Stefanovitch 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Scottish FA Board statement on league reconstruction Wednesday, 17 April 2013 The Board of the Scottish FA has issued the following statement in relation to league reconstruction: â??Over the past 12 months, representatives of the Scottish Premier League and Scottish Football League have worked tirelessly and collaboratively to present an exciting and financially viable proposal designed to take Scottish football forward for all 42 clubs. â??The outcome of Mondayâ??s Scottish Premier League vote, however, has been characterised by acrimony and rancour. Scottish football, even in times of grim uncertainty, should uphold the value of mutual respect, especially among clubs who all have a place within their communities. â??It should be remembered that 10 out of 12 top-flight clubs voted in favour of change. It is with this in mind that the Scottish FA reiterates its commitment to restructuring on the five principles of a single league body, fairer financial distribution, introduction of play-offs, parachute payments and a pyramid below the third division. â??The governing body calls on both the Scottish Premier League and the Scottish Football League to re-affirm their commitment to the five principles. â??We are aware of public comments from club chairmen from both the SPL and SFL inviting the Scottish FA to intervene to find a solution. It should be noted that we have, over the duration of the reconstruction process, facilitated a series of discussions via our Professional Game Board. After the events of last summer, the Scottish FA called upon the leagues to meet under an independent chair with a view to agreeing reconstruction proposals by October 2012. This was rejected by the leagues, who sought to promote their own proposals. â??In December 2012, when that process faltered, the Scottish FAâ??s PGB invited all parties round the table to get the process back on track, which culminated in the agreement in principle in January. Following the separate meetings of each leagueâ??s clubs in January 2013, the Scottish FA again sought to provide assistance to take forward an implementation plan. That offer was rejected by the leagues. â??The Scottish FAâ??s rules â?? and the respective rule books of the league bodies â?? do not allow for the governing body, or any external body, to â??take controlâ?? of a separate company in possession of commercial contracts worth millions of pounds. â??However, if it is truly is the will of the clubs, the Scottish FA is prepared to get involved and act in the best interests of the national game. This will require a mandate to the Scottish FA from both the Scottish Premier League and the Scottish Football League, so that positive changes to improve Scottish footballâ??s future can be proposed without the threat of legal recourse or judicial review. â??Structure, finance, voting and governance are the key issues all of which are intertwined and need to be reflected in one coherent set of proposals. The views of supporters and the general public must also be taken into account. â??Lest it be forgotten, with the honourable exceptions of Celtic and Rangers in recent years, Scottish clubs now routinely exit European football in the qualifying rounds. Our national menâ??s team are bottom of FIFA World Cup Qualifying Group A and are ranked 77th in the world rankings. Some of our biggest clubs are experiencing serious financial difficulty. â??There is no better snapshot to illustrate the current climate than the fact that the afterglow of goodwill and positivity generated by two exceptional William Hill Scottish Cup semi-finals this weekend lasted less than 24 hours. â??We all have a duty to protect and promote the national game. The Scottish FA urges the league bodies, and their respective clubs, to embrace the positive aspects of change now, or to formalise their request to the Scottish FA for external assistance.â? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jimmy millar Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 And who are the SFA's PGB ,O'Regan,Lieswell etc,. aye right,we'll let them sort it out and I don't think. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
blueflag 386 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 they make it sound like they have some super dooper plan that all we have to do is ask for help from the sfa ... fuck off Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk 2 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gers4Life 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Vote defeated end of and get over it ffs! 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bluenose80 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 “We all have a duty to protect and promote the national game." This sticks out for me when in the last 30 years have the SFA done this. And where was their duty to protect the game when they allowed a club to force referees strike because they couldn't take losing. If this is the SFAs purpose they why has Regan not been sacked for failing completely to protect or promote the game in any way shape or form since he's been in charge. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
foggy dewhurst 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 looks like lawwell is trying to get the sfa to talk the clubs round to accepting the 12 12 18 that was rejected 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefanovitch 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 looks like lawwell is trying to get the sfa to talk the clubs round to accepting the 12 12 18 that was rejected and secure the rights to our tv income 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Calgacus 8 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Don't they already have our TV rights - wasn't the deal between the SPL & the SFL for three years? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stefanovitch 0 Posted April 17, 2013 Author Share Posted April 17, 2013 Don't they already have our TV rights - wasn't the deal between the SPL & the SFL for three years? Didn't Charles Green say it was for 1 year only? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
26th of foot 6,055 Posted April 17, 2013 Share Posted April 17, 2013 Peter's pal, Neil has failed to deliver. The baton is now passed to Peter's pal, Stewart. 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.