Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bobbyhouston

Court It Is Then

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, jlsarmy said:

And were the majority of other clubs working alongside us in our plight ? were they concerned about the job losses that our Club will have to enforce to survive.

Of course they weren’t, and you want us to work alongside them .

At this stage with no help from the governing bodies this was our only route .

But your main preferred remedy is to cancel relegation and promotion! Yet we’re telling Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove that’s not really what we want we just want to force clubs to revisit the issue so we don’t get relegated.

So say the Court of Session annuls the resolution, what then? Whose mind will we have changed such that a new resolution for reconstruction will pass? We still need to get the Noes down to at least 10 and the Yeses to double to 32. Who are we persuading with this legal action?

1 hour ago, eljaggo said:

Forgive my ignorance (especially if it's been raised already in this tome of a thread), but can witnesses be called at the Court of Session?

Woodstock Jag's posts seem well informed, and taking them at face value, the best we could hope to achieve would be to highlight the incompetence (or possibly the corruption) of those running the show.  This would be best achieved by getting Doncaster, the Dundee Chairman and the SPFL Chairman into the witness box to ask:

Why did Doncaster offer only one option for allowing final place money to be disbursed, when other options were available?

What passed between Doncaster and Dundee that made them change their vote, and allow their chairman to declare that "concessions" had been obtained (presumably from the SPFL)?

Most evidence is likely to take the form of written affidavits, especially with a short timescale. You’re unlikely to get oral cross examination.

48 minutes ago, javeajag said:

Part of our petition is that the whole basis for closing the season as the only way to release payments was wrong and indeed not all the relevant information was given to the clubs.

on sportsound yesterday it was reported that a number of clubs now believe this to be true and that we will win in this point 

Fine but it’s one thing to say that and it’s quite another then to say that they would vote differently on reconstruction if that information had been available, when it was clearly available on Monday of this week and yet still most of them didn’t vote for reconstruction.

Share this post


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

That’s a matter of opinion. I think sixteen clubs backing a proposal probably would have merited further consultation.

Well listening to the Peterhead chairman he sounded mystified and has received no explanation and the journalists were clear the premier was never going to vote for it as Dave Cormack made clear .... your absolute defence if Doncaster is amusing 

Share this post


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

So say the Court of Session annuls the resolution, what then? Whose mind will we have changed such that a new resolution for reconstruction will pass? We still need to get the Noes down to at least 10 and the Yeses to double to 32. Who are we persuading with this legal action?

In that case you would look more than a little silly ......

And it would depend on the details of the judgement but the context would have changed and you have no idea what will happen ...what for example if Doncaster has to resign? What in fact if some people do change their minds ? What if the sfa step in with arbitration ? At least there are possibilities 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One if the really funny things emerging is that if we do win the spfl is the clubs would have to pay any compensation awarded and our legal costs and the non premier clubs are saying the premier should pay 84% of it because they get 84% of the commercial income .....one to watch 

Share this post


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

If you read what I said the process is that you go via the SFA not via the Courts - SFA Rule 99 - which we are most likely in Breech of - you cant be a member of a Sporting Body and ignore  there rules 

Unless there is a specific way of having to do this, I would say that with Doncaster being on the SFA board and the discussions with him, we haven’t ignored the rules.

Share this post


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

But your main preferred remedy is to cancel relegation and promotion! Yet we’re telling Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove that’s not really what we want we just want to force clubs to revisit the issue so we don’t get relegated.

So say the Court of Session annuls the resolution, what then? Whose mind will we have changed such that a new resolution for reconstruction will pass? We still need to get the Noes down to at least 10 and the Yeses to double to 32. Who are we persuading with this legal action?

Where did I say I was in favour of cancelling Promotions, what I said there was no other option at this moment apart from going to Court.

 

What we have done is perhaps a catalyst for change, as  I don’t think the SPFL will want all their dirty laundry aired in Public and that I believe will lead to meaningful dialogue .

Share this post


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

Well listening to the Peterhead chairman he sounded mystified and has received no explanation and the journalists were clear the premier was never going to vote for it as Dave Cormack made clear .... your absolute defence if Doncaster is amusing 

Probably because he failed to read the letter properly. I listened back on Sportsound and he made the same mistake of conflating “sufficient support” referring to “approving” the change as against “meriting further consultation”

12 minutes ago, javeajag said:

In that case you would look more than a little silly ......

And it would depend on the details of the judgement but the context would have changed and you have no idea what will happen ...what for example if Doncaster has to resign? What in fact if some people do change their minds ? What if the sfa step in with arbitration ? At least there are possibilities 

The nature of what is being argued means that reduction of the resolution only in part is not sustainable. The Court of Session or CAS are not about to force the SPFL to change its corporate governance structure, including its Articles of Association and Rules.

These alternative remedies you cite are still extremely unlikely outcomes.

8 minutes ago, javeajag said:

One if the really funny things emerging is that if we do win the spfl is the clubs would have to pay any compensation awarded and our legal costs and the non premier clubs are saying the premier should pay 84% of it because they get 84% of the commercial income .....one to watch 

And equally if we get an interdict but then lose the case we are liable for the SPFL and other clubs’ legal costs and potentially damages for disruption caused by the delay to the league season.

Oh I’m *sure* our generous benefactor has deep enough pockets to cover that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jlsarmy said:

Where did I say I was in favour of cancelling Promotions, what I said there was no other option at this moment apart from going to Court

I said your main preferred remedy is that.

If you back this case that is a necessary corollary. That is what we are asking for at first instance.

Just now, jlsarmy said:

What we have done is perhaps a catalyst for change, as  I don’t think the SPFL will want all their dirty laundry aired in Public and that I believe will lead to meaningful dialogue .

Sorry but this is on the never never pish. We’ve pissed off the other clubs and if the resolution is annulled they will tell us to go **** ourselves for putting the game into chaos. They will then pass another resolution doing mostly the same thing and enough of the original clubs will vote for it rather than pay back their prize money.

Share this post


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

I said your main preferred remedy is that.

If you back this case that is a necessary corollary. That is what we are asking for at first instance.

Sorry but this is on the never never pish. We’ve pissed off the other clubs and if the resolution is annulled they will tell us to go **** ourselves for putting the game into chaos. They will then pass another resolution doing mostly the same thing and enough of the original clubs will vote for it rather than pay back their prize money.

 

13 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I said your main preferred remedy is that.

If you back this case that is a necessary corollary. That is what we are asking for at first instance.

Sorry but this is on the never never pish. We’ve pissed off the other clubs and if the resolution is annulled they will tell us to go **** ourselves for putting the game into chaos. They will then pass another resolution doing mostly the same thing and enough of the original clubs will vote for it rather than pay back their prize money.

Ok WJ, you’ve spouted lots of rhetoric over the last couple of days , as a PTFC supporter and to try and safeguard our Club what would be your solution taking into account we’ve no definitive start date for our League ( surely a restriction of business) .

Tell me what your solution is , simple question 

Edited by jlsarmy
  • Like 1

Share this post


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

Probably because he failed to read the letter properly. I listened back on Sportsound and he made the same mistake of conflating “sufficient support” referring to “approving” the change as against “meriting further consultation”

The nature of what is being argued means that reduction of the resolution only in part is not sustainable. The Court of Session or CAS are not about to force the SPFL to change its corporate governance structure, including its Articles of Association and Rules.

These alternative remedies you cite are still extremely unlikely outcomes.

And equally if we get an interdict but then lose the case we are liable for the SPFL and other clubs’ legal costs and potentially damages for disruption caused by the delay to the league season.

Oh I’m *sure* our generous benefactor has deep enough pockets to cover that...

Ah of course everybody doesn’t understand but you ........the main point you didn’t address of course everyone  knew the resolution would not pass EVERYBODY

I never mentioned remedies I indicated if we win the case the circumstances change and for example Doncaster  might go  and who knows what might happen ( yes I know you do )

I doubt anyone will go for an interdict we won’t 

Share this post


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

I said your main preferred remedy is that.

If you back this case that is a necessary corollary. That is what we are asking for at first instance.

Sorry but this is on the never never pish. We’ve pissed off the other clubs and if the resolution is annulled they will tell us to go **** ourselves for putting the game into chaos. They will then pass another resolution doing mostly the same thing and enough of the original clubs will vote for it rather than pay back their prize money.

Predicting the future number 8546.....you need to separate facts, opinions and speculation 

Share this post


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

Ah of course everybody doesn’t understand but you ........the main point you didn’t address of course everyone  knew the resolution would not pass EVERYBODY

I never mentioned remedies I indicated if we win the case the circumstances change and for example Doncaster  might go  and who knows what might happen ( yes I know you do )

I doubt anyone will go for an interdict we won’t 

Correct , but I‘m sure it will facilitate dialogue and change .

Share this post


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

Ok WJ, you’ve spouted lots of rhetoric over the last couple of days , as a PTFC supporter and to try and safeguard our Club what would be your solution taking into account we’ve no definitive start date for our League ( surely a restriction of business) .

Tell me what your solution is , simple question 

There isn’t one.

Our only realistic course of action now is to

(1) hope to persuade enough other teams in League One (or if necessary Leagues One and Two) to commit to start in October or (2) failing that as above but for January or (3) failing that to convince 31 other clubs in the next few weeks to back an expanded Scottish Championship and/or Premiership.

If we cant do any of these things we need to minimise the club’s overheads, maximise its dormant revenue, and hope it still exists in 2021.

Share this post


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

hope it still exists in 2021.

Great solution, you couldn’t make it up . !

Glad you’re not fighting our corner for us .

Share this post


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

There isn’t one.

Our only realistic course of action now is to

(1) hope to persuade enough other teams in League One (or if necessary Leagues One and Two) to commit to start in October or (2) failing that as above but for January or (3) failing that to convince 31 other clubs in the next few weeks to back an expanded Scottish Championship and/or Premiership.

If we cant do any of these things we need to minimise the club’s overheads, maximise its dormant revenue, and hope it still exists in 2021.

Well it’s a relief we have actual lawyers defending us ......

that’s even more speculative pie in the sky than from anyone  else 

Share this post


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

Great solution, you couldn’t make it up . !

Glad you’re not fighting our corner for us .

I am genuinely worried this litigation will make it less likely that we still exist: both in 2021 and in the longer term.

Share this post


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

I am genuinely worried this litigation will make it less likely that we still exist: both in 2021 and in the longer term.

Think there is slightly more sympathy for our plight as the media are focussing more on Hearts and Anne Budge for driving this .

Share this post


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

I am genuinely worried this litigation will make it less likely that we still exist: both in 2021 and in the longer term.

More speculation ...which will be wrong 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we all have to wait and see. Absolutely no one can predict what will happen. Personally ( speculation ) is that an interdict to stop promotions/ league delay is extremely unlikely. I tend to think we will force compensation ( and rightly so ). What that number is who knows but hopefully significant enough to sting our SPFL fellow members. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just curious.  If, (a big IF) Hearts and Thistle win compensation, the money can only come from the member clubs.  Can the clubs that voted "yes"  say they voted for the resolution and are therefore not liable?

Share this post


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

There isn’t one.

Our only realistic course of action now is to

(1) hope to persuade enough other teams in League One (or if necessary Leagues One and Two) to commit to start in October or (2) failing that as above but for January or (3) failing that to convince 31 other clubs in the next few weeks to back an expanded Scottish Championship and/or Premiership.

If we cant do any of these things we need to minimise the club’s overheads, maximise its dormant revenue, and hope it still exists in 2021.

Will be interested in the mechanics of an amalgamated L1/L2 around promotion / relegation. The next shambles on the horizon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, One t in Scotland said:

Will be interested in the mechanics of an amalgamated L1/L2 around promotion / relegation. The next shambles on the horizon.

Aye we will probably get relegated 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2020 at 9:36 AM, javeajag said:

Apparently it’s not from hearts or Anderson 

Dont tell us, a friend of yours who is in the know told you ??

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/20/2020 at 3:10 PM, Whitelees jag said:

16 said they would support reconstruction..14 said they wouldn't and apparently 12 abstained/didnt know which was taken as a no vote..

You have to worry about the 12 that did'nt know which way to vote in an indicative vote. Talk about indecisive.

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.

×