even more money to share between the teams. TV alone is worth more than $20 billion to the NFL teams.

I think I'd better give the auditors a bell, then, and ask then to put the count on hold until I hear from the Society.

No email either, which doesn't surprise me as they didn't send me my MFC TV code without my prompting.

In future, you'll just need to stick to the regular '.com' porno sites and leave the '.xxx' ones alone.

I'm still waiting on my ballot papers. Hope a better system is put in place for overseas members before the next key vote.

Rangers went into liquidation. The owners thought the SPL clubs would bend over backwards to let newco back into the SPL. The SPL clubs, based on fans reaction such as ours, decided to reject that application. So the Well Society vote played a part in the rejection of newco application. There was nothing underhand, shady or misrepresented by the club in that vote. Now we are dealing with the consequences, and hopefully the SFL will follow our lead and not be pushed around.

Agree with this. The latest proposals are a direct result of us (and other clubs) rejecting newco from the SPL.

Football, not just Scottish football, has been all about the finances for years (even decades) now. From putting 24 teams in the next Euros, to scrapping straight knockout in favour of Champions League format, to shifting kick-offs for TV, to allowing shady owners to pump in millions, to turfing Well fans out the Cooper Stand for OF games, to releasing 3 or 4 kits when you only ever need 2, to selling 'the brand' in Asia, to naming rights for stadiums etc. Sporting integrity hasn't been a part of the Scottish Football for as long as there has been an 11 - 1 voting system, 12pm Sunday kick-offs, an unequal distribution of TV revenues and the removal of clubs sharing gate money. I'm all for kicking Rangers into Div 3, I'm just surprised at the level of surprise on here that some clubs don't want that.

OK, seeing as you don't believe any of that. What about the following, also from the document: IF WE AGREE THEN WE REQUIRE THE FOLLOWING - A new distribution model with the settlement agreement value protected and future proofed - A more balanced governance model (as circulated) Is that good or bad? Does more balanced governance mean we lose the 11 - 1 voting rules. What about the new distribution model? Does that mean it might be more equal? What was published on the STV site was obviously just a Powerpoint Presentation. Not exactly a legal or binding document. I need to hear what the details are first and, even more importantly, what the SFL response is, before I start with the boycotts etc. again.

Except, when it comes to SPL2, the document reads: 4. RANGERS TO SPL2 •Currently not supported by the SFA •Creates a bigger divide •Leads to some short term commercial losses •A legal challenge could paralyse the game •The overall pot would be much less than anticipated Not currently supported by the SFA could be an issue there, not to mention the legal challenges.

They can, quite correctly, claim they are following the wishes of the Well Society with the "No to newco" vote. Which is why a statement isn't going to make anyone any happier. You can just about write it now: initial vote was for newco, sensitive topic, put it out to Well Society, response was No, ready to take that to SPL on July 4th, only after sufficient clubs indicated no did the SFA/SPL/SFL discussions firm up, needed to distribute them in time for july 4th discussions, no time for 2nd vote, for discussion only and no decision can be made until when or if details are agreed.

You would have to think so. Hopefully somebody photocopied Gannon's notebook before he left.

That's their opinion (right or wrong). However, the SFL can still reject and then the fun would really start.

If the SFL also vote no, it doesn't matter. Rangers will have nowhere to go and the SPL2 will have no teams.

If the SFL teams have the balls to tell them to get stuffed, the SPL2 would be a pretty small league. Be better if the SPL teams that voted no set up their own league with the SFL, and leave the other 3 or 4 SPL teams to play on their own.

The SPL are kicking them out. It's up to the SFL to do the right thing now.

From the Evening Times

It's up to the SFL chairmen now, but hopefully their fans will send them the same message.

Aye, unfortunately that might well be the case. It's all very well agreeing to kick out newco for reduced finances, but the cost will likely be a level of inconsistency in the short terms.

Even more experienced pros like Chris Porter looked out of their depth in their first couple of appearances. If the fans aren't prepared to let our youngsters develop, it's going to be a long season for them, because we can expect to be relying on more of them this time around.