Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bobbyhouston

Court It Is Then

Recommended Posts

To be honest I couldn’t give a flying f*** about the other clubs and what they think of us. At least we’ve got the balls to stand up to the SPFL rather than just roll over and have our tummy tickled. If there’s a chance to show the world that the SPFL isn’t fit for purpose and it leads to the departure of Doncaster plus we get compensation we’re due then job done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just read that we have 83 employes, whether they all get paid does not matter. If some one comes along with the cash for us to take this to court we are entitled to do so.

If we lose we lose nothing. Many fans of other clubs feel we have a grievance. We need for every fan to back the club to stop people losing their jobs. End of.  It is essential we make an effort along with Hearts, to bring down the board of the SPFL, they are the perpetrators of this mess. A new board with new voting rites will bring back some normality to Scottish football. If we do not bring down Doncaster and Co,  Scottish football will spiral further down the road

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Winter of '63 said:

Motherwell escaped relegation in 2003 because of the Stadium Regulations - the following year the rules were changed after the event, and Motherwell voted to relegate us.

Biggest cheats in the game. How many times have they weaseled their way out of relegation?  Unpunished administration? That Craigan testimonial match turned my stomach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A lot will depend on where the legal action takes place. That could range from Scottish civil courts all the way up to the Court for Arbitration in Sport. Regardless, the doctrine of precedent may help, and we should strike while the iron is hot. A precedent has already been established in Belgium and France in regards to relegated teams. That can only work in our favour. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope it suceeds but even if not its the right thing to do. Greed and self interest trumped any attempt at fairness at a time of crisis so these clubs and the SPFL(hopefully) deserve everything thats coming to them.

Also hope the corrupt initial voting process is exposed along the way! 

Edited by Jag36

Share this post


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

This is going to be a complete waste of someone else’s money.

I feel the whole house of cards should be destroyed but I feel the sentiment of what's said is the case. I suspect the corrupt and amateurish forces will carry the day, not that they have a strong case, rather the true exposure of the game will be laid out for all potential sponsors to realise this is not what anyone would be a party too.       

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

  • Like 2

Share this post


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

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

Genuine question as your a fan and entitled to ask these questions and raise these points have you emailed the board or chairman with this? There’s not unfortunately much we in a forum can do but as you have very serious concerns about it - why not email the board who are the ones who have enacted this action that you have genuine concerns about

Share this post


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

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

Oh, please!: "take our medicine" indeed.! It's poison, potentially lethal poison, and we're being forced to take it as a result of being expelled from an unfinished league, leaving us in a critical state of health. And you call it medicine why, exactly? How, precisely, will the "medicine" improve our health? 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Jaggernaut said:

Oh, please!: "take our medicine" indeed.! It's poison, potentially lethal poison, and we're being forced to take it as a result of being expelled from an unfinished league, leaving us in a critical state of health. And you call it medicine why, exactly? How, precisely, will the "medicine" improve our health? 

Is that the one thing you take from his post? Nothing to counterargue the points he makes?

Edited by West of Scotland

Share this post


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

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

I have nothing against the club taking legal action but all of the above seems sensible, sadly.

Share this post


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

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

I think you have some good points, although the Belgian and French cases may carry some weight, they are different legal systems. The question is where does the legal challenge go. If it is the Scottish Courts then your points are all valid. If it goes beyond that to the court for arbitration in sport then there are a very different set of principals and they may make a different decision. 

Share this post


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

People need to distinguish dispassionately between

(1) the fact that we’ve been treated unfairly

(2) whether any laws or legal commitments have actually been broken

(3) whether proving (2) actually in any material way advances the interests of Partick Thistle.

The reality is this:

(1) Our QC opinion is useless. It quite possibly served a purpose when it was unclear how Dundee wanted to vote, in terms of trying “politically” to move the SPFL’s discussion on to linking ending the season and reconstruction. But that ship has sailed now.

(2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter.

(3) All of the urgent incentives for the SPFL mean asking the Clubs to vote to reapprove essentially the same proposal. Money has already been distributed. Many Clubs, if they have to pay it back, will go to the wall within weeks. An entire TV deal has been renegotiated on the basis of an early termination to the season.

(4) The same Clubs will vote for the same thing again even if the embarrassment of losing a court case means Doncaster loses his job. The courts can’t legislate against each Club acting out of self preservation and within the rules.

(5) There are no other obvious acts of the SPFL Thistle or Hearts legally can challenge. A court cannot force a member organisation to change its rules in a specific way when normally a rule change would need a special majority of the members to vote for it. The Court of Session isn’t about to dictate which or how many clubs play in the Premier League or Championship. Only the SPFL itself, under its own rules, can decide that.

(6) Thistle cannot substantiate a claim for a loss of earnings resulting from an unlawful act of the SPFL. It’s not the SPFL’s fault that the current public health advice and the cost of testing makes League One Football not viable. Unless it is legally impossible to relegate us by resolution (spoiler alert: it isn’t) the SPFL can’t be forced to play out the normal League One format on its normal timetable, nor is it legally compelled to let Thistle participate in the Championship this coming season.

(7) What other Club chairmen vaguely said they thought should happen regarding compensation and the like doesn’t matter one flying shit in a court of law. It didn’t form the basis of the text of the resolution so end of story.

(8) This court case is going to aggravate existing ill-feeling within Scottish Football. The best case scenario is a vanishingly unlikely one. The best we can hope for is to force Doncaster into an untenable position.

(9) When we lose this case, it is going to be spun in a way that reflects extremely poorly on us and although Hearts will get most of the attention they won’t get all of it. We will go down in history as the sore losers who fought a civil war with other people’s money, created unnecessary uncertainty in Scottish football in the middle of a pandemic, who “tried to stop 9 in a row”, who tried to run other clubs into the ground by forcing them to pay back money from last season, who delayed the return of Scottish football by stopping the league from finalising the participants for an August/October start for the top two tiers, who put the Sky deal under threat again.

By all means waste someone else’s money on a crusade for justice. But courts don’t deal in justice. They deal in laws.

The law doesn’t help us here. Nor does Belgian competition law or French company law. The smart thing to do is to take our medicine and rebuild our club for life in League One.

Ok let’s not confuse law and speculation....

1. if our QCs opinion results in the vote being annulled then in my opinion it’s clearly not useless and very clearly opens up a whole can of worms as the decision to terminate the season could itself be unlawful .....are Celtic champions in that situation ? 
2. We can speculate if the vote is annulled what the spfl might do or not and how but it will take time and time is a big part of their problem 

3. the spfl may simply try to revote the same proposal - speculation - but it requires a bit of knowledge of the spfl procedures .....so will the vote be open for 30 days ? and if so it may not  be approved until that time has passed which could cause a whole range of other problems 

4. the same clubs voting the same way again is speculation......we don’t know what other factors may or may not have changed eg if the spfl lost the court case and Doncaster left his post would they carry on in the same way ?

5. I think this may be the Hearts angle. I heard Ann Budge say they had discussed their case with 2 QCs  and  that their view was they had an extremely strong case .....We will know more as the case emerges but it may be the spfl did act unlawfully eg outside its own rules. And remember changing their rules is difficult 

6. I think this is interesting but misplaced ....Thistle are only in League 1 because they were voted there which may be unlawful and if you want them to stay there then you have to compensate them. And by the time we get to the autumn the whole pandemic situation  will allow football to be played, it’s other clubs and the spfl that would be stopping thistle play football because they don’t  want to , we can argue about viability ....enter Anderson’s £4m to do exactly that 

7. I can speculate that in order for this to go away , as time is a crucial factor here , that indeed compensation is offered .

8. Ill  feeling in Scottish football has always been there and forcing Doncaster into an untenable position sounds like a step forward 

9. ok your speculation and opinion but as Doncaster specifically mentioned France as a reason supporting his action I can speculate that the advice from UEFA will be a factor in the case as will the actions of other football federations and that would put the spfl in a difficult position.

i also dont see this getting in the way of preparing for League 1 as currently there is no plan , date or anything g else for that division to start indeed it may not play at all ....what do the spfl rules say in that situation ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If nothing else, the court action by Hearts + PTFC may result in the Henry McLeish recommendations being implemented, and that will be a positive outcome if it happens.

I understand the argument of drawing a line under what is in the past and get on with playing football, but we at PTFC have no football to play.  Having a court action that scrutinises the working of Scottish football may [in the long term] be of value to the sport.

For example:- Do we really need or want to have our football leagues continually advertising online betting? Can't we aim a bit higher than that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, ARu-Strathbungo said:

If nothing else, the court action by Hearts + PTFC may result in the Henry McLeish recommendations being implemented, and that will be a positive outcome if it happens.

I understand the argument of drawing a line under what is in the past and get on with playing football, but we at PTFC have no football to play.  Having a court action that scrutinises the working of Scottish football may [in the long term] be of value to the sport.

For example:- Do we really need or want to have our football leagues continually advertising online betting? Can't we aim a bit higher than that?

Re your last point re advertising online betting , it’s going to be a hard sell to get sponsorship with Doncaster and the SPFL ‘s profile just now .

If it was my Company, I don’t think I would want to be associated with such a shambles of an organisation.

It’s came to light today that BT Sport and BBC Scotland are looking for some of their money back from an incomplete season.

IMO it was a mistake not to try and complete the season especially the Premiership and the Championship especially with the financial penalties for an incomplete season.

If anything going to court will show that the SPFL organisation is a shambles with very little transparency in how decisions are made.

At the very least it should make Neil Doncaster’s position untenable which is a good thing if we want to move Scottish Football forward .

 

Share this post


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

Re your last point re advertising online betting , it’s going to be a hard sell to get sponsorship with Doncaster and the SPFL ‘s profile just now .

If it was my Company, I don’t think I would want to be associated with such a shambles of an organisation.

It’s came to light today that BT Sport and BBC Scotland are looking for some of their money back from an incomplete season.

IMO it was a mistake not to try and complete the season especially the Premiership and the Championship especially with the financial penalties for an incomplete season.

If anything going to court will show that the SPFL organisation is a shambles with very little transparency in how decisions are made.

At the very least it should make Neil Doncaster’s position untenable which is a good thing if we want to move Scottish Football forward .

 

BT getting £2.5m or £3m depending on source .....BBC looking for some as well.....did sky get £6m  back ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, javeajag said:

BT getting £2.5m or £3m depending on source .....BBC looking for some as well.....did sky get £6m  back ?

Think Sky’s reimbursement was linked into the new deal over 5 years , it would be interesting to know if the Clubs knew about BT and BBC Scotland’s claim for reimbursement as Sevco’s claim at the time of the vote was there was no transparency over Sky’s claim for an incomplete season.

Share this post


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

Think Sky’s reimbursement was linked into the new deal over 5 years , it would be interesting to know if the Clubs knew about BT and BBC Scotland’s claim for reimbursement as Sevco’s claim at the time of the vote was there was no transparency over Sky’s claim for an incomplete season.

I saw a tweet that said it was not disclosed 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure that once their lordships take into account the provisions of the Relegation Before the Season is Completed (Football), Prevention of, (Scotland) Act, we will get the verdict we seek. Then again, the judges may have difficulty finding such legislation. What has been visited on Partick Thistle is just plain wrong, but that doesn't necessarily make it illegal.

It is likely that the concerns raised by Woodstock Jag would have been in the minds of the Board when they made the initial decision not to pursue legal action. The offer of funding, which I suspect came from the east of Scotland, put them in a very difficult position, and they decided it was best to accept it, on the grounds that we have nothing to lose. I hope they're right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

May I ask?

 

Why does:

 

"2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter. "

 

Revisiting the matter may well be the point.

 

No?

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

May I ask?

 

Why does:

 

"2) Even if the SPFL resolution (authorising ending the Premier season early and actually ending the other seasons early) is annulled by a court it doesn’t help Thistle. It just forces the SPFL to revisit the matter. "

 

Revisiting the matter may well be the point.

 

No?

And opens a whole other can of worms as titles and relegations would be void 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do share some of @Woodstock Jag’s reservations about the perception of Thistle in the eyes of other Clubs. But what Club would not at least try legal action to right a wrong if the fees were gifted to them? 
 

If it had been QoS in our position, they would have fought it too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Understand reservations, but frankly couldn't give a toss what other clubs think of us after this. THEY put us in this position, so why shouldn't we stand up for ourselves?

Not costing us anything - and if it helps bring about meaningful change, even if we don't 'win', then I fail to see any reason why we shouldn't go to Court.

Personally I'm delighted we're doing this & really hope we get a result - remember, with 'relegation' we may not play at all next season. Could we survive that? What about staff, players, suppliers, contractors etc who rely on football being played to put food on the table? Taking this as far as we can is the ONLY option in my view.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s telling that we wouldn’t pursue this case with our own money.

We think we’re going to lose it, and we have grave doubts that even if we win it it will alter the outcome. Mandatory reconsideration of the decisions only works for us if it changes the motivations and behaviours of the other clubs.

The reality is it doesn’t.

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  

×