dave.j Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I think we can safely say they bring more to the Scottish football table than your hilariously shite junior side Dougie Rae brings many laughs to the game. Spend some time in their hospitality suites. It's worth it. But they aren't on a par with Rangers when it comes to giggles. Rangers truly are a joke of a club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Fitlike Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 The pride they have in their phoenix club is quite touching. Similar to the supporters of Hereford FC, Chester FC, Aldershot FC, Gretna 2008 FC, Accrington Stanley FC. The memories and heritage of the previous defunct clubs is something to be treasured as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 So there we have it. You are quite happy for Rangers supporters to be messed around with kick off times and having to travel here there and everywhere on Sunday morning and Friday nights. If you want an equal share of the money you should have your share of the inconvenience. What are you on about? I don't think Rangers need to be mucked around all the time at all. I'm just saying that there need be no direct link between which clubs are screened and how money is distributed. I mean it. How would you like professional football in this country to work? Should Rangers and Celtic have fifteen, twenty times the income of rivals? What sort of imbalance would create the kind of competitions that you'd like to watch Bob? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 tupe applies any time a new company takes over or buys assets of another company and employees have the right to choose if they want to transfer over, that means according to you no business had ever transferred over because employees always have this right - utter bollocks from you as usual - backed up with zero evidence as usual as for your other point it would take another administration event for king to be able to do that - so two points of absolute horseshit from you Yes, that's the same. In case you'd not spotted it, we're all free to go and work for someone else whenever we fancy it without money changing hands. Footballers have different terms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Big stormin Norman sorted oot that tupe business. All hail Norman and his secret meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
forever_blue Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Actually, Orclet, the TUPE issue was addressed in an actual court. You know, where the Law decides the outcome, not vested interests led by someone who was implicated in the whole EBT scam. Guess how that went for the "same club" argument? Really, really, not a line you want to pursue if you don't want to see your carefully-constructed tower of denial crumbling before your very eyes. Who did yeez get in the next round of the cup mate Oh that's right it was morton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shull Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 THE BRAND SPANKING NEW BLUE BIGOTS FC 2012 Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thereisalight.. Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Honestly can't believe 4 years on this old club/new club shit is still being discussed. Get over it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Honestly can't believe 4 years on this old club/new club shit is still being discussed. Get over it. Leave nacho alone. He can't help it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 What are you on about? I don't think Rangers need to be mucked around all the time at all. I'm just saying that there need be no direct link between which clubs are screened and how money is distributed. So how should TV money be distributed and why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 So how should TV money be distributed and why?I think it should be distributed across all 42 clubs equally as a means of spreading the wealth generated by the game.However, I recognise that such a thing is unlikely in this day and age, which is a shame. In the absence of this, I accept the logic of giving it in terms of prize money, although I've reservations about giving the most successful sides yet more money as this is likely to be self fulfilling in terms of dictating where teams finish, which makes things less competitive, more predictable and therefore less interesting. I welcome the changes which have happened recently, which have largely been fuelled by the Rangers saga. The SPL was a disgusting body and I'm glad that the contract now extends over the entire SPFL. Part of what made the old deal so hideous was that it gave similarly large amounts to the clubs finishing first and second, before there was a huge drop to that offered to the 3rd placed team. The logic of this arrangement is not difficult to read. It also just involved twelve clubs, so it's good that the prizes on offer have been somewhat ironed out. What would you like to see? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 The pride they have in their phoenix club is quite touching. Similar to the supporters of Hereford FC, Chester FC, Aldershot FC, Gretna 2008 FC, Accrington Stanley FC. The memories and heritage of the previous defunct clubs is something to be treasured as well. Parma and Timişoara are two clubs which show how things are done since the financial fair play rulings came into force. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.S.D._Parma_Calcio_1913 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FC_Politehnica_Timi%C8%99oara Anything used as precedence in rhetoric prior to the 2011/12 season is moot. The UEFA view on the FFP rules mean that any club reforming as a new club after insolvency have a break in their historical timeline as the case of Timişoara vs UEFA at the Court of Arbitration for Sport showed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 TV money should go to clubs on a per game basis, a higher amount for the home club and lower for the away club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkey Tennis Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 TV money should go to clubs on a per game basis, a higher amount for the home club and lower for the away club. Do you honestly want it to be wildly lopsided in terms of the resources clubs can call on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Do you honestly want it to be wildly lopsided in terms of the resources clubs can call on? Seeing as most of our games are away games, I'm clearly putting others first and hoping that others benefit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave.j Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Seeing as most of our games are away games, I'm clearly putting others first and hoping that others benefit. I'd rather every team got exactly the same regardless of finishing position. TV money, sponsorship the lot. Split evenly amongst every team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Kincardine Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 What would you like to see? Sponsorship money should be evenly distributed. We're one league organisation so should have the same share. Most of the TV money should also be evenly distributed but I'd reserve a small premium for clubs who have games broadcast to be used to upgrade press/TV facilities. The camera angles from some grounds are appalling - and some telly money should be used to improve this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonedsailor Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 Sponsorship money should be evenly distributed. We're one league organisation so should have the same share. Most of the TV money should also be evenly distributed but I'd reserve a small premium for clubs who have games broadcast to be used to upgrade press/TV facilities. The camera angles from some grounds are appalling - and some telly money should be used to improve this. Good post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobWilliamson Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I'd rather every team got exactly the same regardless of finishing position. TV money, sponsorship the lot. Split evenly amongst every team. I agree with this but the TV companies should be showing more than just Rangers and Celtic away games. It is our supporters that are inconvenienced more than any other. There should be a limit on how many times they can show each club Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bennett Posted February 18, 2016 Share Posted February 18, 2016 I'd rather every team got exactly the same regardless of finishing position. TV money, sponsorship the lot. Split evenly amongst every team. If a team has a home game on tv then crowds tend to drop, TV money would cover that shortfall. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.