Norman Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 What annoys me is that amongst all the debate and arguing, we've maybe just not stopped long enough to have a right good laugh at Rangers. I'll wait until the season actually starts with them in Division 3 before I let rip with my laughter. As things stand, the SPL clubs are now panicking and have yet to identify who Club 12 will be. Every SPL chairman who throws out another financial meltdown warning is only strengthening Newco's bargaining position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One t in Scotland Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 (edited) For the first time in about ten years I'm going to buy a season the ticket. Thank the board (just wish they'd come out sooner). Er, what does the hospitality option (extra 15 quid) get you? £25 extra. The usual hospitality package ( usually about £80 ). In the current spirit of largesse might as well go for the £285. Someone might want to alter the website to make income streams such as STs and the Centenary Fund a lot more visible. The Falkirk site is a fine example of how to do it. Edited July 15, 2012 by One t in Scotland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda-jag Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 I'll wait until the season actually starts with them in Division 3 before I let rip with my laughter. As things stand, the SPL clubs are now panicking and have yet to identify who Club 12 will be. Every SPL chairman who throws out another financial meltdown warning is only strengthening Newco's bargaining position. Apparently, Hearts, Dundee United, Aberdeen, Hibs, St Johnstone, Celtic and Motherwell will not change their votes and allow Hunswereus into the SPL. If there is to be a club12 in 2012/13 in SPL, it will be the squeakyclean virtuosos of finance, Dundee. Bigger home and travelling supports, and larger capacity than that of DAFC. Follow the money always ..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Incognito Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 What annoys me is that amongst all the debate and arguing, we've maybe just not stopped long enough to have a right good laugh at Rangers. I know! What a bunch of miserable bassas we are. Here is an amusing smiley to get us started: http://oi46.tinypic.com/k97wz.jpg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jagfox Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 Sorry if being thick but how would the clubs with conflicts of interest have had their votes represented? I think Dundee, Airdrie Utd and Stranraer came under this bracket? If two said yes, maybe the abstentions were lumped in with them? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kni Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 I know! What a bunch of miserable bassas we are. Here is an amusing smiley to get us started: http://oi46.tinypic.com/k97wz.jpg Brilliant! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McKennan Posted July 15, 2012 Report Share Posted July 15, 2012 I'm unsure which of the busier threads on all of this to use, but I have read on Twitter that the SPL has said it has a 'solution' to its 'newco' problem. It's 'newco' problem is called Division Three. Its idea solution would be Division One but there's been a vote against. It's unlikely there'll be a league of two so it's either 'newco' dropped into the SPL against the public wishes but private backing of the SPL chairmen or the last-gasp SPL 2 Viagra pill is about to be offered to teams with misgivings about 'immediate access'. If so, that should be an interesting quandary. Or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Ann Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 noticing more clubs posting lengthy statments on their websites about how they voted and the reasons why. presumably the secret ballot theory is a non starter now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Julie Ann - Im not aware anyone has said it was a secret ballot. Club cleary stated the Board had agreed they will vote no ,and that is the mandate it gave to there representative- at least thats what Im assuming "Carried to the meeting means". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Stevenson Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 Julie Ann - Im not aware anyone has said it was a secret ballot. Club cleary stated the Board had agreed they will vote no ,and that is the mandate it gave to there representative- at least thats what Im assuming "Carried to the meeting means". And did the Club's representative exercise that mandate as instructed....? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordanhill Jag Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 And did the Club's representative exercise that mandate as instructed....? No idea - me and votes at AGMs have a poor relationship so I try to aviod looking into too much detial ,and dont even start me on Proxies Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted July 17, 2012 Report Share Posted July 17, 2012 And did the Club's representative exercise that mandate as instructed....? I'm presuming that Mr Beattie will be happy to answer that question directly at the next 'Meet the Board' evening. Besides by then, no doubt the Club will have contacted the Daily Record to correct their factual inaccuracy (assuming it was indeed incorrect). All still a bit mysterious me thinks... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julie Ann Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 Julie Ann - Im not aware anyone has said it was a secret ballot. Club cleary stated the Board had agreed they will vote no ,and that is the mandate it gave to there representative- at least thats what Im assuming "Carried to the meeting means". quite a few on here suggesting it might be a reason why the club can't say "we voted no". it would appear that that isn't a restriction Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 Chris jack of the evening times saying on twitter that maxxy's statement only confirms how the board directed David Beattie to vote. No confirmation of how we actually voted. @Chris_Jack89: @davej070876 yes. Board met and decided to vote no. Only David knows if he did so or not. Was supposed to be a secret ballot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Norman Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 I keep coming back to the word "unanimously" within Ian Maxwell's clarification. To be clear, the board met a week last Friday and voted unanimously against the prospect of Sevco being granted immediate access to SFL 1 I'm guessing that Beattie participated in that vote, so unless he's had a change of heart or made an enormous balls-up, I can't see how our vote could have been Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 He would have had to have had a massive change of heart, for him to vote no. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nas Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 Not up to him though as he was representing partick thistle whose board unanimously voted no. I don't think he would be allowed to change that vote without phoning board members from the meeting. A meeting that would have clearly been heading for a no vote.... Also to vote yes and then say to the print media that it was a brave but correct decision would make his position completely untenable. It would also be bizarre as surely he would know people would want to find out who the 5 who didn't vote no were. Haven't checked tonight but dundee and falkirk fans in my office today were pretty much resigned to the fact their clubs voted yes. They also said the rumours they had heard was one team was from the 3rd div. Montrose was mentioned. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Willjag Posted July 18, 2012 Members Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 So just to clear this up for myself..... if the Club told David Beattie to vote one way and then he went and voted the other, the fans should punish the Club? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nas Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 It would appear so. Thistle passed a motion to vote no so he should have voted no. If he voted yes i don't believe he was representing partick thistle and therefore the issue is with his actions not thistles. Dundee announced tonight the voted no to sfl1. Falkirk chairman making a statement on his return from holiday this weekend apparently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trotter Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 It would appear so. Thistle passed a motion to vote no so he should have voted no. If he voted yes i don't believe he was representing partick thistle and therefore the issue is with his actions not thistles. Dundee announced tonight the voted no to sfl1. Falkirk chairman making a statement on his return from holiday this weekend apparently. Who does that leave as no votes then? 2 down in QOTS & Hamilton. 3 to go... What if the sums never add up? I still think Beattie would be daft to have voted against the wishes of his board, manager & supporters though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thestreets Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 FFS can we move on... this is a joke this debate ..... either support the jags or dont stop looking for a way out or some other snipe at the board SUPPORT IS WHAT WE NEED not doubters or negative dribble based on this and that and next thing.. base your judgement on what you know and what has been said by board not what this person said and twitter this and my mate knows a guy who knows someone else and told them this.. nonsense. Rant over!! COME THE JAGS.. new season lets get off to good start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewarty Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 I keep coming back to the word "unanimously" within Ian Maxwell's clarification. I'm guessing that Beattie participated in that vote, so unless he's had a change of heart or made an enormous balls-up, I can't see how our vote could have been Yes. Remember that episode of Blackadder where Baldrick votes in the House of Lords... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nas Posted July 18, 2012 Report Share Posted July 18, 2012 According to the Falkirk fan who sits next to me at work the board cancelled a meeting with the bairns trust this week. Bairns trust have a seat on the board but either don't how falkirk voted or aren't allowed to say. He said most fans don't seem to care how they voted so if it turns out it was yes he doesn't expect much of an uproar from falkirk fans. Have read in more than 1 place that only 1 sfl 1team voted yes. However could be same story being repeated. Agree with trotter to go against board, fans and the presumably obvious mood of the meeting would be bizarre behaviour. However it would be between the board fans and mr beattie to resolve. It shouldn't lead to people walking away in the way that the board voting yes might have. Wonder if maybe thats what is behind the wording being the way that it is. A bit of distance. Although it does open us up to accusations of hiding the truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Angelo Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 The bottom line is that we support Partick Thistle FC and not an individual person, such as David Beattie. It would be different if it was a dictatorship and he was the Fuehrer. But the board and the fans have a say in what happens at the club, to a greater and lesser extent respectively. If Mr Beattie has gone against the wishes of the board, that would be unfortunate. However I'm sure Mr Beattie is expecting the support of the board, whatever he may or may not have said, done or voted. It may be the case that the board finds itself between the devil and the deep blue sea, which might explain the ambiguity of what has been said by the club to date. The issue will not go away, but we will all continue supporting Partick Thistle, more or less. The more or less will depend on whether or not the club is open and honest about how it voted on this issue. On a personal note, in my correspondence with the club on this matter, I pledged to purchase a season ticket if the club backed the newco SFL 3 option instead of the newco SFL 1 option. Now, if the club can be open and honest about how it voted, irrespective of whether it voted yes or no to the newco in SFL1, I pledge that I will buy a season ticket. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guy Incognito Posted July 19, 2012 Report Share Posted July 19, 2012 FFS can we move on... this is a joke this debate ..... either support the jags or dont stop looking for a way out or some other snipe at the board SUPPORT IS WHAT WE NEED not doubters or negative dribble based on this and that and next thing.. base your judgement on what you know and what has been said by board not what this person said and twitter this and my mate knows a guy who knows someone else and told them this.. nonsense. Rant over!! COME THE JAGS.. new season lets get off to good start. Good post. The statement from Ian Maxwell tells us what we wanted to know and also what most of us wanted to hear. Case closed. It seems to me that folk are using the 'statement needs to be clearer' line as an excuse not to buy a season ticket or even turn up to watch the team next season. It possibly could be clearer but it doesn't need to be, because unless the reader has a poor grasp of the English language then he or she should be able work out what Maxwell means. Remember that episode of Blackadder where Baldrick votes in the House of Lords... Was that where he spends the money intended as a bribe on a huge turnip instead? 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.