SCOT Gardiner, the Inverness Caledonian Thistle chief executive, today revealed that Ladbrokes Championship clubs were all informed by a senior Dundee official that the Dens Park club had opposed the SPFL resolution – and been sent a picture of their completed form.
The SPFL issued a statement on Friday evening which showed that only nine clubs in the Championship had responded before their requested 5pm deadline – with seven voting for and two against – and stressed that further updates would be issued in due course.
However, Gardiner - whose Highland club had, along with bottom-placed Partick Thistle, voted against the resolution - was astonished because he and his fellow club representatives had received WhatsApp messages from Dundee secretary Eric Drysdale which stipulated the Tayside club had submitted their ‘no’ vote.
The proposal to end the Championship, League 1 and League 2 early due to the coronavirus pandemic, promote and relegate teams based on a points per game basis and also give the SPFL board the power to do the same in the Premiership at a later date required 75 per cent support at every level to be passed.
With the top flight and the lower leagues voting 10-2 and 16-3 in favour respectively the entire resolution now hinges on the second tier backing it – and that is currently hanging in the balance.
It has emerged that Dundee are the club who will cast the crucial vote.
But former Dundee chief executive and Hearts chief operating officer Gardiner spoke to BBC Radio Scotland’s Sportsound programme this afternoon to outline the chain of “alarming” events on Friday which left him “in a state of shock”.
“Just when you think you’ve seen everything,” he said. “Scottish football never fails to surprise you. I just wanted to explain the timeline and actually what happened. I have a minute-by-minute factual account of what happened yesterday. I am happy to say this is what happened when and this is who voted when. I have it all in front of me.
“We (the Championship clubs) have our own WhatsApp groups and we have all been speaking about our different positions and discussing all our different positions since Wednesday. Anyone was entitled to vote any way they like and we respect everyone’s vote.
“Our position was, as far as Inverness Caledonian Thistle was concerned, there was no way we could countenance a vote to cause financial harm to another Scottish football club, another fellow member of our league, in the middle of this pandemic. We could not stomach the thought of that. We were clear in every conversation.
“Moving to the afternoon of yesterday, we had a situation where the three clubs were pretty solid, Partick Thistle, ourselves and Dundee. We had all spoken openly and said we could not vote for this resolution.
“Thistle were the first club to vote. Thistle voted. Gerry Britton sent his voting slip to all of us, not just the three clubs, there were other clubs on this WhatsApp group. Partick sent their voting slip at 14.52.
“At 16.24 we received Dundee’s voting slip, signed and dated. We all received the actual photograph of the voting slip, signed, dated, by John (chief executive Nelms) at 16.24. At 16.39 I signed and dated out voting slip and I published that to the group and I submitted our vote.
“At 16.24 when we were sent Dundee’s no voting slip we were also sent Dundee’s statement that they published on their website at 5.03. At 16.52 we then got a message from Dundee’s club secretary and the final line was ‘DFC vote submitted’. That is the facts of the matter as far as we are all concerned. Thereafter, we went through the rabbit hole.”
Gardiner continued: “We received various text messages from various clubs saying ‘apparently Dundee’s vote hasn’t been received yet’.
“We were talking to the club secretary who was the one who sent us the message which said ‘4.52 DFC vote submitted’. We were getting text messages after five o’clock saying that Dundee hadn’t voted. I was saying to people ‘well obviously there must be a glitch in communication because I have the vote in front of me’.
“I was looking at John’s signature and the date and the text saying ‘the DFC vote has been submitted by the club secretary’. I was quite relaxed because I thought it was just a rumour or something like that because it was submitted.
“We then received a message at 6.07pm from the Dundee secretary saying that their vote wasn’t received. But he gave us his solemn word that it was sent. At that stage, it was quite alarming as you can imagine.
“I replied with a question at 6.12pm. Jacqui (Partick director Low) said ‘well the 5pm deadline isn’t statutory, it’s just advisory you can just resend it and it still counts as the deadline isn’t for 28 days’. At that stage, we were told he had been instructed to hold off from resubmitting their vote. That was 6.21pm.”
When asked on the programme who had instructed the Dundee secretary to hold off voting, Gardiner said: “John (Nelms)”.
He continued: “I replied to Eric’s message at 6.23 saying: ‘If they contacted you to say they hadn’t received your vote, wouldn’t you just have resent it? I would have. I am extremely confused’.
“He replied saying that no one contacted him, he just assumed that the vote had been cast and he was awaiting an acknowledgement. He then heard the SPFL’s statement saying that only two clubs had voted against, that it was only 7-2 and he was cursing the clubs that hadn’t voted.”
However, Gardiner, who revealed that Caley Thistle had voted against the resolution on a point of principle and because they felt that fees could have been released by the SPFL without declaring league positions final, revealed there had been “a radio silence” from Dundee since.
“We have no idea what’s going on now,” he said. “It’s baffling to us. I genuinely do not know. We are now all in the dark. I have not spoken to the league since then. I was sat in an empty stadium last night. I was in a state of shock. Only one club knows in relation to this – and obviously the people who spoke to Dundee on Friday. None of us know.
“I have it all here. I have the three voting slips. We have the message from the Dundee secretary – it was sent at that time, at 4.52. After that? Who knows?”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel