jagman Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 (edited) In my opinion, the Statement is far too vague after other statements made by Beattie in the press over the last couple of days. It's obvious to everyone that we have no say in the SPL decision but what I was looking for was clarity with regards to comments already made by Beattie. Why make statements in two newspapers with some hypothetical details then, in an official club statement, say what you should have said in the first place with no reference to previous comments?! From very early on in close season there was a fantastic buzz being generated from the club and the fans. I was more upbeat than ever about the coming season... funny how things change so quickly. Let's hope our club fight for the outcome the majority of fans clearly want if the need arises. Edited June 22, 2012 by jagman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaggernaut Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 No. If they are not admitted to SPL then they have to reapply to be admitted as newco into SFL. However there is talk that in return for them admitting a newco into SFL 1 league reconstruction will follow close behind. What is meant by "reconstruction" is crucial, I think. If it's merely a name change, a wee bit extra money, and a play-off place added to the existing leagues, then no thank you; that is minor tinkering, not reconstruction. If we are looking at a 14- or 16-team SPL 1 with 2 up and 2 down, then that would represent an advantage to all SFL clubs. Defunct h u n s should still apply for entry at the lowest level, however. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 Statement from our board on OS - http://www.ptfc.co.u...rd_of_directors Compare it to Falkirk's - http://www.falkirkfc.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=5986&Itemid=320 They are both very similar. Even the Falkirk one infers they get into the first, if reconstruction takes place. A mate in the work told me on Tuesday that he had been told, a dummy vote had been done by the SPL chairmen and that it came back that they would not be admitted into the SPL and it was agreed at the start of this week that they would be relegated to div1. I told him there was no way this would happen... More fool me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trotter Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 What is meant by "reconstruction" is crucial, I think. If it's merely a name change, a wee bit extra money, and a play-off place added to the existing leagues, then no thank you; that is minor tinkering, not reconstruction. If we are looking at a 14- or 16-team SPL 1 with 2 up and 2 down, then that would represent an advantage to all SFL clubs. Defunct h u n s should still apply for entry at the lowest level, however. I don't think you'll find many Jags disagree with your last sentence with the possible exception of David Beattie and a couple of others on the BOD. Problem I have is this whole 'leap of faith'- sound familiar? League reconstruction will not happen before this season starts so in effect we're trusting them not to shaft us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mgow Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 They are both very similar. Even the Falkirk one infers they get into the first, if reconstruction takes place. A mate in the work told me on Tuesday that he had been told, a dummy vote had been done by the SPL chairmen and that it came back that they would not be admitted into the SPL and it was agreed at the start of this week that they would be relegated to div1. I told him there was no way this would happen... More fool me. Falkirk said: “It would be totally unacceptable if a “Rangers Newco” were admitted to the First Division on the current rules”. I agree that the “on the current rules” could be a nod to reconstruction meaning all bets were off. However, it does go on to say that: “ Even a weakened “Rangers Newco” would have resources that far outstripped all other First Division clubs and this would pretty much guarantee them promotion before the season even starts” plus uses the F-word in that “Fairness is a word not often quoted in the current situation”. As I said on the other thread, in the end, it would all come down to how the SFL teams actually vote if it is ever put to them. Football boards have been known to vote differently from their publicly stated position (Raith Rovers voting to change the SPL structure from 12 to 10 is one I recall). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
erty13 Posted June 22, 2012 Report Share Posted June 22, 2012 What if the newco rangers, did an Airdrie and bought out a first division club to get into the league. Do you no think that we would be the club they would try to buy, and can you guarantee that our shareholders would not sell. Erty Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garryc Posted June 23, 2012 Report Share Posted June 23, 2012 Don't think Celtic can vote yes, have you spoken to any celtic supporters? I try to avoid them if I can, but they are a PLC, so surely they are obliged to vote for commercial interest? bit of a shocker Aberdeen voting no. I thought that was nailed on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.