Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
Bobbyhouston

Court It Is Then

Recommended Posts

45 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said:

By what measure do you claim "majority" ? Have you polled the membership ? (if so, I think that my voting slip has gone missing). Although I don't have any facts to disprove your claim, judging by the total number of members, and the numbers who have replied on this topic, I would suggest that the "majority" are blissfully unaware of anything Woodstock Jag has said. Without any facts to back up your claim, this is exactly the type of propaganda put out by the SPLF.

For the record, I do appreciate what WJ contributes, although I'm not convinced by some of his conclusions and I think that there are still enough things which we don't know to make it hard to be quite so black and white. For me there are enough grey areas to give me hope of a result of some sort in our favour. 

I think the subject demands a debate!!! Should we set up a committee to decide future actions? how many will be in the organization, that will give us an indication of the required quorum?  

Share this post


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

I think the subject demands a debate!!! Should we set up a committee to decide future actions? how many will be in the organization, that will give us an indication of the required quorum?  

We also need to know whether an unreturned vote is a 

YES

NO

not a YES

not a NO

or not counted.

also, how long do we have to vote (maximum and preferred return date) and what votes can and can't be changed upto the deadline. Basically it is a can of worms to know whether WJ has support or not, so we may need to let the courts decide.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

By what measure do you claim "majority" ? Have you polled the membership ? (if so, I think that my voting slip has gone missing). Although I don't have any facts to disprove your claim, judging by the total number of members, and the numbers who have replied on this topic, I would suggest that the "majority" are blissfully unaware of anything Woodstock Jag has said. Without any facts to back up your claim, this is exactly the type of propaganda put out by the SPLF.

For the record, I do appreciate what WJ contributes, although I'm not convinced by some of his conclusions and I think that there are still enough things which we don't know to make it hard to be quite so black and white. For me there are enough grey areas to give me hope of a result of some sort in our favour. 

I'm sure that there are people like myself who read threads but don't feel compelled to reply to absolutely every post like certain blithering idiots do; so whilst this thread (like so many) has been dominated by a few mouthy individuals who must heartily enjoy the sound of their own voices, there is a usually silent contingent who read what WJ has written and finds his contribution illuminating.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, P of D said:

I envy WJ his deep well of patience and ability  to cull the wheat from the chaff, both amply demonstrated upon this thread.

I envy WJ's amazing speed of thought and typing.

By the time I have typed one sentence, three other people have replied, and my point is no longer relevant, if it ever was.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn’t want WJ on my side in any kind of confrontation. 

I want winners, believers, grafters, initiators.

The board and our legal team are fighting for the existence  of our wonderful club.

He’s worse than a man short.

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1

Share this post


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

I've always wanted to divide opinion in the Thistle support as much as Simon Donnelly.

Mission accomplished.

You set yourself low acheivement levels. All you have to do is ask if we play in red and yellow, or yellow and red .... support divided 50/50

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, partickthedog said:

I envy WJ's amazing speed of thought and typing.

By the time I have typed one sentence, three other people have replied, and my point is no longer relevant, if it ever was.

I know the feeling PTD. I’m just going to post pictures in the future ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An article in the Edinburgh Evening News states that the Hearing starts at 11:00 tomorrow morning.  Parties will use "Videobox" and journalists can connect live.  The general public can listen to a live audio link, which will be on the Court of Session website.  

As it takes me all of my time to sens a text, please don't ask me for hyperlnks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, East Kent Jag II said:

An article in the Edinburgh Evening News states that the Hearing starts at 11:00 tomorrow morning.  Parties will use "Videobox" and journalists can connect live.  The general public can listen to a live audio link, which will be on the Court of Session website.  

As it takes me all of my time to sens a text, please don't ask me for hyperlnks!

The Edinburgh Evening News  link:

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/what-expect-court-session-hearts-and-partick-thistle-take-spfl-2899578

Haven't worked out the Court of Session one yet :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A couple of things that concern me around this debate...

Ever since the legal action was announced my main argument with WJ was that Thistle had no choice. Once the money was offered they had to pursue this or risk losing the fans. Others have argued with WJ, why would Thistle pursue this if they really had such little chance of success? Well there, in my view, could be your answer.

And...

A lot of people seem to object to the SPFL dictating and pushing the agenda, rather than reflecting the clubs' wishes. This to me misses the point. True democracy will always fail to provide a "fair" solution in a case such as this. Our only chance was for the SPFL to push the agenda. My objection is with the particular agenda that they pushed, not with the principle of them doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And another question, purely hypothetical. Let's say the action is successful,  and Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer were all reinstated at the expense of the "promoted" clubs.

Would we expect reconstruction to be proposed, this time to enable promotion, would we vote in favour,  and would it pass?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, allyo said:

And another question, purely hypothetical. Let's say the action is successful,  and Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer were all reinstated at the expense of the "promoted" clubs.

Would we expect reconstruction to be proposed, this time to enable promotion, would we vote in favour,  and would it pass?

Lets get the win first before worrying about what happens next.

As I understand it, today is not about the win, but about whether we are allowed to play for the win. Lets call it a pitch inspection

Share this post


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

Lets get the win first before worrying about what happens next.

As I understand it, today is not about the win, but about whether we are allowed to play for the win. Lets call it a pitch inspection

Today might be the last chance we get to dream of a win.

Edited by allyo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Aliballibee said:

the article mentions an audio only link to proceedings - couldn't find one on a brief look at the CofS website 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the jambos kickback site, seems some on there have the audio code but saying that if you post about the case you could be in contempt of court jouralists only allowed to tweet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, allyo said:

And another question, purely hypothetical. Let's say the action is successful,  and Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer were all reinstated at the expense of the "promoted" clubs.

Would we expect reconstruction to be proposed, this time to enable promotion, would we vote in favour,  and would it pass?

This is how it should have been proposed in the first place. 

1. Vote to 'call' the season (and distribute prize money) 

2. No relegation 

3. Meaningful talks on reconstruction to reward teams at the top of their respective division with promotion. 

This 'to reward' emphasis would have resulted in a more positive approach/debatd and IMO  14-10-10-10 would have been accepted have been accepted 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jags, Hearts and Stranraer are relegated due to the Covid virus and the leagues ending early. Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers are promoted due to the Covid virus and the leagues ending early. Three clubs punished and three clubs rewarded.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, allyo said:

And another question, purely hypothetical. Let's say the action is successful,  and Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer were all reinstated at the expense of the "promoted" clubs.

Would we expect reconstruction to be proposed, this time to enable promotion, would we vote in favour,  and would it pass?

I’d hope we’d vote no to reconstruction in that scenario. :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, madcapmilkdrinker said:

I’d hope we’d vote no to reconstruction in that scenario. :) 

From now on whenever there is a vote, Thistle should have 2 considerations. Whatever benefits Thistle and also if possible get some revenge on those teams that voted against league reconstruction.

  • Like 1

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.

×