Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bobbyhouston

Court It Is Then

Recommended Posts

I was only half joking when i said the devil woman would kill the club...threats of expulsion now wow

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pinhead said:

I was only half joking when i said the devil woman would kill the club...threats of expulsion now wow

While I can believe they would expel us, I'd be staggered if they tried to expel Hearts. But it is further proof that threats and bullying is how Scottish football operates. Anyone who dissents is a troublemaker.

Edited by Garscube Road End
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Correct.

All of these would have required the Clubs to agree a resolution stating that. A clear supermajority of the Clubs decided to back the one advocated for by the SPFL Board instead. The SPFL Board are entitled to exercise their considered opinion on what is best for the Clubs and then to leave it to the Clubs to decide whether they agree with them.

Clearly they thought that other means of distributing urgently needed money were not viable (whether or not you agree with that some of them also suggested they had taken legal advice and that other mechanisms would have breached their fiduciary duties to the SPFL). They were entitled (legally) to proceed on that basis and not to recommend alternatives, even if you passionately and reasonably disagree with their assessment.

They didn't limit the options. It was always open for the Clubs to table a competent motion for an alternative course of action, to be discussed if necessary at an EGM which they have the power to call, and then to vote for that alternative proposal.

Whether you like it or not, the SPFL are not under a legal duty to do all the donkey work for people who think they're shit at their jobs and that better alternatives are available.

Did the SPFL put all of the alternatives to the clubs?

My impression was that it was all a bit rushed, with tight deadlines (unless you are Dundee) and that little or no debate occurred.  so that de facto clubs were faced with a take it or leave it choice.  That to me is the weakness in the SPFL's case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I mean if they're litigating in a borderline vexatious way and in a manner that threatens the very existence of the SPFL and lots of its other members, that sounds exactly like something an organisation that exists to serve its members should, if the facts warrant it, consider doing.

It would also be us challenging a completely separate decision. It doesn't strengthen the original legal argument.

What would the purpose of expelling be. It’s not going to stop the legal action. If they do that it is going to seem so petty that it may well influence a decision on other actions that have been taken? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, eljaggo said:

Did the SPFL put all of the alternatives to the clubs?

They’re not under an obligation to put anything to the Clubs.

However they did explain that they had considered what options were available and that the one they put to Clubs was the only one they considered viable.

They didn’t stop Clubs coming up with their own legally competent and viable alternative and voting on it.

23 minutes ago, eljaggo said:

My impression was that it was all a bit rushed, with tight deadlines (unless you are Dundee) and that little or no debate occurred.  so that de facto clubs were faced with a take it or leave it choice.  That to me is the weakness in the SPFL's case.

They are entitled to present as many or as few options to the membership as they like.

If others don’t wish to propose concrete and specific alternatives that’s not the SPFL’s problem: there was no legal bar to it.

End of the day the members were asked and they decided.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Lenziejag said:

What would the purpose of expelling be. It’s not going to stop the legal action. If they do that it is going to seem so petty that it may well influence a decision on other actions that have been taken? 

Retribution and deterrence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

They’re not under an obligation to put anything to the Clubs.

However they did explain that they had considered what options were available and that the one they put to Clubs was the only one they considered viable.

They didn’t stop Clubs coming up with their own legally competent and viable alternative and voting on it.

They are entitled to present as many or as few options to the membership as they like.

If others don’t wish to propose concrete and specific alternatives that’s not the SPFL’s problem: there was no legal bar to it.

End of the day the members were asked and they decided.

I believe that this is the basis of the successful French and Belgian cases, that there were options to end the season that didn't result in clubs being relegated / not able to attain European qualification. The organisation chose (in our case by a member vote) not to use them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SPFL now asking L1 & L2 clubs when they might be able to begin playing....if at all this season. What a total f***ing mess Doncaster and the other clowns have created. 

And they have royally shafted the pyramid system too, in locking out Brora & Kelty. 

F*ds. 

Edited by sandy
Added last point
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Everything you say up to this point is true.

I genuinely worry that taking a hopeless case to court and having it laughed out is actually counterproductive to the cause of holding the SPFL to account for this shambles. What you are giving them here is a piece of paper that says "you win, you can do this".

Unless Hearts and Thistle are willing to settle for amounts that are maybe what, less than 1/20 of what they're claiming, the SPFL will say "see you in court".

I think the SPFL should at least be consulting with the clubs about what is at stake for them, if we win the case. It isn’t the SPFL that are taking a risk, it is the clubs. 
We have nothing to lose in this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

You're talking shite. At absolutely no point has Anderson said the money is to be used for testing. In fact, very specifically, it is to be used for community initiatives, as it is channelled through the SPFL Trust (a charitable organisation).

Here is how the Anderson cash is reported on the BBC:

Or what about The Herald:

Any cash that may or may not be made available by Anderson or others to Clubs in the future is a quite separate matter. But what is clear at this specific moment in time is that there is not money available to cover the costs of testing.

On your second point, the SPFL rules authorise the clubs to adopt resolutions altering the governance arrangements of the leagues. It also grants certain powers to the SPFL Board to deal with extraordinary situations such as these.

I didn't say that "the rules say" football is only to be played if it's financially viable. But it is legitimate for the SPFL to decide not to play football at a certain level if it isn't financially viable, provided that those decisions are taken in accordance with the AoA and the SPFL Rules.

Couldn't give a flying **** what kind of Covid mess the juniors are or aren't letting themselves in for. It is open to the SPFL to decide that they can't do football safely and in an economically self-sustaining way in the lower tiers. You might disagree with that decision but it's one they're entitled to make.

The 2nd quote you used hadn’t said that it is to be used for community projects only that clubs need to be involved in community projects. I am not sure who that is likely to exclude, though

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

The 2nd quote you used hadn’t said that it is to be used for community projects only that clubs need to be involved in community projects. I am not sure who that is likely to exclude, though

There are two separate pots of money from Anderson £3m to clubs and £1m to the spfl trust for community projects .....someone is trying to confuse them....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sandy said:

SPFL now asking L1 & L2 clubs when they might be able to begin playing....if at all this season. What a total f***ing mess Doncaster and the other clowns have created. 

And they have royally shafted the pyramid system too, in locking out Brora & Kelty. 

F*ds. 

Looks like Maxie was kissing Doncaster’s arse as the pyramid system is under the jurisdiction of the SFA .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Garscube Road End said:

Did Thistle know this?

What is the alternative now that reconstruction talks are over ? If the relegation is declared illegal then there is nowhere to promote them to (or pay out the compo)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dick Dastardly said:

The rush was to get prize money to clubs as early as possible to prevent any getting into financial difficulties. The SPFL claim that the only way to do this was by calling the league early. With no date known at the time for the restart of football, That was the reason for the rush

I think if you're looking for a reason to end the season early you need to look past the prize money. The final payment, which was all that was due at the end of the season, was only a few thousand for many lower division clubs.  Maybe look at who sits on the SPFL board and see how many represented clubs were in danger of being relegated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, jaggy said:

This is literally what the Club statement said they were going to ask the court for. What is surprising about it to people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jlsarmy said:

Looks like Maxie was kissing Doncaster’s arse as the pyramid system is under the jurisdiction of the SFA .

I never expected Maxie to help us. I have not been disappointed. He prefers the blazer to any club loyalty, or indeed football integrity, sadly. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, sandy said:

I never expected Maxie to help us. I have not been disappointed. He prefers the blazer to any club loyalty, or indeed football integrity, sadly. 

Did you expect anything else from someone who couldn’t even run our Lottery properly.

All too cosy in their Hampden offices .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Did you expect anything else from someone who couldn’t even run our Lottery properly.

All too cosy in their Hampden offices .

Exactly @jlsarmy. He wasn’t the sharpest tool in the CEO box.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sandy said:

Exactly @jlsarmy. He wasn’t the sharpest tool in the CEO box.

It’s absolute nonsense that we’ve got 2 bodies ( SPFL and SFA ) running Scottish Football and look at the mess we’re in , all at a cost of 500/600 k between the pair of them .

Shocking 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/17/2020 at 3:50 PM, Dick Dastardly said:

If this does drag on through the courts, we might be able to maintain the 50 year record

1921 - Scottish Cup

1971 - League Cup

2021 - Court case

2019-20 has been a total Fuc Cup!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We've heard a lot on here about what the SPFL is not responsible for,  with the Clubs themselves seemingly taking responsibility for all decisions affecting this sorry mess.

What precisely is the SPFL Board responsible for?

What is Doncaster's role?  It cannot be just an administrator at that level of salary.

Share this post


Link to post
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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×