tom_widdows Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 All public transport is free in the fatherland. You mean its paid for in their taxes. Could be the same in this country except for the 'I dont use public transport so why the fuck should I pay for it' mentality. Anyway has the 11-1 voting system been punted yet? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_min Posted July 31, 2012 Share Posted July 31, 2012 You mean its paid for in their taxes. No, I mean they have no barriers and very few ticket inspectors Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick sheep Posted October 19, 2012 Share Posted October 19, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20013658?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter Anyone else getting fucked around when trying to cut & paste from the beeb? Doing my head in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom_widdows Posted October 22, 2012 Share Posted October 22, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20036930 I cant be the only one who is wondering why the non OF clubs havent just said ' right theres 11 of us and 1 of them so thats enough to change the voting structure cockwomble. Get it sorted now. It actually distresses me at BBC rumours that there are at least 3 clubs who dont want it changed (If true my money is on Kilmarnock, Celtic & St Mirren). This quote from the Big Bang Theory keeps coming about when I think of Cockwomble at these meetings Sheldon: Point of order. I move that any vote on team names must be unanimous. No man should be forced to emblazon his chest with a Bengal tiger when common sense dictates it should be an army ant. Leonard: Will the gentleman of the great state of denial yield for a question? Sheldon: I will yield. Leonard: After we go through the exercise of an annoying series of votes, all of which the gentleman will lose, does he then intend to threaten to quit if he does not get his way? Sheldon: He does! Leonard: I move we are the Army Ants Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manc_don Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Pretty much Tom, it's quite scary at how archaic and short sighted some folk involved with football in Scotland are. Seriously need to look at the medium and long term outcomes of a failure to act. But not, they are just happy to protect their little pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlg1903 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 unfuckingbelievable Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 It's deid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 wtf the fuck (caution from the Daily Retard) IT is understood Aberdeen joined Celtic in opposing the move which would see the current 11-1 majority needed for major decisions change to a new 9-3 voting system. A motion was put forward at yesterday’s SPL board meeting to ditch the current 11-1 majority needed for major decisions with some clubs keen to see a new 9-3 voting system introduced on all issues. But hopes that the changes could be in place by next month hit the buffers at yesterday’s meeting inside Hampden and Record Sport understands that Aberdeen opposed the move. SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster said: “On voting reform, it was agreed that the members’ resolution would be deferred and considered again on November 19. “There’s a perception the voting regime is 11-1 but very few matters are 11-1. The vast majority are 8-4, some are 10-2 and a few are 11-1. “The motion put forward would make everything 9-3 but there will be further debate. It requires an 11-1 vote to get that through.” And on the issue of possible league reconstruction, Doncaster added: “There remains a real appetite for reconstruction of the leagues and talks are ongoing.” And he also reiterated the SPL is coping well after the demise of Rangers. He said: “Crowds have held up well and commercial income is holding up well.” Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgowdon Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 We're one of the three. Probably because we reckon we'll finish 2nd and get the £2.4m. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stewart Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 We're one of the three. Probably because we reckon we'll finish 2nd and get the £2.4m. Was told last week it was because we can't trust certain Ayrshire chairman not to use the change to try and get The Rangers in to the SPL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave_min Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 £2.4million and no Huns? Certainly works for me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlg1903 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I find that incredibly short sighted if true, the huns are going to get back up sooner or later and we need to accept this. When they do if its still 11-1 then we will just fall back into the previous status quo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgowdon Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I find that incredibly short sighted if true, the huns are going to get back up sooner or later and we need to accept this. When they do if its still 11-1 then we will just fall back into the previous status quo Wait until they are Div 1 then propose reform. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlg1903 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 the thing is though its not just the huns, we need to start taking power away from celtic. A change in the way tv money is distributed could go a long way to levelling the playing a field a bit...... you so other teams would have a fighting chance at a title shot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tyrant Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 I hope to fuck it's not true. I hope someone's emailed the club aboot this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edinburghdon Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Anyone consider that it was rejected purely because its not the right change? As the article states, not all decisions require an 11-1 vote, maybe they're trying to get a fairer system than a blanket 9-3 majority. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madbadteacher Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Anyone consider that it was rejected purely because its not the right change? As the article states, not all decisions require an 11-1 vote, maybe they're trying to get a fairer system than a blanket 9-3 majority. This is what my usually reliable "has connections" source telt me when I emailed asking "WTF?" The Ayrshire/govan mafia angle is apparently not the "main" reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penfold Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Aberdeen prefer a 10-2 system. Basically Old Firm + 1. There have been many issues which are decided on the 9-3 vote that we have sided with the Old Firm but still been overruled on by the rest of the clubs. One of these was us voting against the last Setanta deal which ended in disaster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 the thing is though its not just the huns, we need to start taking power away from celtic. A change in the way tv money is distributed could go a long way to levelling the playing a field a bit...... you so other teams would have a fighting chance at a title shot tbh we need to get power away from the spl clubs in general (including afc), preferably by dissolving the rotten excuse for a league. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tlg1903 Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 Fair point GS, i would just like to see clubs look at the bigger picture and try to make changes that will lead to a stronger overall league. Once upon a time Scottish clubs and players were respected in Europe, i think that's what we should be aiming for. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maverick sheep Posted October 23, 2012 Share Posted October 23, 2012 fuck the voting system. let's just ask turnbull hutton to decide whatever needs decided. I do fully agree with GS, scrap the SPL entirely, but at the very least stop the SPL clubs dictating to the rest of Scotland. I'd also give the amateur clubs a vote in how the 'professional' leagues operate, probably by having an appointed a single representative to sit as an equal to the league club chairmen. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigAl Posted October 24, 2012 Share Posted October 24, 2012 the thing is though its not just the huns, we need to start taking power away from celtic. A change in the way tv money is distributed could go a long way to levelling the playing a field a bit...... you so other teams would have a fighting chance at a title shot Spot on...just had this very argument today with a tattie muncher criticising me for laughing at the manner of their defeat last night. Told him I'd support Scottish (??) teams in Europe like the Tic once we all batted off the same wicket, and whilst injustices like the division of TV money remained they could go fuck themselves. He genuinely finds it hard to comprehend that without the other eleven clubs in the league that they wouldn't get a penny themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Lifted fae mad BBC Scotland has details of SFL proposal of 16 team top tier, 10 team 2nd tier and 18 team 3rd tier to include Celtic & Rangers colt teams. They will be discussing this story on Sportsound tonight 18:20 Radio Scotland. First thoughts "colt" teams is a complete non-starter (even ignoring the fact the huns 1st team is in the 4th tier at present). At time when teams are cutting back, and Lennon is complaining about too many games while having the biggest squad in the land they want to add in another team into the equation. Further patronising bullshit that will be sold as being a cash boost to the lower leagues as all anyone wants to see if wee pricks in blue and/or green and white shirts. 16 team top league may work with a 10 team league below that but need more detail on how they will make up for the loss of 4 home games. Seems to suggest the spl will be abolished, some has some good ideas at least. edit to add link: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20302632 aiming to be in place for 2015/16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow sheep Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Also 16 top team league? 2-3 relegated 18 team bottom league 3-4 promoted So middle 10 team league 5-7 teams promoted/relegated every season Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TENEMENTFUNSTER Posted November 12, 2012 Share Posted November 12, 2012 Seems daft. But be prepared for many such schemes the common denominator of them all being Huns back at or near the top league. 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.