SPFL Rangers resolution outcome:

Yes 13 No 27 Abstained 2

Yes vote was 30.9%

Prem 4 yes = 33% ; 8 no = 67%

Champ 1 yes, 9 against

Lower leagues needed 15; got 8 (40%).

comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 31 seconds ago
Champ 1 yes, 9 against

so did Partick or ICT say No?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems very strange

Surprised at the championship one

comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 31 seconds ago
Champ 1 yes, 9 against

so did Partick or ICT say No?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems very strange
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An investigation is required

comment by GTB, I like big bouncing smack your face titties (U14017)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 31 seconds ago
Champ 1 yes, 9 against

so did Partick or ICT say No?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems very strange
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An investigation is required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My thought entirely

So this is even after Rangers offered to pay for it?

Well well well

Time to split with the other 12

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

The next conspiracy cry from the east end will be interesting....

comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by GTB, I like big bouncing smack your face titties(U14017)
posted 19 seconds ago
comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 35 seconds ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 31 seconds ago
Champ 1 yes, 9 against

so did Partick or ICT say No?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems very strange
----------------------------------------------------------------------
An investigation is required
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My thought entirely
----------------------------------------------------------------------
😅

Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 42 seconds ago
Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part of me hopes they do - part not.

What kind of organisation is fearful of an independent review of thier governance.

We’ll get the product we deserve

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 3 minutes ago
Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Probably

They don't surrender apparently

comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 21 seconds ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 42 seconds ago
Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part of me hopes they do - part not.

What kind of organisation is fearful of an independent review of thier governance.

We’ll get the product we deserve

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Not sure you can suggest they were afraid deBear. This was all in the clubs hands and the SPFL didn't have a say how they'd vote.

Is this shìťè done with now?

comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 42 seconds ago
Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part of me hopes they do - part not.

What kind of organisation is fearful of an independent review of thier governance.

We’ll get the product we deserve

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coming round to the idea of a review rather than an inquiry?

Only being saying it for nearly 2 weeks as well...

Maybe go for a vote of no confidence?

comment by I'm not as think as you drunk I am.......Schizophrenia was my idea!.....No it wasn't!.....You are never alone with a Schizo :D (U2115)
posted 10 minutes ago
comment by Ghod#18 (U9390)
posted 31 seconds ago
Champ 1 yes, 9 against

so did Partick or ICT say No?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That seems very strange
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Partick are maybe listed as a league one club?

comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 31 seconds ago
Maybe go for a vote of no confidence?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They might go for that as that only requires a simple majority. But I'd prefer they took this to court.

SPFL CLUBS REJECT CALL FOR INQUIRY

RESOLUTION REJECTED IN ALL THREE VOTING SECTIONS, LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF ALL CLUBS VOTE IN FAVOUR

SPFL clubs have voted to reject a resolution by Hearts, Rangers and Stranraer to hold an independent inquiry into last month’s directors written resolution.

The resolution today required at least 75% of votes in each of the three voting sections (Ladbrokes Premiership / Championship / League 1 & 2) to succeed. However, less than one third of all clubs voted in favour.

All 42 clubs cast their ballots, with 13 in favour, 27 against and two abstentions.

In the Ladbrokes Premiership, where nine clubs would have been required to vote in favour, a total of four clubs (33%) supported the resolution, with eight clubs (67%) opposing it.

In the Ladbrokes Championship, where eight clubs would have been required to vote in favour, a total of one club (10%) supported the resolution, with nine clubs (90%) opposing it.

In Ladbrokes Leagues One and Two, where 15 clubs would have been required to vote in favour, a total of eight clubs (40%) supported the resolution, with ten clubs (50%) opposing it and two clubs (10%) abstaining.

Speaking shortly after today’s EGM, which was held via video conference with clubs casting their ballots electronically, SPFL chairman Murdoch MacLennan urged all clubs to respect the democratic process and unite behind efforts to restart football as soon as could be done safely.

He said: “The last few weeks have been bruising ones for many people in our game. Far too many words have been spoken and written which have sown anger and division amongst clubs. That is a matter of the deepest regret to very many people in our game, myself included.

“I know those who proposed this resolution will be disappointed, but I trust that everyone involved, on both sides of this argument, will now respect the clear, democratic and decisive result we have seen today and allow our game to move forward together. The overwhelming majority of clubs voted to oppose this resolution and it’s now incumbent on all clubs to put their differences aside, otherwise we will all suffer together.

“I have taken careful note of the concerns expressed by the minority of clubs which voted in favour and when we are back to playing football in a safe environment, I will bring clubs together to discuss the lessons learned.
“Every single one of us understands that the Covid-19 pandemic has brought huge challenges for our game, which we must overcome soon if we are to save all 42 clubs and restart the sport we all love.

“That is a daunting prospect in its own right – one of the gravest our sport has faced and it’s no exaggeration to say that it threatens the very existence of many of the SPFL’s clubs if we get it wrong.

“If Scottish football is to survive this, we simply must unite and use the enormous talents, resources and creativity at our collective disposal to rescue our game.

“Time is short. In reality, we must do everything humanly possible to get games back up and running by the end of July.

“We simply cannot afford the distraction of further infighting or legal challenges.

“I’m sure we can all agree that the quicker we get back to playing football, the better.”

comment by My POV (U10636)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by deBear (U8633)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Gingernuts (U2992)
posted 42 seconds ago
Aren’t Rangers going to take this to court?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part of me hopes they do - part not.

What kind of organisation is fearful of an independent review of thier governance.

We’ll get the product we deserve

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coming round to the idea of a review rather than an inquiry?

Only being saying it for nearly 2 weeks as well...
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Just semantics - the previous vote was a shambles. Even the most myopic could see that.

I’d like for this to be over - I just don’t think it will be.

Like I said the first complaints of poor governance from those who voted against this investigation will be warmly received

so thats that then, rangers and caley are cvnts.

smirk

If he just hadn't used the word "minority"

200