weeyin

I guess that explains why they kept a lot of us from listening/voting. But if we do get shafted in the new set up, we can't complain as a Society.

If we had the quality of players that could afford that fine, we wouldn't have lost at Ibrox.

You left it beside the phone being used to let the overseas members listen in.

I thought Boyle used to say he always budgeted for 10th place and one cup quarter final. However, if the budget includes bonus payments for 3rd, compared to bonus payments for 11th offset against the prize money, I'd be interested to see the net difference.

12/23 x 206, but aye, of course! Serves me right for skiving from work.

If you replaced our attendance against Dundee this season (4318) with our last Rangers attendance (9063), that would increase our average gate for the 23 games this season by 206. So while there has been an impact from losing Rangers, it only accounts for 20% of the difference. That should be worrying the bean counters.

Alan Hansen was the same when he played at Partick Thistle, but he had an OK career.

Plus there is always the slight chance we can pick up a free agent next month.

MFC Twitter is saying Cowdenbeath.

I heard they were looking at Sutton too. Not sure about Novo. He always seemed to do damage against us when he was at Dundee, but doesn't appear to have been too productive since he left Rangers.

Some good ones on there. Being an old fart who spent many years standing in The Shed, it would have to be this one for me.

That might be our best approach. I was hoping we could get the MFC TV commentary team to do a live broadcast. "THAT'S A TERRIBLE DECISION FROM DEPMSTER THERE!! WHAT WAS SHE THINKING!" etc.

The response.

The current TV deal? Yes, if that's what it takes to get rid of this ridiculous 8-8 reset points to zero split. I tell you what, though. I guarantee that if we we went for a 16 team league that had both the OF in it, the TV deal would not disappear. There are teams in the First Division that pay transfer fees for players. We even used to do it ourselves when we were down there. Lack of TV does not equate to zero cash. If the current proposals succeed, amateur football might be all we have left in a couple of years.

What's fundamentally wrong is as follows The split. The split means that we don't play each team an equal number of times. The split also means that the SPL has to guess who will be in the top 6 next season to try and make the schedule 'fair' 'Fair' ends up meaning the OF teams get the advantage when it comes to fixtures. Playoffs are also fundamentally unfair in a league situation. The premise behind a league is that a team accumulates a number of points over the course of a season. If I finish 2nd in the First Division, I have proved that I am a better team than the team that finished 4th. Why should I then be subjected to the lottery of a play-off to prove that again? One dodgy refereeing decision, or one unlucky break in a playoff final and, despite the fact I may have finished 20 points ahead of 4th place, I'm out of luck. Playoffs were created purely for the purposes of television. Exciting they may be. Fair they are not.

As I suspected, Doncaster may have been a little economical with the truth. From The Scotsman

Maybe, maybe not. Maybe we just go back to the days of league highlights and the odd Cup Game live. Maybe we offer one 7:30pm midweek game as live each week. There is some ground to give, but I'm more interested in getting people back to the game. If we aren't going to get shafted by TV companies, this has to be the starting point.

Also true. Here's a few of my alternative proposals for anyone attending: Single overseeing body (without won't include Doncaster) that represents fans 16 team top tier Equitable split of TV money 50/50 gate receipts for cup ties 4 week break in January 3pm Saturday or 7:30pm Midweek kickoffs Terracing Cap on gate prices And if the financials mean that short term we operate at First Division level, then so be it.

Terracing has that effect on a crowd.

That was the best I could come up with on the spur of the moment! That is why the board need to share the details with us at the Society meetings. They have our money, so we should see the financials.

Game's aff.

Spot on. Some of the best times I had following the 'Well were when we were dossing around in the First Division. One of the main reasons for that was the novelty of playing different teams and the trips to all the old grounds.

Ticked off that, once again, overseas members (and others who can't make the journey on Saturday) are being excluded from the discussion. Sent this off to Alison, but not hopeful.

Go through with what? Has anybody on here actually heard what "in principle backing this and taking it to the next stage" means? What exactly is the next stage? And what exactly is being backed? How many stages are there? What issues have been discussed? And "in principle" as far as I know, means there are loads of things that still need to be agreed on. So far, I have heard the square root of hee haw. If anyone has anything different I wish they would share.

Then that's a hell of a salary he gets for reading the press releases.