Livingston - all the threads merged

[Skyline Drifter]

Opening post, Oct 7 2008. Action taken Aug 5 2009. Three days before the new season kicks off.

The SFL are clueless.

Financial question and answer sessions between club chairmen/owners and the SFL every 6 months is one suggestion I'd like them to give a go. Laughing stock again.

And?

Yet again, very easy to shout "The SFL should be doing something" in a "Won't someone please think of the children" kind of way but what exactly is it that you think gave them grounds to do anything last October? The present owner of a company suing the previous owner over a lack of disclosure of facts at purchase is nothing to do with the SFL and not a reason for them to do anything.

[The Old Northerner]

I see that the revisionists are busy deleting posts on the LivvyLions forum. I'll assume that the perpetrator will be one of the shat-it brigade from here.

[Sergeant Wilson]

A couple of wee things. Longmuir alluded to the fact it was the second time Livi had been in bother. Does the fact they were in The SPL at the time have any bearing. No rules were in place then and they escaped punishment. But what has that got to do with The SFL and Longmuir (After the last few weeks. I am now convinced we should have got the perv out The Bay City Rollers.) They had no jurisdiction at that time.

I know it sounds ridiculous, but The SFL are quite expansionist, in theory. As a supposedly national organisation they don't like the fact that there are large areas of the country under represented at that level. They are largely 2nd best to the juniors/EOS in The Lothians.

[Ivo den Bieman]

Anyway, the SFL are meeting (again) this afternoon to discuss Saturday's fixtures.

Ross County have threatened to sue for compensation if Saturday's fixtures are called off.

Livingston have said nothing yet but I don't think MacDougall in particular will walk away quietly.

Ross County set to demand compensation

[thejailender]

(Am I still allowed to post on here?)

As long as you stump up a £720,000 bond..... I'll look after it until the end of the season...

[Livi 293]

As long as you stump up a £720,000 bond..... I'll look after it until the end of the season...

[qos_75]

(Am I still allowed to post on here?)

I can't be bothered trawling through pages of celebrations, so I'll just post up my thoughts. Apologies if these points have already been covered.

1. In terms of the rules, we cannot complain about the punishment itself. However, it sets a precedent - any SFL club that becomes 'insolvent' can expect relegation to Division Three. Will that actually happen? Doubtful.

No it dosen't. Gretna were the precedent last season.

2. The way it has been handled is a disgrace. If the SFL were intent on doing this as early as last week, surely it should have been conveyed at the meeting last week. As it is, it just highlights how spineless the SFL are - look like the heroes one week, then stab in the back the next, if you like. Why get hopes up, and allow the club to start planning for Division 1? Shambles.

I can see why you got your hopes up last week, but to be honest it was always on the cards something like this would happen, so I don't know how you can say the SFL were spineless. If anything they stood up to the bullying of the potential new owners.

Heroes and backstabbing? I don't think they were or did any of these things.

3. I'm assuming that the thinking behind Division Three is that it is the only league we can afford to be in, int he eyes of the SFL. Because, if you are talking about the unfair advantage of spending out with your means, the worst we could have been had we lived within our means is the Second Division.

I'm not sure it has anything to do with what you can or cannot afford. I think it has a lot to do with showing that punishment will be hard on any club going into administration for a second time.

4. McDougall, Rankine and Nixon are not ready to walk away. We might, just, survive.

I hope not either. As harsh as the punishment may seem, I do believe it was just. If you cast your mind back to a week ago it was looking like Livi were dead. That being the case I'm sure many would have settled for 3rd Division football if given the option then. In fact many on here said they would bite your hand off for that option. I think the false hope that people thought Livi would survive was due to the timing of the start of the season and the bluster comming from the prospective owners. That really was pie in the sky stuff and hence why a lot of Livi supporters are feeling gutted right now.

That said, I think if these new guys take over and as SDA highlighted earlier, Livi can grow and prosper into the club you and indeed I think they can be, and hope they will be.

Surely the prospect of 3rd Division football with this very achievable progression path, is much more palatable than the death of the club, which was looking very likely last Wednesday morning?

Edited August 6, 2009 by qos_75

[Tryfield]

And?

Yet again, very easy to shout "The SFL should be doing something" in a "Won't someone please think of the children" kind of way but what exactly is it that you think gave them grounds to do anything last October? The present owner of a company suing the previous owner over a lack of disclosure of facts at purchase is nothing to do with the SFL and not a reason for them to do anything.

Wouldn't it be worth looking at the option of the SFL taking action against a club if they are approached by anyone owed money by that club after a payback date had expired?

It'd certainly nip all this pish in the bud.

Let's see rule changes now, to suit ALL clubs, creditors and fans.

The dragging of heals has made us the laughing stock. Three days til kick off, FFS.

[Sergeant Wilson]

Anyway, the SFL are meeting (again) this afternoon to discuss Saturday's fixtures.

Ross County have threatened to sue for compensation if Saturday's fixtures are called off.

Livingston have said nothing yet but I don't think MacDougall in particular will walk away quietly.

Ross County set to demand compensation

He got the programmes printed quick considering the fixture was only "confirmed" last night. Unless of course he knew something we didn't. Unfortunately I think it looks like the new County Chairman is a fucking liar like most of the rest of them

[Ivo den Bieman]

He got the programmes printed quick considering the fixture was only "confirmed" last night. Unless of course he knew something we didn't. Unfortunately I think it looks like the new County Chairman is a fucking liar like most of the rest of them

Have you considered the possibility that the programmes are printed to tight deadlines and are likely to have been ordered on Tuesday or thereabouts, long before the SFL's decision?

I know Montrose's programme deadlines are something of that order.

Still, carry on calling people "fucking liars" if it makes you feel any better.

in any case, he's talking about hospitality here- hospitality which would have been booked on the premise of a first division game taking place against either "Livi" or Airdrie United. So why you're bumping your gums about programmes is anyone's guess. Assuming prgrammes were printed, the chairman has a load of useless Livingston prgrammes heading straight to the recycling facility.

Edited August 6, 2009 by Ivo den Bieman

[MacWatt]

I can't find a link to it, no, but Massone failed to submit annual accounts to the SFL and the club was fined £5000 suspended until September, at the end of 2008-9. It happened at the same meeting that the SFL fell for his blandishments about the club's future.

I think Flash's post above answers all your other questions about the SFL "being unable" to take action unless a club is in administration. There was a lack of political will to tackle the problem in reasonable time.

I would agree that the SFL were in a very tight spot, but stick to the view that they should have acted- and taken this decision- much sooner than they chose to.

Edit- found a link- it's mentioned in this old Tit & Bum article. The club had to submit accounts to the SFA, not the SFL, and it was them who fined them. To what purpose, you'll have to write and ask the SFA, I can only assume it's something to do with club licensing.

Fine for Failing to Submit Accounts

8.1 Finance Requirements for SPL and SFL Clubs

Copy of the Audited Accounts as defined.

These shall be forwarded directly to the SFA by the following deadlines –

For SPL clubs – by 31 March 2009.

For SFL clubs – by 30 April 2009.

8.2.6 SFA Decision

A licence will be refused:

a) If the annual financial statements (that may also include supplementary information) are not submitted to the SFA within the defined deadline.

B) If the club submits annual financial statements (that may also include supplementary information) that do not meet the minimum requirements for the content and accounting.

etc.......

Edited August 6, 2009 by MacWatt

[qos_75]

The dragging of heals has made us the laughing stock. Three days til kick off, FFS.

Livi only went into administration less than two weeks ago ffs. It would have been nice if they done it after the last game of the season just to make things more convenient.

[ayrmad]

While I have no knowledge of SFA/SPL/SFL rules and wether Livi contravened any b4 last week,the MP's for the most part didn't contravene any rules during the expenses farce but morally they were in the wrong as the rules were wrong and made up by themselves for themselves,similar to Scottish football in my opinion.

If Scottish football wants to stop running itself on a self-interest basis and introduse rules for everyone based on what's best for our game then why don't they introduce morally justifiable rules fit for all?

1.Cap expenditure on players wages to 55-60% of turnover.

2.For clubs that have already spent outwith their means to gain an unfair advantage in the past all interest payments due to creditors should be deducted from the above 55-60%.

3.Governing bodies should be able to intervene and gain access to a clubs accounts if for example a club are taken to court for late or non-payment of bills.

4.Governing bodies should be able to gain access to a clubs accounts if players or other staff are not paid on time on more than 1 occasion.

5.Clubs should not be allowed to survive on soft loans,anyone wishing to invest money in a club should receive shares to the value of their investment.

6.Pre-defined penalties should be introduced for entering Administration etc.

There are many more rules that can be put in place,those above would certainly sort out some of the shit that is happening in our football at the moment.

Edited August 6, 2009 by ayrmad

[EdinburghPar1975]

I have genuine sympathy for the Livi fans and hope that McDougall and Rankine are indeed there for the long term as I feel that a club thats allowed to build slowly in the Livingston area would be a success and could easily be sustainable within its own means in the 1st division...it just won't be overnight.

[Ivo den Bieman]

While I have no knowledge of SFA/SPL/SFL rules and wether Livi contravened any b4 last week,the MP's for the most part didn't contravene any rules during the expenses farce but morally they were in the wrong as the rules were wrong and made up by themselves for themselves,similar to Scottish football in my opinion.

If Scottish football wants to stop running itself on a self-interest basis and introduse rules for everyone based on what's best for our game then why don't they introduce morally justifiable rules fit for all?

1.Cap expenditure on players wages to 55-60% of turnover.

2.For clubs that have already spent outwith their means to gain an unfair advantage in the past all interest payments due to creditors should be deducted from the above 55-60%.

3.Governing bodies should be able to intervene and gain access to a clubs accounts if for example a club are taken to court for late or non-payment of bills.

4.Governing bodies should be able to gain access to a clubs accounts if players or other staff are not paid on time on more than 1 occasion.

5.Clubs should not be allowed to survive on soft loans,anyone wishing to invest money in a club should receive shares to the value of their investment.

6.Pre-defined penalties should be introduced for entering Administration etc.

There are many more rules that can be put in place,those above would certainly sort out some of the shit that is happening in our football at the moment.

totally agree with that.

Knowing the SFL, they'll probably respond to the clamour for sensible rule changes by changing a semi colon to a comma in a paragraph no one cares about anyway, and unveil it as a "radical new blueprint for the twenty first century".

Edited August 6, 2009 by Ivo den Bieman

[Sergeant Wilson]

Have you considered the possibility that the programmes are printed to tight deadlines and are likely to have been ordered on Tuesday or thereabouts, long before the SFL's decision?

I know Montrose's programme deadlines are something of that order.

Still, carry on calling people "fucking liars" if it makes you feel any better.

in any case, he's talking about hospitality here- hospitality which would have been booked on the premise of a first division game taking place against either "Livi" or Airdrie United. So why you're bumping your gums about programmes is anyone's guess. Assuming prgrammes were printed, the chairman has a load of useless Livingston prgrammes heading straight to the recycling facility.

Programmes are specifically mentioned in the article. I am perfectly aware of printing deadlines having been involved in programme production in the past. I can't quite figure out how/why he would have had them printed when supposedly he did not know the opponents. I am also aware much of the programme would have been pre-printed ie the bits not about opponents. The quote and the timings do not add up.

[EdinburghPar1975]

Assuming prgrammes were printed, the chairman has a load of useless Livingston prgrammes heading straight to the recycling facility.

May be worth trying to get a hold of a programme for a game that never took place..

[The Idiot Bástard Son]

Livi only went into administration less than two weeks ago ffs. It would have been nice if they done it after the last game of the season just to make things more convenient.

You surely don't think they left it THIS late just to call the League's bluff, do you?

[Ivo den Bieman]

Programmes are specifically mentioned in the article. I am perfectly aware of printing deadlines having been involved in programme production in the past. I can't quite figure out how/why he would have had them printed when supposedly he did not know the opponents. I am also aware much of the programme would have been pre-printed ie the bits not about opponents. The quote and the timings do not add up.

So, he's a "fucking liar" then, yes? Until about 5pm yesterday the opponents were Livingston, he'd have heard nothing to tell them any different, especially after the outcome of the meeting the previous week.

It seems to me that he's far more worried about loss of hospitality revenue, anyway, and that's likely to be a far more significant sum for the club.

[Mackie The Staggie]

He got the programmes printed quick considering the fixture was only "confirmed" last night. Unless of course he knew something we didn't. Unfortunately I think it looks like the new County Chairman is a fucking liar like most of the rest of them

The programmes are most likely County v Livingston programmes, then with the decision made most likely had to rush order a small inlet of Airdrie info to be inserted and all the programmes sticker covered with a sticker over Livi stating Airdrie....now we are told that there is likely no game at all and these go to waste.

Also the loss of the hospitality is more of a blow, added to the fact that we lose the gate receipts and everything else makes it a big kick in the nut sack for most clubs.