Coronavirus and the Scottish Championship

[The DA]

1 minute ago, HMIP said:

Haven’t you heard?  They’re fighting tooth and nail to make Scottish football the best version of itself it can be.  They’re disguising this virtue through the prism of utter incompetence so it’s easy to miss.

They'd do that better by learning to play football properly.

[Dunning1874]

24 minutes ago, Fifespud said:

There’s another statement -

Dundee FC’s vote: Because of the situation detailed above, it was our intention (as the world has seen through the disappointing and regrettable actions of two championship clubs) to vote ‘no’ on the proposed resolution. Despite being electronically submitted, for whatever reason, our vote did not reach the centre (SPFL.) We were not aware of that, however, until the SPFL published the ‘results’ of an incomplete vote and it was shown that Dundee FC’s vote was not received. This raised an immediate red flag for us; not only was our vote missing, but we discovered that at least two Premiership clubs had modified their position from the understanding we had the day prior. It was then that we decided to put our foot on the ball and pause. We conveyed that decision to the centre and ceased taking calls on the subject. We needed time to develop a clearer DFC view on the situation.

Whilst it is not our responsibility to take the lead on solutions for the league (indeed, we believe this is the role of the SPFL), it is our duty to attempt to ensure that the future of Scottish Football remains promising for all the clubs. To that end, we have we have worked tirelessly to achieve solutions to help those who were being disadvantaged and sought ways to help them. We have discussed options with a variety of member clubs to show solidarity to the clubs most negatively impacted by the SPFL proposal. Relegated clubs must have financial assistance to help soften the landing so they can begin the next season on more equitable footing. Through our discussions it appears that there is an appetite to provide various forms of support from other member clubs if these clubs are in fact relegated. Further details of these acts of kindness and solidarity will be worked out amongst the member clubs. 

So among the word salad, the bolded bit there coming after some waffle about reconstruction being an aim in earlier paragraphs would suggest that they believed they had a workable reconstruction plan and a No vote rather than a Yes vote would lead to it. Then Premiership clubs they expected to vote No having previously been in agreement with their reconstruction plan had actually voted Yes and didn't agree with their aim for reconstruction? Which makes their suggestion of a working group to continue to plan reconstruction a long shot for coming up with something acceptable when it needs 11 of the 12 Premiership clubs to back it, and we know Rangers won't.

Which is probably why they're talking about the possibility of clubs being relegated anyway, and financial assistance for them - so accepting relegation has to happen if reconstruction doesn't but with some kind of parachute payments for Hearts, Partick and Stranraer? Good luck finding the money for that.

[Granny Danger]

Why don’t Dundee just cast there vote for no?  It would compel the SPFL to reconsider the matter.

By simply not voting and holding the process up they will pissing off a lot of other clubs.  The SPFL is a small community, I imagine there will be occasions in the future where they will need allies who might get be hard to come by.

[DA Baracus]

Surely the Dundee fans who are claiming that Dundee are genuinely trying to help Scottish football and not acting in their own interests are at it?

Not a criticism of Dundee; every club is doing it, and at this time why shouldn't every club be looking out for itself?

This is completely the wrong time to be discussing reconstruction because so many clubs are in such a vulnerable position and not a strong negotiating one. Far too many concessions can be made by struggling clubs that will l, as always, only favour certain teams and weaken others. The much needed cash can and will be used to get too many to agree to some complete shite that is utterly detrimental to the game as a whole but beneficial to a select, greedy and short sighted few.

[vikingTON]

5 minutes ago, Dunning1874 said:

Which is probably why they're talking about the possibility of clubs being relegated anyway, and financial assistance for them - so accepting relegation has to happen if reconstruction doesn't but with some kind of parachute payments for Hearts, Partick and Stranraer? Good luck finding the money for that.

You could equalise the final payments instead of giving 1st significantly more than 10th or 12th respectively. It's not an abhorrent proposal but I'm not convinced that it would be win the support of over 75% of clubs: there are far more losers under that plan than the original one.

Edited April 15, 2020 by vikingTON

[Derry Alli]

9 minutes ago, HMIP said:

For behaving in a dishonest and opportunistic manner that is achieving nothing then trying to shift the blame elsewhere.  These deranged statements read like they came from the desk of Donald Trump.

Who are the shifting the blame to? 

They've realised, through no fault of their own, that they have an excellent opportunity to discuss a change in Scottish Football. They are exercising their right to take as long as is permitted to do so. They should be applauded at every ground they grace and Nelms given a place on the new year's honours list. 

[rb123!]

10 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

To me, it reads as: Reconstruction needs to be involved and in place for next season in order for us to vote yes. If not, we vote no.

Aside from Rangers, who else sees a reason to vote against this? I'm struggling with your constant claims of this.

But regardless of whatever is agreed between the SPFL and Dundee a proposal on any form of reconstruction would have to be voted on by the clubs, Dundee and the SPFL can't just agree between them that it'll change to a 14 top tier.

Plus a 14 top tier i would imagine would result in 2 automatic relegation spots and one relegation play off spot. The likes of Hamilton and St Mirren wouldn't vote for that IMO because it would increase their chances of relegation to the championship.

[RossBFaeDundee]

Just now, DA Baracus said:

Surely the Dundee fans who are claiming that Dundee are genuinely trying to help Scottish football and not acting in their own interests are at it?

Not a criticism of Dundee; every club is doing it, and at this time why shouldn't every club be looking out for itself?

This is completely the wrong time to be discussing reconstruction because so many clubs are in such a vulnerable position and not a strong negotiating one. Far too many concessions can be made by struggling clubs that will l, as always, only favour certain teams and weaken others. The much needed cash can and will be used to get too many to agree to some complete shite that is utterly detrimental to the game as a whole but beneficial to a select, greedy and short sighted few.

Reconstruction benefits Dundee in both the short and long term. This is factual. If it didn't, Dundee would not be fighting for it.

Reconstruction, however, also benefits the vast majority of Scottish football teams. I completely disagree with you on timing, I think it's the perfect time, particularly in terms of stopping teams being punished when they would not have necessarily deserved it due to the pandemic.

[R.R.FC]

6 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

To me, it reads as: Reconstruction needs to be involved and in place for next season in order for us to vote yes. If not, we vote no.

How can they ensure that though? Surely Dundee would need to say yes to this proposal first? Then the reconstruction vote could take place once they have decided what type of reconstruction will be proposed. They can agree concrete plans for a reconstruction vote before submitting their yes vote but they can’t agree the outcome.

I don’t think there is anything to stop teams telling Dundee they will vote in favour of reconstruction just to get the current proposal through. Once that is through teams can vote whatever way they want in the reconstruction vote surely? Last weeks vote shows people don’t always vote they way you think they will or even the way they have initially said.

[DA Baracus]

1 minute ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Reconstruction benefits Dundee in both the short and long term. This is factual. If it didn't, Dundee would not be fighting for it.

Reconstruction, however, also benefits the vast majority of Scottish football teams. I completely disagree with you on timing, I think it's the perfect time, particularly in terms of stopping teams being punished when they would not have necessarily deserved it due to the pandemic.

Depends what the the reconstruction is. Many times in the past reconstruction has only benefited the select few and been detrimental to many.

Also I must disagree with the timing. For the reasons I outlined the timing is completely wrong.

[Derry Alli]

Dundee United fans last week : HAHAHA DUNDEE NEED THE MONEY BEGGING BOWL OOT HAHAHA.

Dundee United fans this week, after their owner is cap in hand to fans groups asking for donations : WHY DON'T DUNDEE JUST VOTE NO WE NEED TO GET THIS SORTED.

Jinkies. 

 

[UpInTheAyr]

18 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

We're fighting tooth and nail to help Scottish football be the best version it can be, whatever the cost.

[RossBFaeDundee]

Just now, R.R.FC said:

How can they ensure that though? Surely Dundee would need to say yes to this proposal first? Then the reconstruction vote could take place once they have decided what type of reconstruction will be proposed. They can agree concrete plans for a reconstruction vote before submitting their yes vote but they can’t agree the outcome.

I don’t think there is anything to stop teams telling Dundee they will vote in favour of reconstruction just to get the current proposal through. Once that is through teams can vote whatever way they want in the reconstruction vote surely? Last weeks vote shows people don’t always vote they way you think they will or even the way they have initially said.

The way I read the statement was that discussions had already begun regarding serious looks into reconstruction, and the media have reported that the SPFL seem to now be more inclined. Obviously this is conjecture, but I believe that the teams would have been contacted regarding Dundee's proposal, as we definitely didn't hear them before the SPFL and the relevant clubs hopefully. Hopefully they realise the benefit it would have on Scottish football, but we'll just have to wait and see how far this proposal goes.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Yeah, but reading that it means that while agreement may not be revoked, no such limit applies to disagreement. So you can say no as many times as you like, so long as you say yes once in that period...

Which is the point some don't get.

[Gibby82]

“Glasgow Giants”

 

[vikingTON]

 

10 minutes ago, RossBFaeDundee said:

Reconstruction benefits Dundee in both the short and long term. This is factual. If it didn't, Dundee would not be fighting for it.

Reconstruction, however, also benefits the vast majority of Scottish football teams. I completely disagree with you on timing, I think it's the perfect time, particularly in terms of stopping teams being punished when they would not have necessarily deserved it due to the pandemic.

How on earth is it 'perfect timing' to add reconstruction arguments to a tedious enough debate, all while the economy is tanking, clubs have had no gate income for weeks and the league is still without a sponsor from 20/21 onwards? One that will require an 11-1 vote in the top flight just to gain approval?

The reality is that if there was a commonly held view on restructuring the leagues then it will have been done by now: there isn't. You can bet any money that the Old Firm will resurrect their Colts idea and insist that this option becomes the primary one on the table; there is also little appetite from top flight clubs to just open up their division to 14 teams or more while getting less in return. Their interests are completely different to Championship clubs, as are those of the bigger clubs from the seaside league outfits. There is no chance of getting through that logjam while dealing with shrieking brat clubs banging on about titles and relegations and 'fairness' at the same time.

Call the leagues first, distribute outstanding funds and then set up a working body to look at reconstruction is the only sane way forward here.

Edited April 15, 2020 by vikingTON

[Hammer Jag]

Just liquidate Dundee now, please.

[RossBFaeDundee]

2 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

Depends what the the reconstruction is. Many times in the past reconstruction has only benefited the select few and been detrimental to many.

Also I must disagree with the timing. For the reasons I outlined the timing is completely wrong.

It'll most likely be 14-10-10-10. Two teams up to the Prem, Championship, League One and League Two, and teams angry about premature relegations will be safe. I see this having a benefit for all personally, including Dundee both in the short-term and the long-term.

I get the concerns on timing, but I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree on that one.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Does that mean if there were sufficient no votes to prevent the resolution from being passed they’d need to wait the full 28 days before they could declare it because any of the no votes could be changed in that period?  So if Dundee vote no this week, we still won’t know the outcome until the 28 days are up?

Certainly my understanding of it.

The resolution has not passed but these who do not support it can change their minds.

There is no such thing as the resolution falling here.

[DeeTillEhDeh]

Daft question perhaps... 

Would it not be possible for the SPFL to strike down this resolution, and ask for a vote on a new, almost exactly the same resolution, but with a hard and fast deadline? 

It would shut all this down quite quickly. 

You would need 2 seperate votes.

 

One to suspend the existing 28 day deadline.

 

A second of that passes could then be held.

 

I assume the same %s would be required as before for the deadline to be suspended.