The world's most-read Scottish politics website

Wings Over Scotland

Scottish football decides

Posted on July 04, 2012 by

The current positions of all 41 professional football clubs in Scotland (plus Queen’s Park FC) on the future status of the club currently registered as Sevco Scotland. Where possible, direct links to the official club website are provided for verification, otherwise the most helpful news report is linked. Updated as the situation develops.



Dundee United
Heart Of Midlothian
Inverness Caledonian Thistle
Motherwell (see here)
St Johnstone


Rangers (oldco in administration)


Ross County
St Mirren


7 No, 1 Yes, 4 unknown
8 Yes votes needed to pass resolution

(Rangers voted Yes, Kilmarnock abstained.)




Annan Athletic (Div. 3)
Ayr United
(Div. 2)
(Div. 1)
Dunfermline (Div. 1)
Hamilton Accies (Div. 1)
Livingston (Div. 1)
Morton (Div. 1)
Partick Thistle (Div. 1)
Raith Rovers (Div. 1) (see this also)

East Fife (Div. 2)

Clyde (Div. 3)
Peterhead (Div. 3)
(Div. 3)
Stirling Albion (Div. 3)


Dumbarton (Div. 1)
(Div. 2)

(NB Rule 53 of the SFL Constitution expressly forbids abstention. See appendix.)

Airdrie United (Div. 1)
Dundee (Div. 1)


Falkirk (Div. 1)

Albion Rovers (Div. 2)
Alloa Athletic (Div. 2)
Arbroath (Div. 2)
Brechin City (Div. 2)
Forfar Athletic (Div. 2)
Queen Of The South (Div. 2)

Berwick Rangers (Div. 3)
East Stirlingshire (Div. 3)
Elgin City (Div. 3)
Montrose (Div. 3)
Queen’s Park (Div. 3)


14 No, 2 Yes, 2 abstaining, 12 undeclared/uncertain
15 Yes votes needed to pass resolution







53.1 Each Member and Associate Member must send one representative, who must be an Official, to all general meetings (and to all other meetings by whatever name called) of the Members of the League.

53.2 All representatives of Member Clubs must exercise their vote on all matters which fall to be decided at general meetings.  Any Member Club whose representative fails to comply with this Rule shall be dealt with by the Board as a disciplinary matter in such way as the Board thinks proper.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

53 to “Scottish football decides”

  1. Doug Daniel says:

    Motherwell are a No as well, are they not? They’ve already had their shareholder meeting, and it was about 80% against Newco.
    That’s what I thought I read somewhere, anyway…

  2. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Yep, had just this minute added that…

  3. Seasick Dave says:

    Lets just hope that the SPL are not inviting Rupert Murdoch round for a cosy chat and tea and Tunnocks.

  4. Barbarian says:

    If the SLF votes “No” to Division 1 entry, does that mean the newco will have to start in Division 3? Or can the SFL reject any entry at all into the leagues?

    Geting more confused by the minute, and I’m already on medication!!

  5. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Stiff Little Fingers don’t have any influence at all as far as I know. But the SFL is not obliged to admit Sevco FC to any of their leagues. They could be told to piss off to the Juniors, or indeed refused admission to any level of Scottish football.


  6. Iain says:

    What makes you think that anything will be decided? Already the BBC and STV sites are suggesting the SPL will postpone a decision until the SFL meet again. Then, of course, the SFL will have to postpone until the SPL meet again. It has been months now and nobody seems capable of making a decision. Wild accusations, threats and lies but no decisions. 

    Perhaps after the referendum we might be able to make a decision but maybe not.

    How did these people ever get to be in charge of anything? 

  7. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Can’t argue with a word you say, Iain. I’m just putting the info up there. If today’s vote is postponed, the SPL will have achieved something I didn’t think possible: lowering my opinion of it.

  8. jimmyarab says:

    Entry to the SFL requires 3 years audited accounts which Sevco don’t have so they will have to do junior football for 3 years. In the world of rulebooks and laws anyway 😉
    Rumours that the SPL meeting will postpone the vote today and Ally is attending with Hughie. Errkk.

  9. Juteman says:

    SLF might be on to something with Alternative Ulster/Reality.:-)

  10. Erchie says:

    What would happen, say, if there was a fit of insanity and Sevco London PLC bought, for sake of argument, Airdrie

  11. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Then theoretically they’d be straight into SFL1. But time’s a little short for that now.

  12. Juan Solo says:

    With the new season fast approaching with so much uncertainty despite the rules being perfectly clear (as pointed out by Jimmyarab), I’m surprised that the SPL and SFL meetings haven’t at least registered 2 votes.  That being, votes of no confidence in Regan and Doncaster.  

    They are clearly not up to the task and their decisions (or lack thereof) could spell the end of Scottish football.

  13. Doug Daniel says:

    Clyde have put up a summary of the SFL meeting yesterday. Pretty amazing stuff. Their server is going bananas, but I managed to grab a copy of the text: 
    The club sent two directors to attend the meeting of the SFL clubs yesterday and they have reported back to the Board. The meeting and conversations covered the best part of 5 hours but there were only a few overarching themes.

    The clear message portrayed is that Scottish Football is in a very dark place indeed and there is simply no good solution to what is now a structural problem that has gone beyond a one dimensional issue of where Rangers should play next season. No matter what happens now there is going to be enormous fallout across the Scottish game. Whether some good can be extracted from the impending mess will depend entirely on the SPL clubs, guided by the currently absent leadership of the SFA.

    Neil Doncaster wanted only one thing from the meeting, to get a steer from the SFL clubs whether they would allow Rangers into SFL1. He talked the clubs through a detailed explanation of where the SPL clubs would lose £16m next season if Rangers were not entered to the top division of the SFL. This was delivered as a matter of fact, it was a “reality”. It seems that most, if not all, major sponsors of the SPL have exit clauses if either of the ‘Old Firm’ are not within the SPL. The total figure was not new, but the detail behind the number and its impact on individual clubs in the SPL was set out clearly. There were challenges made regarding the flip side of saving the central income from sponsors and media, the obvious impact of loss of supporters to the game who have strongly voiced their intent. Supporter reaction has not been factored in, again there are realities, the SPL clubs are waiting on their Sky cheques in August and clearly that was more important. Nowhere in the presentation was account taken on the impact to the finances of clubs, and more importantly the relevance of the game, should supporters stay at home.

    The consequential impact on the SFL from the presentation was that the SFL would lose its entitlement to circa £2m per annum from the Settlement Agreement put together to compensate the SFL for the SPL breakaway, this was made very clear by Neil Doncaster. He told the clubs that if the SPL didn’t have the money then they could not pay the SFL. The reality however, which was clear from the detailed figures, is that the SPL, whilst losing an enormous amount of funding, would have the cash to make payment; it is just that the SPL would not meet the legal obligation to the SFL as the cash would be used to finance the SPL teams.

    The undeniable statement made on behalf of the SPL is commercially understandable. The SPL would not allow £16m to flow out of their coffers, the impact would be too catastrophic for the SPL clubs to contemplate and as such the only options are that Rangers enter SFL1 or, as a less attractive backstop, a breakaway SPL2 will be formed. There is no prospect, from an SPL point of view, that SFL3 can be allowed to happen.

    Neil Doncaster was delivering a very unpalatable proposition and he did it clearly and effectively, hence the representatives of Clyde Football Club understood that the only thing that mattered was the impact on SPL clubs from the loss of money from media and sponsors.

    It was to the credit of every SFL club, and probably to the surprise of Neil Doncaster, that nobody asked him to improve on the £1m offer.

    The SFL clubs were given a steer for themselves by Neil Doncaster, if the SFL could not tell him how they might vote, then he would expect the SPL clubs not to vote at their meeting either.

    There were a few new things learned in the meeting, not least that the rules of the SFL would allow any club accepted into the SFL, by a simple majority, to be placed in any division. The rules do not state, nor imply, that they must join at the bottom tier, only custom and practice around good governance and integrity has seen teams join in the bottom tier. In addition, the attendees at the meeting were left in absolutely no doubt whatsoever by Stewart Regan that if the SPL clubs voted to allow a Newco into the SPL then it would be blocked by the SFA refusing to transfer the SFA membership. It was however caveated well enough to make it less than an absolute statement. The meeting was full of implied actions and outcomes, the use of clever language when delivering the speeches allows anyone to defend with ‘that is not what I said’. However, nobody will have left the meeting with anything other than the very clear messages being put across. Denials of the substance of the message being delivered do not assist anyone in this absolutely dreadful situation.

    There will be no winners. Any level of integrity for the sport will be lost by one outcome and financial collapse, we are told, will fall upon the SPL with the other. Sadly, the SFA and SPL have decided that whilst they say they are looking for a collaborative solution, they have very clearly made sure that by their own inaction that the blame will sit with the SFL – no matter what the outcome. The Board of the SFL are being put under intolerable pressure by the other bodies looking to avoid the implications of properly applying their own governance procedures.

    In summary, the SFA implication is that there will be no entry to the SPL. The SPL implication is that it therefore has to be SFL1 with a bit of restructure, or an SPL2 with the rest of the SFL cut adrift. There were no other options. Whilst Stewart Regan said that the SFA did not favour an SPL2, there was no equivalent abhorrence of that proposal as was attached to the proposal for a Newco in the SPL, leaving the implication that the door remains wide open for the SPL to secure their £16m with or without the SFL.

    The Board of the club will consider the feedback from its representatives and also the outcomes of the next few days and will keep its supporters fully appraised, but in the meantime see no reason to amend any previous comment.

  14. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    Incredible stuff. Why hasn’t Doncaster been chased out of Scotland by an angry mob yet?

  15. Juteman says:

    Newco refused SPL entry in vote.

  16. Dál Riata says:

    @Doug Daniel

    Thanks for putting that up (at 1:36pm). But … my head is spinning after it! Not because of the way you wrote it, or anything like that, not at all. Your writing is fine. It’s just the whole concept: the arrogance, beligerance and rank stupidity and incompetence of those supposedly ‘in charge’ of this latest episode in the Rangers-Fiasco soap opera! Honestly, the whole thing stinks.

    Isn’t what these numpties are ‘proposing’ to SFL clubs out and out corruption?

    Pressure being put upon clubs to vote in a certain way … financial inducements … threats … arbitary changing of rules to suit … everything will go to hell in a handcart … UNLESS you follow our demands and desires to allow a guilty-as-charged club to continue like nothing happened and a wee rap on the knuckles is enough … so, think about, and be quick …OR ELSE!!!! Just incredible. 

    Neil Doncaster should be charged with … well, this will do for a start; Inducement:

    Persuation by enticement, threat, or urging to commit a crime or pusue a particular course of action

  17. Doug Daniel says:

    Dál Riata – don’t worry, I didn’t write it, I lifted it clean off the Clyde website.
    Seems clear after reading it that Neil Doncaster has no place in Scottish football. The man is corrupt to the core, and if SPL finances are really so delicate that they are tied to the continued existence of two clubs, then whoever negotiated the contracts for TV deals and sponsorship is an incompetent buffoon. Neil Doncaster is the man tasked with running the SPL, so if the league is unsustainable, he’s the man to blame.
    Perhaps this is why his actions have been so bizarre – the man may be fighting for his job here. Let’s hope so, because Doncaster must GO!
    Great that the clubs have voted to reject the Sevco 5088 proposal, although Kilmarnock’s chairman clearly isn’t very savvy. Perhaps this is the reason Kilmarnock are in such financial dire straits? Regardless, if they end up folding over this, then it’ll serve them right. They could have at least had the balls to vote YES instead of being spineless by abstaining.

  18. Doug Daniel says:

    Incidentally, the longer this goes on, the further down the league I want Sevco to start. Having seen the reaction of many Rangers fans to the SPL vote, I’m inclined to think that even direct entry to Division 3 is making a special case for them.
    I’m also still not convinced we won’t see Cowdenbeath reborn as Rangers 2012, although time is perhaps against that happening.

  19. jimmyarab says:

    Admission to SFL3 will have to be a special case as it goes against many of the SFL rules.
    I had a quick look at the SFL rules and the application should have been all done and dusted by 1st June.
    This would include a detailed look at their financial records and any dealings with HMRC. Interestingly I didn’t see the 3 yr records rule which has been reported and I assumed was true. Simple things like the Sevco football colours would have to be submitted to see if it clashed with any other teams. Likewise the badges etc
    Ground inspections and background reports on the owners would also be required. Owners aren’t allowed to have any shares or any dealings with any other football club. The rules are endless basically so Sevco will have to get it’s skates on if the SFL agree to let them join.

  20. Juteman says:

    Who exactly is Doncaster?
    What is his history? 
    Apart from being an ex-member of Stray Cats.

  21. Grant says:

    So the real elephant in the room is the brilliantly negotiated contracts by Doncaster that rely on Celtic and Rangers being in the SPL. This brings up a few points in my mind.

    1. What would happen if either Celtic or Rangers were ever relegated by, you know, being bad on the field? This Old Firm clause was supposedly inserted to protect against Celtic/Rangers moving to England, but wouldn’t a better negotiator make the clause say some legal version of “current Scottish league” rather than SPL?

    2. Related to this, if these contracts exist, shouldn’t they be shown to the SFL teams to prove that renegotiation will be triggered?

    3. Who are these companies that are putting a gun to Scottish football? If fans can threaten to boycott games, they can threaten to take their money out of the Clydesdale bank for example.  

    Just because a sponsor could renegotiate a contract doesn’t mean they may want to.

  22. Dál Riata says:

    Can anyone help me out with the following questions?

    1) If ‘Rangers’ are refused entry into SFL, is there a vote for application to Div. 2 AND THEN a vote for application to Div. 3, or, does the vote for application by-pass Div.2 and go straight to Div. 3? If so/If not, why? OR;

    1b) Is there only a one-time vote from SFL clubs, ie allowing entry to Div. 1, and then that’s it, no more voting required?

    2) What would happen in the result of an SFL No vote to participation in any division, would ‘Rangers’ then have to apply for the Junior League? (Or any other options?)

    3) Could ‘Rangers’ be admitted into SFL Div. 3 EVEN THOUGH the SFL votes against?  

    Sorry if these questions have been answered elsewhere. It’s getting really difficult to keep up with all the twists and turns. The whole thing is, of course, a shambles!

    Thanks for any replies!


  23. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    1. Good question. So far as I can establish from SFL rules, they could indeed try their luck in all three divisions with a separate vote on each.

    2. Yes, Sevco FC would then have to apply to any league that would have them. The newco Gretna, for example, I think went into the East Of Scotland League.

    3. No.

  24. Dál Riata says:

    @ Rev. Stu

    Thanks for answering! 

  25. Doug Daniel says:

    I would think the obvious choice for Sevco 5088 would be to join fellow ex-SFL phoenix club Clydebank in the Juniors’ West Premier League.

    I‘m sure the standard of football is excellent.

  26. Appleby says:

    Seems a bit fishy that they are letting “Rangers” have a vote on this. Rampant cheating and bending of the rules, methinks, seeing as they’re really voting on themselves.

  27. Eoin says:

    Although the shuffling zombie corpse of Rangers has been looking a bit dubious for a while, I think today has illuminated for many people (the ones who aren’t following this closely) exactly how difficult it’s going to be to keep them going.

    Without detailing the SPL vote since it was a foregone conclusion anyway, we’ve had the comments from Clyde FC, and very stern comments from Raith Rovers, plus the news that apparently the SFA are blocking transfers to English clubs, a seemingly pointless act of obstructionism that isn’t going to do them any favours.

    It’s now clear that the SFL clubs are justifiably furious at how the situation has been dumped upon them, and I don’t think anyone is going to be under any illusions that Zombie Rangers will be voted into the first division any more. It seems that the SFA actually expected a positive reaction to the idea of floating the newco club into the first division, based on their silly document saying how it would be a financial solution while supposedly maintaining integrity.

    For their part, the SFA has demonstrated a rather stunning amount of cowardice, incompetence, irresponsibility and in the case of their expectations in regards to reactions to the first division plan, full-on stupidity.

    However this mess ends, the fans (nearly all of them, including a large amount of Rangers fans) can hold their heads high, and the clubs that have voted or will vote in accordance with the wishes of the fans can do the same, especially when most of the loudest voices around them were screaming about how financially critical their decision was going to be.

    The SFA and Zombie Rangers, Duff and Phelps and whatever clubs have voted for fear over integrity, on the other hand, should be ashamed of how they’ve handled this.

    On a final note, as a football fan from outside Scotland, I’ve never found the Scottish league particularly interesting (sorry) – which I think was largely understandable when for the vast majority of my life there’s only been two teams capable of winning it. I’m saying this to put some of the sponsorship worries into context, because I have never been more interested in Scottish football than I am right now.

    For TV sponsors, next season should be a relatively easy sell. The media spotlight, as harshly as it has exposed the ugly side of the game in Scotland, has also drummed up lots of interest. This could be combined with a league that might (for the first time in a while) have more than two predictable competitive sides, and definitely won’t have the predictable two finishing in the top two slots. In the meantime, there’s bound to be some interest in watching Rangers in division 3, even if it’s just for the novelty factor of seeing a genuinely big European side in their country’s lowest level of professional football.

    Instead of worrying about losing sponsors, the SFA should be attempting to sell next season as the most interesting in Scottish football in some time – cynically perhaps, but also realistically.

  28. Dál Riata says:

    Sorry, a few more questions! And for all who’ve been following every move and nuance in the story, my apologies if what I ask is something that has been knowledge for ages, and all the rest of it! So, please bear with me. You’ll hopefully see what I’m getting at with questions 3 and 4!

    Couple of easy(?) ones first!

    1) Do Glasgow Rangers, as once were, still exist? 

    2) If they do not, then they are, or what remains, now, legally(?) known as Sevco 5088: is that right or wrong? 

    Which leads on to the SPL vote: 

    Stu has written above; “Rangers (oldco. in administration)’ 

    3) If Rangers are still Rangers, how can they be allowed to vote for themselves in this case? Is it not a conflict of interest? 

    4) If they are not Rangers anymore, and are Sevco 5088, then who was it that voted AS ‘Rangers’ to keep Rangers in the SPL? 

    Christ, ma heid’s spinnin’ here! I’m getting myself a headache just thinking how to word these questions!

    Sorry if this is common knowledge, or obvious and easy to work out!

    And again, thanks for any replies!


  29. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    1. Yes. The old club is still in the process of administration/liquidation.

    2. Sevco is a completely new corporate entity, which owns all the assets of the old Rangers, having bought them from the administrators for £5.5m.

    3. Because the oldco still exists and therefore retains the SPL share until it’s transferred to someone else. (Almost certainly Dunfermline or Dundee.) And if you hold a share, you’re allowed to vote.

    4. Old Rangers voted to transfer its share to Sevco. The proposition wasn’t “keeping Rangers in the SPL”, but transferring an old company’s share to a new company. The fact that the new company wants to rename itself “Rangers” is technically irrelevant.

  30. Barbarian says:

    With many Rangers players now disappeared to other clubs, the newco might find itself unable to secure promotion out of Div 1 anyway.

    What annoys me is that Rangers management / owners seem to be blaming everyone for the problems, yet it was their finances that have contributed most to the current issues.

  31. Appleby says:

    With Rangers gone, won’t it end up with Celtic dominating alone anyway instead of it being the Old Firm duo? It’d really need the two of them to go to shake it up and get it really interesting.

  32. Appleby says:

    Spot on Barbarian. Nothing worse than crooks playing the victim. Especially after them getting away with it without so much as a slapped wrist.

  33. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “With many Rangers players now disappeared to other clubs, the newco might find itself unable to secure promotion out of Div 1 anyway.”

    I’m not convinced they’ll be able to put out a team at all. At present they have, I think, eight players on their books, a transfer embargo still in place and the SFL season starting in three weeks. I’m not sure what the minimum amount of subs you’re allowed to name is, but right now they don’t even have a starting XI, and I suspect a chunk of the players who are still undecided about transferring over from oldco to newco will have had their minds made up by the rejection from the SPL.

  34. Appleby says:

    One thing about this is that it is certainly the most interesting and talked about drama and moment in Scottish football in such a long time. I hear all sorts talking about it now and then in various ways. Quite a few are optimistic like Stu is and they aren’t even WoS readers (I think).

  35. jimmyarab says:

    It’s certainly the most dramatic story in football in generations but somethings up behind the scenes.
    Not a peep about the story on STV’s Scotland Tonight and it looks like Newsnicht are going to ignore the story as well.
    Plus the decision by the Hootsmon to pull the ‘social unrest’ story by Regan it looks like TPTB have moved in and put a stop to the story.
    Someone is very worried.

  36. Appleby says:

    I suppose without murdurrrr and Rangers they’ve lost about 80% of Scottish TV and newspaper content.

  37. Grantus says:

    Ok, so ‘Rangers’ are no more. Fine.
    The newco applied to the SPL but wrere rejected. Fine.
    As any new entity, they must surely start from the 3rd?
    (Best for everyone as far as i can see.)
    The only problem i see is money from tv. Has there been any word from any broadcaster about the situation?  

  38. charlie says:

    Gretna FC on wiki: At the end of the season, all of the club’s staff were made redundant and the club were initially relegated to the Third Division due to their inability to guarantee fulfilment of their forthcoming fixtures. After this demotion, the one remaining offer to buy the club was withdrawn.[3] The club resigned their place in the Scottish Football League on 3 June[4] and were formally liquidated on 8 August.[5]

    The club’s supporters’ trust then decided to establish a new club, Gretna 2008, who were accepted into the East of Scotland Football League on 11 July 2008. Whilst sharing the same fanbase and a similar name, the new club has no legal connection with the original Gretna F.C.
    Another different point – the BBC radio4 was using the words ‘Rangers have been barred from the SPL..’ Factually wrong and makes them sounds like hard done to. TRFC applied to the league and were turned down. Just to clarify for those who aren’t following the minutiae…

    And another, have Bob Diamond and Neil Doncaster ever been seen in the same room? Thay have been seen in the same moral dimension….but not one that’s been discovered by the rest of us. Hadron is on the case…

    And fair play to all the Stickies here who’ll take the punishment unlike the high heid yins thru’out Scottish football


  39. Seasick Dave says:

    It wouldn’t be the first time that a club, which has been relegated, plummets down through the divisions; Swansea springs to mind.

    Who is to say that Sevco, if they gained entry to SFL1, wouldn’t suffer a similar fate with their hugely weakened squad.

    If it came to pass that Sevco were to be relegated due to lack of onfield success, would Mr Regan and co jump in with a safety net?

  40. Appleby says:

    As a new entity it should be junior leages for three years at least.

  41. Dál Riata says:


    Thanks again for answering my questions (@10:46pm). You know your stuff!

  42. Matt74 says:

    Haven’t Falkirk said no?

  43. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    No. See their statement, linked in the feature. It basically says “We’re open to having Rangers in the second tier of Scottish football, on condition that we get league reconstruction we like.”

  44. Eoin says:

    With Rangers gone, won’t it end up with Celtic dominating alone anyway instead of it being the Old Firm duo? It’d really need the two of them to go to shake it up and get it really interesting.

    With Rangers out of the Premier League, it is somewhat likely that Celtic will dominate next season, yes.

    However, with Rangers in the Premier League….it is somewhat likely that Celtic will dominate next season.

    It’s not like Rangers are, right now, a club with a large pool of players, no real off-the-pitch issues, and brandishing a sizeable transfer budget. They’re the exact opposite of all those things. It is even possible that Celtic would dominate the league to an even greater extent if Rangers were in it next season.

    I think it might also be worth noting that if the SFA were really, truly concerned about having a properly competitive league, then perhaps there were better times to begin taking action than, say, right now.

  45. Appleby says:

    Here’s hoping for Celtic to go down the drain too sometime soon then. It’s all for the good of Scottish football, I promise. ;P

  46. Juteman says:

    Listening to Ally McCoist this morning. He only has 6 signed players and there is a transfer embargo.
    How can he apply to join ANY league? How could any league accept the application?

  47. Arbroath1320 says:

    Here’s the BBC’s take on Ally McCoist’s thoughts on joining the SFL in Division 3.

  48. Appleby says:

    Note that they are all clearly talking about “rebuilding Rangers”. Not building a new team. That is the first mistake or falsehood that needs to be stopped. It’s a new team, treat it accordingly and fairly – straight to the junior leagues for three years at least. That idiot Ally calls it a “punishment” to be in Div 3 when it’s a special free ride that others don’t get instead! Punishment? THAT IS NOT A PUNISHMENT. There is no real punishment yet. He’s (or the club has) not even had his wrists slapped compared to what has been done or what he should be getting for it.
    Otherwise it’s a great way to fiddle tax and get away with fraud that everyone and his brother should do. Why not? Apparently all the “punishment” you’ll get is someone asking you to stop cheating and then you paint yourself a victim. Then all you do is start another shell company and paint it up in the image of the one you abandoned. Magic.

  49. Juteman says:

    Like i said. How can any club apply to join any league if they only have 6 players?
    There is no team/club, surely?

  50. Appleby says:

    They’ll bend the rules to suit again, no doubt. They’ll have a special series of five a side games whenever it’s “Rangers” playing in the leagues.

  51. nelbarn says:

    You can add Annan Athletic to the list of those who will refuse to vote in favour of Newco going to Division 1.  See here:

    My reading of the Falkirk statement is that they too are opposed, although it is possible to interpret what they have said as implying that they could vote yes in the event that this week’s negotiations give rise to a proposal for a 16 team top division. It is not clear whether this is what their board meant.

    On the basis that there are 14 definite no votes and 2 abstentions, as long as the votes follow the publicised intentions, it can only go one way.  There are not enough clubs left to secure the votes required, with only 12 left who have yet to declare their intentions.

  52. Rev. Stuart Campbell says:

    “You can add Annan Athletic to the list of those who will refuse to vote in favour of Newco going to Division 1”

    Cheers, I’d been looking for the Annan statement. That’s that, then. Unless someone changes their mind, the newco CANNOT now get the 15 votes it requires.

  53. Doug Daniel says:

    Seems to me the SFL chairmen are really pissed off with how Doncaster and Regan have acted, and rightly so. Considering how convincing SPL chairmen to see the light seemed to be akin to pulling teeth, it’s refreshing to see the way many of the SFL chairmen apparently see the game the same way as the rest of us. Maybe that’s because people become chairmen of smaller teams through love of football and their club, rather than because they think they’re buying a cash cow, and therefore their motivations are purer.
    Incidentally, do we actually have a statement from Livi? Their website makes no mention of it, but I’m assuming you’ve got some sort of source for confirming them as a no (as if they were ever going to vote yes!)

Comment - please read this page for comment rules. HTML tags like <i> and <b> are permitted. Use paragraph breaks in long comments. DO NOT SIGN YOUR COMMENTS, either with a name or a slogan. If your comment does not appear immediately, DO NOT REPOST IT. Ignore these rules and I WILL KILL YOU WITH HAMMERS.

↑ Top