gisabeer 409 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 They have to get the sfl to agree to that, which they wont 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 They have to get the sfl to agree to that, which they wont what makes you say that? I would have though the spl could do as they wish without the sfl approval. are you thinking along the lines of clubs needing permission to leave the sfl? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutchy Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 The SFL is the league to be in and maybe we should begin to consider who we want to join us as the SFL will probably be the only league with a TV deal. lol Yes, there may be trouble ahead, but who for is my question? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Any update on the SPL begging us to come back? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 any update on our licence as well. what a shambles. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,458 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Interesting from Jim Traynors' blog today,could it happen? The rift could become permanent if the SPL insist on further sanctions which would push Rangers even closer to their new neighbours. In fact, the notion of the SFL and Rangers forming a stand-alone system, which would prevent promotion to the SPL has, I believe, been discussed informally and some think it has merit and possibilities. There are only two massive clubs in Scotland, even if one of them, Rangers, are on their knees. But they will get back to their feet and if they remained in the SFL the game's poor relations could very quickly become the stronger and richer of the two leagues. Naturally, the SPL would laugh at the very idea yet if, because of diminishing TV and sponsorship deals, they lose a few clubs they'd be reduced to Celtic, the game's main power, but perhaps only seven or eight impoverished others. Those clubs could be even less of an attraction to telly companies than now. On the other hand, SFL clubs would benefit from deals of their own because they now have one of the big two in their pack. And having already lost everything, Rangers have nothing left to risk. The SFL, and Rangers, might never have a better chance to grow, while the SPL, who left the others behind in 1998 to set up on their own, would become weaker. The SFA would probably be unable to resist a wish by the SFL and Rangers to stand alone and demand European places because they couldn't rule in favour of, say, eight or nine SPL clubs against 30 in the SFL. After all, haven't the SPL been insisting the voice of the majority must be heard? http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/jimtraynor/2012/07/whats-the-bid-idea.html 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
the gunslinger 3,366 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 Interesting from Jim Traynors' blog today,could it happen? The rift could become permanent if the SPL insist on further sanctions which would push Rangers even closer to their new neighbours. In fact, the notion of the SFL and Rangers forming a stand-alone system, which would prevent promotion to the SPL has, I believe, been discussed informally and some think it has merit and possibilities. There are only two massive clubs in Scotland, even if one of them, Rangers, are on their knees. But they will get back to their feet and if they remained in the SFL the game's poor relations could very quickly become the stronger and richer of the two leagues. Naturally, the SPL would laugh at the very idea yet if, because of diminishing TV and sponsorship deals, they lose a few clubs they'd be reduced to Celtic, the game's main power, but perhaps only seven or eight impoverished others. Those clubs could be even less of an attraction to telly companies than now. On the other hand, SFL clubs would benefit from deals of their own because they now have one of the big two in their pack. And having already lost everything, Rangers have nothing left to risk. The SFL, and Rangers, might never have a better chance to grow, while the SPL, who left the others behind in 1998 to set up on their own, would become weaker. The SFA would probably be unable to resist a wish by the SFL and Rangers to stand alone and demand European places because they couldn't rule in favour of, say, eight or nine SPL clubs against 30 in the SFL. After all, haven't the SPL been insisting the voice of the majority must be heard? http://blogs.dailyrecord.co.uk/jimtraynor/2012/07/whats-the-bid-idea.html I think I would like that. years ago I loved the oldfirm but over the last 5 years celtc have become horrible. in 94 I didn't want them to die now I would dance a jig. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted July 23, 2012 Share Posted July 23, 2012 How nice would it be if in a few years, the SPL goes completely tits-up. The SFL, then being the more dominant power, states that they already have a top division & if any former-SPL team wishes to join them, they would have to start at the bottom. By this time RFC are sitting pretty at the top of DIV 1. Many a smile round Govan way methinks!!! 0 Quote Link to post 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.