ian1964 10,416 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 St Mirren statement on League reconstruction After a very studied consideration of the Structure, Articles of Association, Rules and Shareholders Agreement, the Board of St Mirren Football Club have decided that they will be unable to support the motion at next Monday’s Meeting of SPL Clubs regarding this proposal for League Reconstruction. This view has been taken after careful thought regarding this proposal including engagement with fans and the views of our coaching staff. The principles of a new league structure, single league body and all through distribution model are part of many aspects of this we fully support, however the proposal as presented does not, in our view, move the game forward. The concept of playing 22 games prior to breaking into three leagues of eight, including the middle eight losing their points gained in the first series of games, is not a system we see as taking the game forward in the long term. You will be aware that other countries have tried this system and have since rejected such a set up. We also feel that this system is not fair to fans who buy into their club by way of a season ticket, who are then unsure of what they are purchasing. It is also against the basic wishes of the fans for larger leagues as highlighted in all recent fan surveys. In the proposed rules the voting structure is remaining, in all items that are of importance, an 11-1 vote. In our opinion, this is fundamentally wrong in any structure and is the principle reason why Scottish League Football has not been able to restructure prior to this time, a view St Mirren have held for some time. The restriction on any change for three years is also very much against our view. When engaging with any new rule book there will always be oversight and anomalies that need to be revised on an annual basis. An area St Mirren are very uncomfortable with is the lock down on various financial rules. The credibility of Scottish Football has been tarnished badly in recent times by financial mismanagement and the time has come for strong financial rules to be in place. Another concern to us is the hard line taken by some in certain areas, like season start date, home-grown talent, under-21 rules. This is not an exhaustive list, however we do think these items require negotiation for the betterment of Scottish Football in general. We also do not accept that this is a take it or leave it situation. We do wish to keep working towards one organisation, an all through distribution model and getting closer to our supporters’ wishes of a larger league, while being fully aware of the commercial and financial pressures of operating a football club. On behalf of the Board of Directors of St Mirren Football Club 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian1964 10,416 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Teas oot for the SPL me thinks! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
aweebluesoandso 290 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 An outbreak of honesty in the SPL, hope it catches on. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UCF2008 0 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 I posted this article in the football chat By EWING GRAHAME Published on Monday 8 April 2013 00:43 ANNAN Athletic chairman Henry McClelland believes that the court case started by former Celtic star Harry Hoodâ??s pub business can bring down the SPL â?? and he fears that they could take the rest of Scottish football with them if reconstruction goes ahead. Six years ago the SPL used a court order to prevent Hoodâ??s Angels bar in Uddingston from using a Polish decoder to show live matches. The SPL had previously granted rights to Polish broadcasters Polstat to transmit their games in 2006 and 2007. However, in a similar court case involving the Red, White and Blue bar in Portsmouth and Sky TV last year, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that banning the use of foreign decoders and smart cards was a restriction of competition. In the light of that decision, Hoodâ??s company, Lisini Pub Management, is suing the SPL for £1,761,749. Last month Lord Woolman of the Supreme Court dismissed the SPLâ??s attempt to have the claim refused. â??An EC citizen living in say Germany should not be prevented from obtaining a signal from Sky, BBC, RAI, Nova or Polsat,â? he said. â??In my view the ECJ has held that the object of such agreements is to restrict competition.â? The judge stated there will be another hearing to establish how this case progresses â?? but McClelland believes that this could be the first of many claims against the SPL from other bars who were prevented from using foreign decoders. And he reckons the potential cost to the top division could persuade enough Scottish League clubs to torpedo their plans for reconstruction when members vote on the issue at Hampden on 19 April. â??It can certainly reflect the way we vote, if we believe that there is sufficient risk,â? he said. â??Could this open the floodgates? That would open the door for someone to act on behalf of other pubs which have gone down the same route and they could bring the same litigation forward. It could bring the SPL down. http://www.scotsman.com/sport/footba...-spl-1-2882311 Typical stupidity of the SPL. It shouldn't even have been their fight in the first place. You'll notice the EPL managed to avoid trouble in the other case as it was up to Sky as the rights holder to take action. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
der Berliner 3,249 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 (edited) The crystal balls turned golden to many of them last summer, only to realise after a long and ruinous season that there was ever only one club to reap all the rewards, one club who does not wish to change the current status quo, one club whose fans don't want to be here, one club who drove the whole thing to the walls ... and yet stands there with millions in their accounts and a smug smile on their faces. At times you wonder how often a Scot needs to get kicked in the teeth before learning that the promised gold on the horizon does not by default materialize at the end of the day. More often than not, it turned/-s out to be some polished brass ... at best. Edited April 8, 2013 by der Berliner 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lizzie78 0 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 the only real reason it would be now or never is if there isn't an spl to merge with the sfl next season 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted April 8, 2013 Author Share Posted April 8, 2013 Let's just hope Ross County stand firm, and/or others stand with St Mirren on this. It's genuinely astonishing that the SPL have focussed so much attention on trying to bribe the SFL1 clubs into supporting the proposals or joining a break-away, when they can't get their own house in order. It begs the question whose views has Doncaster been representing in recent weeks. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Is the vote next week a secret ballot???? I think if it is, there will be more clubs voting against. If its not, more clubs will fall in line 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
amms 0 Posted April 8, 2013 Share Posted April 8, 2013 Surely if the 'proposal' doesn't go through, no matter who scuppers it, then 'SPL 2' kicks in? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigy 0 Posted April 8, 2013 Author Share Posted April 8, 2013 Surely if the 'proposal' doesn't go through, no matter who scuppers it, then 'SPL 2' kicks in? Why? They'd still need 11 v 1 to introduce SPL2. Why would St Mirren and the like vote for that? 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.