Jump to content

Conference League Good Guys List


Ray Patterson

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Brazilianlex said:

The silence from SPFL Clubs is deafening. Looks like a 3 line whip to say nothing until the AGM.

Shameful from the SPFL clubs, but many of them are offering lower rate season ticket renewals presently, which they may think is reason enough to keep quiet.

3 hours ago, welshbairn said:

I haven't heard anyone on Sportsound or Sportscene mention it either.

Many pundits on these programmes have a past with OF clubs, they know some supporters hold strong views on the subject and have possibly been told to avoid the topic. Also, by mentioning the proposals, they may awaken supporters who don't have much idea of the SFA/SPFL scheme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Dundee Hibernian said:

 

Many pundits on these programmes have a past with OF clubs, they know some supporters hold strong views on the subject and have possibly been told to avoid the topic. Also, by mentioning the proposals, they may awaken supporters who don't have much idea of the SFA/SPFL scheme.

I think Stuart Cosgrave's the only broadcasting pundit to mention it.

https://www.thenational.scot/sport/opinion/23505797.colt-teams-row-symptom-scottish-footballs-avarice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the Highland League itself has concerns based on a statement issued by its secretary, John Campbell, following a meeting of its League Management Committee.

“As has been publicised, members of the League Management Committee from the Breedon Scottish Highland Football League (SHFL) met in Lossiemouth last night (Thursday 18 May) to discuss the resolution on the Conference League, submitted by the Scottish Football Association in their papers for the up and coming AGM on 6 June 2023.

“Throughout all discussions held in relation to the Conference League, the SHFL has maintained a stance that they wished to protect the league moving forward at all costs and also expressed disappointment that time was not made to go for wider consultation with spectators, as the views of the fans are paramount to all within the SHFL.

“The vote at the Scottish Football Association AGM on 6 June 2023 will allow each club, as a full member of the SFA, the right to cast a vote.

“Both the Aberdeenshire FA and the North of Scotland FA (which all SHFL clubs are affiliated to) have the right to vote, unlike the SHFL, as an affiliated league, who although are invited to attend, have no right to vote.

“As with many things in life, opinions are varied and the SHFL wish to make clear that all member clubs have the freedom to express their views when voting, taking into consideration the views of the club, their supporters and the direction they wish to travel.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Footballfirst said:

Looks like the Highland League itself has concerns based on a statement issued by its secretary, John Campbell, following a meeting of its League Management Committee.

“As has been publicised, members of the League Management Committee from the Breedon Scottish Highland Football League (SHFL) met in Lossiemouth last night (Thursday 18 May) to discuss the resolution on the Conference League, submitted by the Scottish Football Association in their papers for the up and coming AGM on 6 June 2023.

“Throughout all discussions held in relation to the Conference League, the SHFL has maintained a stance that they wished to protect the league moving forward at all costs and also expressed disappointment that time was not made to go for wider consultation with spectators, as the views of the fans are paramount to all within the SHFL.

“The vote at the Scottish Football Association AGM on 6 June 2023 will allow each club, as a full member of the SFA, the right to cast a vote.

“Both the Aberdeenshire FA and the North of Scotland FA (which all SHFL clubs are affiliated to) have the right to vote, unlike the SHFL, as an affiliated league, who although are invited to attend, have no right to vote.

“As with many things in life, opinions are varied and the SHFL wish to make clear that all member clubs have the freedom to express their views when voting, taking into consideration the views of the club, their supporters and the direction they wish to travel.”

 

They're not actually saying they're against the Conference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Burnieman said:

They're not actually saying they're against the Conference.

The can't tell clubs which way to vote, but my reading of elements of the statement "protect the league moving forward at all costs" and "the views of the fans are paramount" suggests that they are against it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

The can't tell clubs which way to vote, but my reading of elements of the statement "protect the league moving forward at all costs" and "the views of the fans are paramount" suggests that they are against it.

They can recommend, which the tier 6 leagues have done. Mind you it's better than the silence from the LL.

Edited by Burnieman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 19/05/2023 at 13:54, Footballfirst said:

“Both the Aberdeenshire FA and the North of Scotland FA (which all SHFL clubs are affiliated to) have the right to vote, unlike the SHFL, as an affiliated league, who although are invited to attend, have no right to vote

Forgot those FAs, assuming they have a vote as well - is this a definitive list of those allowed to vote?

  • 42 SPFL clubs
  • 18 Highland and 16 Lowland clubs
  • 16 tier 6 clubs licensed before the 2019 AGM (p62 of the handbook)? WOS - Girvan, Glasgow Uni, Threave, SOS - Newton Stewart, St Cuthbert W, Wigtown & B, NCL - FW and Golspie, EOS - Burntisland, Coldstream, Hawick, Linlithgow, LTHV, Preston, VOL, WW
  • All 10 affiliated associations listed on page 48 of the SFA handbook? i.e. the following FAs: Aberdeen, EOS, Fife, Forfarshire, Glasgow, North, Southern Countries, Stirlingshire, West, Wigtown
  • All 7 national associations on p49? i.e. Amateur, Junior, Para, Schools, Welfare, Womens, Youth
  • Any others?

That means a total of 109 voters? 

Edited by Ginaro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't help but think that Brora's blowhard executive shouldn't have publicly sooked the B team/Conference boaby, before these 'full facts' were disclosed.

But a potential, humiliating reverse ferret is better than digging a deeper hole for themselves. Quite a few then SFL clubs (including Morton) also had to be jolted into line by the fanbase when Rangers died. 

Edited by vikingTON
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/05/2023 at 18:14, Ray Patterson said:

You simply love to see it BUT quite disappointing there's been no official word from SPFL clubs. 

Falkirk, St Mirren, Morton and a couple of others said they would discuss it with fans a few weeks back, and there's been almost no chat since.

According to the Chairman of Stenny, he hasn’t got the proposal despite being a member of the Pyramid working group, or he may just be trying to run for cover ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Brazilianlex said:

According to the Chairman of Stenny, he hasn’t got the proposal despite being a member of the Pyramid working group, or he may just be trying to run for cover ?

It's the SFA we're talking about here tbf.

The PWG docs and the actual proposal are two completely different things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/05/2023 at 18:14, Ray Patterson said:

You simply love to see it BUT quite disappointing there's been no official word from SPFL clubs. 

Falkirk, St Mirren, Morton and a couple of others said they would discuss it with fans a few weeks back, and there's been almost no chat since.

That's how a proper consultation process works. The Morton fans' body put a survey out for responses about a fortnight ago - those responses will be collated and then conveyed to the club board, which is majority controlled by the fans' group. 

Publishing a club statement after about 3 seconds of taking views - just to get big licks on social media for taking a stance - is not a serious response. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, virginton said:

That's how a proper consultation process works. The Morton fans' body put a survey out for responses about a fortnight ago - those responses will be collated and then conveyed to the club board, which is majority controlled by the fans' group. 

Publishing a club statement after about 3 seconds of taking views - just to get big licks on social media for taking a stance - is not a serious response. 

My criticism wasn't with Morton - more with the clubs that haven't followed suit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Brazilianlex said:

So who came up with the proposal if it wasn’t the PWG ?

The SFA delivered the proposal to the PWG without a status quo option, and no opportunity for discussion, as I understand it. First meeting for the PWG since Spring 2022 when the SFA promised to come back with a cracking new proposal!

Edited by welshbairn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bet the LL clubs are glad they allowed the colts in for “1 season only” and a proper consultation with the PWG on the best way forward for the game… that’s gone as well as we all expected

Mugs! 

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...