Well today has been a bit of a Carlsberg day thus far - I think it may well have been them they had lined up.

SPL2 anyone?? How will that help the whole of Scottish football which is what this reconstruction was supposed to be about according to some ...

I'm all for taking supporters' views into account, but football isn't a democracy. What most fans want is league expansion for the sake of it. A 16 team league makes no sense whatsoever for SPL clubs - lower shares of revenue and more meaningless games against smaller sides (two things proven to reduce attendances). The basic fixture list doesn't even work out because you only get 30 games.

Voting for that would be a complete nonsense and SPL chairmen know it. This was their attempt at a constructive alternative.

According to Richard Gordon it wouldve enabled the chance to vote on a bigger league further down the lne.

I said when the SPL clubs failed to change the 11-1 voting system that it would come back to haunt them. Now we will have SPL 2 and in July next year, the SPL will once again be run solely by Celtic & Rangers. Serious missed opportunity.

SPL2 is not on the table.

Watch this space. SPL 2 will be on the table very soon. The Hamilton chairman said a couple of weeks ago if reconstruction was voted down he would push for SPL 2 for next season (and Rangers will be invited to join)

Well that's OK then - be stuck with something you don't want for three years just so there's the chance of expanding the league at a later date.

It was a cynical ploy by Celtic, nothing more nothing less.

Do you get the 11-1 voting system? If Celtic don't want something but everyone else does, it goes through!
The clubs should have voted down the 11-1 thing as soon as Rangers died but for some strange reason, they failed.

Ironically it was Celtic and Aberdeen who vetoed the change to the 11-1 voting system ... fast foward 6 months and they want to then use that 9-3 option. You couldn't make this shit up ...

I'm sorry, what?

This morning, Celtic proposed taking "league reconstruction" off the list of issues requiring 11-1, and putting it in the 9-3 camp. That was designed to push through the reconstruction measures on the table.

This is nothing to do with changing the 11-1 as a whole.

So, Celtic proposed a voting structure that would make them less powerful, to force through a reconstruction plan that would give them less money and that was a "cynical ploy"?

Less powerful only for voting on league reconstruction.

And yes, it remains a cynical ploy. I don't know why Celtic were in favour, but they were and tried to force it through while making St Mirren look bad.

You're basically describing a simple compromise that was offered to try and reach an agreement. I don't see why that should be labelled a "cynical ploy", it's exactly what clubs should be doing - offering a compromise to try and reach a position that everyone can get behind. St Mirren wanted to change the voting system (or at least said they did) so they were offered it. I don't see them offering anything constructive in return other than a 14 team league that nobody else wants.

Please read my post again, because it seems you've not understood what happened.

Celtic wanted to change the voting structure only for reconstruction. Nothing more. That's not what St Mirren or anyone else (except Celtic, and Aberdeen for some reason) want - they want it changed for everything (that's currently subject to 11-1).

St Mirren didn't need any help to look bad. A poor decision, with poor reasoning and the SFL clubs will pay the price.

In other news, Charles Green faces an internal investigation by Rangers International.

Is it just possible, that Celtic were thinking of the long term future of Scottish football and not short term gain?

I understand exactly what you're trying to say. You're attempting to argue that because the rest of the SPL clubs didn't offer to abolish the 11-1 vote entirely that it doesn't count as a compromise. That's a decidedly odd argument.

St Mirren wanted the 11-1 vote changed full stop, the rest of the SPL offered them a change to a 9-3 vote in certain areas. That's precisely what a compromise is - you get some of what you want but not everything.

Stewart Gilmour said last week the 11-1 vote for league reform was a 'big ticket' item that he wasnt happy with.

Call it a ploy or a compromise but the fact is he voted against changing it to 9-3.

No, they offered a 9-3 in one area. And it just so happened that area was the one which was about to be voted on.

That's not a compromise.

Why don't we look at what he actually said:


Not quite the same, is it?

"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."

So, to prove 11-1 is the reason that there has been no reconstruction, they decide to vote against reconstruction? That is some strange logic!

If St Mirren want the 11-1 vote abolished in all areas, and the SPL offer to abolish it in one area, then it's closer to what St Mirren want than the status quo. I don't see on what planet that can't be described as a compromise. By all means argue it wasn't enough of a compromise, but to discount it entirely and try and pretend it was some sort of cynical trick is bizarre.

I was listening to him last week on sportsound and he did specifically mention the 11-1 vote on the proposals.

I thought thats why Scott Gardiner was so incensed by what he was saying.

It's the fact that the voting structure was staying the same they disagreed with. What's the point in voting for reconstruction if it's the same rotten setup that governs it?