Jump to content
Sinner-to-Saint

League Reconstruction 20/21 season

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

I know it's not hurtful, I just think you should use less of a scatter gun approach and think your trolls through a bit more.

It was impossible to fulfil both contracts (i.e. finish current season and start new contract in August) so there was also going to be a trade off in terms penalties incurred and getting income in.

It makes sense to breach the smaller contract that is almost dead in order to preserve the much larger prospective contract and then try and minimise the penalty through negotiations.

Agreed.

Based on the fact it’s not the league choosing not to play matches but government stepping in and preventing them from doing so it may even be the case that Sky can’t claim for losses.

If there’s a ‘Force Majeure’ clause in the current contract covering epidemics, pandemics, or government interventions then both parties could be relieved of their contractual obligations without penalty due to the circumstances being totally unforeseeable when the contract was drawn up. 

Even if not, the current circumstances could be seen as frustration, preventing one or both parties from fulfilling the obligations of the contract. I doubt a court would see the league failing to finish as entirely their fault and imposing financial penalties.

It may be the case that Sky already know they’re be unlikely to enforce any penalties and for the sake of goodwill and continuation of the next contract they’ve agreed not to push for it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Green Day said:

How and when?

Apparently every club should go 6 months without income, via matchdays or the final prize money amount, so we can play 8/10 games to end a season.

Instead of handing out prize money that will see clubs survive until August when they can restart the new season and not impact the TV deal at all, while also allowing clubs to downsize their squads heavily in the period inbetween.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, bennett said:

It could've been fitted in, the epl sides are managing but you already knew that. 

No, I really don't think it could've. It wasn't to do about just fitting it in it was about the ability of the clubs in the league as a whole (not just Celtic and Rangers) to deal with the economics of taking players off furlough, extending/ rolling contracts and also having government permission to resume training weeks before playing (itself impacting the clubs ability to then pay full wages).

I don't think you can even try to compare the situations North and South of the border as the economics are completely different.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EdinburghPar1975 said:

No, I really don't think it could've. It wasn't to do about just fitting it in it was about the ability of the clubs in the league as a whole (not just Celtic and Rangers) to deal with the economics of taking players off furlough, extending/ rolling contracts and also having government permission to resume training weeks before playing (itself impacting the clubs ability to then pay full wages).

I don't think you can even try to compare the situations North and South of the border as the economics are completely different.

I think they're the exact opposite to us, in fact.

For them, the penalty for not completing the season was too great a financial burden for them to take, hence the clamouring for it back. For us, we couldn't afford to not get prize money to teams by finishing the existing season and jeopardise the new season. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

I think they're the exact opposite to us, in fact.

For them, the penalty for not completing the season was too great a financial burden for them to take, hence the clamouring for it back. For us, we couldn't afford to not get prize money to teams by finishing the existing season and jeopardise the new season. 

Exactly, and whilst Bennet's assertion that;

17 minutes ago, bennett said:

the rush to finish the league absolutely stinks

..is to me absolutely rubbish and based on nothing other than a ridiculous attempt to think 9 in a row could be stopped, I completely agree it could have been handled and dealt with a lot better than it was.

As I've said before I have sympathy for all the teams relegated (but mostly Partick), but any reconstruction should be for the long term benefit of the game and not just Hearts and I just don't get that from the proposals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

Apparently every club should go 6 months without income, via matchdays or the final prize money amount, so we can play 8/10 games to end a season.

Instead of handing out prize money that will see clubs survive until August when they can restart the new season and not impact the TV deal at all, while also allowing clubs to downsize their squads heavily in the period inbetween.

Not to mention that the teams would need to hire players with the income they're not getting, since a pile of loan and contract expiries kicked in about 3 days ago. Either that or they could have 'easily' played football before the end of last month in defiance of government movement restrictions and the prevailing health advice. Some people may have died, but that's a chance that bennett was willing to take to resurrect Rangers' tiny chance of beating Celtic this year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Green Day said:

Hearts fans wont be boycotting away grounds.

They will see this as an opportunity to visit some grounds they have never seen   not seen for decades    not visited for a couple of seasons.

Same ones you loved so much you visited for 3 seasons😂😂😂😂

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aim Here said:

Not to mention that the teams would need to hire players with the income they're not getting, since a pile of loan and contract expiries kicked in about 3 days ago. Either that or they could have 'easily' played football before the end of last month in defiance of government movement restrictions and the prevailing health advice. Some people may have died, but that's a chance that bennett was willing to take to resurrect Rangers' tiny chance of beating Celtic this year.

I might have misread (and apologies if I have), but haven't Rangers deferred salaries as opposed to using furlough? I thought i'd read that all salaries would need paid up to date before going back to training/ playing. Given the wedge that some of those guys would be on I wouldn't imagine the board at Ibrox would be too keen on going anywhere near a pitch for a few months yet....regardless of the stance taken in the media

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

..Partick, Falkirk, Stranraer, Kelty/Bonnyrigg/Brora were barely a consideration.

Are we talking Hearts' approach to their failed attempts at keeping themselves in the top division? If so, I fully agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gorgie greatness said:

Same ones you loved so much you visited for 3 seasons😂😂😂😂

Before returning to the top league and finishing above your mob every season since.
 

Spoiler

8FC8C7F4-6E28-4374-BF90-8437D51A9697.jpeg.3f80b2579d4886650a246d268a1055c8.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, EdinburghPar1975 said:

As I've said before I have sympathy for all the teams relegated (but mostly Partick), but any reconstruction should be for the long term benefit of the game and not just Hearts and I just don't get that from the proposals.

When the call was made I had no beef with Celtic being crowned, they were comfortably ahead, but did think it was incredibly unfair on Partick, Hearts and Stranraer in that order as well as Brora/Kelty.

I genuinely expected the majority of Scottish football fans to be incensed at this injustice BUT in actual fact the vast majority of feedback on P&B and Twitter has been "Ha Ha we fucking hate Hearts...get doon!!".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, bennett said:

You'll throw out more insults but we all know the truth,  the rush to finish the league absolutely stinks.

1) Have any games in the UK gone ahead so far? No. Which suggests getting them played before now is not a reasonable assumption.

2) Have most teams had to let go players (or players intentionally deciding to leave) due to their contracts expiring? Yes. Which suggests getting them played now is not a reasonable option.

I hope that clears up any daft nonsense that we could have somehow finished the season. Calling it was the only option left, either null/void or promotion/relegation.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bennett said:

Then we could have started the following season but one team had to have their way and to hell with everyone else. 

Are you suggesting Dundee got a brown envelop?
Over 80% of clubs voted to end the season time to move on zippy.
Plus your manager is still in a job because of the early finish to the season.

Edited by wastecoatwilly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zing. said:

Before returning to the top league and finishing above your mob every season since.
 

  Hide contents

8FC8C7F4-6E28-4374-BF90-8437D51A9697.jpeg.3f80b2579d4886650a246d268a1055c8.jpeg

 

👍 you only got out after the big teams were promoted.  Have we still got the record points in the hardest diddy league there is ever likely to be😉 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Craig - I think worries about Killie's financial situation are clouding your otherwise logical thinking. The issue is not £1.5m versus £150m. That's a very deliberate misrepresentation you're making there.

Year's 2 onwards of the SKY deal will either be for normal football, or the whole game is goosed anyway - the biggest clubs most of all. Celtic's wage bill is £1m per week. The issue is/was starting year 1 on August 1st or risk the first £30m being renegotiated (and any personal bonuses vanishing) versus losing £1.5m for SKY's lost games + £5-10m given away with 5 years free sponsorship + £5m (?) potentially lost from BT + any compo due to the shafted teams.  Pushing the decision a certain way would be any Celtic supporters on the board because their overwhelming  concern was that absolutely nothing should jeopardise them being ready for starting Euro competition and the £20m or whatever that brings them. And some 9 in a row thing you might have heard of.

Hearts, Partick, Falkirk, Stranraer, Kelty/Bonnyrigg/Brora were barely a consideration.

I have no particular worries about Killie's financial situation. I can't imagine it's amazing, just like it won't be for any club, but we used the furlough scheme, and had lots of players out of contract this summer anyway. We also sold a player for £2m last summer and have a chairman who appears to be willing to put money in if need be.

I don't believe you are posting in good faith here whatsoever. You have repeatedly claimed (despite having no evidence for it) that you think Sky will be wanting to renegotiate the TV deal, even if the SPFL adhere to it to the letter. Now you are suggesting that if they do start the season on time it will be fine, and if they don't then they're only going to want to renegotiate the first year of it. I don't see why that would be the case - if the deal is breached then they would surely be entirely within their rights to rip up the whole thing. Obviously there would still be some TV deal, but there would be no guarantee it would be anything like the same value. You've also added in some conspiracy theory stuff about Celtic fans on the board, a line which you must be raging has got absolutely no traction, even from your own fans or Rangers fans, in the 300 previous times you've alluded to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Going back to James Anderson and his money.

I'm assuming the 'no strings attached' line is just in terms of not conditional on reconstruction and not in exchange for anything tangible (i.e. no repayment, no place on the board etc etc).

There must be some conditions attached surely to how the money is split between clubs, what it is spent on etc i.e. retaining administrative staff, Covid testing or other essentials. I'm not convinced Premiership clubs should see any of it either.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, The_Judge said:

I genuinely expected the majority of Scottish football fans to be incensed at this injustice BUT in actual fact the vast majority of feedback on P&B and Twitter has been "Ha Ha we fucking hate Hearts...get doon!!".

Sorry, I just don't agree that this is an injustice. It's a massively unfortunate way to have to end the season and as I said I have sympathy for any club impacted whether that be by relegation or promotion denied by a play off - i'd hate it if it was my team impacted in such a direct way - but it was, in my mind, the only way to finish the leagues. I'm actually all for reconstruction but it should be as part of an overall review of what is needed going forward and not for what would seem way to assist one of the larger teams in the country.

As for the feedback on P&B, Twitter etc. I think that's generally to be expected given the forums that they are. I would say that the majority of the pushback of this type is either due to rivalry, 'banter' or in a number of cases due to some Hearts fans showing a level of arrogance as to it being almost a 'right' to stay up and teams should be falling over themselves to help them.

I have no beef with Hearts (or any other team) but things teams need to be able to start looking at next season and how that'll work pretty quickly to help clubs survive. FWIW I think that they should be looking at getting talks on reconstruction, SPFL governance review etc. on the table for when the teams are playing again with crowds in the grounds and aim to have something in place for season 21/22...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

I have no particular worries about Killie's financial situation. I can't imagine it's amazing, just like it won't be for any club, but we used the furlough scheme, and had lots of players out of contract this summer anyway. We also sold a player for £2m last summer and have a chairman who appears to be willing to put money in if need be.

I don't believe you are posting in good faith here whatsoever. You have repeatedly claimed (despite having no evidence for it) that you think Sky will be wanting to renegotiate the TV deal, even if the SPFL adhere to it to the letter. Now you are suggesting that if they do start the season on time it will be fine, and if they don't then they're only going to want to renegotiate the first year of it. I don't see why that would be the case - if the deal is breached then they would surely be entirely within their rights to rip up the whole thing. Obviously there would still be some TV deal, but there would be no guarantee it would be anything like the same value. You've also added in some conspiracy theory stuff about Celtic fans on the board, a line which you must be raging has got absolutely no traction, even from your own fans or Rangers fans, in the 300 previous times you've alluded to it.

1. Good. So you don't deny that your £1.5m v £150m comparison was pish.

2. SKY are not the devil. They won't want to create havoc for the sake of it. But they will be under financial pressure and they will want a fair deal.  You think they  won't renegotiate. I say you're naive. Doncaster has just admitted they've taken £6.5m - £11.5m out of the SPFL for last quarter of last season (assuming league sponsorship is worth £1-2m pa). Wakey, wakey.

3. The stuff about Celtic supporters on the board isn't a wind-up. It's just an acknowledgement of human nature. Would be the same for any other team - although nobody else currently has huge dollops of Euro money built into their budgets. You think the Chairman, the lawyer and maybe 1 or 2 others wouldn't let their heart influence them?  Oh, Craig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doncaster hasn't "admitted" anything at all - I don't think he's commented on broadcasting rights once, certainly not that I've seen. And I would expect them to be repaid money for last season given that last season was unable to be played finish - the total TV deal was worth something like £18m a year, so if you're not getting a chunk of what you paid for then you're going to be refunded for that. Given the ban of 3 months and counting on football being played in this country, it would be impossible for the SPFL not to breach either last season's TV contract or the upcoming five-year TV contract.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pet Jeden in pulling things out of his arse and nominating them as his 'hill to die on for the day' shocker.

Share this post


Link to post
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...