Sportsound Watch

[Lobby Dossar]

3 minutes ago, Green Day said:

Just to be 100% clear, clubs did not have to vote Yes or No.

It was a resolution and hence required a certain number of Yes votes to carry. Ergo not voting or a No carry the same weight.

The SPFL asked for votes by the Friday 5pm in order to try to get a result out ASAP, but all the clubs knew that they have 28 days as usual.

Waiting until all votes were cast is not necessary, as not all votes are required to pass the resolution.

Where the SPFL screwed up was in relation to the Dundee situation - Dundee absolutely played the SPFL and the other clubs No clubs in the Championship brilliantly, and now have their Reconstruction task force in place. A classic Machiavellian move but not one which has endeared them to the other clubs.

Still could allow pressure to be put on certain clubs to get the outcome that they wanted … … … YES / NO

[Swordfishtrombone]

Poor Tom English he has now been accused  at times on here and elsewhere of being in Lawwells pocket and now Ann Budges. It’s almost as if he is objective and people take exception when his view differs from theirs.

[Frank Grimes]

Tom English is the boy

Winds up the sellick & Sevco Twitter Da’s in hilarious, equal measure 

Long may he reign at BBC Scotland 

[JamieThomas]

He's certainly got the Celtic lads on Twitter sputtering into their soup.

[craigkillie]

40 minutes ago, Green Day said:

Where the SPFL screwed up was in relation to the Dundee situation - Dundee absolutely played the SPFL and the other clubs No clubs in the Championship brilliantly, and now have their Reconstruction task force in place. A classic Machiavellian move but not one which has endeared them to the other clubs.

Reconstruction talks were already promised. At best, Dundee got themselves a seat on that board, at worst they snaked their fellow clubs for nothing.

[meanmistermustard]

Listening on delay. Dodds raging about not getting the Dundee job.

 

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

56 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

Of course you can -

You can but you would be kneecapping clubs like Hamilton, Livingston and probably a couple of others that budget based on the knowledge they might be relegated.

 

[Cowden Cowboy]

5 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

You can but you would be kneecapping clubs like Hamilton, Livingston and probably a couple of others that budget based on the knowledge they might be relegated.

 

They can’t have their cake and eat it - places 1-42 have a percentage allocated already no need for change.  These clubs at 13 and 14 haven’t miraculously become better sides but they will get bigger gates in Premier plus a share of UEFA solidarity 

[craigkillie]

8 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

They can’t have their cake and eat it - places 1-42 have a percentage allocated already no need for change.  These clubs at 13 and 14 haven’t miraculously become better sides but they will get bigger gates in Premier plus a share of UEFA solidarity 

They can do whatever they want. In 2018/19, the club finishing 12th earned £1.125m and the club finishing 14th earned £475k. Adding two extra teams to the top flight without adjusting the prize money means that the guaranteed income for Premiership clubs plummets, and I don't see any reason why they'd choose to vote for that. The money would need to be spread out more, and that would have to come from the top.

The Premiership clubs already voted 7 years ago to give away a decent chunk of money to the lower league sides as part of the merger - clubs in the Championship are now earning 3-8 times as much as they did in the SFL days, and most of that is funded by sponsorship and TV rights for Premiership matches.

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

18 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They can do whatever they want. In 2018/19, the club finishing 12th earned £1.125m and the club finishing 14th earned £475k. Adding two extra teams to the top flight without adjusting the prize money means that the guaranteed income for Premiership clubs plummets, and I don't see any reason why they'd choose to vote for that. The money would need to be spread out more, and that would have to come from the top.

The Premiership clubs already voted 7 years ago to give away a decent chunk of money to the lower league sides as part of the merger - clubs in the Championship are now earning 3-8 times as much as they did in the SFL days, and most of that is funded by sponsorship and TV rights for Premiership matches.

Exactly. You need changes to payouts otherwise how are clubs meant to prepare for a new season if there is a potential £650K hole in their finances and that is on top of the hardships faced this season and the uncertainty of future gate receipts.

[ropy]

If the money for clubs 1 to 42 adds up to 100% then for the money not to change clubs 43 and 44 get nothing?

[Ray Patterson]

Anyone else listening to OTB this evening, it's surprisingly good.

The Covid songs were fantastic.

[Cowden Cowboy]

54 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

They can do whatever they want. In 2018/19, the club finishing 12th earned £1.125m and the club finishing 14th earned £475k. Adding two extra teams to the top flight without adjusting the prize money means that the guaranteed income for Premiership clubs plummets, and I don't see any reason why they'd choose to vote for that. The money would need to be spread out more, and that would have to come from the top.

The Premiership clubs already voted 7 years ago to give away a decent chunk of money to the lower league sides as part of the merger - clubs in the Championship are now earning 3-8 times as much as they did in the SFL days, and most of that is funded by sponsorship and TV rights for Premiership matches.

There is no guaranteed income for the Premier - the whole system is based on shares already agreed for every position from 1-42.  Thus whether team 13 is in Premier or Championship makes no difference to the percentage they receive and teams 1-12 receive exactly the same in either case

[weeredbook]

On 12/04/2020 at 10:49, VictorOnopko said:

For once, this Sportsound was a genuinely good listen*

*Well, the first half at least.  The absence of "Biscuits", Pat Bonner and "Chick Young" definitely helped the coherence of the discussion.

 

This .

[craigkillie]

1 hour ago, Cowden Cowboy said:

There is no guaranteed income for the Premier - the whole system is based on shares already agreed for every position from 1-42.  Thus whether team 13 is in Premier or Championship makes no difference to the percentage they receive and teams 1-12 receive exactly the same in either case

If there is a 12 team Premiership next season, St Mirren, Ross County, Accies etc will be guaranteed 4.5% of the total prize pot (£1.125m in 2018/19) even if they finish bottom. That is a guaranteed income for those clubs.

If there is a 14 team Premiership next season, then the amount those clubs would get if they finish bottom is 1.9% of the total prize pot (£475k in 2018/19). Therefore the guaranteed income for Premiership clubs is vastly reduced if the prize money distribution does not change.

It doesn't matter that 12th place gets the same in both seasons, the point is that as it stands those clubs can finish no lower than 12th, whilst if two teams were added to the league then those clubs could finish 14th. No sensible club is going to vote for that sort of proposal.

 

[Ludo*1]

3 hours ago, meanmistermustard said:

Listening on delay. Dodds raging about not getting the Dundee job.

 

Billy Dodds on John Nelms after not getting the job at Dundee:

“John Nelms, after speaking to him yesterday, he's a good lad and what you see is what you get. And that's the way I found him.”

Billy Dodds when given the opportunity to stick the boot in:

"I wouldn’t like him in the trenches with me. I couldn’t trust the guy."

He's one of BBC Scotland's leading pundits. He's definitely a reason to make one consider not paying their license fee. Is he truly the best Scotland can offer?

[Lobby Dossar]

4 hours ago, Green Day said:

He was told their vote didn't matter, as the Premiership already had the number of votes required.

Now I’m not applying any impropriety here but what if Doncaster phoned 3 other clubs and said that their vote was not needed as they had the required 9 votes

Not saying that happened but with all that’s gone on in this farce how do we know it didn’t 

Not a fan of Tom English but he’s right I think we now need to know what time each clubs vote was submitted

[DA Baracus]

25 minutes ago, Speroni*1 said:

Billy Dodds on John Nelms after not getting the job at Dundee:

“John Nelms, after speaking to him yesterday, he's a good lad and what you see is what you get. And that's the way I found him.”

Billy Dodds when given the opportunity to stick the boot in:

"I wouldn’t like him in the trenches with me. I couldn’t trust the guy."

He's one of BBC Scotland's leading pundits. He's definitely a reason to make one consider not paying their license fee. Is he truly the best Scotland can offer?

His credentials, as is the case for most other 'pundits', are that he played for one of 3 clubs.

[craigkillie]

17 minutes ago, Lobby Dossar said:

Now I’m not applying any impropriety here but what if Doncaster phoned 3 other clubs and said that their vote was not needed as they had the required 9 votes

Not saying that happened but with all that’s gone on in this farce how do we know it didn’t 

Not a fan of Tom English but he’s right I think we now need to know what time each clubs vote was submitted

Why would being told your vote didn't matter make you vote yes?

[kingjoey]

4 hours ago, BucksburnDandy said:

5 hours ago, Green Day said:

I wasn't aware Hearts had signed Tom English onto the payroll.........

He's always been a Granny Budge fanboy. Still, he's the sort of journalist sorely lacking in a world where too many just churn out clickbait nonsense.

Oh, come on. You’re simply making things up in your head with that comment.