54andcounting 0 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I'm not so sure about that. I'd like to see how democratic it is. I expect that a couple of SPL teams will be able to block anything that doesn't suit them. St Mirren & Ross County? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I'm not so sure about that. I'd like to see how democratic it is. I expect that a couple of SPL teams will be able to block anything that doesn't suit them. We'll see, that's entirely possible. I think clubs like Motherwell, Ross County, St Mirren and Thistle will side with the Div 1 clubs more often than not leaving Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee Utd and Hibs as a block with Hearts too if they survive. I can't say why I just dont see the mid-sized clubs being pushed around in the way they were before. The games up and they all know it, I've some faith in the smaller clubs to do the right thing for the game now. I might be hopelessly naive, I accept that. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,422 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 St Mirren & Ross County? We'll see, that's entirely possible. I think clubs like Motherwell, Ross County, St Mirren and Thistle will side with the Div 1 clubs more often than not leaving Aberdeen, Celtic, Dundee Utd and Hibs as a block with Hearts too if they survive. I can't say why I just dont see the mid-sized clubs being pushed around in the way they were before. The games up and they all know it, I've some faith in the smaller clubs to do the right thing for the game now. I might be hopelessly naive, I accept that. Longmuir, and someone earlier in this thread, mentioned a 3-2-1 system of governance. Does anyone know if this is the proportion of board members or something else? Either way I suspect this means that the top 22 teams (3 + 2 = 5) will be in control and the bottom 20 (1) will be left to hope and pray. I think that we would be all best to expect the top 22 to do what is in their own self interest and that any benefit for the wider game is likely to be a welcome side effect. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I think that we would be all best to expect the top 22 to do what is in their own self interest and that any benefit for the wider game is likely to be a welcome side effect. - I suppose it's an advance on the top 12 doing what is in their own interest 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 What about the 'trialists' rules? Some say the SPFL rules plan to remove that entirely. Surely 23 of the 29 SFL clubs wouldn't have voted for that? I always thought the lower division clubs depended on it. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ranger_syntax 4,422 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 I suppose it's an advance on the top 12 doing what is in their own interest With all other things being equal I'd say that's true. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 will the top division still have the split after everyone has played each other three times? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Cooper 0 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 What about the 'trialists' rules? Some say the SPFL rules plan to remove that entirely. Surely 23 of the 29 SFL clubs wouldn't have voted for that? I always thought the lower division clubs depended on it. Did my picture thing work mate? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
54andcounting 0 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Did my picture thing work mate? Yep - cool bud 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbr 1,266 Posted June 12, 2013 Share Posted June 12, 2013 Longmuir, and someone earlier in this thread, mentioned a 3-2-1 system of governance. Does anyone know if this is the proportion of board members or something else? Either way I suspect this means that the top 22 teams (3 + 2 = 5) will be in control and the bottom 20 (1) will be left to hope and pray. I think that we would be all best to expect the top 22 to do what is in their own self interest and that any benefit for the wider game is likely to be a welcome side effect. This is what the Annan Chairman was quoted as saying last Sunday , see the Annan says no thread . Board composition is another red-line area. The 3-2-1 make-up means there will be three members from the top 12 clubs, the SPL, two members from the next ten clubs, the First Division, and one member covering the next 20 clubs, which equates to the entire Second and Third Divisions. This is not equitable. We know our place in the lower tiers but we put something back. We proposed a 3-1-1-1 composition of the board, which would have meant one representative from each of the Second and Third Divisions. It was a small gesture that would have given clubs at all the levels the comfort they had a voice but made little difference to decision-making since the top-flight clubs would still have been able to carry the day. Yet it was thrown out completely, illustrating to us that the bottom 20 clubs are to be marginalised in the “new” SPFL to the point of being irrelevant. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.