1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 1 minute ago
Well said Thistle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What have they said bless them?
Like Hearts an utter shambles of a team this season.
To secure a vote to end the season, the SPFL linked it to releasing funds to hard-pressed clubs, making it clear there was no alternative. However, as it now transpires, there was a vehicle to release monies in the shape of loans, quite apart from the possibility of changes being made to the SPFL Articles to allow the payments normally made at the end of the season to be made now. We would urge the SPFL to move immediately to approve loans to clubs against the monies owed to them at the season end, based on their current position in the league.
With that urgent situation dealt with, there can then be considered discussion involving all clubs to address the way forward for Scottish football in this unprecedented season. The SPFL presented to clubs (in 25 pages of briefing note and resolution and with 48 hours to consider it) that there was no alternative. It is now apparent that that is not the case.
Again, we restate that we are uncomfortable with the position Scottish football finds itself in at a time of national emergency and have been reticent to get involved publicly. However, as a Board, we would be wrong not to share the Opinion with our fellow clubs across the leagues, as well as with our staff, management, players and fans.
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 2 minutes ago
1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs. Another shower of ill informed idiots.
Maybe they should take legal advice instead of whining or maybe even take it up with Dundee who broke their sordid little pact.
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
It might not be that crazy and idea that closed doors could happen.
I don't care or want to know your moral or political stance on this, but I could see it the next 2/3 weeks the lockdown restrictions being gradually lifted.
More and more time at COBRA meetings, Cabinet meetings Scottish Govt meetings will start to turn towards saving the economy and business.
Callous as that sounds someone in power is going to have to make a decision pretty soon on how many lives can be reasonably justified being put at risk to have an economy to come back to.
100, 1000, 5000 who knows, its horrible but I think the pressure will be on that kind of thinking soon.
Like I said its not my viewpoint on the matter or my morals just how I see it going.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well we have been told by the resident epidemiologist and expert on everything on here that the lockdown will be lifted at the end of April so at least we have a date we can work towards 👍
Another 3 weeks at least of Lockdown despite what others say
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 2 minutes ago
1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs. Another shower of ill informed idiots.
Maybe they should take legal advice instead of whining or maybe even take it up with Dundee who broke their sordid little pact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgot this bit
At a time when football is not a priority and when people are suffering across the country, Partick Thistle is dismayed that Scottish football remains in limbo as a result of Friday’s vote.
The basis of our approach throughout this situation is that no club should be worse off, either financially or in a sporting sense, as a result of any resolution.
We have obtained a Joint Opinion from Senior and Junior Counsel to identify what can be done to remedy this situation. The QC’s legal Opinion concludes
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 20 seconds ago
Another 3 weeks at least of Lockdown despite what others say
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking more like after the May bank holiday which is around the 8th. Thought it would be end of this month but forgot about the holiday.
Makes sense to be fair. No point opening up for 4 days.
Interestingly IMF have just declared that the UK is heading for the worst recession in over a century and the world since the Deep Depression.
And that's before any lockdown extension.
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
It`s sad Ginger even after the May bank holiday,imo this will run for a while yet,I hope not but my fear is it will.
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 1 second ago
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And that's not taking into account that the clubs themselves voted in all the officers to govern and rule.
Except when erm.......
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 1 second ago
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And that's not taking into account that the clubs themselves voted in all the officers to govern and rule.
Except when erm.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And, presumably, agreed and approved the rules in the first place.
Incredible dereliction of duty.
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 49 seconds ago
It`s sad Ginger even after the May bank holiday,imo this will run for a while yet,I hope not but my fear is it will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will mate but we have to climb out of lockdown.
Numbers of illnesses and deaths will inevitably rise again but I'd like to think we've got used to having some social distancing and better cleanliness habits now that we can function as a country and still do everything we can to minimise the risk.
But we can't just lockdown, open up, lockdown etc etc.
And the country simply can't afford to keep supporting employees and businesses.
It is understood that a third of Scottish businesses will go under by the end of this month if there is no sign of a let up.
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
Jordans comments on Doncaster are interesting too.
Its a very thinly veiled 'I cant believe you lot gave that fandan from Norwich the top job'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Doncaster
Gardiner
Peter Grant
Jock Brown FFS
Somehow football is littered with folk getting jobs on the back of 'sooner or later someone will be suckered'.
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 31 seconds ago
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mentioned this at the weekend.
Silver thought of Gretna to see them through the season.
Can't think of any others.
That was what the rule was designed for. If anyone thinks it was to cover all clubs in a Force majeure situation they're bonkers
And there's a big difference between 'able to' and 'wish to'. As of now the board of the SPFL do not wish to and probably for good reason.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 31 seconds ago
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mentioned this at the weekend.
Silver thought of Gretna to see them through the season.
Can't think of any others.
That was what the rule was designed for. If anyone thinks it was to cover all clubs in a Force majeure situation they're bonkers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and * that because it was SPL, not SPFL.
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't referring to that one.
It looks as the the SPFL had some small amount of details on some other options but had clearly biased the proposal to just one option.
Granted you can't have hundreds of options, i just think that we wouldn't be here at all if they had at least tried to give some equal 'air time' to the other options.
That way you are more likely to get full engagement from your members rather than them think it was a done deal.
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't referring to that one.
It looks as the the SPFL had some small amount of details on some other options but had clearly biased the proposal to just one option.
Granted you can't have hundreds of options, i just think that we wouldn't be here at all if they had at least tried to give some equal 'air time' to the other options.
That way you are more likely to get full engagement from your members rather than them think it was a done deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because there was and still is a significant urgency to release money.
And that call is getting louder every day so fwck knows what Dundee are thinking about by dragging this out.
Clubs are about to fold.
Sign in if you want to comment
Tainted Tuesday
Page 10 of 20
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15
posted on 14/4/20
Well said Thistle
posted on 14/4/20
1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 1 minute ago
Well said Thistle
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What have they said bless them?
Like Hearts an utter shambles of a team this season.
posted on 14/4/20
To secure a vote to end the season, the SPFL linked it to releasing funds to hard-pressed clubs, making it clear there was no alternative. However, as it now transpires, there was a vehicle to release monies in the shape of loans, quite apart from the possibility of changes being made to the SPFL Articles to allow the payments normally made at the end of the season to be made now. We would urge the SPFL to move immediately to approve loans to clubs against the monies owed to them at the season end, based on their current position in the league.
With that urgent situation dealt with, there can then be considered discussion involving all clubs to address the way forward for Scottish football in this unprecedented season. The SPFL presented to clubs (in 25 pages of briefing note and resolution and with 48 hours to consider it) that there was no alternative. It is now apparent that that is not the case.
Again, we restate that we are uncomfortable with the position Scottish football finds itself in at a time of national emergency and have been reticent to get involved publicly. However, as a Board, we would be wrong not to share the Opinion with our fellow clubs across the leagues, as well as with our staff, management, players and fans.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 2 minutes ago
1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs. Another shower of ill informed idiots.
Maybe they should take legal advice instead of whining or maybe even take it up with Dundee who broke their sordid little pact.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by lexballielegend (U22335)
posted 1 hour, 45 minutes ago
It might not be that crazy and idea that closed doors could happen.
I don't care or want to know your moral or political stance on this, but I could see it the next 2/3 weeks the lockdown restrictions being gradually lifted.
More and more time at COBRA meetings, Cabinet meetings Scottish Govt meetings will start to turn towards saving the economy and business.
Callous as that sounds someone in power is going to have to make a decision pretty soon on how many lives can be reasonably justified being put at risk to have an economy to come back to.
100, 1000, 5000 who knows, its horrible but I think the pressure will be on that kind of thinking soon.
Like I said its not my viewpoint on the matter or my morals just how I see it going.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well we have been told by the resident epidemiologist and expert on everything on here that the lockdown will be lifted at the end of April so at least we have a date we can work towards 👍
posted on 14/4/20
grey line
posted on 14/4/20
Another 3 weeks at least of Lockdown despite what others say
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 2 minutes ago
1. The information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
2. The original vote by Dundee FC was cast in line with the SPFL’s own rules and must stand, meaning that the resolution falls.
3. There is the potential for the SPFL Articles to be altered, as would be required to bring a season to end early, in order to, for example, facilitate the payment of fees to Member Clubs.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
ffs. Another shower of ill informed idiots.
Maybe they should take legal advice instead of whining or maybe even take it up with Dundee who broke their sordid little pact.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Forgot this bit
At a time when football is not a priority and when people are suffering across the country, Partick Thistle is dismayed that Scottish football remains in limbo as a result of Friday’s vote.
The basis of our approach throughout this situation is that no club should be worse off, either financially or in a sporting sense, as a result of any resolution.
We have obtained a Joint Opinion from Senior and Junior Counsel to identify what can be done to remedy this situation. The QC’s legal Opinion concludes
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 20 seconds ago
Another 3 weeks at least of Lockdown despite what others say
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Looking more like after the May bank holiday which is around the 8th. Thought it would be end of this month but forgot about the holiday.
Makes sense to be fair. No point opening up for 4 days.
Interestingly IMF have just declared that the UK is heading for the worst recession in over a century and the world since the Deep Depression.
And that's before any lockdown extension.
posted on 14/4/20
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
posted on 14/4/20
It`s sad Ginger even after the May bank holiday,imo this will run for a while yet,I hope not but my fear is it will.
posted on 14/4/20
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 1 second ago
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And that's not taking into account that the clubs themselves voted in all the officers to govern and rule.
Except when erm.......
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 seconds ago
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 1 second ago
It's incredible the number of member clubs who seem to have been completely unaware of large sections of the SPFL rule book despite having been members for years.
Many of those clubs have had members on the board over that time.
That's the real story here.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And that's not taking into account that the clubs themselves voted in all the officers to govern and rule.
Except when erm.......
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And, presumably, agreed and approved the rules in the first place.
Incredible dereliction of duty.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Bluebell (U7064)
posted 49 seconds ago
It`s sad Ginger even after the May bank holiday,imo this will run for a while yet,I hope not but my fear is it will.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It will mate but we have to climb out of lockdown.
Numbers of illnesses and deaths will inevitably rise again but I'd like to think we've got used to having some social distancing and better cleanliness habits now that we can function as a country and still do everything we can to minimise the risk.
But we can't just lockdown, open up, lockdown etc etc.
And the country simply can't afford to keep supporting employees and businesses.
It is understood that a third of Scottish businesses will go under by the end of this month if there is no sign of a let up.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
posted on 14/4/20
Jordans comments on Doncaster are interesting too.
Its a very thinly veiled 'I cant believe you lot gave that fandan from Norwich the top job'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Doncaster
Gardiner
Peter Grant
Jock Brown FFS
Somehow football is littered with folk getting jobs on the back of 'sooner or later someone will be suckered'.
posted on 14/4/20
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 31 seconds ago
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mentioned this at the weekend.
Silver thought of Gretna to see them through the season.
Can't think of any others.
That was what the rule was designed for. If anyone thinks it was to cover all clubs in a Force majeure situation they're bonkers
posted on 14/4/20
And there's a big difference between 'able to' and 'wish to'. As of now the board of the SPFL do not wish to and probably for good reason.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by New Magnum. The Mild Drover (U16400)
posted 31 seconds ago
The loans thing is straw clutching IMO.
I'm fairly sure that role was envisaged to apply where one club was in a short term crisis...not to provide a crisis loan to every club in the league.
I'd be interested to know which clubs have benefited from this arrangement in the past and on what basis.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Mentioned this at the weekend.
Silver thought of Gretna to see them through the season.
Can't think of any others.
That was what the rule was designed for. If anyone thinks it was to cover all clubs in a Force majeure situation they're bonkers
----------------------------------------------------------------------
and * that because it was SPL, not SPFL.
posted on 14/4/20
posted on 14/4/20
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't referring to that one.
It looks as the the SPFL had some small amount of details on some other options but had clearly biased the proposal to just one option.
Granted you can't have hundreds of options, i just think that we wouldn't be here at all if they had at least tried to give some equal 'air time' to the other options.
That way you are more likely to get full engagement from your members rather than them think it was a done deal.
posted on 14/4/20
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 59 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 3 minutes ago
he information dispensed to Clubs and the process utilised in putting forward the resolution, could potentially be held to be a breach of the duty by the SPFL to provide sufficient information to member clubs to allow them to make a properly informed decision in relation to the SPFL’s resolution. In particular, the Opinion highlights the fact that the SPFL did not explain to member clubs alternative means by which payments could be made other than by requiring the immediate termination of the current league season. On that basis, clubs may have lacked sufficient information – by omission - to make an informed decision based on the SPFL’s briefing document.
--------------------------------
This is the key failure by the SPFL for me.
They so clearly biased the decision in favour of one option when it's clear there were other options available.
These options may (or may not) have been far less palatable/ workable but any responsible organisation putting a significant proposal to it's members must lay out all the options on an equal footing in terms of pros & cons and let the clubs decide on the fullest information possible.
Not having all the options (and potential consequences/benefits) in the open leads to poor quality decisions.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
There was another option put forward by Rangers which was deemed unworkable and unacceptable. Strange that Robertson was ok with that until he was reprogrammed
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I wasn't referring to that one.
It looks as the the SPFL had some small amount of details on some other options but had clearly biased the proposal to just one option.
Granted you can't have hundreds of options, i just think that we wouldn't be here at all if they had at least tried to give some equal 'air time' to the other options.
That way you are more likely to get full engagement from your members rather than them think it was a done deal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because there was and still is a significant urgency to release money.
And that call is getting louder every day so fwck knows what Dundee are thinking about by dragging this out.
Clubs are about to fold.
Page 10 of 20
11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15