Jump to content

SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )


Heres Rixxy

Recommended Posts

Who decided that leagues 1 and 2 should be suspended?

 

Surely it can only have been the clubs if, as ****face claims, the board only carry out the wishes of the clubs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 93.5k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Mikey1874

    2099

  • Pasquale for King

    1723

  • Ethan Hunt

    1598

  • Beast Boy

    1415

1 minute ago, Footballfirst said:

Now the Compliance Officer can sanction Celtic for failing to adhere to Covid protocols with a token fine being the limit of the sanction.  

Yes, that way the footballing authorities are seeing to be doing something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NANOJAMBO said:

Have a laugh at that : Hearts get pilloried for going to court but St Cheats FC engaged TWO lawyers (one a QC) to appeal a disciplinary case. That must have cost them a few bob. 

 

Plus their new £10,000 fine. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, eyesandears said:

It will never be null and voided mate. Can you imagine any club except Celtic of course voting for that? The fans of clubs voting to null and void the season would be demanding their season ticket money back and rightly so. This situation is why most clubs made it clear a few weeks ago that they would not let the SPFL Board / Doncaster make decisions like this. They know Lawwel pulls Doncaster's strings and they will have been wise to this scenario.


hobos

hamilton

dross county

st mirren

dundee utd

 

as a starter list

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Boof said:

Who decided that leagues 1 and 2 should be suspended?

 

Surely it can only have been the clubs if, as ****face claims, the board only carry out the wishes of the clubs?

The man has been so economical with the truth he has actually forgotten, when he actually has told the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

After the Celtic debacle, this was a nap. Games forfeited to be rescheduled. Which for me is the correct decision as they did it for Celtic and Aberdeen.

Unsurprising and perhaps justified but nonetheless further evidence of the complete incompetence of the SPFL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Boof said:

Who decided that leagues 1 and 2 should be suspended?

 

Seems it was a joint decision between the SFA board and Minister for Public Health Sport and Wellbeing.

 

And who sits on the SFA board?

 

The main Board consists of eight members: the Scottish FA Office Bearers (Rod Petrie, President; Ian Maxwell, Chief Executive; and Michael Mulraney, Vice President), plus Neil Doncaster (PGB), Duncan Fraser (PGB), Thomas McKeown (NPGB) and independent non-executive directors, Ana Stewart and Malcolm Kpedekpo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Brave Hearts said:


 

Unbelievable statement by st mirren 

image.jpeg.e9f45253dbdd6db68746dbae25467d95.jpeg

 

Another club saying they are the worst treated club. 

 

They had only lost a potential 3 points. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Pilmuir said:

Unsurprising and perhaps justified but nonetheless further evidence of the complete incompetence of the SPFL.

SPFL board should be disbanded asap. There needs to be new governance in Scottish football, if the big two from Glasgow dont like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Now the Compliance Officer can sanction Celtic for failing to adhere to Covid protocols with a token fine being the limit of the sanction.  

That’s exactly what this is all about. A corrupt shambles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, dtgj said:

Apparently St Mirren and Killie win appeals against the 3-0 losses handed out to them.

 

Disappointing, I thought the penalties were one of the few things the SPFL has got right.

 

 

I agree.

 

It is now clear that in the run up to the Dundee game, Hearts would have been better breaching the social distancing rules to ensure that we didn't have to play, rather than playing with two key players missing due to Covid. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
36 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Now the Compliance Officer can sanction Celtic for failing to adhere to Covid protocols with a token fine being the limit of the sanction.  

 

 

Will be controversial here and say unless the law has been broken then even a fine could be deemed harsh. 

 

Outwith the morality, politics etc, if players, staff haven't broken the law. But catch it anyway I don't see how clubs can be punished or should be punished. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King

More matches to squeeze in for these shitehouses, love it. Initial decision deemed to be wrong. Couldn’t run a piss up in a brewery. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

I agree.

 

It is now clear that in the run up to the Dundee game, Hearts would have been better breaching the social distancing rules to ensure that we didn't have to play, rather than playing with two key players missing due to Covid. 

 

Simple solution is to introduce a rule that states those who test positive don't play in the rearranged games. Those who are self isolating as close contacts could play in the rearranged game.

 

Obviously nothing retrospectively includinfmg Raith but could be a decent clear rule that ensures fairness going forward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Will be controversial here and say unless the law has been broken then even a fine could be deemed harsh. 

 

Outwith the morality, politics etc, if players, staff haven't broken the law. But catch it anyway I don't see how clubs can be punished or should be punished. 

 

If they have broken SPFL rules around covid then it seems reasonable to me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Footballfirst
11 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

Will be controversial here and say unless the law has been broken then even a fine could be deemed harsh. 

 

Outwith the morality, politics etc, if players, staff haven't broken the law. But catch it anyway I don't see how clubs can be punished or should be punished. 

 

It is a condition of continuing to play elite football that all agreed protocols are followed during training, travel both to games and training (camps), team meals, all with social distancing maintained.

 

St Mirren and Kilmarnock both admitted their failures to adhere to the protocols in their recent hearings, as has Celtic to "minor" breaches according to John Kennedy.  I now expect the SFA's compliance officer to sanction Celtic for those minor breaches and a token fine to follow. 

Edited by Footballfirst
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Will be controversial here and say unless the law has been broken then even a fine could be deemed harsh. 

 

Outwith the morality, politics etc, if players, staff haven't broken the law. But catch it anyway I don't see how clubs can be punished or should be punished. 

 

 

They've not broken the law, but they have broken the football protocols. Football clubs are punished all the time for breaking football rules rather than the law. Why should covid-related rules be different? In fact you could argue that there is more argument for punishing clubs breaching covid-related rules as that is putting the whole game at risk of being suspended.

 

3 minutes ago, Hungry hippo said:

 

Simple solution is to introduce a rule that states those who test positive don't play in the rearranged games. Those who are self isolating as close contacts could play in the rearranged game.

 

Obviously nothing retrospectively includinfmg Raith but could be a decent clear rule that ensures fairness going forward.

 

It would a partial solution. There would still be a risk that a club abuse the covid rules to get a game postponed when they have key players out through injury and suspension.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
2 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

They've not broken the law, but they have broken the football protocols. Football clubs are punished all the time for breaking football rules rather than the law. Why should covid-related rules be different? In fact you could argue that there is more argument for punishing clubs breaching covid-related rules as that is putting the whole game at risk of being suspended.

 

 

It would a partial solution. There would still be a risk that a club abuse the covid rules to get a game postponed when they have key players out through injury and suspension.

 

 

Did they break protocols tho? 

If so how severe? 

 

Agree with last point, the punishments should be severe for wilful and serious breaches of protocol. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Did they break protocols tho? 

If so how severe? 

 

Agree with last point, the punishments should be severe for wilful and serious breaches of protocol. 

 

Celtic have admitted they broke protocols. The only way to establish how severe those breaches were would be for the SFA or SPFL to charge them and investigate, something they so far seem unwilling to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

St mirren’s statement. If that’s how they react to potentially losing 3 points after admitting breaches, are we seriously to believe they would have “taken their medicine” if demoted last year in the manner we were. as the likes of Chick Young and Tony Fitzpatrick insisted.

 

Addleshaws and a QC probably cost more than the difference between the fines too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
14 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

If they have broken SPFL rules around covid then it seems reasonable to me. 

 

12 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

It is a condition of continuing to play elite football that all agreed protocols are followed during training, travel both to games and training (camps), team meals, all with social distancing maintained.

 

St Mirren and Kilmarnock both admitted their failures to adhere to the protocols in their recent hearings, as has Celtic to "minor" breaches according to John Kennedy.  I now expect the SFA's compliance officer to sanction Celtic for those minor breaches and a token fine to follow. 

 

 

Fair points, but only if th football protocols make sense. 

Too many times the spfl and sfa come up with rules/ policies that are just plain stupid. 

 For example if you can play, Mark, tackle, share the same changing room, even hug a player on the football pitch, then eating/ drinking next to them seems an extension of that. 

 

That's assuming testing etc has been undertaken before hand. 

 

The rules do need to be clear, practical and sensible, and if they are breeches punished severley. 

 

Tbh, I've lost all faith in our governing bodies to carry out anything that is practical, and sensible all together. 

 

 

Edited by Smith's right boot
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
3 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

Celtic have admitted they broke protocols. The only way to establish how severe those breaches were would be for the SFA or SPFL to charge them and investigate, something they so far seem unwilling to do.

 

They definitely need to to do that. 

As above tho, probably little faith in thier own protocols being tight, practical and sensible so won't want them scrutinised. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

SPFL board should be disbanded asap. There needs to be new governance in Scottish football, if the big two from Glasgow dont like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar.

It’ll need quite a few club chairmen to grow a set for that to happen. Most of them are compliant geldings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

SPFL board should be disbanded asap. There needs to be new governance in Scottish football, if the big two from Glasgow dont like it, they can Foxtrot Oscar.

Too late. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

It is a condition of continuing to play elite football that all agreed protocols are followed during training, travel both to games and training (camps), team meals, all with social distancing maintained.

 

St Mirren and Kilmarnock both admitted their failures to adhere to the protocols in their recent hearings, as has Celtic to "minor" breaches according to John Kennedy.  I now expect the SFA's compliance officer to sanction Celtic for those minor breaches and a token fine to follow. 

I'd hope the punishments are different if Celtic are fined. 

 

St Mirren and Killie broke protocol and were also unable to fulfil their fixture obligations. Celtic broke protocol but still fulfilled the fixture. 

 

The fine handed to St Mirren and Killie are fine to apply to Celtic but for me, those failing to fulfil fixtures through fault of their own should have harsher punishments, including forfeiting points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

 

Fair points, but only if th football protocols make sense. 

Too many times the spfl and sfa come up with rules/ policies that are just plain stupid. 

 For example if you can play, Mark, tackle, share the same changing room, even hug a player on the football pitch, then eating/ drinking next to them seems an extension of that. 

 

That's assuming testing etc has been undertaken before hand. 

 

The rules do need to clear, practical and sensible, and if they are breeches punished severley. 

 

Tbh, I've lost all faith in our governing bodies to carry out anything that is practical, and sensible all together. 

 

 

 

The Covid protcols (and general covid restrictions across all sectors) aren't a switch. It isn't a case of either there is risk or there isn't. They are all designed to minimise the risk of transmission. This is done by removing close contact where possible. So you can go shopping for food but not for records. One might seem like 'an extension' of the other, but by removing the one you can get away with removing the overall risk is decreased. In the case of football you can't remove the on field activity while still playing football, so if you want to allow football to still be played you just have to accept that level of risk. That doesn't mean you have to then accept risk form all activities around the football club that aren't essential, so you introduce protocols that prevent car sharing, group meals, etc, which all decreases the overall risk profile of a football club continuing to operate. Given that football is played outside and car sharing and group meals are indoor activities where you will remain in close proximity for an extended period of time, removing those activities is likely to significantly decrease the overall risk profile of the club, while still not removing risk completely.

 

If clubs just ignore the protocols they increase the overall risk of transmission at clubs, which might both lead to more games being called off and tip the risk/ benefit calculation of allowing professional football to continue at all. Clubs that breach the rules should be getting hammered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
9 minutes ago, dtgj said:

I'd hope the punishments are different if Celtic are fined. 

 

St Mirren and Killie broke protocol and were also unable to fulfil their fixture obligations. Celtic broke protocol but still fulfilled the fixture. 

 

The fine handed to St Mirren and Killie are fine to apply to Celtic but for me, those failing to fulfil fixtures through fault of their own should have harsher punishments, including forfeiting points.

 

 

Also fair. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
1 minute ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

The Covid protcols (and general covid restrictions across all sectors) aren't a switch. It isn't a case of either there is risk or there isn't. They are all designed to minimise the risk of transmission. This is done by removing close contact where possible. So you can go shopping for food but not for records. One might seem like 'an extension' of the other, but by removing the one you can get away with removing the overall risk is decreased. In the case of football you can't remove the on field activity while still playing football, so if you want to allow football to still be played you just have to accept that level of risk. That doesn't mean you have to then accept risk form all activities around the football club that aren't essential, so you introduce protocols that prevent car sharing, group meals, etc, which all decreases the overall risk profile of a football club continuing to operate. Given that football is played outside and car sharing and group meals are indoor activities where you will remain in close proximity for an extended period of time, removing those activities is likely to significantly decrease the overall risk profile of the club, while still not removing risk completely.

 

If clubs just ignore the protocols they increase the overall risk of transmission at clubs, which might both lead to more games being called off and tip the risk/ benefit calculation of allowing professional football to continue at all. Clubs that breach the rules should be getting hammered.

 

 

Generally agree, but as above celtic still completed thier fixture so each situation is different. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

Generally agree, but as above celtic still completed thier fixture so each situation is different. 

 

 

And that is the trouble with the St Mirren and Killie punishments. If the punishment for breaching the rules to such an extent that two of your games are postponed is a £10k penalty, then the punishment for minor offences is going to be so small that it won't be worth the effort and certainly not a deterrent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Brave Hearts said:


 

Unbelievable statement by st mirren 

image.jpeg.e9f45253dbdd6db68746dbae25467d95.jpeg

Obviously they are subject to blackouts down Paisley way, they seem to have forgotten last season already.

absolute charlatans

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SectionN said:

Listening to Sportsound and hearing Tony Fitzpatrick ( St Mirren) talking about sporting Integrity. 
 

Hypocrite. 

Couldnae spell it never mind practise it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pasquale for King
10 minutes ago, Toxteth O'Grady said:

Twats - I hate that scummy club

I will celebrate whoever gets relegated but let’s hope that these ***** are one of the two 🤞

Link to comment
Share on other sites

part_time_jambo
6 hours ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

In regards to unused vaccines, I know the NHS is contacting local employers and asking if they want to use up any excess stock.

 

In the hospitals they are giving it to retail staff for example and contractors if they have any excess and more locally nhs have contacted the likes of the council to advise that they can have x amount of staff vaccinated.

 

Makes sense, especially with the Pfizer vaccine that can't be transported and is very delicate.

How can their be excess stock when not everyone has been vaccinated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, John Findlay said:

After the Celtic debacle, this was a nap. Games forfeited to be rescheduled. Which for me is the correct decision as they did it for Celtic and Aberdeen.

 

100% 👏

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
9 minutes ago, Saint Jambo said:

 

And that is the trouble with the St Mirren and Killie punishments. If the punishment for breaching the rules to such an extent that two of your games are postponed is a £10k penalty, then the punishment for minor offences is going to be so small that it won't be worth the effort and certainly not a deterrent.

 

 

Agreed, but then a step backward from that  would be for the board to review it's protocol's and determine if they are for for purpose so that breaches can be punished accordingly.  If there are protocols in there that are irrelevant, impractical or just plain absurd then they should be removed.

I have no faith in he spfl or sfa tbh.

 

The EPL isn't threatening clubs with 3-0 defeats, why are we?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bazzas right boot
1 minute ago, part_time_jambo said:

How can their be excess stock when not everyone has been vaccinated?

 

Unsure of your point, Not everyone will get vaccinated from  the same location.

I assume they get x amount delivered, give it to all on the list, in this case it was NHS staff at a hospital. They then had excess, rather than waste it and unable to transport it, they offered it to the retail outlets and contractors that operate  in the hospital. That is how it was explained to me.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of what you think of the chairman of Stenhousemuir, he has just nailed Doncaster on Sportsound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, gordiegords said:

 

Aye, well done Stuart Wallace, in your rush to show your smug indifference to lower league clubs you have pissed all over Partick Thistle's legitimate concerns about this new predicament they have been landed in. Short memory when you consider Hearts and Thistle were co-operating in last year's debacle due to shared injustice.

How to win friends and influence people, right enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SectionN said:

Listening to Sportsound and hearing Tony Fitzpatrick ( St Mirren) talking about sporting Integrity. 
 

Hypocrite. 

Exactly this, that monosyllabic hypocritical cretin Fitzpatrick, applauding a decision that allowed his club to decide their fate on the field of play, yet voted to deny Hearts, Partick & Stranraer exactly the same opportunity last year. I hope the likes of Tom English call him out very very publicly on this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest ToqueJambo
1 minute ago, JDK2020 said:

 

Aye, well done Stuart Wallace, in your rush to show your smug indifference to lower league clubs you have pissed all over Partick Thistle's legitimate concerns about this new predicament they have been landed in. Short memory when you consider Hearts and Thistle were co-operating in last year's debacle due to shared injustice.

How to win friends and influence people, right enough

 

He's very obviously talking about the clubs that did nothing last summer. So not Partick Thistle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • davemclaren changed the title to SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

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...