Spam Valley Jag
-
Posts
18 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Spam Valley Jag
-
-
-
-
So there's this guy called James Muddiman that paints football stadia up and down the country for a living and this week he's currently doing a painting of Firhill.
Should be finished tomorrow. Prints sell for £15 inc P&P. Would defo make a great gift for someone
You can follow him on twitter @JKMartwork or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JkMuddimanArt?ref=
-
Excuse my ignorance as i don't know anything about this guy but 16 goals in 185 appearances isn't exactly prolific. Heres hoping he can prove the doubters (including myself) wrong.
-
That's my plans for Aberdeen away well and truly scunnered.
Same. Was going to do an overnighter up there with some mates but thats that oot the windae now.
-
Doolan and Baird both looked great on Friday night but as said above they have no aerial threat. We need a big target man.
-
The King of Spain was in the JH.
-
Great game. Great saves from both keepers. Some of our passing destroyed their defense. They were definitely there for the taking. Think we are needing a big target man up front.
-
-
Did Queens Park no skelp Aberdeen on penalties at Firhill a few years back?
-
I've just joined Twitter, anyone know who's best to follow for updates?
@BBCchrismclaug
@OFFICIAL_SFL
-
Unless I've missed it, the following clubs are still "on the fence" and haven't indicated how they likely plan to use their vote.
Alloa - Seems Alloa will now vote no.
Forfar
Hamilton Accies
Montrose
Queen of the South
Queens Park
And, ourselves.
Here is a good breakdown of how the clubs are expected to vote tomorrow:
09/07/2012
Annan Athletic
Status: No
Chairman Henry McLelland said:
“Why should things be treated differently because it’s one of the big two clubs in the country? The argument can’t be moulded to suit one club over another. Rangers should go into Division Three.The alternative is they go nowhere.."
Contact: through the website at http://www.annanathleticfc. com/contactus.asp
Berwick Rangers
Status: No
Berwick Rangers Board tonight agreed unanimously that should the new Rangers FC be admitted to the SFL for the new season, that they would support a move directly into SFL Division Three. The Club has also taken on board the feelings of their Supporters Club, Supporters Trust and the countless individual fans who have contacted them directly. There will be no further statement from the club on this matter.
Contact: by email at club@berwickrangersfc. co.uk
Clyde
Status: No
It is worth mentioning that three years ago Clyde made huge cutbacks in order to avoid defaulting on debt, and accepted that it would make an impact on their on-field performance probably for some years to come. They have been among the strongest and most eloquent critics of the SPL / SFA proposals.
"The overwhelming reality is that we are being asked to make one of the most important decisions for Scottish Football in a vacuum devoid of factual information, that vacuum having been filled with unhelpful rhetoric and scaremongering by the chief executives of the SFA and SPL. In summary, the complete absence of information on Sevco Scotland Ltd renders it impossible to vote with any logic in favour of any of the Resolutions. The default in these circumstances would unfortunately be to vote against. We hope and trust that this unacceptable situation will be resolved swiftly and will allow Clyde Football Club to support Resolution 1 from an informed position and will see Rangers Football Club playing in SFL3. We see Resolution 2 as a matter of trust and it would take a change of personnel and attitude for us to be confident that David Longmuir would be entering discussions with a group of people committed to a collaborative process in a spirit of genuine partnership.In the current circumstances our only decision could be to vote against Resolution 2. Subject to a satisfactory outcome on Resolution 1 we would support Resolution 3."
Contact: email on [email protected]
East Stirlingshire
Status: Undeclared
At least one news report has suggested that the Shire are in the No camp, but the club are yet to make any official statement.
Contact: by email at fceaststirlingshire@gmail. com
Elgin City
Status: Undeclared
Again, news reports have suggested that Elgin intend to vote No, but there has been no official statement.
Contact: by email on [email protected]
Montrose
Status: Undeclared
Another club who have not commented officially thus far.
Contact: email on [email protected]
Peterhead
Status: No
Statement 12th July "Although football clubs from all leagues rely heavily on media revenue and sponsorship to survive, it is the fans that are the heart of the club. Our fans have made their feelings very clear over this issue and we have listened and taken on board all comments. We hope that voting to admit a Newco team into Division 3 will unite fans to vote with their feet to support their local team and help preserve our Scottish game."
Contact: by email at office@peterheadfc. co.uk
Queen's Park
Status: No
Contact: by email on secretary@queensparkfc. co.uk
Stirling Albion
Status: Probable No
Following a poll among their supporters, which favoured Newco going to the third division, the club announced this was the position they would take forward to the initial general meeting. It is anticipated, though not explicitly confirmed, that this will remain their position.
Contact: by email on stirlingalbion@btconnect. com
Stranraer
Status: No
Stranraer are another club who have had to make major cutbacks to avoid defaulting on debt, so it is not a surprise that they have made one of the strongest official statements criticising the proposals to allow Newco straight into a higher division.
"We are not convinced at the emotive language currently being aired to describe the potential ramifications to our game should a NewCo not be given special case treatment and consider that the benefits that could be negotiated do not counter balance the damage that would be done to the credibility of the SFL as a governing body."
Contact: email on [email protected]
Second Division Clubs Position
09/07/2012
Airdrie United
Status: Abstention
Airdrie have already announced that they intend to abstain, as one of the clubs whose own divisional status would be affected by the decision of where to place Newco. This is consistent with their previous behaviour in similar circumstances in both 2008 and 2009.
Contact: via the website at http://www.airdriefc. com/contact.html
Albion Rovers
Status: Yes maybe (I think)
12 July "Much has been said and written about sporting integrity. In normal circumstance we would have no hesitation in voting to place Newco Rangers in SFL Division3 but as a Board, we do now need to consider all of the implications before we make that call." .
Contact: by email on [email protected] or through the website at http://albionroversfc. com/?page_id=125
Alloa Athletic
Status: Undeclared
The most recent statement from Chairman Mike Mulraney says
"We would also like to assure our fans that we will not be bullied into a decision by any outside influences, but will act in the best interest of Alloa first and Scottish football second. Sporting integrity will of course weigh heavily in any decision we make."
Contact: by email on fcadmin@alloaathletic. co.uk
Arbroath
Status: No
Statement 12th July "After considerable and careful deliberation, that had also taken place over many previous meetings, the Club reached the decision that it cannot support a proposal for Rangers Newco to be directly admitted to Division 1 of the Scottish Football League and that sporting integrity must be upheld. We are however in support of entry to the Scottish Football League in Division 3 for next season. The Club is extremely grateful to the large number of stakeholders and supporters who took time to contact the Club and express their views, which we felt very important in assisting us to make an extremely difficult judgement."
Contact: through the website at http://www.arbroathfc. co.uk/AFC%20Contact.shtml
Ayr United
Status: Probable No
There has been no official statement from the club, but chairman Lachlan Cameron has made some strongly critical statements in the media.
"The Third Division would be the perfect place for Rangers. There is pressure for them to go into the First by the SPL and SFA but I believe they should go intothe Third."
Contact: email on info@ayrunitedfc. co.uk or through the site at http://www.ayrunitedfc. co.uk/contact.asp
Brechin City
Status: Yes
Brechin released a statement before the July 3rd meeting saying they would be making no public comment prior to it. Nothin further has been heard and they are another unknown quantity at present.
Contact: via the website at http://www.brechincity. com/bcfc/servlet/BCFCFrontControllerServlet? action=Feedback&category=6
East Fife
Status: No
Like the other Fife clubs, East Fife have issued a fairly emphatic No.
"The board of directors of East Fife FC, however, is unanimous in its view that we shall not support any integrated plan that in our view compromises sporting integrity by involving the admission of any ‘Newco’ directly into Division One. Any "Newco" must follow the normal application route into the bottom tier."
Contact: via the website at http://eastfifefc.info/ contact-us
Forfar
Status: Undeclared
Another club from whom there has been no official comment thus far.
Contact: through the website at http://www.forfarathletic. co.uk/index.php?option=com_contact&view=category& catid=29&Itemid=6
Queen of the South
Status: Undeclared
Statement "The club are unhappy at being dropped into this position and do not, yet, feel they are in posession of the full facts to allow them to make a final decision.
The club are well aware of the strong opinion of the fans and have read all the comments, emails etc sent to the club and fans should rest assured that they are being listened to.
The Club will continue to discuss the situation and make a further announcement when a final decision is confirmed and we ask the fans, in the meantime, to trust that we will make the best decision for Queen of the South FC.
Contact: by email at [email protected]
Stenhousemuir
Status: Yes
Stenhousemuir were the first club to put their heads above the parapet with an explicit Yes. Their reasoning seemed to be twofold:
1. That the SFL would lose the Settlement Agreement figure from the SPL;
2. That in the event of a No vote the same thing would be achieved via an SPL2 in any case.
Contact: by email at info@stenhousemuirfc. com
08/07/2012
Cowdenbeath
Status: No
Cowdenbeath have issued a strongly worded statement indicating their opposition to the proposals.
"The Board decided that it would support any application by "Rangers" to join the SFL but would vote against the present proposal which, amongst other matters, would admit "Rangers" directly into the First Division of the SFL."
Contact: [email protected] or via http://www.cowdenbeathfc.com/ index.php?act=viewDoc&docId=2
Dumbarton
Status: Yes
Dumbarton have released a statement this week indicating that strongly implies they are intending to vote Yes:
"After hearing arguments on both sides, a clear majority of those voting (55 to 28) reluctantly felt that admitting the Newco into the First Division would be the better option for Scottish football and smaller clubs as a whole"
Contact: Chairman Alan Jardine at [email protected] or through the website athttp://www.dumbartonfootballclub. com/contact2/
Dundee
Status: Abstention
Dundee have released a statement indicating that they have been instructed to abstain from the process due to a believed conflict of interest. This may be challengeable, it is not clear why Dundee fans should thus be disenfranchised from such an important vote when other potentially conflicted clubs, such as Dunfermline and Stranraer are not.
Contact: via the club's website at http://www.dundeefc. co.uk/contact/
Dunfermline
Status: No
Dunfermline have very clearly indicated that they will vote no to Newco in the first division. They have not commented officially on what stance they would take if invited to join an SPL2.
Contact: [email protected]
Falkirk
Status: Possible No
Falkirk's official statement has indicated they will vote No to the current proposals, but left it unclear as to whether they might be swayed should the league reconstruction proposals be altered or improved. Their manager Steven Pressley has been a strong and eloquent critic of the manner in which the footballing authorities have handled the situation.
Contact: [email protected]
Hamilton Accies
Status: Possible No
Hamilton Chairman Les Gray has indicated opposition to the plans, at least in isolation, but may have left the door open for an arrangement which included more favourable terms on reconstruction.
"If our Governing bodies ever get round to tabling any firm proposal to vote on it is unlikely in our opinion that this proposal, in isolation, would be acceptable to the members."
Contact: [email protected] or via the club's website at http://www.acciesfc.co.uk/ index.php?option=com_contact&view=contact& id=2&Itemid=221
Livingston
Status: Possible No
Livingston have made no official statement of their position, but their Chairman Gordon McDougall (who is also an SFL board member) has made public comments expressing considerable scepticism, particularly in the light of the League's handling of Livingston's own case in 2009.
Contact: [email protected] or use the contact form here: http://www.livingstonfc. co.uk/club/club_contact.php
Morton
Status: No
Chairman Douglas Rae has been strongly critical of the plans and has indicated a clear intention to vote No. Again, there has been no mention of their position should they be invited to join an SPL2.
"Under the current SFL rules, any Club making an application for membership should be admitted to the 3rd Division. I personally see no reason to make any exception to that at this time and would therefore vote accordingly."
Contact: general enquiries on [email protected]
Partick Thistle
Status: Possible No
As with some other clubs, Partick's last statement was on the face of it a clear No, but it is not altogether clear that they might not be open to the idea if tied in to other .
"On its own this proposal is clearly unacceptable, on a number of levels, and is something the Board of PTFC are not prepared to support."
Contact: [email protected]
Raith Rovers
Status: No
Raith have been firmly against the proposals from the outset, and their director Turnbull Hutton has been one of the most outspoken critics. Most recently they released a further statement querying the process for the forthcoming vote.
Contact: general enquiries [email protected]
Source: http://honestyinsport.weebly.com/voting-intentions-of-sfl-clubs.html
-
Club Statement: SFL Special General Meeting
Tue, 10th Jul 2012 6:17pm
The board of Clyde Football Club met last night to consider how it might approach the resolutions (see below) to be voted on at the SFL meeting on Friday 13th July. This update is to inform our owners and supporters and hopefully explain some of the complexities that face the club when carefully and objectively considering how we might vote. We hope that by being as clear as possible about the difficulties surrounding this situation that the people able to support the process act swiftly to do so.
The overwhelming reality is that we are being asked to make one of the most important decisions for Scottish Football in a vacuum devoid of factual information, that vacuum having been filled with unhelpful rhetoric and scaremongering by the chief executives of the SFA and SPL.
We therefore looked at what we were being asked to vote on, how it fitted with the principles of the sport, and what information we might need to inform a logical decision in context of the current reality.
It was clear that the resolutions marked a clear departure from all previous process and custom and practice when considering admitting a team to the SFL, albeit operating within the rules of the SFL. It was in that context which we considered the resolutions. In reality, the customary principles of sport were not at the forefront of the resolutions.
We first concluded that there was limited risk to the SFL from the 'Armageddon' theory, as depicted in the detailed presentation by Neil Doncaster and supported by Stewart Regan, which had prompted fears of cash flow loss to the SFL next season. We have obtained a copy of the Settlement Agreement signed up to by the SPL and the SFL in April 1998 - it is clear that the agreement is not ambiguous in this regard and there is no scope for the SPL to fail to meet the obligations to the SFL except by deliberately breaching the agreement. Neil Doncaster was unequivocal when he said that there would be no payment under the agreement and stressed that it was not the board of the SPL that made big decisions, it was the clubs themselves. We have concluded that it defies credibility that the SPL clubs would instruct the SPL to deliberately breach a legal agreement. To assist the SFL clubs to take decisions in the right manner then the external threat should be removed by the SPL clubs, confirming to the SFL that they have not and will not instruct the SPL to breach the Settlement Agreement.
Consideration was then given to Resolution 1 which we concluded required to be reworded to be explicit that entry was to SFL3. The reason for this is that once entered to the SFL in the manner proposed under Resolution 1, we understand that it is within the power of the Board of the SFL to place a club into any league of their choosing. We believe that, due to the intolerable pressure placed on the SFL board to date by external parties, this resolution should be explicit to avoid the Board coming under pressure from either the SFA or SPL in the event that Resolution 2 is rejected. It is also our opinion that Resolution 1 being explicit sits more appropriately with Resolution 2 which in itself is explicit about where any club might play.
In terms of Resolution 1, whether reworded or not, it seemed inconceivable to the Board of Clyde that absolutely no information whatsoever has been provided to support the resolution. This is clearly a matter of haste and again driven by an external agenda, perhaps because Sevco have not lodged an application to join the SFL then they have not submitted any information. Whilst we have accepted that this is being treated as a special case and we are willing to run with this, it simply was not possible to conclude that we could make any decision at this time. The matter is made worse because of the extent of uncertainty which hangs over Sevco. There is no need to prepare an exhaustive list of the issues as they are well publicised, however the extent of outstanding sanctions that may or may not be levied against a club which has yet to obtain SFA membership, together with the increasing number of possible commercial and legal challenges to the transactions to date simply presents a significant risk to the ability of the club to fulfil its fixtures in any league. Given that some of these matters are in the hands of the governing bodies it seems inexplicable that they are left hanging. We are clear that for the good of the game that we would want a swift and positive conclusion that would see Rangers Football Club taking part in the game again and we would wish to be able to support a Resolution that saw them entered to SFL3. However, until we receive enough information to inform such a decision then we are being pushed into a corner which would actually leave any club making a logical decision arrive at the conclusion that Resolution 1 should not be supported. The SFA could assist the process by transferring the SFA membership to Sevco prior to the Friday meeting if they have satisfied themselves of fit and proper tests and have carried out their own diligence on the viability of the club and the various legal challenges.
Resolution 2 suffers from the same issues as Resolution 1, in that no information of any sort about Sevco, not even whether it will obtain SFA membership, leaves no possibility of making a decision about entry to the SFL based on facts or logic. Clearly it is incumbent on all the governing bodies to make available all factual information they have available if they truly want this process to have any chance of being recovered from the current chaos. At the very least the business plan for Sevco and any other information that led the SPL clubs to arrive at a decision should be made available to the SFL clubs, and not with inappropriately short notice, although that point has as good as passed. Resolution 2 was where the challenge to sporting integrity arose. It was impossible to engage with this concept without continually bearing in mind that the SFA had already undermined the prospects for any integrity to be maintained by making it clear that failure to deal with the admission of a newco to SFL3 would be a dereliction of duty. In effect posting notice that no matter what decision is taken by the SFL clubs to administer their league, the SFA would not tolerate anything other than SFL 1, an equivalent point having been made by Neil Doncaster on behalf of the SPL clubs. The stated position of the SFA and SPL chief executives means that, whilst this club can have faith in David Longmuir to do all in his power to deliver a new combined structure that meets the objectives of Resolution 2, we have no faith in the parties that the new arrangements would be negotiated with. Their behaviour to date is evidence enough for us. We should not be disingenuous on our own position in terms of the question of trading sporting integrity for transformational change to the way the game is governed that is posed by Resolution 2. We have said previously that there would be no winners and that compromise would be required at some point. With this in mind, had we worked through this process and seen positive collaborative behaviour from the leaders of the SFA and SPL and we were challenged with backing Resolution 2 in exchange for revolutionary change that would truly benefit the game as a whole, then we would have engaged with that. As it stands, we have no information on the proposals other than that distributed in advance of the meeting last week and no confidence in the parties that will control the process outside of the SFL. As such we would vote no to Resolution 2.
Resolution 3, as many have pointed out this resolution seems presumptuous as no invitation has been issued from the SPL to either club. Again, this arises because of the external pressures, the haste and the failure of other bodies to complete their own processes. As things stand, whilst Sevco/Newco was not voted into the SPL, it seems that the SPL still has 12 members based on the reported voting at the SPL meeting last week, albeit one of whom is in liquidation. It seems to make more sense that the SPL complete their processes and make the appropriate invitation for a club to join the SPL. We would seek to support whichever of our member clubs are invited to join the SPL to make that move, however, at the moment there is no certainty that Sevco will be entered into the SFL and the SFL should not risk leaving itself short of a team.
In summary, the complete absence of information on Sevco Scotland Ltd renders it impossible to vote with any logic in favour of any of the Resolutions. The default in these circumstances would unfortunately be to vote against. We hope and trust that this unacceptable situation will be resolved swiftly and will allow Clyde Football Club to support Resolution 1 from an informed position and will see Rangers Football Club playing in SFL3. We see Resolution 2 as a matter of trust and it would take a change of personnel and attitude for us to be confident that David Longmuir would be entering discussions with a group of people committed to a collaborative process in a spirit of genuine partnership.
In the current circumstances our only decision could be to vote against Resolution 2. Subject to a satisfactory outcome on Resolution 1 we would support Resolution 3.
The three resolutions presented to the club are as follows:-
(i) That the Scottish Football League Members agree to admit Sevco Scotland Limited as an Associate Member and agrees to permit Rangers F.C. to play in the League during Season 2012/13.
(ii) That the Scottish Football League Members direct the Board of Management of The Scottish Football League (the “Board”) to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13 unless the Board shall have to its satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the Board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game, how it is structured, how it is governed and how it is financed, whereupon the Board shall be authorised to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the First Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13.
(iii) That the Scottish Football League Members in terms of Rule 12 approve the resignation of either Dundee F.C. or Dunfermline Athletic F.C., whichever shall be admitted to join the Scottish Premier League for Season 2012/13, such resignation to take effect as at the date of admission of such club to the Scottish Premier League, notwithstanding that the requisite notice under Rule 12 shall not have been given.Details of the series of measures referred to at (ii) above shall be made available to the Members in advance of the meeting and an opportunity for full discussion of those measures will be given prior to the proposals being put to the meeting.
-
Would still go to Firhill. Not soo sure about away games. Certainly wouldnt go to any game involving sevco or those that vote for them.
-
Rattled mine off at lunchtime
Dear Mr Beattie
I write with regards to the on-going media specualtion of a newco
rangers possibly being admitted directly into SFL Division 1.
I note that your official statement to date confirms your position in
terms seeking the views and opinions from Partick Thistle supporters
in order to make a decision that promotes the best interests of
Partick Thistle Football Club and Scottish Football as a whole, i
would like to add that as a lifelong Partick Thistle supporter for
over 30 years, i have serious concerns for the future of Partick Thistle
should the club vote a newco into the 1st division. Every other club in
Scottish football has to play by the rules and progress through
Divisions 2 and 3 by getting promoted on the pitch, rather than off it.
Whilst i also whole heartedly agree with your position that
fundamental changes need to be made to Scottish Football, sporting
interity has to be paramount in this instance and I strongly implore
you to follow the stance of Raith Rovers, Falkirk & Morton who have
all offically said no to newco being admitted directly into SFL
Division 1.
Yours sincerely
******
-
Women trying to run in high heels
So folks what are yours?
Women.
-
£100M. 15 players. Are you game?
Once you've got your team, click on 'join mini league' and enter
League name: Wearethistle
League PIN: 8004317
New Sponsor
in Main Jags forum
Posted
I like it. It's edgy. It's different and it's not as bad as these guys: