Jump to content

Court It Is Then


Bobbyhouston
 Share

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Was there or wasn’t there a working group on reconstruction quite literally chaired by Ann Budge between mid-April and mid-June?

Was there or was there not an indicative vote of SPFL Clubs in which just half of the minimum votes necessary for reconstruction were secured?

You might be laughing but it’s a sad truth. Reconstruction was given plenty airing and the bottom line is the Clubs simply didn’t want it.

You’re still going back to self - interest , fuelled by money , that’s why the reconstruction card was always going to be off the table .

As you said in a previous post you would have done nothing , sums it up for me . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, javeajag said:

Utterly preposterous twaddle 

what’s being destroyed ?

what collateral damage ?

Those gleefully cheering on the financial cost this is imposing on DUFC, RRFC and CRFC. Those rubbing their hands with glee at a misplaced belief that Hearts and Thistle are going to shaft the finances of Scottish Football by seeking compensation of £10 million from the SPFL pot.

Those saying they think it’s a good thing that our raising a dispute makes it harder for clubs to plan and be sure of a prompt start to next season.

Those saying that it’s better to go down swinging as long as we’re not a cuddly toy.

It’s classic “**** you all” mentality that will get us nowhere, win us no friends and make us plenty enemies. It’s burned any goodwill we might have had (and we had a lot) before we went down this silly road.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Hearts and Thistle were given ample opportunity to persuade their fellow clubs that any given reconstruction proposal was in the wider interests of the Clubs at large and of individual Clubs beyond their own.

They failed to convince what, 26 of the Clubs? That’s total gutterball.

What were they going to do, wave a wand? It took longer than I'd have liked but in the end 14-10-10-10 was pretty much the only reasonable reconstruction and it was brought to a vote. It's not the fault of Thistle and Hearts that clubs didn't vote for it.

Edited by allyo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Hearts and Thistle were given ample opportunity to persuade their fellow clubs that any given reconstruction proposal was in the wider interests of the Clubs at large and of individual Clubs beyond their own.

They failed to convince what, 26 of the Clubs? That’s total gutterball.

Here was me thinking Hearts & Thistle we’re members of the SPFL, didn’t realise we had to persuade other clubs into reconstruction for the good of the game...

To suggest we’ve failed to do this is nonsense. Should never have been part of our remit. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Those gleefully cheering on the financial cost this is imposing on DUFC, RRFC and CRFC. Those rubbing their hands with glee at a misplaced belief that Hearts and Thistle are going to shaft the finances of Scottish Football by seeking compensation of £10 million from the SPFL pot.

Those saying they think it’s a good thing that our raising a dispute makes it harder for clubs to plan and be sure of a prompt start to next season.

Those saying that it’s better to go down swinging as long as we’re not a cuddly toy.

It’s classic “**** you all” mentality that will get us nowhere, win us no friends and make us plenty enemies. It’s burned any goodwill we might have had (and we had a lot) before we went down this silly road.

Why is the financial damage being done to us of less importance than possibly £150 divided by three minus crowdfunding ?

Enemies ? When did we have friends ? Goodwill ? Valueless 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Those gleefully cheering on the financial cost this is imposing on DUFC, RRFC and CRFC. Those rubbing their hands with glee at a misplaced belief that Hearts and Thistle are going to shaft the finances of Scottish Football by seeking compensation of £10 million from the SPFL pot.

Those saying they think it’s a good thing that our raising a dispute makes it harder for clubs to plan and be sure of a prompt start to next season.

Those saying that it’s better to go down swinging as long as we’re not a cuddly toy.

It’s classic “**** you all” mentality that will get us nowhere, win us no friends and make us plenty enemies. It’s burned any goodwill we might have had (and we had a lot) before we went down this silly road.

The 80% who voted us down anyway were already our enemies , does it make much difference anymore, everyone appears to be looking after themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

Here was me thinking Hearts & Thistle we’re members of the SPFL, didn’t realise we had to persuade other clubs into reconstruction for the good of the game...

To suggest we’ve failed to do this is nonsense. Should never have been part of our remit. 

Correct, that’s what the Clubs pay Doncaster and Co for , to show governance and direction .

We shouldn’t have too much faith in an organisation that can’t even complete the minutes of their meetings properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, allyo said:

What were they going to do, wave a wand? It took longer than I'd have liked but in the end 14-10-10-10 was pretty much the only reasonable reconstruction and it was brought to a vote. It's not the fault of Thistle and Hearts that clubs didn't vote for it.

It’s no one’s “fault”. The members are the masters of a member’s organisation. If you don’t like it you can leave.

9 minutes ago, Gary Peebles Tackle said:

Here was me thinking Hearts & Thistle we’re members of the SPFL, didn’t realise we had to persuade other clubs into reconstruction for the good of the game...

To suggest we’ve failed to do this is nonsense. Should never have been part of our remit. 

I mean it quite literally is part of our remit if you think Clubs should act in the wider interests of the game and that reconstruction is that.

In a members’ organisation literally all decisions about structure and governance are about members persuading one another of the merits of their preferred proposal.

8 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Why is the financial damage being done to us of less importance than possibly £150 divided by three minus crowdfunding ?

It isn’t but one doesn’t justify the other.

8 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Enemies ? When did we have friends ? Goodwill ? Valueless 

A lot of clubs felt sympathy for our position. Had we gone to arbitration without going to court first I think there’s a decent chance we’d have got a solidarity payment out of it.

Now I think those prospects are a great deal slimmer. There is active resentment at what our club is doing to the Scottish game in the middle of a pandemic. Whether you like it or not they blame us for this, not themselves, and they are going to act accordingly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I’m afraid I think the analogy, in terms of the sentiments expressed on here, is an apt one. It’s a “you’ve been shit to us so we’re going to destroy everything around us if we don’t get our way and we don’t care what collateral damage we cause”.

Looking forward to the big screen adaptation of these events. Based on this blurb certainly sounds like a real action packed cliff hanger. In cinemas next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

A lot of clubs felt sympathy for our position. Had we gone to arbitration without going to court first I think there’s a decent chance we’d have got a solidarity payment out of it.

Now I think those prospects are a great deal slimmer. There is active resentment at what our club is doing to the Scottish game in the middle of a pandemic. Whether you like it or not they blame us for this, not themselves, and they are going to act accordingly.

Thought it was 3 independent legal professionals that decided the outcome, nothing at all to do with the Clubs whether they sympathised with us or not .

Edited by jlsarmy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Thought it was 3 independent legal professionals that decided the outcome, nothing at all to do with the Clubs whether they sympathised with us or not .

Its really relevant if they felt inclined to reach a settlement before it ever went to a decision.

Had we gone straight to arbitration I think a settlement might have happened.

It is now less likely given that we’ve dragged everyone through the mud first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, gianlucatoni said:

Interesting that DU have appointed a new manager & can afford to pay compensation for a year of his contract. 

But on the same day they openly beg for money to continue their arbitration case. 

Tangerine *********. 

You do realise Hearts paid-up two years of Robbie Neilson’s contract to sign him from Dundee United, right? That probably explains why Dundee United could them sign up a Tranmere no mark.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Its really relevant if they felt inclined to reach a settlement before it ever went to a decision.

Had we gone straight to arbitration I think a settlement might have happened.

It is now less likely given that we’ve dragged everyone through the mud first.

Why is it less likely? Are you saying the arbitration process will be *******ised? Its wholly irrelevant of how we got to arbitration. They are there to be impartial. If not what's the point? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, gianlucatoni said:

& RR to decide in next 48 hours whether they will continue. 

 

 

Maybe depends on how their crowd funding plea goes. Anyway surely dundee united have a multi millionaire who can pay their fees. However the SPFL member clubs will surely bail them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

You do realise Hearts paid-up two years of Robbie Neilson’s contract to sign him from Dundee United, right? That probably explains why Dundee United could them sign up a Tranmere no mark.

:doh:perhaps my original juxtaposition was too subtle for you - read twice before battering your keyboard obi wan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Its really relevant if they felt inclined to reach a settlement before it ever went to a decision.

Had we gone straight to arbitration I think a settlement might have happened.

It is now less likely given that we’ve dragged everyone through the mud first.

There was never any offer of any settlement unless you can tell  me otherwise, whether we got to arbitration before any Court action seems incidental, if there is any settlement it’s down to the 3 judiciary who are judging the case , nothing to do with the Clubs .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, dl1971 said:

Why is it less likely? Are you saying the arbitration process will be *******ised? Its wholly irrelevant of how we got to arbitration. They are there to be impartial. If not what's the point? 

*sigh*

No. I am saying that if we had gone to arbitration straight away, and thus not imposed court costs on the SPFL and other clubs, and if we had only asked for modest and realistic compensation, instead of jointly demanding £10 million, other clubs would have had more sympathy for our position.

In those circumstances they would have been more inclined to make a token payment to us to “make it all go away”. There would have been a settlement (i.e. a voluntary agreement between Hearts/Thistle and the SPFL, where money exchanged hands, everything was kept quiet and no fault or wrongdoing was admitted) instead of a decision at arbitration (where the independent panel has to decide what the outcome is based on the arguments of the warring parties).

Having gone to court the prospects of a settlement are now greatly diminished because we’ve pissed off a lot of the other clubs.

2 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

There was never any offer of any settlement unless you can tell  me otherwise, whether we got to arbitration before any Court action seems incidental, if there is any settlement it’s down to the 3 judiciary who are judging the case , nothing to do with the Clubs .

You don’t understand the difference between a settlement and a decision. Read the above.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We were ****** when we were bottom of the league, we were significantly more ****** when the league was shambollically ended early, and we are once again going to be more ****** after this legal bun fight is over.

It's like the logical extension of our demise over the last few seasons. Even without football  being played, we still keep sinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still haven’t changed my opinion, and yes, I’m one of the ones who are glad we are seen as a pain in the proverbial by other clubs. Some of them totally deserve any pain that may be inflicted upon them - Dundee and Brechin for example. I’m only interested in my club - couldn’t give a monkeys toss about the others. What good will did we have? What have we lost in reality by going to court? Nothing. The other clubs can moan all they want. They would have done exactly the same in our position.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

No. I am saying that if we had gone to arbitration straight away, and thus not imposed court costs on the SPFL and other clubs, and if we had only asked for modest and realistic compensation, instead of jointly demanding £10 million, other clubs would have had more sympathy for our position.

*sigh*

Unless you've got anything to back that up that's total conjecture dressed up as fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

When is Firhill being repurposed as a vexatious litigation training camp and how do you qualify for the more advanced training at Tynecastle?

You don't understand what a vexatious litigant is - look it up in your legal textbooks.

On the first page of this thread, you claimed that a legal challenge was "utterly hopeless"...eminent QC's and a Court of Session Judge (real lawyers) have taken a different view. Now you think arbitration is futile...so what?

You took up pages lecturing us on how our court action would not succeed...but failed even to comment on the arbitration issue which was the reason our case also foundered in 2004. It's the equivalent of that Linesman signalling a throw in against Morton but missing Doolan's Ghost Goal.

Back in the 70's Thistle fans used to chant "Worse than East Fife" at any negative & boring  teams...when I see yet another supercilious post from you I think "Worse than Javeajag"

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

*sigh*

No. I am saying that if we had gone to arbitration straight away, and thus not imposed court costs on the SPFL and other clubs, and if we had only asked for modest and realistic compensation, instead of jointly demanding £10 million, other clubs would have had more sympathy for our position.

In those circumstances they would have been more inclined to make a token payment to us to “make it all go away”. There would have been a settlement (i.e. a voluntary agreement between Hearts/Thistle and the SPFL, where money exchanged hands, everything was kept quiet and no fault or wrongdoing was admitted) instead of a decision at arbitration (where the independent panel has to decide what the outcome is based on the arguments of the warring parties).

Having gone to court the prospects of a settlement are now greatly diminished because we’ve pissed off a lot of the other clubs.

You don’t understand the difference between a settlement and a decision. Read the above.

There is no way the clubs or the SPFL would have given us a penny to assist us. How could we possibly trust them to ahem do no harm....its only by enforcing a legal gateway that we have a chance of a settlement. Its possible we may get hee haw but we simply had no choice. As many have said there is simply no goodwill in the SPFL. Dundee united putting out the begging bowl is hilarious. Raith rovers equally so given their hypocrisy. I feel for cove though but DU could easily cover their fees....from a sporting integrity perspective. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

*sigh*

No. I am saying that if we had gone to arbitration straight away, and thus not imposed court costs on the SPFL and other clubs, and if we had only asked for modest and realistic compensation, instead of jointly demanding £10 million, other clubs would have had more sympathy for our position.

In those circumstances they would have been more inclined to make a token payment to us to “make it all go away”. There would have been a settlement (i.e. a voluntary agreement between Hearts/Thistle and the SPFL, where money exchanged hands, everything was kept quiet and no fault or wrongdoing was admitted) instead of a decision at arbitration (where the independent panel has to decide what the outcome is based on the arguments of the warring parties).

Having gone to court the prospects of a settlement are now greatly diminished because we’ve pissed off a lot of the other clubs.

You don’t understand the difference between a settlement and a decision. Read the above.

There was never any offer of settlement and reverting to type , the Clubs would never agreed to any compensation as the Self Interest angle would have kicked in .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...