Jump to content

SPFL and Covid ( Championship clubs asked if they want to suspend )


Heres Rixxy

Recommended Posts

TheGoodLord
1 minute ago, Fozzyonthefence said:


Anyone any good at hacking email accounts?🤫


Seriously it might come to this, a request can legally be made to establish this sort of thing. God only knows what other stuff they’d find. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 93.9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mikey1874

    2065

  • Pasquale for King

    1712

  • Ethan Hunt

    1597

  • Beast Boy

    1415

maroonsgotop
1 minute ago, Squirt said:

 

Hopefully but the more Budge talks the less faith I have in her to stick up for us. I respect her massively and will forever be grateful to her but I just don't think she's got the fire in her belly that you need when you're running a football club. I also think she's got a few too many morals for it, which is a horrible thing to say but this is football after all!

 

Hopefully she makes me eat my words and I'll apologise unreservedly if she does.

yup. Sadly I think you need to be a smiling assassin

Link to post
Share on other sites
annushorribilis III
49 minutes ago, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Just to be clear - Dundee voted NO - the SPFL say it was not received - and instead of Dundee confirming their NO vote they are now in further “discussions” with the SPFL??? Really???

If that is true then the original email will be held by Dundee obviously and all they have to do (and must do surely ?) is resend it. 

What I don't get is - 

SPFL say they didn't get it ?

DFC didn't get an undeliverable  bounce back of their email  vote ?

DFC didn't put a read receipt on their email ?

 

 

DFCs vote is recorded in the original email , just resend it, it isn't "LOST".  . Job done. They've cast their vote , it just hasn't been received yet. 

 

Otherwise send for Harvey Specter. 

 

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

Don't bank on it.  Unless you are just off the phone to AB.

It's clear some clubs clearly lied to her she has been damaged by this and if she actually went along with this sham and voted, it should be the end of her time at Hearts.

I have backed Mrs Budge in most of her time here but we really need strong leadership now.

Someone who is prepared to kick down doors if necessary. 

 


I don’t know if they lied to her or if it’s similar to situation mentioned by Aberdeen that certain assurances were given in one to one calls prior to deadline, and those individual assurances changed some minds on key issues. That in itself is a bit dodge but the whole thing certainly stinks either way.

 

Main iffyness being Dundee situation by look of things at the moment. I guess the only positive is that things have been so obviously and clearly compromised that legal challenge would be relatively meaningful. It’s a total shit show.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Dagger Is Back
7 minutes ago, King Of The Cat Cafe said:

 

 

Great minds think alike....

 

But still neither of us work at SPFL HQ

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, slightly off topic and I don't want to derail the thread so apologies if it's deemed irrelevant but in all the new madness happening recently did we ever hear a resolution to our players and their wages? And if not do we know when we might?

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

Don't bank on it.  Unless you are just off the phone to AB.

It's clear some clubs clearly lied to her she has been damaged by this and if she actually went along with this sham and voted, it should be the end of her time at Hearts.

I have backed Mrs Budge in most of her time here but we really need strong leadership now.

Someone who is prepared to kick down doors if necessary. 

 


I think it’s pretty obvious what is going on. I also think Dundee need to be very careful about what they do next. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, tightrope said:

A few clubs must have lied to Mrs B given her previous statements.

Lawwell holds more aces than Budge and that’s all that it’s boiled down to. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, tightrope said:

A few clubs must have lied to Mrs B given her previous statements.

Why? It failed based on Championship teams. Dundee now may change their mind supposedly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Let's be honest Lawell has been running Scottish football for years he took over from David Murray the corrupt ****.**** me bribing their way to a title

Link to post
Share on other sites
Saint Jambo

I'm always amazed at posters willingness to state as absolute fact things they clearly don't know for sure.

 

The idea that releasing the partial vote result makes the vote legally illegitimate is a good example. Based on reporting the vote appears to be a mechanism for executing a written resolution of members. It would be perfectly normal in signing a written resolution for the member of a business to know who else had signed it before you. There might be rules stipulating that this won't happen, but those without access to those rules stating as fact  that it would be easy to challenge the outcome on the basis of partial results being released don't know what they are talking about.

 

The question of whether the Dundee vote was properly recieved may also be more complicated than it first appears. I read through a long email from our in house lawyer yesterday detailing the steps we needed to take and software we needed to use to electronically signed document. This was based on guidance issued by the Law Society of Scotland. It is possible that the SPFL had stipulated a process for confirming your vote and that Dundee either haven't followed this or made a mistake whilst doing so. This might explain the slightly odd suggestion that the "competence" of the Dundee vote was being questioned.

 

There is lots of uncertainty for those of us looking in from the outside of this process. Probably easiest to just learn to live with that. It will resolve itself in a few days as the outcome of the vote is confirmed and members then decide whether to challenge the outcome. Those confidently asserting that already know what the result of a legal challenge would be are wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Why? It failed based on Championship teams. Dundee now may change their mind supposedly.

She said she had spoken to Premiership and Championship clubs prior to the vote and was confident.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Special Officer Doofy said:

She said she had spoken to Premiership and Championship clubs prior to the vote and was confident.

Aye...? My post you quoted still stands.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

If Dundee does and no doubt will be forced to change their minds then they have held out for a bigger bribe. But they could expose the level of corruption by insisting on the no vote and expose lawwell and Doncasters. They could hold the  key to whole thing and if the email WAS sent and the spfl chose to pretend it was not received and trying to force Dundee to change it. Then we are looking at criminal behavour. Dundee will have the proof. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:


I think it’s pretty obvious what is going on. I also think Dundee need to be very careful about what they do next. 

I reckon they want a 16 team league. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Five to One
18 minutes ago, BarneyBattles said:


Of course but there’s no confirmation that Dundee have reversed their vote. 

I understand that. Did you see their statement?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hughesie27 said:

Why? It failed based on Championship teams. Dundee now may change their mind supposedly.

She said she was confident the proposal would be defeated. All the Premier teams except Hearts and Rangers have voted

in favour.

The proposal hinges on the vote  of one club as yet undeclared. 

Hardly a reason for confidence. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just so we have a handle on all the under hand tactics at play from the SPFL/Lawwell: 

 

1. Can only hand out prize money if final placings are confirmed. Ask clubs to vote to end the season as it stands to release the funds. 
2. After announcing the only way clubs will get their money is to vote for their proposal they also announce that football in Scotland is officially postponed until June 10th. 
3. Tell everyone that they have to vote by 5pm Friday only to then advise after the motion seems to have failed that actually it’s 28 days the voting ends and that 5pm today was just a guide line. 
4. They release a statement saying that 10 teams in the top flight have voted Yes, 1 has voted No and another hasn’t voted. Hearts and Rangers indicate that they both voted No 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️
5. Dundee vote No but apparently the SPFL didn’t receive it and won’t accept the original vote now and suddenly Dundee are now waiting to resubmit their vote after spending most of tonight in discussions with the decision makers who are trying to convince them to vote yes. 
 

Am not even going to go into the claims that Rangers are making in regards to the under hand tactics they have encountered. 
 

We better be waiting for the dust to settle on this one before unleashing hell on the SPFL and Doncaster. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Back to 2005 said:

No surprise that Aberdeen did what Celtic told them.

 

So you can't trust a word that comes out of McInees's mouth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hagar the Horrible

Ann has just realised the level of corruption exist. Some clearly changed their minds. When they all had the same info? And were against it. So what happened in the last minute for the bankers to change their minds? And why is the whole league trying so hard to screw us over?

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

She said she was confident the proposal would be defeated. All the Premier teams except Hearts and Rangers have voted

in favour.

The proposal hinges on the vote  of one club as yet undeclared. 

Hardly a reason for confidence. 

Some reports suggest Dundee did vote but it wasn't received. If Budge was told by ICT Partick and Dundee reps they were voting against then she had every right to be confident.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hughesie27 said:

Aye...? My post you quoted still stands.


I’m not trying to catch you out or something, man. Jesus. 🙄

 

Thought my reply was relevant, if I’ve misunderstood what you were saying then fine. 
 

Was the topic of discussion not Ann Budge feeling the SPFL Board proposal was going to be voted down based on conversations she had had with Premiership and Championship club officials? When she also stated that she hadn’t spoken to many L1 and L2 clubs, because she didn’t have the contacts there?

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

I reckon they want a 16 team league. 


So do I. 16 at least.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NaturalOrder74
Just now, hughesie27 said:

Some reports suggest Dundee did vote but it wasn't received. If Budge was told by ICT Partick and Dundee reps they were voting against then she had every right to be confident.

 

Be actually good news if the reason she was confident was because she was told by Dundee it would just further suggest they have been forced to change their mind

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

Just so we have a handle on all the under hand tactics at play from the SPFL/Lawwell: 

 

1. Can only hand out prize money if final placings are confirmed. Ask clubs to vote to end the season as it stands to release the funds. 
2. After announcing the only way clubs will get their money is to vote for their proposal they also announce that football in Scotland is officially postponed until June 10th. 
3. Tell everyone that they have to vote by 5pm Friday only to then advise after the motion seems to have failed that actually it’s 28 days the voting ends and that 5pm today was just a guide line. 
4. They release a statement saying that 10 teams in the top flight have voted Yes, 1 has voted No and another hasn’t voted. Hearts and Rangers indicate that they both voted No 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️
5. Dundee vote No but apparently the SPFL didn’t receive it and won’t accept the original vote now and suddenly Dundee are now waiting to resubmit their vote after spending most of tonight in discussions with the decision makers who are trying to convince them to vote yes. 
 

Am not even going to go into the claims that Rangers are making in regards to the under hand tactics they have encountered. 
 

We better be waiting for the dust to settle on this one before unleashing hell on the SPFL and Doncaster. 

Basically :laugh:

 

Hearts and Rangers are now in a predicament whether to release statements absolutely trashing the SPFL and the vote, or keep their powder dry. Tomorrow might be even more mental. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Special Officer Doofy said:


So do I. 16 at least.

Makes sense. They won't get it but they may as well try to gain leverage and get themselves promoted. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
davemclaren
8 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

I'm always amazed at posters willingness to state as absolute fact things they clearly don't know for sure.

 

The idea that releasing the partial vote result makes the vote legally illegitimate is a good example. Based on reporting the vote appears to be a mechanism for executing a written resolution of members. It would be perfectly normal in signing a written resolution for the member of a business to know who else had signed it before you. There might be rules stipulating that this won't happen, but those without access to those rules stating as fact  that it would be easy to challenge the outcome on the basis of partial results being released don't know what they are talking about.

 

The question of whether the Dundee vote was properly recieved may also be more complicated than it first appears. I read through a long email from our in house lawyer yesterday detailing the steps we needed to take and software we needed to use to electronically signed document. This was based on guidance issued by the Law Society of Scotland. It is possible that the SPFL had stipulated a process for confirming your vote and that Dundee either haven't followed this or made a mistake whilst doing so. This might explain the slightly odd suggestion that the "competence" of the Dundee vote was being questioned.

 

There is lots of uncertainty for those of us looking in from the outside of this process. Probably easiest to just learn to live with that. It will resolve itself in a few days as the outcome of the vote is confirmed and members then decide whether to challenge the outcome. Those confidently asserting that already know what the result of a legal challenge would be are wrong.

I think you are right in that the Dundee vote should be cast one way or other over the weekend and, if required, the Legal people of Hearts and Rangers will look at it to understand what options, if any, there are. It’s certainly been a more interesting process than anticipated. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Hungry hippo

Even if they somehow get this proposal through there will be a lot more pressure on the SPFL to seriously look at urgent league reconstruction.

 

16 team league is a complete non-starter as will never get enough votes but 14 is and would still improve opportunities for progression for Dundee.

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

I know youre not asking me but I've thought about this a fair bit and I'd love to think no matter where we're in the league or anyone else was, that my opinion that this proposal stinks wouldnt waiver. And, aunty n baws as it may be, I'd have loved Hearts to be the team in a position to pish on it.


Do you genuinely think that that would be the case though if we where 11th? 
Would you then accuse the club of taking Celtics boaby? A ridiculous analogy(pardon the pun).

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Some reports suggest Dundee did vote but it wasn't received. If Budge was told by ICT Partick and Dundee reps they were voting against then she had every right to be confident.

No wriggle room there at all to be confident.

Somebody's been having her on.

My money is on her pal at ER.

Link to post
Share on other sites
NaturalOrder74
1 minute ago, Hungry hippo said:

Even if they somehow get this proposal through there will be a lot more pressure on the SPFL to seriously look at urgent league reconstruction.

 

16 team league is a complete non-starter as will never get enough votes but 14 is and would still improve opportunities for progression for Dundee.

 

They may as well push for 16 why not ? worst that can happen is they just say no to the proposal and expose all the wrong doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

Ann has just realised the level of corruption exist. Some clearly changed their minds. When they all had the same info? And were against it. So what happened in the last minute for the bankers to change their minds? And why is the whole league trying so hard to screw us over?


I did think after the Vlad era, when a reputable Scottish business woman took over Hearts that we would get a bit of slack cut our way from the SPFL and media.........🙈

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

Basically :laugh:

 

Hearts and Rangers are now in a predicament whether to release statements absolutely trashing the SPFL and the vote, or keep their powder dry. Tomorrow might be even more mental. 

We now have to wait on Gordon Strachans, Paul McGowans, Conor Hazards Dundee voting to save us hahahaha. 

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

Even if they somehow get this proposal through there will be a lot more pressure on the SPFL to seriously look at urgent league reconstruction.

 

16 team league is a complete non-starter as will never get enough votes but 14 is and would still improve opportunities for progression for Dundee.


No there won’t.  The Prem clubs all voted it through apart from us and Rangers.  Why would they then want league reconstruction.  Maybe if one or two others voted against there would be a chance.  Nobody in the top league including Rangers would vote that through.  It would be us and that’s all. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
13 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

I reckon they want a 16 team league. 

It’s the only way they’re coming up this summer, stay down and it’s playoffs at best again next season really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Pasquale for King said:

It’s the only way they’re coming up this summer, stay down and it’s playoffs at best again next season really.


And it’s never going to happen.  Result today is a disaster for the club.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

There’s clearly more to come on subject of Dundee vote. If it was sent, what original vote was, why it was rejected (if it was - this “technical issue” thing), status of abstentions if they don’t re-submit. All sorts of things.

 

It’s already messy but looks like it’s maybe going to get a whole lot messier. 

 

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

No wriggle room there at all to be confident.

Somebody's been having her on.

My money is on her pal at ER.


Her cosy relationship with Dempster certainly back fired on her!

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


Do you genuinely think that that would be the case though if we where 11th? 
Would you then accuse the club of taking Celtics boaby? A ridiculous analogy(pardon the pun).

WTF has that got to do with our case  ?

You should give up the devils advocate routine before folk get doubts about you. 

Who's side are  you on  ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
annushorribilis III
17 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

I'm always amazed at posters willingness to state as absolute fact things they clearly don't know for sure.

 

The idea that releasing the partial vote result makes the vote legally illegitimate is a good example. Based on reporting the vote appears to be a mechanism for executing a written resolution of members. It would be perfectly normal in signing a written resolution for the member of a business to know who else had signed it before you. There might be rules stipulating that this won't happen, but those without access to those rules stating as fact  that it would be easy to challenge the outcome on the basis of partial results being released don't know what they are talking about.

 

The question of whether the Dundee vote was properly recieved may also be more complicated than it first appears. I read through a long email from our in house lawyer yesterday detailing the steps we needed to take and software we needed to use to electronically signed document. This was based on guidance issued by the Law Society of Scotland. It is possible that the SPFL had stipulated a process for confirming your vote and that Dundee either haven't followed this or made a mistake whilst doing so. This might explain the slightly odd suggestion that the "competence" of the Dundee vote was being questioned.

 

There is lots of uncertainty for those of us looking in from the outside of this process. Probably easiest to just learn to live with that. It will resolve itself in a few days as the outcome of the vote is confirmed and members then decide whether to challenge the outcome. Those confidently asserting that already know what the result of a legal challenge would be are wrong.

In that particular instance , what happens if you fail to follow due process - is your vote "spoiled"  or invalid , in effect ?

 

I appreciate your experience may not mirror the SPFL "process" but I am struggling with the idea that DFC were told what the process is (presumably) and didn't comply (for whatever reason) - but then get ANOTHER vote ? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really like a 16 or 18 team league. 

 

14 is just more of the same. I would take it over the current 12 though. Just one more disaster away from actual change :D 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Pasquale for King
Just now, Last Laff said:


And it’s never going to happen.  Result today is a disaster for the club.  

You can’t know that for certain, nobody knows what the future holds. Reconstruction might just happen if clubs fold. 
Today’s was a disaster for us though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
TheGoodLord
11 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

I'm always amazed at posters willingness to state as absolute fact things they clearly don't know for sure.

 

The idea that releasing the partial vote result makes the vote legally illegitimate is a good example. Based on reporting the vote appears to be a mechanism for executing a written resolution of members. It would be perfectly normal in signing a written resolution for the member of a business to know who else had signed it before you. There might be rules stipulating that this won't happen, but those without access to those rules stating as fact  that it would be easy to challenge the outcome on the basis of partial results being released don't know what they are talking about.

 

The question of whether the Dundee vote was properly recieved may also be more complicated than it first appears. I read through a long email from our in house lawyer yesterday detailing the steps we needed to take and software we needed to use to electronically signed document. This was based on guidance issued by the Law Society of Scotland. It is possible that the SPFL had stipulated a process for confirming your vote and that Dundee either haven't followed this or made a mistake whilst doing so. This might explain the slightly odd suggestion that the "competence" of the Dundee vote was being questioned.

 

There is lots of uncertainty for those of us looking in from the outside of this process. Probably easiest to just learn to live with that. It will resolve itself in a few days as the outcome of the vote is confirmed and members then decide whether to challenge the outcome. Those confidently asserting that already know what the result of a legal challenge would be are wrong.

 

Do we think the SPFL during the single biggest decision of its life just sat and waited till 5pm and then checked it’s inbox to see who had replied?  Pretty sure it would have been sending reminders to any club who had not replied at least every 15mins. If Dundee did send a reply which had not been received pretty sure they’d have been chased by SPFL and it would have been fixed. All sounds highly unlikely it’s been sent but not received, Virtually impossible for there not to be record of it at least having been sent. Somebody is at it. 

 

 

 

3

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, busby1985 said:

We now have to wait on Gordon Strachans, Paul McGowans, Conor Hazards Dundee voting to save us hahahaha. 


Does James McPake get a say? 🙈

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

In that particular instance , what happens if you fail to follow due process - is your vote "spoiled"  or invalid , in effect ?

 

I appreciate your experience may not mirror the SPFL "process" but I am struggling with the idea that DFC were told what the process is (presumably) and didn't comply (for whatever reason) - but then get ANOTHER vote ? 

 

That's an excellent point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saughton Jambo said:

Budgie needs to cease with the vermin dumpster love in. It’s becoming embarrassing and it’s only her that can’t see it. Wake up and listen to fans please Ann? We’ve known all along that rats will always be rats 


amen

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Cruickshank for Scotland said:


Does James McPake get a say? 🙈

Probably more so than Berra, Hamilton, McGee and Callachan, sadly. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • jkbmod 9 changed the title to SPFL declare league (2019/20) due to Covid (Arbitration panel upholds SPFL decision )
  • davemclaren changed the title to SPFL and Covid ( Championship clubs asked if they want to suspend )

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.




×
×
  • Create New...