SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[John Findlay]

3 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said:

You could well be right. It would only be picked apart. Indeed all this media noise is probably a tactic looking for the club to break cover. Keep schtum

Play it by the book as instructed by Lord Clark. Let all the others do the gobbing off via the media.

[Jambo314]

3 minutes ago, Newton51 said:

Cove statement

 

 

[Cisco1914]

19 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

When is a joint statement NOT a joint statement!

 

When it is only put up on their websire by Dundee United and Cove?  Raith have not..  well not YET???????/ hmmmmm

I think raith have got the begging bowl out tae.🤙

[John Findlay]

CR, DU, and RR finding out the hardway that like us when it comes to the crunch, you have no friends in Scottish football.

They were well warned. Teaspoonful at a time lads makes the medicine go down.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

5 minutes ago, Interested Bystander said:

 

Bottom 8 after the Premiership split - £200-250 thousand from reduced gates plus diluted prize money.

League 1, reduced gates from swapping Partick Thistle and Falkirk for Edinburgh City.

League 2, less about money than shitting themselves about Brora and Kelty coming up after what Edinburgh City and Cove Rangers did, and what's happened to Berwick and East Stirlingshire.

Plus mass demotions in each league if it went back to 12-10-10-10 in a few years, not sure what promises were made about that.

As I said, I would have voted for it as it seemed the fairest option for sharing out the pain, but threatening to bankrupt everyone if they didn't sign up for it was not the way to go. 

 

 

 

Still way less than the hit you seem think it's OK for PT, Stranraer and Hearts to take? 

 

The whole point is that the vote meant those clubs take ALL the extra financial hit. Reconstruction spreads the pain around. Which do you think is fairer?

 

Why should Hearts and PT pay for Raith Rovers to get promotion when 1 pt ahead with 8 games to play, or to help Hamilton, St Mirren and Ross County escape a playoff and possible relegation? Or to help Motherwell secure a European spot with 8 games to play? Or to give Celtic their title and CL money? All of those clubs would still have got all of those financial benefits with reconstruction, just a little less money.

 

Feel free to tell me how 3 clubs taking the hit for the other 39 clubs is in any way fairer than the financial hit being spread around all 42....

 

And that's even before we discuss the circumstances around how that decision was arrived at - which a judge has conclusively said is possibly unlawful.

Edited July 6, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[neilnunb]

Just now, Clark Griswold said:

No Raith statement yet as they need to change their ‘winning League 1 by a considerable margin’ para 

 

What I've found strange is the local press (Fife Free Press) published no update from last week's court hearing, even the following statement. They haven't published the latest one yet either.

 

They were quick on the keyboard when the initial statement was issued though and have published other Raith stories.

 

🤔

[Chuck Berry]

Those statements are quite something, seeking to further open up deep wounds and with an astonishing lack of self awareness.

[Anything2]

3 minutes ago, Selkirkhmfc1874 said:

Sporting integrity went out the window when they expelled us while we had 8 games to reverse our situation 

It's brilliant, he even uses the term declared champions or something similar which suggests they didn't win it! Surely they see the irony here? 

[Hagar the Horrible]

4 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

The one point in the court case where I thought there was a promise made without firm confirmation. 

 

Boreland and the SPFL lawyer confirming the SFA could start Arbitration quickly and be finished before end July. 

It does not look like that will be the case, if they fail to turn up, it should be declared as a 3-0 victory for us

 

This bit is brilliant a copy and paste job from cove but they have substituted Championship for Division 2, but its a statement Raith Rovers cannot use, and have so far not supported this Joint statement!

 

Having won League Two by a considerable margin

[Ex member of the SaS]

8 minutes ago, 1971fozzy said:

Dundee Utd complaining about us and sporting integrity 😂

when they voted against reconstruction that would of saved everyone money and punished nobody unfairly.

Their turning from jubilation on Friday to shitting themselves today is ‘arousing’.

begging other clubs to help

fund their case when the other clubs are laying staff off ? Where’s Dundee Utd integrity with that ?  These Rat clubs that voted for a few quid to end the season and stamp us  down are now all shitting it. The vermin across  the city gave up £150,000 in prize money to expel us. I remember reading fek all about that !

Give us £8m and we will play in the championship thank you. The alternative is delaying the season if we are reinstated. That would have to be the case as we will not of trained

The problem with taking the money and playing in the Championship is they will not allow promotion, meaning we would be down for more than one season. ONLY if there is a firm commitment to allow promotion at the end of this season should we even consider taking the cash and demotion.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

1 minute ago, Chuck Berry said:

Those statements are quite something, seeking to further open up deep wounds and with an astonishing lack of self awareness.

 

 

This is the jaw dropping thing. 

 

It's again a case of "Punish those 3 clubs over there not these three clubs of which I happen to be one"

[Gordon Ramsay]

12 minutes ago, BRY said:

 

 

Well said, Tom. 

 

They are on the ropes and we are winding up the knockout blow. 

[jibz]

If you want sporting integrity, it would be quite simple, play the remaining fixtures.

[SectionN]

Was speaking to a colleague at work today and we both feel that the SPFL are putting pressure on the 3 clubs to plead poverty hoping that us and thistle withdraw our argument.

 

Feeling a bit confident that the SPFL might be a bit scared of what will hopefully come out of these documents. 

[Jambo314]

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/notice-of-referral-to-arbitration/?rid=13929

[David McCaig]

2 hours ago, Interested Bystander said:

3 questions from an outsider.

 

1. What rule was broken by Dundee changing their vote?

2. What was wrong if Aberdeen were told their vote didn't matter? It didn't as there would still have been the required

     Yes vote in the Premiership section had they voted No. The Dundee vote only affected the Championship section.

3. With proper training only being allowed by the Scottish Government last week, and the earliest BCD games can start is

     August 1st, and with barely enough free dates available for the fixtures, when could the 19/10 season have been played 

     to a finish?

4. Does anybody think Leslie Deans open letter threatening bankruptcy to the other SPFL clubs 2 days before the 14-10-10-10

     vote helped your cause? 

 

As per the legal advice David Thomson QC have Partick Thistle

 

F. The Dundee Rejection Vote
26. A document signifying agreement to a written resolution may be sent in electronic form under the 2006 Act, s 296(2), if an authenticated document is sent indicating agreement in electronic form. “Authenticated” is defined in the 2006 Act, s 1146. Sending by electronic means is defined in the 2006 Act, s 1168(4)-(5), which make provision as to what it means to “send” something electronically. The procedure for written resolution by electronic voting is supplemented by paragraphs 5-8 of Schedule 4 to the 2006 Act.
27. There was no obligation on any SPFL member to cast a vote. In the ordinary course, members normally vote in favour of a proposed written resolution or not at all. As we have explained already, above, a resolution simply lapses if it does not achieve the requisite majority. That is why a vote in favour of a resolution is expressly made irrevocable by the 2006 Act, s 296(3) and, equally, why there is no similar provision made in relation to a “negative” vote. There was no statutory obligation to cast a negative vote and, indeed, the statutory scheme does not anticipate that “negative” votes will be cast.
28. In so far as an SPFL member decided to exercise its right to vote, however, in our view, such a vote is subject to the terms of the SPFL’s Articles. It might assist, at this stage, to explain the significance and status of a company’s articles of association. Thus, the 2006 Act, section 18 provides inter alia:
“(1) A company must have articles of association prescribing regulations for the company.”
29. A company’s articles of association fall within the definition of a company’s constitution: 2006 Act, section 17.
30. On that basis, one should note that the 2006 Act, section 33 provides inter alia:
“(1) The provisions of a company’s constitution bind the company and its members to the same extent as if there were covenants on the part of the company and of each member to observe those provisions.”
31. Accordingly, there is effectively a contract in place between, at least, the company and its members. As it is explained in Gloag & Henderson, The Law of Scotland, (14th Ed., 2017), paragraph 46.14:
“...Articles regulate the management of the company and once registered, form a tripartite contract between the shareholders, the company and, depending on the wording, the directors or anyone else given rights in the articles. If articles prescribe a certain course of action be followed, provided it is not contrary to some requirement of statute or otherwise illegal, it must be followed...”.
32. On this basis, although, as we have explained already, the 2006 Act itself does not contemplate the lodging of “negative” votes, the contract between the parties, namely, the Articles, has been operated by the SPFL and the members on the basis that what was being invited, in relation to the Written Resolution, was the submission of votes by the members, whether in favour or against the Written Resolution.
33. Against that background, we are instructed that the Dundee Rejection Vote was sent by email on 10 April 2020 at around 4:48pm. We know too from the terms of the SPFL Letter that the email transmitting the Dundee Rejection Vote was, in fact, received by the SPFL at some point on 10 April 2020. Following the 5pm deadline on 10 April 2020, the SPFL Statement was issued, around 5:44pm, publicising the fact that all but one Championship Club had voted. The allegedly missing vote, we are instructed, was that of Dundee. The factual position in relation to discussions between the SPFL Board and Dundee following the 5pm deadline is unclear.
34. In the SPFL Letter dated 12 April, the SPFL Chairman explained matters as follows:
“Further, it has been suggested that all Ladbrokes Championship club votes were cast on Friday night. One Ladbrokes Championship club attempted to submit a voting slip, which did not reach the SPFL until late that evening. Earlier, at 6pm on Friday, that club had confirmed in writing to the SPFL that any attempted vote from that club should not be considered as cast. We have had a number of conversations with the chairman of that club over the weekend, in which he reiterated that his club had not yet voted on the SPFL resolution. The SPFL has proceeded on the basis of the unequivocal instruction from that club received at 6pm on Friday.”
35. In our view, it is not possible to reconcile the procedural approach purportedly adopted by Dundee, and seemingly accepted by the SPFL, on the one hand, and the terms of the Articles, on the other hand. In particular, in terms of Article 185, the Dundee Rejection Vote was deemed to have been cast when it was sent:
“Any notice or other document [sent]1 otherwise than by post, or sent by facsimile transmission or telex or email or other instantaneous means of transmission, shall be deemed to have been served or delivered when it was left or sent.”
36. The sender of the email has confirmed when it was sent, and the SPFL have confirmed it was in fact received. The Dundee Rejection Vote was therefore deemed to have been cast at 4.48pm when it was sent. In particular, it is our opinion that the Dundee Rejection Vote
1 We consider this word to be an obvious omission that a court would read in as a matter of interpretation: Mannai Investments co Ltd v Eagle Star Insurance Co Ltd [1997] AC 749.

 had legal effect at that time, rather than when it was (later) received. In our view, neither the contractual effect of the Articles nor their content could be varied by a unilateral written notice (which we have not seen) apparently sent for and on behalf of Dundee that “any attempted vote from the club should not be considered as cast”. The subsequent conversations in terms of which it is said that the vote has not yet been cast, are inconsistent with the actual vote having been executed and having had effect when it was sent at 4.48pm on Friday 10 April.
37. The consequence of the proper construction of Art 185, in our opinion, is that it was no longer open to Dundee to seek to withdraw their vote subsequent to its dispatch. We consider our analysis to be consistent with the very purpose of including provisions such as Art 185. We consider too that our construction is consistent also with basic ideas of fairness in voting procedures. Our construction avoids the situation which now arises of those who have cast a vote in a particular way either being subjected to undue pressure or being placed in a position of unfair advantage in seeking to secure favourable treatment for a changed vote.

[Victorian]

Tom English is magnificent but he got a small point wrong there.    Hearts and Thistle standing up for themselves IS a surprise,   to most of the others.    That's why we are where we are.

 

We were expected to be crushed under the weight of corruption,   disinterest from clubs,   delaying tactics,   threats,   ridicule.     We were expected to... such an enlightening moment in all of this caper... take our medicine.

 

The reality of where we are is a surprise to most.     Many of them are probably still deluded enough to believe we have no case.    Others are scared.

[Riccarton3]

11 minutes ago, Interested Bystander said:

 

Bottom 8 after the Premiership split - £200-250 thousand from reduced gates plus diluted prize money.

League 1, reduced gates from swapping Partick Thistle and Falkirk for Edinburgh City.

League 2, less about money than shitting themselves about Brora and Kelty coming up after what Edinburgh City and Cove Rangers did, and what's happened to Berwick and East Stirlingshire.

Plus mass demotions in each league if it went back to 12-10-10-10 in a few years, not sure what promises were made about that.

As I said, I would have voted for it as it seemed the fairest option for sharing out the pain, but threatening to bankrupt everyone if they didn't sign up for it was not the way to go. 

 

If you think Deans really had a bearing on this,you crack on. Nothing was going to bring reconstruction other than the Board making it part of the initial resolution which any creditable governing body would have proposed. SO, out of the swamp and into the light.You think someone at Ayr, for example, or Montrose is swithering with no impact on them and Deans just pushed them to say naw?  

Edited July 6, 2020 by Riccarton3

[Anything2]

Thing is, it should always have been DU, RR, and CR taking the court action. The other clubs should never have been demoted and therefore any reconstruction talks should have been to include those three out of good will. Raith in particular haven’t a leg to stand on. 

[Mikey1874]

13 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said:

The only reason this case is not being heard in the Court of session is due to the the SPFL rules. Nothing else. It is obvious Clark sees a case. Maybe that is what Buffjaw means because of SPFl rules because there ain't nothing else stopping it being heard in public , not after you win a motion of  access to all relevant docs. 

 

Hindsight is our failing.

 

But it's clear as you say that Lord Clark judged that we have a case worth being assessed and judged.

 

Would be interesting to know why they thought they could get the case dismissed.

 

To be fair I should know as I did listen to Boreland's borefest. Lots of obscure case law, authorities and legal points. But Lord Clark simplified it by assessing as most reasonable people would that there is a case.

[Footballfirst]

Courtesy of Barry Anderson

 

[Chuck Berry]

2 minutes ago, Anything2 said:

Thing is, it should always have been DU, RR, and CR taking the court action. The other clubs should never have been demoted and therefore any reconstruction talks should have been to include those three out of good will. Raith in particular haven’t a leg to stand on. 

 

It never ceases to surprised the terminology these three use like being "dragged in" and  "something we didnt seek"  etc.

 

They voted against reconstruction.

 

Therefore, Hearts and PT are seeking to reverse the whole process that lead to them being relegated and the 3 clubs being declared Champions.  One cannot happen without the other, it's not as if Hearts and PT just fancy a random rammy for the hell of it whilst fighting the SPFL.

[frankblack]

These clubs pleading poverty are going to be in for a shock if they expect other clubs to chip in for them.  Its not known as the Self Preservation Football League for nothing.

[Riccarton3]

1 minute ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Hindsight is our failing.

 

But it's clear as you say that Lord Clark judged that we have a case worth being assessed and judged.

 

Would be interesting to know why they thought they could get the case dismissed.

 

To be fair I should know as I did listen to Boreland's borefest. Lots of obscure case law, authorities and legal points. But Lord Clark simplified it by assessing as most reasonable people would that there is a case.

Hindsight? Arbitration first would not have got anywhere near the documents, whatever their significance. And Arbitration first, if all processes are done correctly, leaves no way back to court anyway. No?

[Hagar the Horrible]

So the SFA has confirmed that we have started arbitration, not leaving DU time to raise the funds, and the SPFL have no case without them.

 

Welcome to the PARTY pal!

 

Yippiekayay

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

18 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said:

What is that? Like gloating and stuff

Finance, no?

[Guest ToqueJambo]

7 hours ago, firsttimecaller said:

I'm aware this is an essay, but nevermind!

 

It’s come to the point where I feel I can’t stand by any more. A reality check needs to kick-in at some point here.

 

At the time when the league was suspended, Hearts were bottom. They were beaten 1-0 by St Mirren in a game which the vast majority of Hearts supporters, and everyone else, had labelled as “must win”. Hearts didn’t win this game, and were therefore four points adrift at the bottom of the table with eight games to play. Hearts had won four games all season. The performance at St Mirren was described variously as “meek”, “insipid” and “lacking threat”. Hearts nearest rivals for relegation were unbeaten in their last five home matches and had kept clean sheets in four of those.

 

Hearts supporters shared the view that, from a sporting point of view, they were the worst team in the league. On 14^th March, under the title of “At What point Did You Think Our Season Was Doomed?”, various posters on JKB acknowledged how poor Hearts were. Saughton Jambo, who has recently been noticeably vocal around fairness with regards to the Court of Session case, pointed out “This is worse than the 80-81 season [when Hearts were relegated]. We had an excuse back then... we don’t now”. Stan pointed out that “Going 3 down to Killie after the break … was the last chance to turn the corner and finish the season well”. Famous 1874 said that “It’s hard to say when we were doomed as we’ve been s***e all season bar a handful of results”. In a poll on the 14^th March on JKB, 12.8% of Hearts own fans acknowledged that they deserved to be relegated.

 

From a sporting perspective, Hearts were the worst football team in the league. In the match thread following the St Mirren defeat, the overall mood was disappointment and acknowledgment of how poor a team they were. In that match thread, Fozzyonthefence noted prior to the defeat “Lose on Wednesday and we’re down.  I think you’re the only person on here that doesn’t think that” in response to a poster suggesting they could stay up. JimmyCant pointed out that “We’ve got 5 key games left … We’ll need to win 4 out of those 5. That’s becoming a big ask the more you look at it.” Bear in mind, this is a Hearts team that had won four times all season.

 

On sporting merit, Hearts deserved to be relegated.

 

There is also the worrying trend emerging around Hearts supporters expressly hoping for negative outcomes for other clubs whilst at the same time becoming noticeably vocal around the concept of fairness. There is the startling example of the post on the aforementioned St Mirren matchday thread of a poster highlighting how funny it would be to beat St Mirren, sending them bottom, and then for the season to be called due to COVID19. I’m fairly certain the poster in question has had this particular post copy/pasted several times, and so I’ll spare them the reminder of it. This schadenfreude has now been replaced by hoping that other clubs go into administration, seemingly based on the assumption that they “voted against Hearts” in order to relegate them.

 

Throughout various threads, numerous assertions have been made as to which clubs people would like to go into administration. The thread titled “Administration” from 26^th June notes that some fans believe that “quite a few” will suffer this fate and that Hearts should “Get that interdict served ASAP”. Amongst others, Dundee, Hibs, St Mirren, Ross County, Hamilton and Albion Rovers are all named as clubs that posters hope enter administration, a process which results in numerous job losses and can end in financial hardship for ordinary employees. It’s noteworthy that several of these clubs were Hearts rivals within the bottom six of the league.Thank goodness for the few comments of common sense on such matters, notably Sassenach, who said “I've suffered admin events … It's horrible, and I wouldn't wish it on any fellow football fans”. Some things surely transcend sport.

 

The matter of finance also comes into play in issue. Hearts suffered a previous administration event, ultimately leading to their relegation in the 2010s. This was caused largely by financial mismanagement. Within their list of creditors, Hearts included fellow football clubs Ayr United, Livingston, Musselburgh Athletic, Stenhousemuir and Rangers. They also owed monies to a variety of public bodies, including the City of Edinburgh Council, Scottish Water and Scottish Police Authority. There are no winners in administration events. Supporter boycotts of all clubs who voted against Hearts league reconstruction proposals have been widely mentioned online.

 

To a significant extent, supporters of other clubs (the Pie & Bovril forum is a marker of this) do sympathise with the situation in which Hearts currently find themselves, but many have expressed a significant distaste for the sense of entitlement being displayed. Under the JKB thread of “Wigan Go Into Administration”, posters note that there may be “decent freebies to be had” and that this is “karma for Webstergate”. The irony and understanding of the concept of karma and justice for perceived previous wrongdoings is an interesting one.

 

Similarly, the suggestion that Dundee United are a target of Hearts fans’ dislike appears to be an interesting perspective. Taken from the thread last week on JKB  “I Used To Post On Here About Liking Dundee Utd”, Salad Fingers notes that he/she “recently developed a strong hatred of them and their fans”. The supposed crime committed by Dundee United is defending themselves and their promotion in the Court of Session and being asked to pay £50,000 for the privilege.

 

The thread posted this morning on JKB titled “Merging Clubs” highlights and reinforces the prevailing sense of entitlement amongst posters on the site, perhaps representative of the wider Hearts support. The assertion from Space Pirate that there are “far too many wee diddy clubs” and that clubs should merge underlines the contempt in which other clubs in Scotland are held.

 

As it stands, the hugely successful Foundation of Hearts brings circa £2M into the club each year from fans and it has been revealed that James Anderson has acted as a benefactor over recent times. During this time, Hearts have spent £17M on a main stand within Tynecastle and this is yet to be fully completed. During the recent Court of Session case, various figures of compensation have been raised and noted, both on JKB and within the Scottish media. It has been suggested that Hearts are seeking compensation and damages in the region of £8M.

 

Following on from the Court of Session hearing, Hearts supporters are seemingly painting the club, and Ann Budge in particular, as champions of justice, noting that there is a crucial role to be played in fighting corruption. Indeed, it has been suggested that Ann Budge previously stepped down from her role on the SPFL Board as she wanted to challenge the corruption that she saw. Reporting of the matter would seem to indicate otherwise - https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts-chairwoman-ann-budge-voted-spfl-board-583624

 

Throughout this process since March, there has been much play with regards to revisionism. The term relegated has been replaced with expelled, for instance. Interestingly, manager Daniel Stendal’s contract reputably had a clause allowing it’s termination in the event of relegation, as confirmed by both Ann Budge and Daniel Stendal. This clause was enacted. The tone and portrayal of Ann Budge has shifted too. Compare the descriptions with regards to her perceived leadership skills that were expressed on JKB during January and February to now.

 

Before Hearts continue to fall further down the rabbit hole of blaming other people, clubs and institutions, perhaps the blame needs to lie closer to home.

 

 

Nice essay. Shame you wasted your time. Two words:

 

Werder. Bremen.

 

Four points behind when football stopped. Worst team in the league at that time. Football restarted and they escaped automatic relegation. Just as we could have.

 

Football is all about last minute escapes and title and relegation battles. Should we just end the league after 30 games now because the team bottom at that time has no chance of escaping it (according to Pie and Bovril and social media)? Why bother playing on?

 

PS: What about Partick Thistle?

Edited July 6, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Anything2]

2 minutes ago, Chuck Berry said:

 

It never ceases to surprised the terminology these three use like being "dragged in" and  "something we didnt seek"  etc.

 

They voted against reconstruction.

 

Therefore, Hearts and PT are seeking to reverse the whole process that lead to them being relegated and the 3 clubs being declared Champions.  One cannot happen without the other, it's not as if Hearts and PT just fancy a random rammy for the hell of it whilst fighting the SPFL.

If they had voted for reconstruction they would have had a lot more credibility as well as it being a smarter business decision knowing that their promotion could be overturned in court. By voting against they have said that it should be an either or so if the arbitration panel side with us, they really can't grumble as they have said that there should be no reconstruction. 

[Mikey1874]

21 minutes ago, Interested Bystander said:

 

Bottom 8 after the Premiership split - £200-250 thousand from reduced gates plus diluted prize money.

League 1, reduced gates from swapping Partick Thistle and Falkirk for Edinburgh City.

League 2, less about money than shitting themselves about Brora and Kelty coming up after what Edinburgh City and Cove Rangers did, and what's happened to Berwick and East Stirlingshire.

Plus mass demotions in each league if it went back to 12-10-10-10 in a few years, not sure what promises were made about that.

As I said, I would have voted for it as it seemed the fairest option for sharing out the pain, but threatening to bankrupt everyone if they didn't sign up for it was not the way to go. 

 

 

No one is threatening to bankrupt anyone.

 

Just a natural step when self interest is the guiding principle.

[Riccarton3]

9 minutes ago, SectionN said:

Was speaking to a colleague at work today and we both feel that the SPFL are putting pressure on the 3 clubs to plead poverty hoping that us and thistle withdraw our argument.

 

Feeling a bit confident that the SPFL might be a bit scared of what will hopefully come out of these documents. 

That would show a level of care, indirectly, that is not in the SPFL's competency .

 

More realistically they are using the clubs and media as shields against the ire being directed at them and created a pre arbitration narrative.. It is really one of the lowest times for the game and that's saying something.

 

It is hate 

[Brick Tamland]

1 minute ago, SE16 3LN said:

I''m not that much of  a c~~~.

😂 pity I would have liked to have known what you had managed to uncover...

[Zico]

Those statements
 

 

Let’s see how deep your pockets are you *****. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

10 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

Courtesy of Barry Anderson

 

 

 

 

Haha. That's genius. And completely accurate.

 

 

[Riccarton3]

5 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Finance, no?

Only worry is ever with the tax man. I don't like the club having to splurge money but there it is. We is wasteful. But we is the Heart of Midlothian.

[Cruyff]

35 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

They'll still be asterix champions. They just won't be promoted, unless they support Budge's very sensible reconstruction proposal that would have avoided all of this.

Certainly won't officially be Champions if the resolution was overturned. 

30 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Our petition is a response to Reconstruction being ruled out.

 

If we are not to be relegated then the only way to do that is no promotion. 

Correct. As it should have been. 

[David Black]

1 minute ago, Riccarton3 said:

That would show a level of care, indirectly, that is not in the SPFL's competency .

 

More realistically they are using the clubs and media as shields against the ire being directed at them and created a pre arbitration narrative.. It is really one of the lowest times for the game and that's saying something.

 

It is hate 

The problem most clubs have is that they are to thick to see it. It is mindboggling how stupid some club owners are.

[SE16 3LN]

1 hour ago, Billybuffjaw said:

If that's a serious post you're a sad individual.

Amateur Trolling is the mark of a sad individual, I gave him a warning, and yet you're worried about him. Why would that be?

 

 

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

https://www.dundeeunitedfc.co.uk/news/6503/CLUB-STATEMENT.html?utm_campaign=coschedule&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=dundeeunitedfc
 

On the day that the SPFL have released the Premiership fixture list for 2020/21, which is scheduled to start on 1st August, instead of looking forward and planning for the forthcoming season, the executive team and Board at the Club are embroiled in preparation work for the SFA arbitration process that starts this week in respect of the action raised by Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle.

As confirmed in our joint statement on Friday, we, along with Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, were pleased with Lord Clark’s decision to refer the dispute to arbitration, however we remain incensed that we are having to devote considerable time and incur significant legal costs in defending this action. Together we have already incurred costs of over £50,000, and face further legal fees for the arbitration process that could take the total bill to over £150,000. 

Given the serious financial implications of these escalating legal costs for Raith Rovers, Cove Rangers and ourselves, the three clubs have considered withdrawing from the arbitration process and allowing the expert panel of arbiters to judge the case raised by Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle without any submissions from us in defence of our case. However, we believe (and our external legal advisors have confirmed same) that there is too much at stake to not defend our position against the Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle petition, which is seeking to reverse a decision that was made by 81% of the SPFL member clubs.

If successful in their action, in our opinion Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle would compromise the sporting integrity of the SPFL with clubs having been declared champions of their league not being promoted. Having won the Championship by a considerable margin, and invested substantial sums of money in preparing for next season in the Premiership, a decision to overturn the SPFL resolution that was supported by 34 of the 42 member clubs would be ruinous for us and our fans.

Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle could also be awarded significant sums in terms of compensation. Their compensation claim is for a total of £10 million. For the SPFL and its member clubs this would have potentially catastrophic consequences, with any compensation payment made to Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle being paid directly out of SPFL funds that are distributed to all clubs each season as prize money.

It is with these factors in mind, that, along with Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, we are reaching out to our fellow member clubs for support in defending this action, which has not only potentially grave consequences for us, but every SPFL club. We also intend running a crowdfunding campaign to raise money to help fund the huge legal bills that we face. We hope that as well as our own supporters, fans of clubs across Scotland will see this as a worthy cause to get behind in that if Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle are successful in their action it could have serious ramifications for the whole of Scottish football.

They probably shouldn't be making frivolous legal challenges if they can't afford to pay the bill.

They should take their medicine.

[Kenbo]

Good to see Cove making the most of their fancy website and hi speed internet whilst they can. Because they wont have a pot to piss in when we have finished with them!!

[Nookie Bear]

1 hour ago, Interested Bystander said:

 

4. was an afterthought. I was in favour of 14-10-10-10, but knew it had no chance of getting passed after that suspiciously well informed letter. You were asking a lot of clubs to take a serious financial hit, and though I doubt it would have passed anyway, that kyboshed any chances of it. You might say Leslie Deans wasn't representing the club, but it matched exactly what the club ended up doing, and I'm sure the club chairmen took it as such.

Apologies if I have missed your post but who did you say you support?

[JamboGraham]

27 minutes ago, Interested Bystander said:

 

Bottom 8 after the Premiership split - £200-250 thousand from reduced gates plus diluted prize money.

League 1, reduced gates from swapping Partick Thistle and Falkirk for Edinburgh City.

League 2, less about money than shitting themselves about Brora and Kelty coming up after what Edinburgh City and Cove Rangers did, and what's happened to Berwick and East Stirlingshire.

Plus mass demotions in each league if it went back to 12-10-10-10 in a few years, not sure what promises were made about that.

As I said, I would have voted for it as it seemed the fairest option for sharing out the pain, but threatening to bankrupt everyone if they didn't sign up for it was not the way to go. 

 

 

What you have listed  is financial self interest. I am sure you will acknowledge our right to respond in kind.

Edited July 6, 2020 by JamboGraham

[Guest ToqueJambo]

34 minutes ago, BRY said:

 

 

 

A lot of the responses to this show some kind of mass delusion. Folk are deliberately ignoring the bigger picture and treating D Utd's title and our relegation like just a regular run of the mill season with promotion and relegation.

 

f it is, why the **** are we in court you dingbats? 

 

Do they really think Hearts and Thistle would be doing this if we'd just been relegated as per normal or if D Utd and Raith had won their titles after a full league programme?

 

In any case we never went to court because we were relegated. We went to court because of the way we were relegated and the lack of reconstruction, something D Utd and Raith voted against out of, what, spite and self-interest?

Edited July 6, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Drumelzier]

43 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

When is a joint statement NOT a joint statement!

 

When it is only put up on their websire by Dundee United and Cove?  Raith have not..  well not YET???????/ hmmmmm

 

True, Cove will fold IMO, leaving the Calpol 1 to go it alone.

[NaturalOrder74]

Please give us some money celtic* 

[merseyjambo]

7 hours ago, firsttimecaller said:

I'm aware this is an essay, but nevermind!

 

It’s come to the point where I feel I can’t stand by any more. A reality check needs to kick-in at some point here.

 

At the time when the league was suspended, Hearts were bottom. They were beaten 1-0 by St Mirren in a game which the vast majority of Hearts supporters, and everyone else, had labelled as “must win”. Hearts didn’t win this game, and were therefore four points adrift at the bottom of the table with eight games to play. Hearts had won four games all season. The performance at St Mirren was described variously as “meek”, “insipid” and “lacking threat”. Hearts nearest rivals for relegation were unbeaten in their last five home matches and had kept clean sheets in four of those.

 

Hearts supporters shared the view that, from a sporting point of view, they were the worst team in the league. On 14^th March, under the title of “At What point Did You Think Our Season Was Doomed?”, various posters on JKB acknowledged how poor Hearts were. Saughton Jambo, who has recently been noticeably vocal around fairness with regards to the Court of Session case, pointed out “This is worse than the 80-81 season [when Hearts were relegated]. We had an excuse back then... we don’t now”. Stan pointed out that “Going 3 down to Killie after the break … was the last chance to turn the corner and finish the season well”. Famous 1874 said that “It’s hard to say when we were doomed as we’ve been s***e all season bar a handful of results”. In a poll on the 14^th March on JKB, 12.8% of Hearts own fans acknowledged that they deserved to be relegated.

 

From a sporting perspective, Hearts were the worst football team in the league. In the match thread following the St Mirren defeat, the overall mood was disappointment and acknowledgment of how poor a team they were. In that match thread, Fozzyonthefence noted prior to the defeat “Lose on Wednesday and we’re down.  I think you’re the only person on here that doesn’t think that” in response to a poster suggesting they could stay up. JimmyCant pointed out that “We’ve got 5 key games left … We’ll need to win 4 out of those 5. That’s becoming a big ask the more you look at it.” Bear in mind, this is a Hearts team that had won four times all season.

 

On sporting merit, Hearts deserved to be relegated.

 

There is also the worrying trend emerging around Hearts supporters expressly hoping for negative outcomes for other clubs whilst at the same time becoming noticeably vocal around the concept of fairness. There is the startling example of the post on the aforementioned St Mirren matchday thread of a poster highlighting how funny it would be to beat St Mirren, sending them bottom, and then for the season to be called due to COVID19. I’m fairly certain the poster in question has had this particular post copy/pasted several times, and so I’ll spare them the reminder of it. This schadenfreude has now been replaced by hoping that other clubs go into administration, seemingly based on the assumption that they “voted against Hearts” in order to relegate them.

 

Throughout various threads, numerous assertions have been made as to which clubs people would like to go into administration. The thread titled “Administration” from 26^th June notes that some fans believe that “quite a few” will suffer this fate and that Hearts should “Get that interdict served ASAP”. Amongst others, Dundee, Hibs, St Mirren, Ross County, Hamilton and Albion Rovers are all named as clubs that posters hope enter administration, a process which results in numerous job losses and can end in financial hardship for ordinary employees. It’s noteworthy that several of these clubs were Hearts rivals within the bottom six of the league.Thank goodness for the few comments of common sense on such matters, notably Sassenach, who said “I've suffered admin events … It's horrible, and I wouldn't wish it on any fellow football fans”. Some things surely transcend sport.

 

The matter of finance also comes into play in issue. Hearts suffered a previous administration event, ultimately leading to their relegation in the 2010s. This was caused largely by financial mismanagement. Within their list of creditors, Hearts included fellow football clubs Ayr United, Livingston, Musselburgh Athletic, Stenhousemuir and Rangers. They also owed monies to a variety of public bodies, including the City of Edinburgh Council, Scottish Water and Scottish Police Authority. There are no winners in administration events. Supporter boycotts of all clubs who voted against Hearts league reconstruction proposals have been widely mentioned online.

 

To a significant extent, supporters of other clubs (the Pie & Bovril forum is a marker of this) do sympathise with the situation in which Hearts currently find themselves, but many have expressed a significant distaste for the sense of entitlement being displayed. Under the JKB thread of “Wigan Go Into Administration”, posters note that there may be “decent freebies to be had” and that this is “karma for Webstergate”. The irony and understanding of the concept of karma and justice for perceived previous wrongdoings is an interesting one.

 

Similarly, the suggestion that Dundee United are a target of Hearts fans’ dislike appears to be an interesting perspective. Taken from the thread last week on JKB  “I Used To Post On Here About Liking Dundee Utd”, Salad Fingers notes that he/she “recently developed a strong hatred of them and their fans”. The supposed crime committed by Dundee United is defending themselves and their promotion in the Court of Session and being asked to pay £50,000 for the privilege.

 

The thread posted this morning on JKB titled “Merging Clubs” highlights and reinforces the prevailing sense of entitlement amongst posters on the site, perhaps representative of the wider Hearts support. The assertion from Space Pirate that there are “far too many wee diddy clubs” and that clubs should merge underlines the contempt in which other clubs in Scotland are held.

 

As it stands, the hugely successful Foundation of Hearts brings circa £2M into the club each year from fans and it has been revealed that James Anderson has acted as a benefactor over recent times. During this time, Hearts have spent £17M on a main stand within Tynecastle and this is yet to be fully completed. During the recent Court of Session case, various figures of compensation have been raised and noted, both on JKB and within the Scottish media. It has been suggested that Hearts are seeking compensation and damages in the region of £8M.

 

Following on from the Court of Session hearing, Hearts supporters are seemingly painting the club, and Ann Budge in particular, as champions of justice, noting that there is a crucial role to be played in fighting corruption. Indeed, it has been suggested that Ann Budge previously stepped down from her role on the SPFL Board as she wanted to challenge the corruption that she saw. Reporting of the matter would seem to indicate otherwise - https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts-chairwoman-ann-budge-voted-spfl-board-583624

 

Throughout this process since March, there has been much play with regards to revisionism. The term relegated has been replaced with expelled, for instance. Interestingly, manager Daniel Stendal’s contract reputably had a clause allowing it’s termination in the event of relegation, as confirmed by both Ann Budge and Daniel Stendal. This clause was enacted. The tone and portrayal of Ann Budge has shifted too. Compare the descriptions with regards to her perceived leadership skills that were expressed on JKB during January and February to now.

 

Before Hearts continue to fall further down the rabbit hole of blaming other people, clubs and institutions, perhaps the blame needs to lie closer to home.

Wow Bill, for a journalist from a rag like the Sun you use some pretty big words and I’m fairly sure that you have posted this to get a reaction so you can write yet more vitriolic tripe in that comic which you know isn’t exactly famous for telling the truth and is utterly despised here in Merseyside because of the proven lies your paper wrote.

 

You seem to think that on sporting integrity that with 8 games to go we should be relegated. Ok, that’s your opinion. Season 18/19 St Mirren were bottom at this time and looking almost beyond redemption yet they turned it round. A couple of seasons before, Dundee looked dead and buried at this point in the season, they turned it round. It’s not as if we were 10 points behind with 5 games to go.

 

As a so called journalist, you should be looking to uncover the truth. The truth about why the SPFL held a gun to their members heads saying end the season or they won’t get money but have previously issued loans to clubs to help them or why the lawyers have acknowledged that the Dundee vote against ending the season was received yet ignored saying it had been in a spam folder to the point where their mind was changed and the resolution passed. I’d want to know the answers to these or why is it ok to play the Scottish Cup at some point but not have the Highland/Lowland league play off with winner playing Brechin. How is it right they maintain their league status yet the bottom teams in the other divisions have to ‘take their medicine’. Instead you are choosing to focus on a target who are doing what any other club in their position would be doing, fighting an injustice. Do you honestly believe it’s fair that a team like Partick are being completely shafted. 2 points behind with a game in hand. Is that fair. Their position in this gets lost. They are fighting too, yet your article only focuses on Heart of Midlothian Because the press want to portray us as the bad guys in this. When managers like Brian Rice and Derek McInnes believe there is a fundamental problem with what happened by relegating teams and understand why the fight is going on, journalists should be listening to that. 
 

How many hours did it take your minion to go back through the pages of JKB to get some selective quotes that you use to justify the press hatred towards our club at the moment. No doubt they will make their way into your next piece in the comic. You focus on them instead of the posts where fans are saying they feel sorry for other clubs having been dragged into this or how the fans believe we could avoid relegation. 
 

There will always be some fans who will laugh at the demise of others. You should probably go onto their teams message boards to see how much they want us to die as a result of this. It’s the nature of football fans. 
 

We might not have played well in a lot of games this season but we were not certainties to go down. We know where a lot of the blame lies but to end a season, relegate teams through a global pandemic when others rode it out to and played on is just wrong. 
 

I can’t be bothered to go through all the replies to you and no don’t these points have been highlighted but the press treatment of Heart of Midlothian has quite frankly been shocking. Going down after 38 games if you don’t have enough points is one thing, going down with 24 points to play for and being 4 points behind is something completely different. 2 wins for Hamilton took them away from the bottom. Why couldn’t Hearts have done the same

 

 

 

 

 

[Mikey1874]

11 minutes ago, Riccarton3 said:

Hindsight? Arbitration first would not have got anywhere near the documents, whatever their significance. And Arbitration first, if all processes are done correctly, leaves no way back to court anyway. No?

 

Dundee United, Raith and Cove thought they could get the case dismissed.

 

I asked why. Because it's clear there is a case to answer 

[Toxteth O'Grady]

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/notice-of-referral-to-arbitration/?rid=14258

"The Scottish FA has received a notice of referral to arbitration in respect of the dispute between Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle, and the respondents named as the Scottish Professional Football League, Dundee United, Cove Rangers, Raith Rovers and Stranraer."

 

 

 

When did Stranraer get involved?

 

 

[Steve]

8 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

No one is threatening to bankrupt anyone.

 

Just a natural step when self interest is the guiding principle.

Bang on!!!

[Interested Bystander]

Just now, Nookie Bear said:

Apologies if I have missed your post but who did you say you support?

 

You'll have to ask SE16 3LN 

[milky_26]

Just now, Toxteth O'Grady said:

https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/notice-of-referral-to-arbitration/?rid=14258

"The Scottish FA has received a notice of referral to arbitration in respect of the dispute between Heart of Midlothian and Partick Thistle, and the respondents named as the Scottish Professional Football League, Dundee United, Cove Rangers, Raith Rovers and Stranraer."

 

 

 

When did Stranraer get involved?

 

 

they were named as respondents in our petition as it would directly affect them, but in a good way unlike the three stoogies