Jump to content

jaf

Members
  • Content Count

    1,226
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

290 Excellent

About jaf

  • Rank
    Jags fan

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Array
  • Location
    Array
  • Team
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

1,401 profile views
  1. But with much lower population density. Comparisons really are pretty meaningless.
  2. I know a number of private sector care home operators and this agrees completely with what they have told me. It seems to me that if you took care homes out of the numbers, Scotland and England would have much lower numbers. The strategy to move people from hospitals into are homes when you had a disease whose symptoms did not show for several days was a massive error. It was an error made by both Scottish and UK governments.
  3. I also think there is a fair chance of that outcome. And indeed, there always was. I am not sure that being directed by the court to do something that you were always permitted/required to do anyway But didn’t want to is necessarily a victory though!
  4. I always thought arbitration was where we should go anyway Legal case is all or nothing Arbitration, different process, more of a range of outcomes
  5. Was there not an injury time equaliser, namely the awarding of 50% of SPFL's costs?
  6. The Fulham case always looked more compelling than the St Johnstone case
  7. Personally, I hope the boardrooms of PTFC and Hearts have had someone challenging, pushing back, and debating in the way WJ has. Its healthy for robust debate and challenge to exist. The legal issues are complex, and much of the discussion entirely uninformed. I see that Leslie Deans (lawyer, lets remember) sent out something stating why the SPFL letter was wrong and why PTFC and Hearts were correct in their statement. A short time later, Leslie Deans has had to concede in fact he was wrong in what he was saying. This is emotional for lots of people - Deans among them as probably for many associated with both clubs - but sometimes dispassionate consideration is more fruitful, and just taking a little step back. Deans has made himself look pretty silly. The forensic analysis WJ has brought to this debate has perhaps been appreciated by some who want to think this through without posting every 30 minutes. I know I have found it useful and thought provoking and interesting on a personal level. I am not sure why he has had to take the criticism which he has endured on this thread for having a contrary opinion to others. Its fascinated him clearly, but whats wrong with that.
  8. One speculation I have seen is that people are upset over the implication the petition cannot be leaked, when the petition is a document in the public domain. That would come down to interpretation or misinterpretation of what we have seen in the snippet of the letter. Doncaster does indeed mention the Petition and goes on to say these are, once lodged, under the control of the court. However, from what we have seen, he is not saying we have done anything incorrectly. It may be in public domain, but being in possession of the court, their advice is that it is now not for anyone else to share it, or the other court documents. Whether that advice is correct or not, I do not know. A reminder, the court are deciding this case, not the clubs.
  9. Quite. Potentially an act of incredible stupidity but I guess only seeing the letter will allow us to know.
  10. Surely, its the court who are going to decide our fate (this time), not the clubs? So whatever he has said to the clubs, I am struggling to see how its relevant to this particular case - that doesn't preclude another different action. I suppose every (bitter) court case ever has at least one side asserting the other is wrong.
  11. I know this wont be popular, but I don't really want any club to go burst during this pandemic, and wont be celebrating if any do. Their supporters will be deprived of something important to all of us. We need to practice what we preach - 'Do No harm' wasn't it? And we will all have part of the fabric of our game and society removed, and more importantly a part of Scottish football history, and our own collective and individual football histories too. Dundee? Andy Gibson goal - what a moment I recall nearly every time we go back to Dens for example. They may have voted against us in many cases, but there is no point PTFC surviving at the exclusion of everyone else, or we have no-one to play! We have stared down the barrel of losing our football club before, and I would not wish that on any other fan of any other club personally. Although I do understand why many feel differently.
  12. Lets remember Mr Anderson acted generously - which we as a club have benefitted from. Donations of this type are often given with restriction. Apparently he chose not to make such a restriction on his gifting (unless it was that all clubs be eligible to £50,000). His money, his choice. Once it landed with SPFL, the distribution was up to them if there were no restrictions on his gift. I am quite sure in normal times, never mind the current atmosphere of mistrust, that whatever distribution method had been chosen, the SPFL would have been criticised by someone somewhere. Perhaps they viewed this as the path of least resistance? It does seem a missed opportunity to me however.
  13. Which even our own legal opinion acknowledged, eg security needing to be given
  14. Northern Ireland have just decided to end their season , and promote and relegate based on the games that have been played.
  15. There's a difference between something 'partially happening' and something being treated as if it never happened. So, although, you are technically correct, in law there could have been very different outcomes under the two different scenarios
×