Jump to content

Adblock Detected

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

Spfl Issues Defence


Cobra

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, chomp my root said:

Fair play to you for buying an ST no matter what, a year ago (well slightly over) I'd have been the same, I'd have bought our two. What a difference a year makes...

As for the 'fan account' stuff, it doesn't have to be pay as you go, sorry if I was implying that, it was more along the lines of putting cash and/or 'tokens' into the account to put towards stuff as opposed to on tick. If you have (for example) a couple hundred quid in your 'account' then you don't have to find nearly as much for a ST or you could use it to buy a game ticket etc. It might increase ST sales, dunno, I've no evidence to back that up but a lot of us want to have one even though for most of us it doesn't stack up. Just thinking instead of an Amazon voucher or whatnot you could ask friends and family for a DFC voucher/token that you could use. To rock it 'old skool', you don't have to have an online account, it could be used like an old fashioned book token to keep it simple, although online is easy for most folk.

Ah, right, get you now. Yes, actually that would be a great idea and something I think I'd take advantage of. I'd guess it would probably be quite popular with younger fans who are maybe more likely to ask family to chip in (although I do that too, to be fair!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adblock Detected

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

I have been involved, on a business level, with a membership based organisation. The problem is insolvable because the people on the membership board inevitably make decisions that suit their own firm and the CEO of the membership organisation then is tasked with selling the plan to the members. 

For me the SPFL is a perfect example of this type of organisation and now that it includes the clubs from the lower divisions there are so many more opportunities for conflict. How on earth can an organisation that looks after the interests of the OF act for the benefit of Forfar for example.

The business model is flawed and perhaps the top league cutting itself adrift, and a return to the original set up with a change to a 75% voting structure might be better. One up one down was really tough, but when you look at the success rate of the winner of theplayoff structure in the Championship against the second bottom team  in the top league, maybe it's not such a benefit?

I still think it would be worth getting Sky to enter the discussion. What's the point of discussing this at all if Doncaster knows that the Sky deal will be binned if there's any change in the format. Maybe the talk of two year temporary deal is something that Sky are demanding? Maybe getting Sky in the firing line might give them cause to review what they are doing. 

I am afraid that this whole process is just window dressing for the conversations that were held between the SPFL board members and those clubs who asked for more information. I think the word bullying has an emotive connotation given the sensitivity of social media etc, but I am finding hard to find an alternative word to describe being told like it or lump it, this is the only thing we can do, if you don't vote for this plan we will not be able to distribute any money.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, BCram said:

I have been involved, on a business level, with a membership based organisation. The problem is insolvable because the people on the membership board inevitably make decisions that suit their own firm and the CEO of the membership organisation then is tasked with selling the plan to the members. 

For me the SPFL is a perfect example of this type of organisation and now that it includes the clubs from the lower divisions there are so many more opportunities for conflict. How on earth can an organisation that looks after the interests of the OF act for the benefit of Forfar for example.

The business model is flawed and perhaps the top league cutting itself adrift, and a return to the original set up with a change to a 75% voting structure might be better. One up one down was really tough, but when you look at the success rate of the winner of theplayoff structure in the Championship against the second bottom team  in the top league, maybe it's not such a benefit?

I still think it would be worth getting Sky to enter the discussion. What's the point of discussing this at all if Doncaster knows that the Sky deal will be binned if there's any change in the format. Maybe the talk of two year temporary deal is something that Sky are demanding? Maybe getting Sky in the firing line might give them cause to review what they are doing. 

I am afraid that this whole process is just window dressing for the conversations that were held between the SPFL board members and those clubs who asked for more information. I think the word bullying has an emotive connotation given the sensitivity of social media etc, but I am finding hard to find an alternative word to describe being told like it or lump it, this is the only thing we can do, if you don't vote for this plan we will not be able to distribute any money.

Good post in general mate. I'd love to see a way forward without splintering the leagues again because under a separate top flights more clubs in ever nearly folded (for a variety of reasons and at a variety of levels) than, from my knowledge, any other time in Scottish Football - certainly post WWII. It really didn't serve anyone well. What that way forward is.... well that's a harder question to answer.

Your last paragraph is key though and absolutely spot on. Running a members organisation must be incredibly tough and yet it seems the people charged with doing so have continued to make their own role ever harder. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could this be why Rangers are so keen to press for an independent investigation of SPFL?
After being appointed Chairman of the SPFL board of directors in July 2017 Murdoch MacLennan in March 2018 was appointed Chairman of the International News and Media Group where Dermot Desmond is  a majority shareholder. This is the same Dermot Desmond who is also a majority shareholder of Celtic Football Club. 
Rangers were not happy about Murdoch MacLennan possibly being too close to Dermot Desmond but the SPFL refused to investigate their complaint. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/football/2018/05/29/spfl-rebuff-rangersinvestigation-demands-overmurdoch-maclennan
Apologies for the conspiracy theory!
Not sure if the links will work, help!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, BCram said:
Could this be why Rangers are so keen to press for an independent investigation of SPFL?
 
Apologies for the conspiracy theory!
Not sure if the links will work, help!

Oh, no 'theory' in Govan, it seems.

They really are a bizarely paranoid bunch, bottom to top.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adblock Detected

Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...