Jump to content

What's the most "Tin Pot" thing you've seen in the SPFL


Recommended Posts

46 minutes ago, steelmen said:


Course they will. It all goes into the one (small) pot and divided up between the clubs. With them coming second they will get a larger share than most.

Let’s say they win the league next year, will they raise their own custom flag again? Will the they be called cinch premiership champions?

The spfl have fcuked this royally.

Doubt Cinch is too bothered tbh, the more they dig their heels in and refuse to advertise Cinch at Ibrox, the more publicity for Cinch, win, win for Cinch.  Otherwise yeah it could have got messy for the SPFL.

Btw i couldn't even tell you who Sevco's own sponsor and rival to Cinch is, and i'm prob not the only one, so again Cinch has come out the winner there.

Edited by LIVIFOREVER
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, kingjoey said:

It can’t get much more tin pot than having one of your clubs not adhering to the sponsorship of the entire league because they’re a bunch of bully boys. F*ck*ng unbelievable.

 

21 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

Rangers should get nothing from this deal.

 

33 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

They get a payout for not participating in the sponsorship deal? Seriously?

 

:lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

 

 

:lol:

Your club are a joke and are continually allowed to do whatever they like because the football authorities are terrified of the set of bullies that run the despicable institution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, LIVIFOREVER said:

Doubt Cinch is too bothered tbh, the more they dig their heels in and refuse to advertise Cinch at Ibrox, the more publicity for Cinch, win, win for Cinch.  Otherwise yeah it could have got messy for the SPFL.

Btw i couldn't even tell you who Sevco's own sponsor and rival to Cinch is, and i'm prob not the only one, so again Cinch has come out the winner there.

You’re probably right, but my gripe is that Rangers are apparently going to benefit from a sponsorship that they have gone out of their way to avoid like the plague.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, kingjoey said:

Your club are a joke and are continually allowed to do whatever they like because the football authorities are terrified of the set of bullies that run the despicable institution.

This is all on Doncaster. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, kingjoey said:

You’re probably right, but my gripe is that Rangers are apparently going to benefit from a sponsorship that they have gone out of their way to avoid like the plague.

Yeah they've been absolute c***s refusing to advertise Cinch and still getting paid, but it's hilariously and ironic that by doing so they've actually given Cinch more advertising than they'd ever have got had Sevco just gone along with advertising them in the first place.

Sevco will see it as a big win getting their own way, but in reality the SPFL haven't really lost anything money wise, and Cinch is the clear winners from all the continuing publicity over it all.

If i was a future sponsor i'd be looking at how they could upset one of the arse cheeks so they'd refuse to put up the sponsors signs, seeing how well it has worked out for Cinch.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only losers in this are the rest of the league. 

Yes, we’ve managed to retain the agreed sponsorship from cinch but as has been alluded the existing deal is a bit shit. 

Cinch have had more exposure but this certainly won’t be encouraging them to increase the deal or even renew. Any potential sponsor either won’t be arsed dealing with a league that has a member actively out to sabotage its chief exec, or worse still they might see sponsoring Celtic or rangers directly as it would be easier. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dons_1988 said:

The only losers in this are the rest of the league. 

Yes, we’ve managed to retain the agreed sponsorship from cinch but as has been alluded the existing deal is a bit shit. 

Cinch have had more exposure but this certainly won’t be encouraging them to increase the deal or even renew. Any potential sponsor either won’t be arsed dealing with a league that has a member actively out to sabotage its chief exec, or worse still they might see sponsoring Celtic or rangers directly as it would be easier. 

 

Although the rest of the league can take solace from the notion that this can only hasten Doncaster’s eventual departure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, topcat(The most tip top) said:

Although the rest of the league can take solace from the notion that this can only hasten Doncaster’s eventual departure 

True, but this is essentially the end game for rangers here. Create the image that Doncaster is an active obstacle to investment to encourage the rest to oust him. 

The result may be a good thing but it’s a dangerous precedent in terms of the method. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

True, but this is essentially the end game for rangers here. Create the image that Doncaster is an active obstacle to investment to encourage the rest to oust him. 

The result may be a good thing but it’s a dangerous precedent in terms of the method. 

 

2 hours ago, Dons_1988 said:

The only losers in this are the rest of the league. 

Yes, we’ve managed to retain the agreed sponsorship from cinch but as has been alluded the existing deal is a bit shit. 

Cinch have had more exposure but this certainly won’t be encouraging them to increase the deal or even renew. Any potential sponsor either won’t be arsed dealing with a league that has a member actively out to sabotage its chief exec, or worse still they might see sponsoring Celtic or rangers directly as it would be easier. 

 

 

Doncaster paid an agency £500k to get the "shit" deal.

 

Despite his massive wages, he is an obstacle to proper investment and thought that he could just ignore the SPFLs rules.

 

It could have been worked out fairly amicably but Neil knew best. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

 

Doncaster paid an agency £500k to get the "shit" deal.

 

Despite his massive wages, he is an obstacle to proper investment and thought that he could just ignore the SPFLs rules.

 

It could have been worked out fairly amicably but Neil knew best. 

 

You won’t have any argument from me that Doncaster is poor at his job. 

That doesn’t make rangers come out of this looking good or make actively sabotaging him to get him out the right thing to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

You won’t have any argument from me that Doncaster is poor at his job. 

That doesn’t make rangers come out of this looking good or make actively sabotaging him to get him out the right thing to do. 

He sabotaged himself. 

 

Rangers informed him that they had a serious contractual issue with the deal that he paid £500k for and it would need to be worked out. Neil arrogantly went ahead with it anyway. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jacky1990 said:

Surely every club that has a sponsorship with a betting company, including Rangers, would have had a clash when the league was sponsored by Ladbrokes.

If they wont advertise, they shouldnt get the prize money cinch provides.

I don't know, the guys company has been on the back pages periodically for a year now. Free advertising with added bonus of looking properly staunch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, bennett said:

He sabotaged himself. 

 

Rangers informed him that they had a serious contractual issue with the deal that he paid £500k for and it would need to be worked out. Neil arrogantly went ahead with it anyway. 

 

Doncaster bad = rangers good!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, kingjoey said:

Rangers should get nothing from this deal.

Maybe they aren't.  Perhaps the lack of an increase in the value of the deal- essentially a drop given the level of inflation at the moment - is because Rangers are getting a smaller cut?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

You won’t have any argument from me that Doncaster is poor at his job. 

That doesn’t make rangers come out of this looking good or make actively sabotaging him to get him out the right thing to do. 

Doncaster's job is to take the flak for the clubs. He's brilliant at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bennett said:

He sabotaged himself. 

 

Rangers informed him that they had a serious contractual issue with the deal that he paid £500k for and it would need to be worked out. Neil arrogantly went ahead with it anyway. 

 

whilst technically true, the fact that Rangers refused to show him the contract doesn't help.

Doncaster should have been shown the door a long time ago, he has been extremely poor at his job but he hasn't been helped by 1 club undermining him publicly at every opportunity. The whole Parks' wanting an apology can get in the sea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

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.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...