They Can't Relegate Us (Legally)

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

UEFA letter actually reads ok for us, that sporting competition must decide and that can't be done by ending leagues prematurely.

[Beast Boy]

Belgium leading the way in putting lives before profit. The “big five” can go **** themselves and play each other in their own shitty European set up. It’s what they want anyway. 

[DETTY29]

How can you conclude your own season when Uefa still want to UCL and UEL to conclude.

 

Any cross border competitions really should have all people travelling tested, quarantined for 14 days after travel, and same again on way back.

 

Stop living in cloud cuckoo land.

[Nookie Bear]

I'm sticking with my theory is that this will somehow be the trigger for a European League.

[Bazzas right boot]

2 hours ago, Dazo said:

That’s not all you’ll be doing, you’ll be Unfairly relegating teams and denying other teams promotion. You seem to be blinkered by 1st spot. 
 

Commercially as a whole I can’t see how declaring the league as is makes any positive difference. 

 

I have said no relegation and bring up two teams from the other divisions. 

 

You have completey ignored my post apart from 1st place. 

 

 

[Nicholas Brody]

32 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

So much depends on different broadcast deals.

 

Cowdenbeath chairman said on Saturday UEFA and broadcasters are the key players. 

 

This is the problem. Uefa and broadcasters should not be the driving force behind this. This is far bigger than football. It's a public health emergency and for some reason, they can't seem to get their heads around this.

[Dazo]

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

I have said no relegation and bring up two teams from the other divisions. 

 

You have completey ignored my post apart from 1st place. 

 

 

Did you ? Sorry I didn’t even see that in any of the posts I quoted. 
 

League reconstruct is a non starter I’d imagine. If it can’t be finished you don’t tinker with every league in the country to sort it imo. 

[Jamboelite]

8 minutes ago, Dazo said:

Did you ? Sorry I didn’t even see that in any of the posts I quoted. 
 

League reconstruct is a non starter I’d imagine. If it can’t be finished you don’t tinker with every league in the country to sort it imo. 

I think you do if it takes most of the pain points away,  it can just be for one season only and even then that season maybe a reduced one.

 

I just cant see how you get past player contracts and insurance etc.......beyond 12th June when contracts usually terminate in Scotland.

 

As for UEFA this is all about money and confirms that TV holds the power not them. If TV broadcasters can come to a deal

in the top 5 countries regarding the season stopping now then thats what will happen, if not we will have this fantasy scenario of finishing in July continue for another month or two.

Edited April 3, 2020 by Jamboelite

[Dazo]

1 minute ago, Jamboelite said:

I think you do if it takes most of the pain points away and it could be for one season only, even then that season maybe a reduced one.

 

I just cant see how you get past player contracts and insurance etc.......beyond 12th June when contracts usually terminate in Scotland.

 

As for UEFA this is all about money and confirms that TV holds the power not them. If TV broadcasters can come to a deal

in the top 5 countries regarding the season stopping now then thats what will happen, if not we will have this fantasy scenario of finishing in July continue for another month or two.

I just think league reconstruction is just another can of worms at a time it’s the last thing we need. For 1 season ? Assuming it is 14 So 3 are relegated, who is voting for that ? 14 is a shitty number and the clubs won’t have any more through fear of losing their precious OF games. 

[Alva-Jambo]

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

Nice to see Belgium telling UEFA where to go. Looks like Netherlands will join them. Would be great to see Scotland doing what is best for our game and all our clubs, instead of crawling up the backside of England and just blindly following the money trail. Pathetic to see our league desperately trying to get the scraps from the so called big five leagues. Like watching Oliver asking ' please sir, can we have some more'. 

 

What we need is strong leadership and a spine, which is something that Petrie, Doncaster, Lawell and our media simply don't have.

[frankblack]

Just now, Alva-Jambo said:

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

 

What you just proposed would see Hearts on the phone to their lawyers in five minutes.

[Alva-Jambo]

Thats OK,  however, it is hard to see how Hearts would win a case under the unusual circumstances.   But if the League is extended in to Autumn to complete the matches,  UEFA may rule Rangers Celtic and Aberdeen or Motherwell, from European tournaments.   It is obvious, that Rangers and Celtic would go for my version- unfortunately.

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by Alva-Jambo

[Nookie Bear]

40 minutes ago, Nicholas Brody said:

 

This is the problem. Uefa and broadcasters should not be the driving force behind this. This is far bigger than football. It's a public health emergency and for some reason, they can't seem to get their heads around this.

So, if note UEFA, the government should be deciding?

Edited April 3, 2020 by Nookie Bear

[Malinga the Swinga]

7 minutes ago, Alva-Jambo said:

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

That isn't natural justice, that is a farce. We haven't all played same teams or had same home and away fixtures. If you don't see that, there is no hope for you.

[SectionDJambo]

This is the same UEFA who wouldn't allow Wolves not to travel to a club which had personnel infected by Coronavirus. Who tried to force Getafe, I think it was, to travel to play Inter, whilst the crisis has become obvious in Italy.

An organisation so far up it's own backside that it thinks itself more important than the lives of the people of Europe.

Football has, well and truly, gone to the dogs.  It's time that the European governments pulled UEFA into line and told them that they're not playing any football for a long time.

[Fozzyonthefence]

32 minutes ago, Dazo said:

I just think league reconstruction is just another can of worms at a time it’s the last thing we need. For 1 season ? Assuming it is 14 So 3 are relegated, who is voting for that ? 14 is a shitty number and the clubs won’t have any more through fear of losing their precious OF games. 

If what I read earlier is correct in that 32 of 42 clubs would have to vote for league reconstruction then I can’t see that happening.

[ramrod]

1 hour ago, Alva-Jambo said:

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

Scanning for logic 👀

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, Dazo said:

Did you ? Sorry I didn’t even see that in any of the posts I quoted. 
 

League reconstruct is a non starter I’d imagine. If it can’t be finished you don’t tinker with every league in the country to sort it imo. 

 

Well, they will need to do something.

 

Imo, what I posted earlier mitigates the most damage.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 hour ago, Alva-Jambo said:

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

 

 

Declaring champions  and relegation are not linked in any way, they are separate issues.

Promotion as well.

 

Relegation is the one that stands out that would be challenged in the courts and quite easily as there are other options available.

To forcibly relegate a club should be a last option as it is a tangible and material change to the club from where it is now.

Awarding a title has no such issues.

Promotion is all about "might have", "could have" and "would have". The bottom line is that even keeping a club in the same division does not change their position from what it was at the start of the season or even right now for that matter.

 

Mitigation should be the key here, because if not, lawyers will have a field day.

Demoting a club when there are other options available is the  one that stands out as the big issue across the leagues as it will be challenged in court and given that there are other options then it should be challenged rather easily. 

 

If the practical and tangible damage can be minimised to every other club then this should be done, it would also be very hard to challenge in court if the governing bodies do this, because what would you challenge if they mitigated to their best all the issues across the board.

 

There is no logic in a toss of a coin either.

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by Smith's right boot

[pharmaceutical01]

1 hour ago, Fozzyonthefence said:

If what I read earlier is correct in that 32 of 42 clubs would have to vote for league reconstruction then I can’t see that happening.

if you want all 42 clubs to vote, better to do it now as there will not be 42 left at the end of this pandemic

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 hours ago, IveSeenTheLight said:

 

 

Theres a good chance that is true, however indicators are showing that places like Spain and Italy, the 2nd and 3rd worst hit areas in the world appear to have peaked and are starting to decline.

With July three months away, is it conceivable that games could be played behind closed doors in July or August?

Maybe, maybe not, but there may be a possibility.

 

 

 

Wuhan in China is now telling people to stay indoors again. This is going to take a long time. It could even come back in winter. Imagine starting the league and then having to stop it again. It's mental from UEFA. 

[DETTY29]

Belgian FA saying audio with Uefa today and Uefa backing down on threat of Uefa suspensions if associations decide not to complete leagues.

[sac]

21 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Declaring champions  and relegation are not linked in any way, they are separate issues.

Promotion as well.

 

Relegation is the one that stands out that would be challenged in the courts and quite easily as there are other options available.

To forcibly relegate a club should be a last option as it is a tangible and material change to the club from where it is now.

Awarding a title has no such issues.

Promotion is all about "might have", "could have" and "would have". The bottom line is that even keeping a club in the same division does not change their position from what it was at the start of the season or even right now for that matter.

 

Mitigation should be the key here, because if not, lawyers will have a field day.

Demoting a club when there are other options available is the  one that stands out as the big issue across the leagues as it will be challenged in court and given that there are other options then it should be challenged rather easily. 

 

If the practical and tangible damage can be minimised to every other club then this should be done, it would also be very hard to challenge in court if the governing bodies do this, because what would you challenge if they mitigated to their best all the issues across the board.

 

There is no logic in a toss of a coin either.

 

Think all the clubs jockeying it out for the play off positions would be rightly aggrieved at not having the opportunity to gain promotion via this route.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

3 minutes ago, sac said:

Think all the clubs jockeying it out for the play off positions would be rightly aggrieved at not having the opportunity to gain promotion via this route.

 

That's why league reconstruction solves all of these issues (or almost all depending how much you increase our top league by). The trickle down effect will mean that teams in promotion positions further down also go up and no-one gets relegated.

 

The big worry is what happens next winter when flu season arrives and if there is no vaccine yet or no quick testing procedures. All it takes is one person to catch it from travelling or something and the whole things starts all over.

 

I think we'll be living under rolling lockdowns of varying strictness and very strict travel and group gathering restrictions for some time. A quick, reliable testing kit will make a huge difference - at airports for example.

 

It's also up in the air how many football clubs will survive a long disruption and if they do survive how quickly they can restart, have a pre season, recruit players, etc. For example, if travel is restricted, could we see teams only playing home-grown players to avoid unnecessary travel by players for trials, talks, etc? This could be a massive levelling of the playing field for everyone outwith clubs with massive cash reserves and very rich owners - almost like a restart for football.

[soonbe110]

2 hours ago, Alva-Jambo said:

IF the league has to be completed due to pressure,  eg  from UEFA, and money will talk, it may have to be , and that means  based on the positions of the last played match.  The following: 

Celtic are announced winners, and regrettably, by that same token and natural justice, Hearts are relegated. 

( NOT allowing a team to come up would not, be natural justice).

Secondly, the playoff place should be decided by the best of three bets - toss of coin.  It cannot , be played. 

I greatly dislike what I just said, but there is logic in it. 

Relegating a team 8 games before season ends is hardly natural justice is it. Also we have played St.Mirren once at home and twice away from home so far. Had it been the other way around it’s highly likely that we would be ahead of them at the moment. Natural justice? 

[Mikey1874]

20 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Belgian FA saying audio with Uefa today and Uefa backing down on threat of Uefa suspensions if associations decide not to complete leagues.

 

Belgium's trump card is what its Government decrees. 

 

UEFA has a problem if Governments say football can't be played. 

[Nicholas Brody]

2 hours ago, Nookie Bear said:

So, if note UEFA, the government should be deciding?

 

Yes.

[Mikey1874]

EPL statement 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

Key point from EPL - no return date.

 

Only when it is safe. 

[Bazzas right boot]

52 minutes ago, sac said:

Think all the clubs jockeying it out for the play off positions would be rightly aggrieved at not having the opportunity to gain promotion via this route.

 

Yes, but though titties tbh, a pandemic cut the season short. 

Hence why there is an issue. 

 

Denying the possibility of, opportunity etc is different to actually physically relegating a club. 

It's quite a big difference when you break it down. 

 

Mitagation is all about limiting the actual and tangible damage being done. 

 

Teams jockeying for promotion will be pissed, but keeping them as is does no further damage to them, neither does it change their circumstances from what they are currently. 

 

Relegating Hearts clearly does and is a massive practical and tangible change. 

 

Mitigating the fall out is not really concerned with what ifs and maybes aye and maybe naw. 

 

It's about the clubs situation right now and minimising the damage to them as is. 

Denyiing opportunity is shite, but being pragmatic,  it actually changes nothing for these clubs. 

They will be as is. 

 

The sporting side and business side are at odds here. 

Any other way imo and legal teams will have a field day. 

 

There is no one solution for all, but Mitagating the damage has be the priority imo, it's the way that will keep most clubs satisfied and one that will reduce legal actions, if not completely remove them. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by Smith's right boot

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

Key point from EPL - no return date.

 

Only when it is safe. 

 

EFL have followed with same position 

 

 

[maroonsgotop]

7 hours ago, IveSeenTheLight said:

 

I agree, not enough time to be certain of anything,

but the graph suggests that the peak from 30 cases is around 30 days. Now I accept each country has responded differently so there will be variances.

China got it back down to manageable levels within 2 months.

 

I think we'll be in lockdown all of April, probably most of May, but social distancing is potentially likely to be eased come June / July

be interested to see how that would work with no vaccine available for the foreseeable meaning any relaxation would see the 2nd wave appear and no doubt a 3rd wave in winter. In my view hard to see any Football being played in front of crowds until at least September and in all possibility 2021. It might be that they conclude this season and scrap 2020/21.

[Big Mack]

Several people have indicated that clubs (and Hearts in particular) are likely to challenge SPFL decisions in court.  I doubt that this will happen.  The SPFL rules are available for all to see on their website.  I won't claim to have read all 249 pages but I could not find anything that covers the current situation.  Therefore I looked at the SPFL Ltd Articles of Association which cover the internal workings of SPFL Ltd and found article 99.9 which states that in relation to the League, the Board of SPFL Ltd may -

"be entitled to make such arrangements, adopt such procedures and make such determinations as it considers appropriate in circumstances where the Rules or Regulations, as the case may be, do not direct or provide for the manner in which the League, League Cup or other Competition operated by the Company should proceed or be operated".

This clearly gives the Board of SPFL Ltd wide powers to decide what should happen in the current circumstances.  It seems most unlikely that any court could intervene and "natural justice" is irrelevant if SPFL Ltd follows its own Articles of Association.  Ann Budge has stated that Hearts would "take further legal advice".  I am sure that such advice would say that Hearts do not have a strong case and given the current financial situation I can't see Hearts undertaking expensive legal action with only a small or no chance of success.  Therefore I think that Hearts will be stuck with whatever decision the SPFL make.

[frankblack]

17 minutes ago, Big Mack said:

Several people have indicated that clubs (and Hearts in particular) are likely to challenge SPFL decisions in court.  I doubt that this will happen.  The SPFL rules are available for all to see on their website.  I won't claim to have read all 249 pages but I could not find anything that covers the current situation.  Therefore I looked at the SPFL Ltd Articles of Association which cover the internal workings of SPFL Ltd and found article 99.9 which states that in relation to the League, the Board of SPFL Ltd may -

"be entitled to make such arrangements, adopt such procedures and make such determinations as it considers appropriate in circumstances where the Rules or Regulations, as the case may be, do not direct or provide for the manner in which the League, League Cup or other Competition operated by the Company should proceed or be operated".

This clearly gives the Board of SPFL Ltd wide powers to decide what should happen in the current circumstances.  It seems most unlikely that any court could intervene and "natural justice" is irrelevant if SPFL Ltd follows its own Articles of Association.  Ann Budge has stated that Hearts would "take further legal advice".  I am sure that such advice would say that Hearts do not have a strong case and given the current financial situation I can't see Hearts undertaking expensive legal action with only a small or no chance of success.  Therefore I think that Hearts will be stuck with whatever decision the SPFL make.

 

I don't think you quite understand how lawyers work.  That would not stand up in court as a defence.

 

If they make a decision other than to void the fixtures or do temporary league reconstruction they will be served papers within the day from all clubs penalised unjustly.

Edited April 3, 2020 by frankblack

[Nookie Bear]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

Key point from EPL - no return date.

 

Only when it is safe. 

And that will be dictated by the government when they allow the release of the usual first aid/police etc etc numbers that bff or all requires. They would also have to allow gatherings of people before crowds are allowed to attend. I wonder if clubs will accept closed door games assuming the players have been cleared to play?

 

To be honest, I don’t blame any authority for not making a decision yet. It’s too soon. 

[Bellion]

2 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

And that will be dictated by the government when they allow the release of the usual first aid/police etc etc numbers that bff or all requires. They would also have to allow gatherings of people before crowds are allowed to attend. I wonder if clubs will accept closed door games assuming the players have been cleared to play?

 

To be honest, I don’t blame any authority for not making a decision yet. It’s too soon. 

Agree completely.  If we could be confident that we could get back to playing by the Autumn, there'd be a much better case for wrapping 19/20 up now (one way or another) and moving on.  But there's no way of knowing when leagues will restart, so we're going to have to wait and see for now.  If they did call it now, people would probably be unhappy with that too.     

[Bellion]

30 minutes ago, Big Mack said:

Several people have indicated that clubs (and Hearts in particular) are likely to challenge SPFL decisions in court.  I doubt that this will happen.  The SPFL rules are available for all to see on their website.  I won't claim to have read all 249 pages but I could not find anything that covers the current situation.  Therefore I looked at the SPFL Ltd Articles of Association which cover the internal workings of SPFL Ltd and found article 99.9 which states that in relation to the League, the Board of SPFL Ltd may -

"be entitled to make such arrangements, adopt such procedures and make such determinations as it considers appropriate in circumstances where the Rules or Regulations, as the case may be, do not direct or provide for the manner in which the League, League Cup or other Competition operated by the Company should proceed or be operated".

This clearly gives the Board of SPFL Ltd wide powers to decide what should happen in the current circumstances.  It seems most unlikely that any court could intervene and "natural justice" is irrelevant if SPFL Ltd follows its own Articles of Association.  Ann Budge has stated that Hearts would "take further legal advice".  I am sure that such advice would say that Hearts do not have a strong case and given the current financial situation I can't see Hearts undertaking expensive legal action with only a small or no chance of success.  Therefore I think that Hearts will be stuck with whatever decision the SPFL make.

There's no rule aimed specifically at what happens in the event of a global pandemic suspending the season.  But there are several rules which say that everyone in the Premiership has to play 38 games, and that nobody can be relegated until all of those games have been played.  If they have to, Hearts will point to those rules, and the SPFL will have to explain why they've been ignored.  

 

The SPFL Rules are really pretty prescriptive about how the league is to be structured and how promotion/relegation is meant to operate.  The SPFL will have a very hard time relying on any generic power like art 99.9 while more specific rules are in place. 

[DETTY29]

Chris McLaughlin on Radio Scotland 5pm news saying many clubs are planning for a next season and don't believe there is any way this season will finish.

 

 

Edited April 3, 2020 by DETTY29

[Big Mack]

18 minutes ago, frankblack said:

 

I don't think you quite understand how lawyers work.  That would not stand up in court as a defence.

 

If they make a decision other than to void the fixtures or do temporary league reconstruction they will be served papers within the day from all clubs penalised unjustly.

 

On the contrary, a good deal of my career involved company law, which is what applies here.  I struggle to find what argument an aggrieved member of the SPFL could use to overturn decisions made in accordance with its own rules. The question of what is fair is not relevant, the issue is whether SPFL has the power under to make a decision in these very difficult circumstances. 

[Hearts007]

Just now, DETTY29 said:

Chris McLaughlin on Radio Scotland 5pmnews saying many clubs are planning for a next season and don't believe there is any way this season will finish.

 

 

Neither do i

[indianajones]

Just now, DETTY29 said:

Chris McLaughlin on Radio Scotland 5pmnews saying many clubs are planning for a next season and don't believe there is any way this season will finish.

 

 

 

Many clubs have sense. 

 

Null and void OR award league titles and promote without relgations. 

 

Only two sensible options now. 

[Nookie Bear]

4 minutes ago, indianajones said:

 

Many clubs have sense. 

 

Null and void OR award league titles and promote without relgations. 

 

Only two sensible options now. 

Why not relegate? 

[Big Mack]

7 minutes ago, Bellion said:

There's no rule aimed specifically at what happens in the event of a global pandemic suspending the season.  But there are several rules which say that everyone in the Premiership has to play 38 games, and that nobody can be relegated until all of those games have been played.  If they have to, Hearts will point to those rules, and the SPFL will have to explain why they've been ignored.  

 

The SPFL Rules are really pretty prescriptive about how the league is to be structured and how promotion/relegation is meant to operate.  The SPFL will have a very hard time relying on any generic power like art 99.9 while more specific rules are in place. 

 

I agree that the rules are very detailed about what happens after 38 games have been played.  However they say nothing about what happens if, for reasons outside their control, it is impossible to play 38 games.  Therefore I believe that the SPFL have to make up a new rule to cover this situation that clearly was not contemplated when the existing rules were written.  I have no idea what they will decide and I would hate to be in the position of having to make the decision myself.  

[Mikey1874]

2 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Chris McLaughlin on Radio Scotland 5pmnews saying many clubs are planning for a next season and don't believe there is any way this season will finish.

 

 

 

1 minute ago, Hearts007 said:

Neither do i

 

It's coming. 

 

Waiting a bit longer is okay. Private talks to give clubs some indication of the direction of travel is needed though. 

[Bellion]

12 minutes ago, Big Mack said:

 

I agree that the rules are very detailed about what happens after 38 games have been played.  However they say nothing about what happens if, for reasons outside their control, it is impossible to play 38 games.  Therefore I believe that the SPFL have to make up a new rule to cover this situation that clearly was not contemplated when the existing rules were written.  I have no idea what they will decide and I would hate to be in the position of having to make the decision myself.  

Agree, sort of.  They don't just say what happens after 38 games have been played: they explicitly require everyone to play 38 games. 

 

Obviously the current scenario wasn't contemplated when those rules were written, but if the SPFL are going to invoke some generic power to call the season finished after 30 games, that wouldn't be a supplementary rule to paper over a gap in the existing rules, it'd be a new rule which contradicts the rules that the SPFL have chosen to put in place & which member clubs have been working with until now.  Very big question mark over whether the SPFL have the power to do that, and if they try to, it's not something Hearts will (or should) accept lightly.   

Edited April 3, 2020 by Bellion

[Dazo]

28 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Why not relegate? 

I agree with that, if you are handing out unearned titles and promotions then you’ll have no problem handing out relegations. It has to be void or finish imo. No half n half. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

2 hours ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

EFL have followed with same position 

 

 

Well now the big boys have made statement, we can now expect our spineless leaders to blindly follow suit. Don't know why we bother having these useless twats, they seem incapable of putting Scottish football at the forefront of their minds. Far easier to copy England than think for themselves.

[indianajones]

42 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

Why not relegate? 

 

12 minutes ago, Dazo said:

I agree with that, if you are handing out unearned titles and promotions then you’ll have no problem handing out relegations. It has to be void or finish imo. No half n half. 

 

Winning the title has less financial implications to those that would be relegated without 'earning it'. 

 

It will also wind up the zombies which i am happy with. 

[Mikey1874]

4 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Well now the big boys have made statement, we can now expect our spineless leaders to blindly follow suit. Don't know why we bother having these useless twats, they seem incapable of putting Scottish football at the forefront of their minds. Far easier to copy England than think for themselves.

 

To be fair Scotland did an indefinite shutdown. It was England that chose dates in April. 

 

But you are correct. Scotland will follow and not make any decisions.