Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, Green Day said:

So the lower league clubs need to vote for less money.

Not having a go at you by the way, but do we really see that passing the vote in the current climate?

Adding 2 to 42 will be nothing compared to Budge's pals millions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, JamesM82 said:

Ian Murray MP was sounding off in the papers this morning, saying that "all the teams in a promotion place [automatic or playoffs] should be promoted, and nobody demoted". Obviously forgetting that 3rd and 4th are also playoff places, which mean that he would have to put Dundee and Ayr in the Premiership as well.

More like he's totally ignorant as to how it works.

4 hours ago, EdinburghPar1975 said:

No trolling intended at all but would Somerset Park be allowed to hold top level league games? I've not been in years but i'd have thought they may have to limit attendance if there was any chance at all of even going up via a play off?

Also, following the vote to end the season have Hearts 'resigned' their share at the top table and been accepted into the Championship yet? If it has happened, wouldn't Hearts currently be in one of the lower leagues that needed to sort themselves out? If so then go for the 14 with Hearts staying down and ICT and Dundee coming up...Hearts can slum it with the rest of us and work out what we should do...

They got rid of the horrendous all seater rule. Ground rules are now about meeting safety standards and things like floodlights being to a certain standard etc.

3 hours ago, Wilbur said:

When are the first ties of the preliminary rounds for 2021-22 Scottish Cup scheduled to be played ? As long as it is possible (Covid-19 permitting) to complete the three outstanding matches prior to the commencement of the upcoming season's tournament then I don't see any reason not to go ahead. 

Why not? None of the 4 semi final teams will need to play in the 20/21 tournament until January at the earliest, possibly later depending on what a potential schedule might look like.

3 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

Anderson's £4m is now around £2m apparently:

£50,000 each. What a game changer.

£50k is a nice gesture, and many lower league clubs would gladly take it, but it solves precisely zero of the issues of playing games in empty stadiums (i.e it isn't financial viable).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, DA Baracus said:

More like he's totally ignorant as to how it works.

They got rid of the horrendous all seater rule. Ground rules are now about meeting safety standards and things like floodlights being to a certain standard etc.

Why not? None of the 4 semi final teams will need to play in the 20/21 tournament until January at the earliest, possibly later depending on what a potential schedule might look like.

£50k is a nice gesture, and many lower league clubs would gladly take it, but it solves precisely zero of the issues of playing games in empty stadiums (i.e it isn't financial viable).

And Peterhead, Clyde and Forfar will lose even more revenue if 14 is replicated in L1and L2. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Samsonite said:

Can see this going through but with 14/10/10/10 will keep the majority of lower league teams happy, especially the L1 teams who are getting “relegated” in the 14/14/14 set up.

 

Has that been mentioned? Solves most of the immediate problems if a bit boring.

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

But the £9m that was offered for ending the leagues - that was fine, eh?

tbf your lot are voting against anything that isn't aimed at inflicting pain on us. Quite right too. That's your job. 

The end of the league prize money , yes that was fine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ludo*1 said:

Who had mentioned it was between 1 and 2 million until that article?

The media types were saying it'd be well over 4m as has been stated in the posts above.

Ann Budge mentioned a seven figure sum.   

The media types need to create click-bait.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Mr. X said:

Ann Budge mentioned a seven figure sum.   

The media types need to create click-bait.

So you were just guessing at between 1 and 2million then? Since that wasn't said anywhere.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, djchapsticks said:

Interesting. Where are you pulling £10m from? 

Bear in mind, you said last week that Falkirk were due a 7 figure compensation fund from the SPFL for not going up to the championship and I asked you to show your working on that wee doozy - which you conveniently ignored. 

So go on, where are you getting £10m compensation from? BBC Sport at reporting it as £1.5m refunded and spread over 5 years. 

Surely you wouldn't just pull numbers out your arse. 

+ 5 years free sponsorship of SPFL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 02/06/2020 at 09:41, Widge said:

As RandomGuy has said whilst you're probably correct in that we benefited from it more this season, it was simply a trial and not something we've been doing previously or have any requirement to do to survive or make enough money. Merely by doing it we profit a little more from it and that can help fund new growth at the club.

The irony is that a resurgent Dundee United will bring far more fans to the likes of Perth, Aberdeen and probably plenty of other grounds than Hearts did for the last few seasons. There used to be a time where Hearts got both stands behind the goal in Perth (roughly 3500 seats) now they struggle to generate a 4 figure attendance, which puts them roughly at the same level of fans as Kilmarnock and Aberdeen, who we don't "need" to continue operating. The notion that this "maroon" pound is anything even worth taking note of is laughable, as is the notion from some fans that other teams in Scotland need Hearts in order to survive!

laugh lol GIF

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Ludo*1 said:

So you were just guessing at between 1 and 2million then? Since that wasn't said anywhere.

 The only official figure I heard was 'seven figure sum'.  I then heard loads of media types giving figures ranging from 1 million to 4 million.  

The believable figure as far as I was concerned was between 1 and 2 million.  If others chose to believe the 4 million figure then that's entirely up to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Mr. X said:

 The only official figure I heard was 'seven figure sum'.  I then heard loads of media types giving figures ranging from 1 million to 4 million.  

The believable figure as far as I was concerned was between 1 and 2 million.  If others chose to believe the 4 million figure then that's entirely up to them.

 "Good morning, Sytner, Bentley Edinburgh. How may I help you?

Aye, it's Ken Ferguson, Chairman o' Brechin City, the fitba' team. I ordered a motor yisterday...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, craigkillie said:

Again, I don't think any of your argument here is in good faith, which makes it hard for me to engage with.

You are guessing when the paper would have been drafted, and have absolutely no idea.

Doncaster was involved with the committee relating to commercial deals as posted above, and delegated this to a large reconstruction committee - no doubt you'd have been equally outraged if he had decided to take control of this himself from the outset.

The £9m "sweetener" was the clubs' money, which they were always going to get at some point, you're talking as though they magicked it up out of thin air ahead of this vote.

Even Rangers' most pessimistic estimate said that the total liability to broadcasters from last season being stopped would be £10m, that included both broadcasters. Now you've decided that it was actually £10m to Sky (out of a deal that was worth £18/19m across both broadcasters, not £25m as you stated), even though several newspaper reports today have suggested it was reduced to £1.5m, to be paid back over the five years of the TV deal.

Good faith - you maybe don't like what I say. But it is in good faith.

Board Papers - I'm sure plenty of people on P&B can tell you that board papers, for big decisions that could swing either way, don't get rustled up the day before.

£9m sweetener - wasn't magicked up. But its welding to the "Call it" decision was sorcery

£10m to SKY - it's probably even worse than that. Link below says Ladbrokes deal was £2m pa. 5 years = £10m and it's been chucked at SKY to avoid a bigger cash repayment now?  So £11.5m gone. And that's out of just £18/19m you say? For missing out on just the last 20% of the season? And you don't think BCD is going to see SKY find a way to renegotiate the £25m contract from 1st August? No wonder the SPFL is showing some interest in James Anderson's relatively small  £2m or £4m or whatever it is. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/49361657

Edited by Pet Jeden
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...