As he does in what I quoted.

It's called "giving an example".

Their reason for voting against reconstruction was a voting system that has stopped reconstruction from happening. It makes no sense!

Of course it makes sense.

There's no point in voting something through if it doesn't fix one of the core issues.

The core issue was not being able to restructure.

Or do plenty of other things because of the 11- structure.

As I said, there's no point in changing the structure if it's still governed in the same, rotten way.

A better distribution of money, a single governing body, the introduction of play-offs and a pyramid system. Surely better to accept these things and work on Aberdeen to change the 11-1 system before Rangers come back.
As it stands, we have the silly 11-1 system AND all the other problems too!

No, because part of the proposal was that everything stays the same for three years. So no way of changing the voting structure before The Rangers have their first season in the SPL.

So, you think it's better to have all the bad things kept in place on the off-chance that the voting structure will change?

Yes, because the voting structure happens to be one of the biggest "bad things".

There's an opportunity to change it. That opportunity shouldn't be eradicated completely on the back of league reconstruction.

SPL 2, complete with Rangers, rushed through for next season, Rangers in the SPL 1 next July and everything stays the same. Oh that will be fun!

That would need an 11-1 SPL vote...

According to Charles Patterson on SSN the 9-3 voting structure would've been for all major areas.

Edit: Neil Doncaster says that 9-3 was for league reconstruction but there was a common consensus that 9-3 for everything wasn't required.

10 minutes in to the phone in and already it's Rangers fault

I think this argument about the 11-1 voting is a bit of a side issue at any rate. The fact that St Mirren said it was an issue doesn't mean it actually was in reality. We're expected to believe that they place a higher priority on the voting system than the fact that they'd be more likely to get relegated in the 12-12-18 system. You have to be pretty gullible to take that at face value.

Ah well, back to the drawing board it is.

No point - keep the status quo and should clubs in SFL1 go bust then so be it.

In the last 3/4 years 10-14 team league proposals have been rejected - 16 team+ is deemed not viable. So what is the point in wasting anymore time on this.

I think it is a bit of a myth that SFL1 teams will go bust simply because of this - the SPL are still duty bound to give the SFL £2 million each year under the current agreement.

The way things are going SFL1 clubs will at best struggle to break even in the current climate, maybe that'll change when Rangers charge through for a season. But it's the SFL1 clubs who were also wanting these proposals to go through.

Considering how long it took to get 12 clubs to agree on a proposal to move forward on I doubt there will be another workable proposal any time soon.

Jim Traynor needs to go back to school.

Can't believe anything a club spokesman says nowadays..

The SFL1 clubs vote in effect was being bought. The league reconstruction wasn't solely about them it was about the WHOLE of Scottish football.

Those SFL1 clubs won't be any worse off than this time last year and it is highly likely that an SPL club will be in financial trouble before these SFL1 clubs you say are struggling.

Im glad the reconstruction proposals were voted against. The new set up was not the way forward it was a very poor idea and I dont know any fans who wanted it.

There is really no way Scottish football can change as there are two obstacles which go directly against each other:

1. Fans want a bigger League and to play each other twice
2. Clubs want a small League so they can play Celtic 3/4 times a season and the more TV money.

If any Clubs Die like Rangers because of financial issues it their own faults for not running themelves properly. They can all start up New Clubs and apply to join the bottom League.

Like Dunfermline who are an SFL1 club?

Jim Spence says that he has spoken to one SPL chairman and as far as he and four other clubs are concerned the reconstruction debate is over.

Dundee United Football Club

54 minutes ago.

STATEMENT FROM STEPHEN THOMPSON, DUNDEE UNITED CHAIRMAN.

Today saw Scottish Football miss a massive opportunity to move the game forward. The package that was voted on was a balanced package with many items that would have breathed new life into the game. The proposals would have attracted new sponsors and advertisers and, more importantly, encouraged more fans to attend the exciting and vibrant spectacle we are producing on the park, as was witnessed in the two William Hill Scottish Cup semi finals at the weekend.

I have stated publicly before that the proposals that were presented were not perfect, but that there were enough positive changes in the package for the overall good of the game. Merging two league bodies was a massive step forward, an all through distribution model supported other full time clubs in Scotland, and the introduction of play offs and a pyramid system, would have rewarded ambition at all levels of the senior game. The restructuring proposals also brought more meaningful games during the season with clubs always having something to play for.

At Dundee United we were not happy with a number of issues in the proposals, but we preferred instead to look at the undoubted benefits of the overall package for the game as a whole. It has taken years for clubs to agree a way forward and many individuals and groups have given up a considerable amount of their own time to bring the proposals forward. In doing so, they gained the support of the vast majority of SPL clubs and most of the Division One clubs. Indeed, approximately 90% of full time clubs in Scotland supported the proposals and all SPL clubs were given ample opportunity to express any concerns during the many months of consultation.

In an attempt to overcome some late concerns, concessions were made on the day with regard to voting of 11-1, but these were not even allowed to be amended; never mind voted on!

Despite all of this, two clubs today decided to vote in a certain way and my belief now is that it will be many years before other proposals backed by so many will reach the table again.

As a family who have rightly or wrongly injected £5.6 million into one club, and not an individual who is taking huge amounts out of the game in salary, it's now time for football supporters throughout Scotland to ask questions.

I personally believed that the proposals were a major step forward, one league body would have been progress and brought sponsors and advertisers to a new and exciting product, the new league structure would have brought excitement and meaningful games and a financial distribution model that would support all clubs in Scotland and in particular all full time clubs.

There are no other proposals on the table and none are likely in the near future.

It is now time to concentrate on all that is positive on the park. Many Scottish clubs, including Dundee United, have a vibrant youth policy and we have also seen many exciting games throughout the season, especially in recent weeks. Our own club still has much to play for this season and the outlook for next season excites me.

I now propose to work even harder at Dundee United and build a better club for our supporters. We have an exciting new manager in Jackie McNamara and I believe we have a bright future ahead of us.

mcD.ftd