Thinker

I guess it may have been an attempt to plan ahead, knowing that we were about to have an embargo slapped on us...? I think we all had hopes of winning a cup though. The Ramsden's at the very least.

I don't think this is a case of arrogance. If the majority vote to screw over a minority for financial gain - that's immoral. They should be voting for what's fair. I don't see anything wrong with us exercising our democratic right to withhold our custom from them, and prevent them from profiting through their greedy, selfish behaviour. All hyopthetical of course - since it would be impossible to properly organise a boycott.

Ah, the old, "I did it on purpose" defence. Classic stuff!

Sorry for scraping the bottom of the trolling barrell, but I think you mean, "Hear, hear". Since you got that wrong, all your other posts are rendered null and void.

For those who can't listen it's the same old crap: He reckons we're a new club because we walked away from our debt. He completely fails to grasp (or mention, at least) that we settled all our footballing debts, and paid into the creditors pot via the purchase of assets - which means we've walked away from a smaller proportion of our debts than many clubs who've agreed a pence-in-the-pound deal - which is what we would have done had HMRC not been incorrectly awarded the right to prevent it. Bottom line, Andy: The SFA, UEFA and the ECA have acknowledged we're the same team, so your opinion is irrelevant.

Okay, you could have 12 clubs playing each other 4 times, but that was widely regarded as being too many games. A season that long, plus cups and Europe destroys players.

In general, 20 is the best number for a top flight - 18 can be made to work. For Scotland though... TV will always demand a top section playing each other 4 times a season - so we're stuck with either a 10 club top flight or something with a split (12, 14 or 16).

I agree it's not ideal. The way I see it though - if, as should happen, we sort out a proper football pyramid in Scotland, there'll be the opportunity to shed a few teams from the SFL (or whatever we end up with). Personally I'd drop everything outside of the top two divisions into a Scottish equivalent of the Conference National.

True - it needs to be made clear that we won't give them our money if they do. On the other hand reconstrucion would mean 2 matches against us rather than 4 for 2nd divisions sides next year. Only 8(?) need to vote against it... At first glance, St Mirren's suggestion of 12-12-10-10 seems bad as it increases the number of teams in the already over-burdened senior set-up. It might actually be an acceptable compromise though...

It's a rehash of the same crap he's been spouting for months, but that particular page is new today. Wonder why he feels the need to re-iterate his opinion today of all days.....

He doesn't understand that concern? Seriously? He doesn't understand that a football club sets a budget and spends money based on what objectives it needs to achieve in an upcoming season? He doesn't understand that to change those objectives once the money has been spent might be a concern? That failure to understand raises only one question: Playing dumb, or actually dumb?

Surely they're restricted by their own rulebook as to how much they could fine us?

Ought to protect clubs from the situation we find ourselves in, and was clearly intended to do so, but I can see a few technicalities in how it's phrased that could be used to circumvent it.

I think, to pitch Scottish Football to sponsors and broadcasters, they need to know what changes are going to happen over the next 5 years (or however long they want those deals to run for). Also, to save the cash strapped SPL clubs, they need to make deals which involve us. because, without Rangers, any sponsorship or broadcasting deal is worth no more than 50%. Obviously, both of those objectives can be achieved without shafting us out of what we were told we were playing for at the start of the season - so you've got to wonder if maybe it's being done out of malice.

We've had reporters from all over the world covering our story this season, so people definitely are interested in us. If Scottish football's authorities render our title for this season meaningless by effectively promoting the entire division, and if they can't come up with a reason for shifting the goal-posts mid-season that stands up under cross-examination (and the one they've given so far most certainly does not) then it's not a conspiracy theory. Your average fair-minded, observer on the outside will spot the injustice in it - we just have to make sure that they hear about it and that the Scottish football authorities are internationally shown up for their shameful behaviour. IF they press on with this, that is. The Motherwell statement suggests it might not be cut and dried yet.

We may not be able to stop them, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be upset about it. We need to publically state what they've done and why they've done it. And we need to redouble our support for the club in the face of injustice.

But, as far as I can see, any financial/sponsorship/Tv rights issues would be resolved by merging the SPL and SFL. As long as there's one body, the top flight clubs can leech money out of a TV deal that features our matches. The changing of how many clubs are in each division can take place at any future, specified time - providing they decide on it now. The only possible reasons for merging the 2nd and 3rd divisions at the end of this season are that: A) They want us to be the team that suffers by winning the league and not receiving any benefit. B) They want to bump us up an extra league to appease the TV companies. And I'm fairly certain they've ruled out option B with their comments.

For all Doncaster's blather, I can't see why the league restructuring has to be in place for next season. A vote could just as easily be taken on what structure the leagues will move to for the 2014/15 season rather than at the end of the one we're halfway through. That still creates certainty for a TV deal. And there's nothing to say that the merging of the SPL and SFL couldn't take place for next season, while the rejigging of the divisions was held off for a while. It doesn't all have to happen at once.

It would be nice if it were true, but I don't think the FA could be forced to let us in if they didn't want to. Competition law is about commerece not football. There's no barrier to Scottish clubs being on TV South of the border, or any other commercial activity. IMO, talk of the Championship is a bit far-fetched, but if the Conference accepted us, would the FA really deny us promotion? I think, if push came to shove, they'd be happy enough to let us work our way up the leagues.

Forget the fact we lost millions in terms of contracted players due to the blocked CVA. We hardly came out of it quids in - I doubt many other clubs will be wanting to "do a Rangers" to boost their coffers. But then - this is the same genius of a guy who would have us give the Falklands to Argentina. Essentially he lives by the moto "British is bad".

That, and why they allowed CW to run up such a humungous debt before making it public knowledge. Personally, I think it's because they couldn't be certain they'd get voting rights (on the CVA) proportional to their trumped up tax case, and wanted to make sure they'd still have the casting vote.

We can only guess at the timescales, but I can't see it taking as long a couple of decades.

I'm for the gamble too! Just pointing out that it would be a gamble and it would take a hell of a long time before we saw the real benefits. No, I wouldn't be jealous in the scenario you pointed out - but I'd be a touch envious if, in a few years, we were playing Swindon while the Tims were playing PSV.

If nothing changes in the way European football is organised, then the gap between Scottish teams and those of England, Spain, Germany etc. will continue to get bigger. We'll be forced to choose between either playing "anti-football" or getting humped. The gamble is, that it'll take many years to get to the top of "English football" (IF the Conference route is even an option). European football may well have changed by the time we get there, and we might have missed out on something big (A European or regional league) while we're fighting through the lower divisions.

You're absolutely spot-on about 2-10-10-10 - that's the main problem with Scottish football. There is no way any other team can regularly overcome the financial gap created by the vastly superior number of supporters of us and them. By the same argument, wouldn't a 20-22 setup really just equate to 2-18-22 though? The only kind of solution that's going to suit the 10 make-weights in the current top flight is one where they get to drain the (inevitable, eventual) top two with their leeching, so that the financial gap closes. At the moment, they have the power to vote through whatever they want - the only way for us to avoid it is to find some way to leave Scottish football.