UCF2008

I don't think any of the teams would be unknown. Even we would have faced most of them in our recent history. Yes the number of away fans at the games would likely decrease slightly as fans would most likely pick and choose, but each team would have 17/19 home games where I'd expect attendances to unanimously increase.

I think it could only work if it did replace domestic football. One way of working it would be each country involved is given and retains a quota. For example the likes of Holland and Portugal get 3 places while countries the level of Scotland get 1 or 2 places. Clubs involved wouldn't have any domestic league obligations but would still participate in domestic and European cup competitions. Could be an 18 or 20 team league with relegated teams replaced by their nation's top seeded teams. Seeding could be based on domestic performace over previous 3 years. So for example if Rangers or Celtic were relegated it would normally take at least 2-3 years to get back in. Nations involved share European spots with the league giving it an overall higher level of involvement in the CL & EL than any other European league. It would be the best league in Europe ...At least until it proved so successful that it was demoted to div2 of a larger model when the big guns want to join in. A Dutch - Belgian Women's football test run won't tell us anything.

Do you think MM will last any longer?

Probably said that just to pacify the mob through following the Killie party line of sitting on the fence. Wouldn't want the bheasts to think he or his boy were Rangers men.

Who appointed CG and MM then? It's not meant to be a chicken / egg question btw :fish: Also, I think you may have forgotten about AJ, but that's understandable.

This is a bit of a strange one. From square one it's been out there in the open that CG's consortium, including Green himself, had connections to the far east. Sponsors and investors have been expected, but the only named consortium member from that corner of the globe so far is a player in the hospitality industry. The recent Olympic Games served as a reminder that China has no shortage of world class athletes, but as Green pointed out via the mysterious Chinese billionaire anecdote, they don't boast the wealth of footballing talent their populous merits. It's certainly an untapped resource. The Tims will probably be quick to point out otherwise, but Green appears to be suggesting we do more than assume the best they have to offer is the current national team captain.

Not unless they're under 18

The SFL is 122 years old. It's the very foundation of league football in Scotland. Compare this to the SPL which is a failed experiment, corrupted and insolvent. Recent events have shown us how little respect can be shown to our country's longest established football institutions, but in any restructuring the rotten to the core SPL MUST BE DISBANDED and CANNOT BE ALLOWED to take over this new league structure. I vote for SFL1 and SFL2. I don't care whether that lot start at the top or bottom, but we need to protect our footballing heritage. It's one of the few things that makes the game in this country special afterall

Just back from the Fuehrer's estate in Italy to spread the word perhaps?

Since the split was introduced a minority have been lucky if they get 2 home games against each side of the OF anyway. They'd more likely be complaining about sharing the spoils with the extra teams being added to the league. The way I see it the only way to expand the league is to give those clubs the same money with a projected increase. To do that the game needs to somehow bring in more money from TV and sponsorship and share the pot more evenly.

I'd go with 18 in SFL1 and 24 in SFL2. SFL1 has 3 relegation spots. SFL2 is structured like the English Championship with 2 promotion and 4 playoff spots. Bottom 3 are relegated to regionals.

The embargo doesn't kick in until 1st September. We can also sign 18 year old's during the embargo so long as they're eligible as an under 18 player for that season.

We won't have a choice in the matter beyond our own vote.

Nope. check page 180 article 122 of the SFL regulations headed 'PLAYING OF PLAYERS WITHOUT REGISTRATION'. '

Just thinking about how funny that would be any time we're short of players or even just to wind up the SFA we could make a habit of it at home games to have a retired player or celebrity trialist turn up and come on for a few minutes at the end when we're 4 or 5 nil up. :devil:

What about trialists?. They don't even have to be named never mind registered.

Because they can? Who knows what motivated them to go after us the way they did in the first instance. HMRC (or at least some of their employees) had it in for Rangers long before Craig Whyte arrived on the scene.

One thought that crossed my mind was Coisty's trip over there last summer. I think I can remember him commenting that a couple of younger players who weren't quite the finished article had caught his eye. If that's the case for this lad and the trial was arranged some time ago, I just hope our current predicament doesn't get in the way of a deal being done.

They did. Their statement even sugar coated it with how we could carry on debt free in the SPL iirc

If HMRC object to the transfer of assets then we're not out of the woods yet

The PFA seem to have been very quiet on the whole issue. I wonder why that is?

What for? The reason it's a registration embargo is because they can't legally ban us from signing players. We wouldn't be doing anything wrong. It's their mess.

Doesn't mean he can't take the pi$$ out of them now though does it? Or is he all mouth?

Technically, we wouldn't have to put up any fight. Just sign a player who's so desperate to play for us that he and his agent will take any and all required legal action.

Can we still sign under 18's? Haven't got any clarification on whether that exception was carried across when the ban was 'extended'.