Jag36
-
Posts
173 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Gallery
Posts posted by Jag36
-
-
4 minutes ago, Big Col said:
No it doesn’t - disastrous appointment.
Chairmen appoint the wrong managers all the time and it doesn't get this response- stand by my point its disproportainate. Always thought there must be more to it and i'd missed something but if thats what it is then thats all i need to know
-
1
-
-
31 minutes ago, JAG1970 said:
Mainly appointing Caldwell ..... and then abandoning her commitment to speak to the supporters when results failed to improve...
She can bleat about the injustice of clubs voting for self interest (we would do the same) but her appointment of Caldwell- a guy who never had us away from the bottom of the league during his 12 months tenure despite two transfer windows and a lot of money given to him - is a big reason why we’re going down
If thats it seems a bit disproportionate..get the bit about not engaging enough with fans. But Caldwell seemed a reasonable appointment at the time ( though not a fan of him) and they did back him with funds. It did turn out to be the wrong appointment but that can happen and the fact that Colin Weir showed faith in her must at least must indicate that she has the best interest of the club at heart. Think the dislike of JLow on this forum seems a bit over the top. From a Thistle fan of 30 years
-
2
-
-
8 hours ago, Pinhead said:
Doesn't matter what falkirk say, us and them will lay down and be run over! Now is the time for the she devil to do something worthwhile but will she?
Out of interest whats the big problem with JLow? Can someone please explain this to me cause feel i have missed something.
-
Interesting listening on sportsound..apparently as Dundee had the deciding vote- if it had been recieved( no) then it would have been called(as the threshold had been reached) and that would of been it final. Basically they would of been unable to retract it and change their mind.
Therefore the argument that Dundee could of retracted their vote and change it,whether it had been recieved or not,within 28 days kind of falls apart.
-
Just a thought..and pretty much contradicting my earlier point about lack of a legal case. But why not just wait til the money is paid out then take legal action? Surely paying out the money doesnt suddenly exempt the SPFL from any legal comeback
-
Not really sure what the legal case here is anyway. Once a NO vote was submitted it could be retaracted and changed within the 28 days. So whether the SPFL recieved it or not probably in legal terms is irrelevant. No doubt the whole process was dodgy and there were most likely dodgy dealings going on in the background- but this would have to proven as 'illegal' rather than just a form of lobbying. No doubt the process was heavily weighted in favour of a Yes vote- but the majority of clubs agreed to this- so again not sure where the legal point would be. No doubt its incredibly unfair but would a long legal case get the desired outcome- seems unlikely
-
3 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:
What about the livelihoods of our own staff , is that not worth fighting for , remember this is not the first time the SPFL have done this to us , surely you’ve got to stand up for yourselves at some point
4 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:What about the livelihoods of our own staff , is that not worth fighting for , remember this is not the first time the SPFL have done this to us , surely you’ve got to stand up for yourselves at some point
Don't disagree with you there. Would imagine the chances of winning a legal battle, its cost, and financial impact of relegation have all been weighed up too. Dont get me wrong im not happy about this but we have totally been put in an impossible position. Seems like all the other clubs that were up for fighting this too have disappeared off the radar
-
Totally agree with the Thistle statement. We have totally been backed into a corner and because we are a good decent club we have decided that we dont want to put anybodys livelihoods at risk ( this includes non-playing staff) - which is what would have happened due to the situation the SPFL have created if we took legal action. We have EVERY RIGHT to do so. Its not about having 'baws'- we were put in an impossible position and the fact we are a good decent club means we couldn't go down the legal route. Proud to be a Thistle fan and lets hope we start getting the credit we deserve for this- cause as it stands we have come out of this worse thsn anyone else.
-
Anyone remember that time when Rangers said they had a whistleblower etc etc. Well that turned out to be nothing
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:
Still a shambles.
Don't disagree with you there. The whole process has been corupt and a mess. Even if the outcome is no relegation for thistle the SPFL still have to be held to account. Was just making the point that maybe relegation is not inevitable
-
Talk is of a 14 team top flight. If Hearts and Hamilton are on the taskforce then there will be no relegation.
Dundee utd and ICT promoted to make 14. Dundee miss out - possible carrot of 2 automatic promotions next year( who knows) for which Dundee would likely be favourites
But that leaves an 8 team championship- unless they decide to promote 3 from league 1, which is unlikely. Then it will be 2 from league 1 with thistle avoiding relegation to make up the 10
Presumably a highland and lowland league team will make up the league 2 numbers.
Ultimately you need to bring in two new teams to the SPFL to avoid any relegation with a 14 top flight
Could be totally wrong the way things are going. But maybe all is not lost yet
-
1 minute ago, Garscube Road End said:
Yeah! From Sky??
Thought it might go that way
-
1 minute ago, Garscube Road End said:
If there is to be a 14 team Premiership then it is likely we will not be relegated.
Well lets hope so but wouldnt be too sure
-
1 hour ago, javeajag said:
It’s not referring to us I don’t think
Doesn't really matter whether its referring to us or not( although it definitely is) it was totally right to expose what had gone on. Seems like either by luck or some dodgy dealings Dundee are now in a position of control- and their quite enjoying it. The morally right thing to do would have been to just resubmit their vote- they have no high ground. And sorry but ' the world has seen' - people are interested in Scottish footbal but lets not get carried away- who writes these statements!
-
24 minutes ago, dl1971 said:
Part of our legal case is that you cant change your vote once lodged. However in theory we could withdraw it and let's see what the SPFL do then. What would Dundee do.....?
Im i missing something here or does the motion not just need 8 out of 10 yes votes to pass? Therefore whether we vote Yes, No or nothing doesnt actually matter cause if Dundee vote yes then motion is passed as 8 out of 10 Yes votes has been achieved. Us retracting our vote makes no difference and wont hold anything up
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, Dick Dastardly said:
A NO could be changed to a YES within 28 days. I'm not sure that it is possible to withdraw a vote and we certainly don't want to change to a YES
We certainly don't. Doesn't look like us withdrawing over vote would have any bearing. Think in this respect Dundee hold all the cards
-
49 minutes ago, One t in Scotland said:
So would we if we also switched from No --> Yes. 1 Yes vote required and only ICT, Dundee or PTFC can make it happen. Guarantee to extend the League to 14 or negotiate some hefty compensation and we vote Yes.
Out the box thinking perhaps but why let Dundee hold all the cards whilst just waiting to be shafted.
You could be right..but think the rules were that once you've submitted a vote it can't be changed. Hence why the Dundee vote was 'never recieved' rather than they just retracted it. Could be wrong there though. Also if Dundee voted Yes that would meet the required threshold to finalise the league anyway because ours is a No vote so dont think it would hold anything up unfortunately.
-
23 minutes ago, One t in Scotland said:
What's stopping Thistle withdrawing our 'No' vote? Then we'll have exactly the same reconstruction leverage Dundee currently have.
No it wouldn't..its the fact Dundee have the deciding vote that gives them the leverage
-
3 minutes ago, laukat said:
Its the key question in all this. Why and why now?
Why? I presume they want it marked as completed and a winner declared for 2 main reasons. First of all to prevent any sponsor or TV company for wanting their money back and secondly to say to UEFA that Scottish results stand so we expect our second champions league spot.
Why now? I suspect its partly to try and force UEFA's hand but mainly to declare final positions before a club goes into administration, gets hit by a points deduction that would effect their final league position and ultimatley their particpation in european competition.
The SPFL don't care about anyone else other than the old firm and the tv deal. Celtic aren't in financial trouble and will be in the champions league no matter what. The TV deal hinges on 4 games between the ugly sisters so the only logical conclusion is its something to do with Sevco
They could well go into administration which would mean a 15 point deduction which still leaves them 5 points ahead of Motherwell for 2nd place but probably unable to take up a european place due to financial fair play. They would be unlikely to get out of administration without champions league football so it puts the TV deal at risk. If Uefa started poking about financial fair play in regards to Sevco and how they've managed to meet these it could open up a can of worms.
Sevco might declare in public that this is terrible to appease their fans but in private they'll be all for this. Stewart Robertson from Sevco sits on the SPFL board so how on earth does this proposal get through there without him not being ok with it?
Have Uefa insisted on leagues finishing to finalise champions league places? Not from what i've heard.
And why would any team have to go into administation if loans are available without the league needing to be finalised at the moment.
Think the answer probably lies closer to home and with the powerbrockers in Scottish football. Celtic want 9 in a row- might just be as simple as that. Rangers influence in Scottish football was diluted years ago
-
6 minutes ago, jags on tour said:
Can’t help but feel we’ll be the most hated club after all this happens for prolonging the season instead of just saying ‘Aye just relegate us, we don’t mind.’ I think we are right to do what we are doing but think it’s just delaying the inevitable, they will never null and void the season, realistically the season won’t get finished and there will be another vote later to end the season which will get accepted as other clubs chairmans are too scared to upset the big teams. I can’t see reconstruction happening either.
Theres another bigger point now though about fairness transparency and confidence in the SPFL as an organisation. If it emerges that there were underhand dealings going on and the vote was 'fixed' then just like any governance or organisation how can there be any confidence in them as a fit and proper organisation in their current form to be in charge of Scottish Football.
-
1 minute ago, Emsca said:
Whicc is what I keep coming back to. Why were the SPFL so desperate to get the Leagues wound up?j
Setting a precedent for the Premier League to finish..payouts to SPFL board members and executives..you're right that is what it all comes back to!
-
3 minutes ago, dl1971 said:
Think of the biggest rock v biggest hard place. There lies Mr Doncaster and his board. Not forgetting that Shyster Nelms.
Exactly and would imagine they've spent the last few days trying to figure away out this. Excellent timing too by Thistle as it would appear Dundee are very close to slyly changing their vote. Looks like the SPFL tactic is just going to be to push it through and try to ride it out- so the more pressure the better!
-
33 minutes ago, exiledjag said:
Excellent statement from the club. Just knew we would be ferreting away in the background.
Provided we are not bluffing there is enough in this statement to let the SPFL know there could be a legal challenge. The request from PTFC to Doncaster to circulate to all 42clubs full details of loans available and circumstances in which they can be applied for is a very good tactic!
If the SPFL refuse this request it will not look good in court and if they agree to the request it will be tantamount to admitting this information was either not known or not previously readily available.
We might not win in the long run but on this point the phrase 'over a barrel' comes to mind!
Now we need to get Rangers and Hearts (and another clubs) onside!
Good point..and a lot of clubs apparently only voted for the proposal based on releasing the funds so if they are shown the loans were available in the first place and this information wasn't made available at the time- sure this won't go down well and will indicate further that whole voting process was heavily weighted in favour of shutting down the league
-
Worryingly seems like the corupt voting process is already being forgotten in all this. Nelms didn't just change his mind. Dundee voted NO- the deciding vote! then were clearly targeted to change their mind. Hence the never recieved vote then subsequent firewall BS excuses etc. The rules were also set so you can change your mind on a No vote but not a Yes one- why? Probably for these exact circumstances. Hope Rangers have something cause this is dodgy and cant just be sold as Dundee having a change of heart
What if they shut down the season?
in Main Jags forum
Posted
Seems totally obvious now that the reconstruction was just a smokescreen for Dundee to change their vote. Seems utterly bizzare the SPFL determination to force this through at all costs. The ship may have sailed on this debate but does raise the question who and how do they benefit from it.Bonus payments for excecutive members when the new deal kicks in....?