SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Jim Panzee]

1 minute ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Exactly what experience does FF have? Is he qualified lawyer or QC, has he 10 years legal experience? Only last week, a Law Lord of Scotland saw sufficient evidence to decide the case was worthy of further debate and whilst not in CoS itself, in a private court of arbitration.

 

Think I will stick with Law Lord over poster, who albeit with good intentions, posts on here.

fair enough. as others have said we'll see. Seriously hoping for reinstatment - fingers crossed.

[graygo]

1 minute ago, neilnunb said:

 

Quite ironic when he styles his look on Barry Mannilow.

 

 

 

Quite scary that I have a couple of mutual friends with this cretin on Facebook.

Think it might be time for a purge.

[Anything2]

3 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

I had a bet on us to win by 7.

 

By bt I knew my net was burst 😂

Reminds me of my mate at the big semi, there was a chance at the end, might have been Pospisil, and he was willing it to miss. Threw him a look and he admitted that he had backed us for 4-0 and was on for over £200 but didn't want to say as he knew it would be his round. 

[Rogue Daddy]

14 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Has he seen the documents that will be released? If not, he knows as much as we do.

No, pretty sure he said he didn’t have a clue as to what part the documents play or what they hold. So yes, you’re right, he knows as much as we do. 

[manaliveits105]

10 though Dean ay thats like 2 x 5 

FTH

[AndrewB]

What is it with Cowdenbeath, by the way?  We played them in the cup a good few years back (20-ish?) and the team was full of Hibs fans who all dyed their hair (SOOOO Hibs, that is).

 

And then fast forward to now and there's this clown (although no longer playing there), Donald Findlay (who would rather scrap his own team's chance of a play-off place) etc.

 

Was also one of the coldest ever matches I went to (not a HMFC game; thought I'd "go to a game" as a neutral) one evening back in the 1980s.

[ericb]

37 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

This seems to start and stop with the Dundee vote. If that is considered to be fair (I don’t see how it can be but this is Scottish football) then the SPFL will win. If it isn’t then they surely lose.

I'm not sure it does necessarily hinge on this, yes it was handled very unfairly, but what was being voted on is just as important, i.e. what was on the table was prejudice against Partick and Stranrear, and ulitimately us.

[Don Dan]

Let’s go back to the resolution put forward by Doncaster and the information given to those eligible to vote. 
He plainly stated that this resolution was the ONLY way to release funds which was manifestly misleading. He would know that the information he put forward was wrong. He sent out a resolution based on that information. The resolution paper did not ask for a no vote or a yes vote. It asked for adopt or reject. It’s asked for them to be returned by 5pm if possible whilst the rules as I understand them allow for 28 days. The Dundee vote arrived at 4;48pm and was cast as reject. 
Surrounding all this was numerous phone calls and changes of minds and once again misinformation mostly from the main man Doncaster.

Apart from the Dundee vote which was very much cast before the 5pm deadline (if possible)  

the initial advice from Doncaster will imo make that resolution invalid. Bear in mind Doncaster deliberately did not tell the truth to the Clubs about funding then this is in fact illegal. He lied by omission. 
Any right thinking Arbitrator will see this as underhand manipulation to gain the outcome that you want. That is backup by the phone calls around 5pm as Doncaster tried to swing the vote. 
Imo it fails right there. 
 

[Cruyff]

1 minute ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

Too many posters on here believing other posters thoughts/opinions when said person really has no idea what those documents will uncover and what could happen with the case from there.

No one knows what is in the documents outwith the SPFL, the Petitioners and the Arbitrators. 

 

It might be damaging to them. It might be nothing. 

 

We will probably never know and will only be able to make assumptions based on the decision when it is publicised. 

[Beast Boy]

42 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

think someone said November but obviously not confirmed 

In that case we will be well behind in our fitness and preparations compared to our opponents. On that basis we should be allowed to train as an elite club.

[Cruyff]

7 minutes ago, neilnunb said:

 

Quite ironic when he styles his look on Barry Mannilow.

 

 

  

[colinmaroon]

59 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

No, I don’t get this either. We’re one of the biggest clubs in the country with all the facilities to train safely but we’re not allowed? Dicks

 

 

Why was that decision made?  Purely the Scottish Government?

 

I don't think so?

 

Leaves two choices:

Ours?

SPFL'?

 

 

 

[manaliveits105]

Malone you say ? is he a friend of Peters 

 

No shock that bbc have rolled out an "expert" to downtalk our chances 

[Fluorescent Adolescent]

5 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

In that case we will be well behind in our fitness and preparations compared to our opponents. On that basis we should be allowed to train as an elite club.

I’m sure we could push for it if we wanted to, we need to consider the furloughing aspects though. It looks almost certain we’ll be playing in the Championship so it would cost us a fair wedge to bring the players back earlier than required.

 

Better just to sit tight, see what happens at arbitration, then delay the start of the Premiership if required.

 

 
 

Edit - misinterpreted your post. Ignore me.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Fluorescent Adolescent

[Bazzas right boot]

6 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Exactly what experience does FF have? Is he qualified lawyer or QC, has he 10 years legal experience? Only last week, a Law Lord of Scotland saw sufficient evidence to decide the case was worthy of further debate and whilst not in CoS itself, in a private court of arbitration.

 

Think I will stick with Law Lord over poster, who albeit with good intentions, posts on here.

 

3 minutes ago, Heartsmad1874 said:

Too many posters on here believing other posters thoughts/opinions when said person really has no idea what those documents will uncover and what could happen with the case from there.

 

 

Tbh, I don't think it's that. 

 

It's just folk have different opinions. 

Some felt without a doubt it was a CoS matter just a few weeks ago. 

 

There maybe a case to answer and that is good, but we still need somthing in our favour to win, and to win to the tune of £10m.

 

I can't believe that there wil be a paper trail left that allows us to win £10m.

Maybe there is, but there is a lot of hope being pinned of the documentation being damming, it may be, they did want it to remain hidden and tbh giving the spfl's brass neck and general incompetence it may not be 100% correct, but enough to flip things in our favour? 

 

I'm really pissed of that no one seems to be interested in the other options, the reasons for voting, general fairness, mitigation for all, etc. It just seems all bogged down on details of the law and I don't think that's in our favour. 

[colinmaroon]

53 minutes ago, number-16 said:

 

 

Scottish Football's Joint Response Group  presented a plan for the resumption of the professional game to Joe FitzPatrick, Minister for Public Health, Sport and Wellbeing, in May. That plan only called for top league teams to be allowed to train.

 

Further information on their plan can be found at https://www.scottishfa.co.uk/news/jrg-presents-its-return-to-football-strategy-to-scottish-government/.

 

The permanent membership of the Joint Response Group was formed with four permanent members:
Rod Petrie - Scottish FA President

Ian Maxwell - Scottish FA Chief Executive

Neil Doncaster - SPFL Chief Executive

Dr John MacLean - Scottish FA Chief Medical Consultant.

 

So the man in charge of the organisation we took to court, and the former chairman of our rivals got to recommend to the Scottish Government that we couldn't train.

 

 

So, not based on facilities (remembering that we were instrumental in the other clubs having the finance to test) but on prejudice?

 

There is an example of the "care" for every member of the association that should be used as a little pointer to the hypocrisy of the governing body.

 

 

[Anything2]

My main concern is that either the SPFL get away with another technicality as per last week or if everyone's fears materialise and they do have undue influence over the purported independent panel and we either get nothing or a nominal compensation package, this will be celebrated as a great victory for the SPFL and the rest of the league. Whereas, everyone should be waking up to the fact that the SPFL board gambled the future of the game on a roll of the dice and all to cover up some questionable dealings that they have been involved with. The media should be championing reconstruction and the resignation of all office bearers. In fact they should ha e already been put under so much public pressure that reconstruction was forced through. 

Edited July 7, 2020 by Anything2

[Heartsmad1874]

New piece from the 4th Official. Outstanding

 

I started watching a new Netflix docuseries the other day, a rehash of an old show from years back, Unsolved Mysteries it's called. What's that got to do with football? Not a lot but the name of the show could describe Scottish football perfectly well.

The show's one of those generic, typically American tv shows that goes into detail of an unsolved crime, with friends and family interviewed who've been devastated by the loss of a loved one. A decent enough watch but incredibly frustrating as it kinda leaves you hanging with no conclusion or with any real inclination as to what's happened to the victim.

Victims. There's a word for you. Scottish football is full of them. Paranoid, raging victims. None more so this week than Dundee United and Raith Rovers. Those particular two clubs released statements on Monday suggesting that Hearts and Partick Thistle, by taking the SPFL to the Court of Session have damaged the integrity of our national game.

Yes, they really did. Both clubs released statements that stated they both fear the financial implications of having to defend themselves regarding the Court of Sessions verdict on the dispute between the relegated Hearts and Partick Thistle and the SPFL.

The dispute is about whether the relegation of those two clubs, which was agreed via a member vote and whether that decision by the Scottish clubs was legitimate and legal.

Due to that, the promotions of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers are legally questioned, which is a perfectly reasonable stance to take for those clubs being relegated due to a member vote. Hearts and Partick Thistle believe the decision to be unfair and the SPFL rulebook states that no decision made can be unfair on its member clubs.

Well. Dundee United and Raith Rovers don't think so, in fact, they appear to not like being dragged into this dispute one iota. The notion of this being taken all the way seems not to have entered the heads of anyone connected with these two football clubs, which is a bit naive if nothing else.

The issue I have with that is a fairly basic one. Hearts told them way back in April they would seek to deal with this mess via the legal route which was open to them, which is precisely what they did.

Why Dundee United and Raith Rovers would be surprised at this is what I don't understand here. Hearts told them for months that if they were relegated, they would challenge that in a court of law and here we are in the situation we're in.

 

The Court of Session ruled that the decision should be made under the auspices of the SFA with those arbiters being picked as thus...

One picked by Hearts and Partick Thistle.

One picked by the SPFL

One decided by those picked by each party, who will chair the arbitration.

That, in all honesty, seems quite fair to me. After all, shouldn't we follow the Arbitration Act? Not according to Dundee United and Raith Rovers though, who feel the cost of this could bring some kind of financial meltdown.

Yip. Can you see the irony here? Those two clubs who've benefited from a vote to end the season are banging on about sporting integrity, while at the very same time complaining about Hearts and Partick Thistle, who are being harshly treated here, so much so that the damages claim is for up to £10 million between them.

Let that sink in for a minute. All of it.

Hearts told them they'd go to court to seek redemption here. All the way through this fiasco, Ann Budge has been crystal clear on her intention to get fairness for her club. What sticks in my throat though is the hypocrisy of those promoted clubs, particularly Raith Rovers who just so happened to be a point clear of Falkirk with eight games to go.

Not only were they only a point clear, they still had Falkirk to play, at Falkirk no less. Raith Rovers just so happened to be in the most complex situation of all clubs in the league, where five points were separating the top three and eight points separating the top five teams in that league (League 1).

They weren't a stick on for promotion at all. They weren't even guaranteed a playoff place.

They do have the temerity to question the decision by the Edinburgh and Glasgow clubs to take this all the way and had the audacity to suggest the sporting integrity of the game is under attack due to the Court of Session telling them to pay their own costs last week when they attempted to get this issue thrown out of court.

If they were to lose the arbitration ruling, they'd also be liable for their own costs at that hearing too which has seen them come out and question the sporting integrity of such things.

Which is a bit strange, isn't it?

Honestly, the sheer brass neck of those two promoted clubs bamboozles me here so much so, it actually beggars belief, and I've found myself laughing at the pair of them. Rangers called this all out on April 10th. They released a dossier that both Hearts and Partick Thistle have used quite significantly during their pursuit of justice and compensation.

 

Rangers alluded to the vote to end the season on April 10th being invalid due to the SPFL receiving Dundee's vote before the deadline. The SPFL denied this, therefore, allowing Dundee a further five days to change their vote. It would seem that may be a significant problem for the SPFL as it appears that the rules of the resolution on April 10th suggest that whether a yes or no vote is delivered, it can't be changed, meaning the resolution would have failed.

Lord Clark's ruling at the Court of Session which allowed for it to be overseen by SFA rules, with full disclosure of what exactly went on during that vote and the subsequent shenanigans thereafter will hopefully get to the bottom of this shambles, but that remains to be seen.

No matter what the outcome eventually is, my lack of sympathy for Dundee United and Raith Rovers will remain. All this pair had to do is.... well they could've done many things here, and any of them could be seen to be doing the right thing.

Rangers called for an independent inquiry. It was voted down. Only thirteen clubs voted for it, and ultimately Douglas Park offered to pay for it meaning not one club would've been out of pocket. Both Dundee United and Raith Rovers voted against the invitation provided by Rangers and Mr Park.

Hearts offered league reconstruction. Three leagues of fourteen which would've seen Dundee United and Raith Rovers promoted while Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer would've escaped relegation. Dundee United and Raith Rovers voted against that proposal.

Rangers then offered another option for league reconstruction, similar to the Hearts proposal but with Kelty Hearts and Brora Rangers (who were denied the opportunity of promotion due to the SPFL abandoning the playoffs) being included in the bottom tier along with Colt teams from both Rangers and Celtic. That was rejected.

The SPFL then asked member clubs to consider the original three leagues of fourteen. That was also dismissed out of hand. Both Dundee United and Raith Rovers voted against such a proposal. Now if you cast your mind back through the last four months, Ann Budge has stated quite clearly she would take this all the way to the courts to protect her club and her club's fans and quite rightly too.

The absolute brass neck of Dundee United and Raith Rovers, a pair of self-serving and self-interested clubs who've shown a complete disregard for anyone but themselves. How they can dare mention sporting integrity yesterday and keep a straight face is beyond me.

In fact, it's contemptible, to be honest. The cheek to mention sporting integrity and suggesting they won a league fair and square while ignoring Hearts and Partick's plight has got me to the point where I hope their promotion is legally denied.

If it isn't, then I hope the clubs seeking reparation get full compensation. For me, this entire shitshow since April exemplifies exactly what Scottish football has now become. A national game so full of hate, antipathy and self-interest that's getting precisely what it deserves.

Decisions that have cost many millions of pounds, approximately £10 million already, a claim from Hearts and Thistle for another £10 million, a league with no sponsor and an executive board that's got down on its hands and knees to kiss the feet of Sky Sports. A Sky Sports that treats the Scottish game with such disdain and disregard that I'm always stunned when we get any kind of build-up to a match at all while the post-match analysis is non-existent nine times out of ten.

This is where Scottish football finds itself. The only money coming into the game is via tv companies who show us such disregard and contempt, give the league a pittance when you compare and look at other leagues throughout Europe, our league is the poor man of the continent. No sponsors, no leadership and no money.

Yet we've got this pair of jokers talking about sporting integrity? If it weren't so severe, it would be funny, but nobody's smiling or laughing here, it's in no way funny at all. The most selfish group of football clubs on earth. The most antagonistic supporters in world football. The most incompetent governing bodies on the planet. That's where Scottish football's at.

We are getting everything we deserve so spare me the sanctimonious bullshit about sporting integrity, there is none, and there hasn't been for years. Scottish football is eating itself to a slow, miserable death here and frankly, no one cares anymore really, do they?

Do I believe the mystery of the Dundee vote and what exactly went on with the SPFL executive board thereafter? No, not really. I have a feeling it'll remain an Unexplained Mystery you could squeeze right into that docuseries I was talking about...

 

[RobNox]

7 hours ago, David McCaig said:

Too complicated?

 

i can literally amend the fixture list in 5 seconds.

 

Hearts/Hibs being at home on the same day at the same time is meaningless BCD.

 

There are only 4 fixture clashes beyond the earliest date of crowds being readmitted and two of those are midweek, which are always a toss up between Tuesday/Wednesday anyway.  That leaves a couple of fixtures in 2021 to be moved to either a Friday, Sunday or Monday.... good luck convincing Lord Clark that is impossible  - he had a 10 page legal summary published within 45 minutes of the trial finishing.

 

We could actually produce a list of all the fixtures that were moved around in the last completed season to accommodate TV companies, or European ties etc.  That would demonstrate beyond doubt that having to rejig the fixture list is not a major problem, as it actually happens routinely every season.

[Gordon Ramsay]

Is the crowd funding page up and running yet I've got 10p I want to contribute? 🤣🤣

[Chuck Berry]

12 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

No one knows what is in the documents outwith the SPFL, the Petitioners and the Arbitrators. 

 

It might be damaging to them. It might be nothing. 

 

We will probably never know and will only be able to make assumptions based on the decision when it is publicised. 

 

I think there must be documentation, seen by Hearts/PT via the "Rangers dossier", that they know exists either directly or suggested to in the dossier.  They will also have been speaking to ICT and Falkirk I would assume.

 

They'll have a good idea of what they're expecting to see handed over, and have a fair idea of where this will lead.  Smoking gun? I guess we'll see. 

[buzzbomb]

9 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

No one knows what is in the documents outwith the SPFL, the Petitioners and the Arbitrators. 

 

It might be damaging to them. It might be nothing. 

 

We will probably never know and will only be able to make assumptions based on the decision when it is publicised. 

If the Dundee vote is the smoking gun that we all hope and is illegal, why are the SPFL allowing this to go to even go to arbitration ? Surely their QC has told them the chances of losing? And in the process, they will have to reveal their confidential documents, which may contain nothing illegal, but they clearly don't want seen. Yet, they seem happy to go to court, risking losing and exposing their documents. They are either stupid (don't think so) or very confident in their case.

[colinmaroon]

41 minutes ago, ericb said:

The podcast frustrates me, Tom English, who has been excellent throughout this whole affair seems ground down. Repeatedly he could have made the point `To McIntyre and all that all the clubs needed to do was right a wrong, and none of this expense would be around.

 

 

I agree!

 

It was screaming out for that point to be made.  Disappointed but not surprised!

 

[Diadora Van Basten]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

This completely contradicts what Doncaster said yesterday about how it would have been impossible to finish the league as teams are just starting to train now.

 

We could have finished the league as other countries are doing. All the SPFL had to have done was proceed on the assumption we would play to a finish, keep in touch with the government, and get all the health protocols in place to hit the ground running as soon as the go ahead is given - which was June 22.

 

It was a whopper told on camera and unchallenged by our media again. He also claimed all premier teams agreed with the decision to end the season.

[AndrewB]

The Fourth Official isn't usually so pro us is it?  I've only seen it mentioned on here once or twice so not totally sure. Presumably they have different contributors.  That piece above has surely been written by someone from here.

Marvellous stuff, btw.

[Hagar the Horrible]

19 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

@Hagar the Horrible, excellent posts.

A friendly warning. Have a wee sly dig at the Navy again, and I will blow you out the water😉😉

LOL It wasnt in any way a dig at the Navy, just they were using the wrong force in the wrong arena, I could have said for fairness they wanted to send in the desert rats to the battle of Trafalgar.  Or the marines to the desert, the clue is in the title? And as a massive Led Zep fan I am aware that the bassist founded the US Navy.  I am full to the gunwales. Timbers shivered, mainbrace spliced...all on board me hearty

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

17 minutes ago, ericb said:

I'm not sure it does necessarily hinge on this, yes it was handled very unfairly, but what was being voted on is just as important, i.e. what was on the table was prejudice against Partick and Stranrear, and ulitimately us.

But if the clubs vote for it, they vote for it. That’s the mechanism for decisions. The question has to be, did Dundee vote yes or no?

[Heartsmad1874]

6 minutes ago, Gordon Ramsay said:

Is the crowd funding page up and running yet I've got 10p I want to contribute? 🤣🤣

Put me down for two shirt buttons.

[Gordon Ramsay]

Just now, AndrewB said:

The Fourth Official isn't usually so pro us is it?  I've only seen it mentioned on here once or twice so not totally sure. Presumably they have different contributors.  That piece above has surely been written by someone from here.

Marvellous stuff, btw.

 

It's very pro Rangers so easy to see why the positive article. 

 

Doesn't take away from the fact it's all true though. 

[gjcc]

8 minutes ago, Gordon Ramsay said:

Is the crowd funding page up and running yet I've got 10p I want to contribute? 🤣🤣

Stick it to HSL instead. That is probably their average donation. 

[David Black]

13 minutes ago, ericb said:

I'm not sure it does necessarily hinge on this, yes it was handled very unfairly, but what was being voted on is just as important, i.e. what was on the table was prejudice against Partick and Stranrear, and ulitimately us.

There was information not given by Doncaster to the clubs prior to the vote. He stated they had to vote to end the season before they could get their money. That has been proved to be wrong/a lie. He contacted UEFA stating the clubs has voted to end the season before the vote had actually taken place. Then there is the phone calls/e-mails between Doncaster and Nelms . This is where Nelms could do himself a big favour in the eyes of his own support and wider. A big part will centre around if you can change a no vote to a yes vote. The Partick QC is of the opinion that you can't. A lot of other chairmen said that would give evidence at an independent inquiry as they were unhappy at how the vote was handled. It is time they stood up as well.

[Daveandal]

Hello All 

 

Long-time member, very occasional poster and ridiculous user name.  Apologises if this should be moved elsewhere but I just had to get a few things off my chest.  Other areas of social media and traditional media have been awash with what I can only describe attempts to re-write history and cover up what I suspect they know is a shameful episode in the history of our game.

 

 

 

I will attempt to explain why the expulsion of Hearts, Partick and Stranraer is wrong and then try and look into the possible future outcomes and how the action taken now will have lasting and damaging repercussions no matter what happens in terms of the global pandemic going forward.

 

 

 

I won’t go into the various votes the SPFL held, or the misleading information they gave in terms finances, reconstruction etc.  but more in terms of that SPFL’s solution is and why it will spell trouble going ahead.

 

The reason why the expulsion of the three named clubs is simple.  They are being punished for a global pandemic.   Football has a season.  That seasons was not close to being finished.  Therefore it is wrong to pretend that it was punish teams for where they happened to be after x amount of games.  Having played different opponents at different locations.  Conversely it would be wrong to deny (not punish as these teams would not be playing at a lower level then they currently are) teams promotion due to a global pandemic.  The natural solution is to reconstruct the leagues so no one suffers.  But alas that did not happen……yet.

 

So what does the future hold if the SPFL solution does come to pass.

 

 

 

Scenario One.

 

 

Premiership starts 1^st August.  The rest of the leagues start mid-October.  Season plays out with fans returning in September/October. Relegation and Promotion happen as normal.

 

Pros – Life and football return to normal in the sense the games are played and people can attend.

 

Cons – Hearts, Partick and Stranraer as clubs, businesses and fan bases fell hard-done by.  Possible Hearts supporter boycott of teams deemed too have caused them unfair expulsion.  Big hit to teams such as Alloa / Arbroath who would have been excepting / hoping for big Hearts support to part cover losses due to covid.  Same situation for teams in League 1 with Partick fans.  Could even fracture Hearts support with some people believing supporting the team in person is vital with others not wishing to boost the finances of clubs that have literally tried to kill the club. 

If Hearts are promoted the possible boycott would continue and harm Premiership Teams including Hibs and Dundee Utd who are in financial trouble.  If they remain in the Championship teams still hurt by the fact that thousands of Hearts fans won’t be giving money to the clubs or local communities around them.  The third largest support (in part or in whole) alienating themselves from 80% of other teams.  Can teams afford to lose that sweet Jambo dollar?

 

 

Scenario Two.

 

Premiership starts 1^st August. The rest of the leagues start mid-October.  Fans can’t return to stadiums until New Year.

 

Pros – Leagues can operate and there should be a return to normal promotion and relegation

 

Cons – If Lower league clubs are forced to play some will not survive.  It is clear there is a paradox that it is easier to “mothball” a small club and extend its potential life span than to force it to play behind closed doors.  For bigger clubs the opposite could apply. TV money in the Prem and potential for supporters of say Hearts and Partick to donate money to their respective clubs to minimise loss of match day income.  However other clubs do not have cash reserves, benefactors or motivated supports to organise financial help teams will be liquidated. (The Rangers support were unable/unwilling to save their club.  It can’t be taken for granted every club can do a FOH).

As in scenario one the clubs in the Championship and League one will not benefit from the post New Year supporters bounce as the numbers of Hearts and Partick away support will be down on previously seasons. Risking more clubs going to the wall. 

 

 

Scenario Three.

 

Premiership starts 1^st August. The rest of the leagues start mid-October. Season played to an end.  Fans can’t return to stadiums for entire season.

 

Pros – League happens, promotions and relegations can happen.

 

Cons – Worst case and maybe the only one not directly affected by Hearts situation*.  Many smaller teams will go bankrupt, Larger teams in real danger as well.  The only two teams in Scotland who could confidently say they could actually ride this wave would be Celtic and Hearts.  Leagues would need to be reconstructed as there simply wouldn’t be teams continue as is.  Real risk to the likes of Hibs, Dundee Utd and Aberdeen continuing.

 

*If the leagues had been reconstructed this seasons there may will have been good will amongst all supporters and it is not too farfetched to imagine joint up efforts to save as many teams as possible. This is unlikely now with ironically the only joint efforts between Hearts, Partick and possibly teams such as Inverness CT and Falkirk.   

 

 

Scenario Three (a)

 

Premiership starts 1^st August. The rest of the leagues start mid-October. Lower league Season played until around January as a second wave happens. Prem and Championship finish behind closed doors. Fans never return or only partially for a few weeks.

 

Pros – Flagship league finishes.

 

Cons – Larger teams in League 1 and 2 in real danger of bankruptcy, namely Partick and Falkirk (two teams thrown to the wolves). Smaller teams in Championship ironically face the same issue, namely Alloa, Arbroath and Ayr.

In this situation the teams who were expelled from their leagues would have been better suited to playing in the leagues above.  Hearts could cope without playing in front of fans as well as anyone.  Partick and Falkirk would be as capable as anyone in the current Championship to play out a season (bar Hearts) but would be under threat of existence if forced to stop playing. The lack of reconstruction would actually be responsible for the death of some clubs.

 

 

Scenario Three (b)

 

Premiership starts 1^st August. The rest of the leagues start mid-October. All leagues  played until around January as a second wave happens. Prem is able to continue to a finish behind closed doors. Fans never return or only partially for a few weeks.

 

Pros – Flagship league finishes.

 

Cons – We are back the “sporting integrity” question. The Prem would have been completed.  Someone will have finished bottom after playing a full 38 games.  But the team sitting top of the Championship may have only played 10 / 11 games.  Would it be fair to promote a team on that basis?  Previously I would have said NO and I think the majority of supporters would say no, however we now have precedent.*  It gets more confusing as if we have a wet autumn and bad winter it not impossible to imagine a situation where say Inverness CT and Arbroath might have only played 5 games….. they might be a few points behind say Hearts but would have a real claim that they might have been top, PPG would be very interesting. 

 

Coupled with the fact teams in the Championship would be in financial crisis we could end up in a situation when some “middle” sized clubs fold but smaller ones survive as its “easier” for them to be mothballed.

 

 

* This is not to say that Dundee Utd or Cove didn’t deserve their promotions, but did Raith?

 

 

Scenario Four

 

Premiership starts 1^st August. The rest of the leagues start mid-October. All leagues  played until around January as a second wave happens.  All football stops.

 

Pro – I can’t see any. Maybe a “we tried”

 

Con – The SPFL ruling with Hearts etc. now becomes an issue the SPFL cannot escape. Leagues will have games played.  Teams will be top and bottom of their respective leagues.  Due to what happened teams must be relegated and promoted. The Dundee Utd doctrine of “Promotion and relegation are fundamental parts of football” may come back to haunt them and it will certainly haunt others.

There will be more court cases, will Hibs, Aberdeen, Kilmarnock etc. accept relegation after less than half the season? We can’t have reconstruction as that was rejected last time this happened just a few months ago.  Yet it might be the only solution as half a dozen or more teams across the leagues could go bust, meaning, to have any league going forward would need “re-jigging”.  But then could Hearts go back to court again seeking more compensation as they were denied this? Or would they keep relegation? We could seriously have a situation where 3 or 4 teams in the Championship go bust.  Would they relegate the lowest finishing afloat team and promote 4 from League one just to give themselves protection in case Hearts and Partick seek millions in compensation?

 

This version of the future is not that far-fetched. Looking at Spanish flu patterns and what is currently happening in the USA its clear viruses of this kind of infectious nature don’t just disappear and are likely to come back.  By throwing Hearts etc. into the wilderness it means there is now a blue print of how this is done. 

 

“First they came for the Hearts and I giggled as they are mini huns with a woman in charge, then the Partick and I shrugged my shoulders as they are just Glasgow Hipsters, then Stranraer and I said nothing as it’s a minor team, then they came for (insert team name) and no one spoke up for me”  

 

 

Scenario Five

 

Season never starts due to 2^nd Wave.

 

Pros – None

 

Cons – We probably move to a franchise system.  Celtic, Rangers, Hearts, Dundee City, Aberdeen and Inverness Utd, AFC Lanarkshire, The Lothians and Leith, Fife FC, Greater Glasgow and the West Coast Bears.

 

 

What I am trying to say is that there was not an ideal solution to this and league reconstruction would not have magically fixed everything. But it would have given teams a fighting chance. A genuine debate lead by the SPFL, laying out the possible futures (or risk assessments if you will) would surely have lead people to see it was the path of least harm.  And then if this has still been dismissed, publically with robust reasons, other than YOU ARE RUBBISH GET OVER IT, we as a support might have accepted it and understood it.  Even a proposal that if next season can’t finish then we’d move to a 16 team top league to help mitigate the financial losses of Championship members might have softened the blow to the Hearts, ICT, Partick and Falkirks out there.

 

Instead we now have a situation where 20% of clubs despise the others.  One of these clubs just happens to be the only team outside of Rangers and Celtic that can actually financially fight this and has a support that could help other teams financially or withdraw support from them financially.  Hearts are a massive club, much bigger than several clubs in any of the top leagues across Europe.  The FOH has proved we as a support can be mobilised to do good, yet when our help could have literally have saved other teams we have been not just shunned but ridiculed by supporters and chairmen of other teams.

 

  

We are to blame for Dundee Utd and Raith’s financial situation.  Maybe they should look at their own boards who have it seems brought both these teams to the brink of bankruptcy. 

 

We are told to take our medicine when we are actually offering a cure and others are risking their own clubs by pure pig-headedness

 

There has been abuse aimed at one of Scotland’s most successful business women. Misogyny of the highest order yet Sports Journalists giggle like little school children rather than call it out.

 

 

Why did journalists not question why Ann was left to come up with a reconstruction plan?  It was always going to look like self-interest even when it was clearly for the greater good.  

 

Why had journalists been unable to understand why Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove were named in papers.  They have tried to stoke this into Hearts v them when we all know it’s not.  Yet the ploy has worked. Just look at the way Dundee Utd supporters act on twitter! It’s like Hearts caused the bloody pandemic in the first place.

 

Whatever happens Hearts will survive.  Other than Celtic I am not sure anyone else in Scottish football can say the same.

 

 

[John Findlay]

9 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

LOL It wasnt in any way a dig at the Navy, just they were using the wrong force in the wrong arena, I could have said for fairness they wanted to send in the desert rats to the battle of Trafalgar.  Or the marines to the desert, the clue is in the title? And as a massive Led Zep fan I am aware that the bassist founded the US Navy.  I am full to the gunwales. Timbers shivered, mainbrace spliced...all on board me hearty

AD28(splice the mainbrace).

[Cruyff]

5 minutes ago, Chuck Berry said:

 

I think there must be documentation, seen by Hearts/PT via the "Rangers dossier", that they know exists either directly or suggested to in the dossier.  They will also have been speaking to ICT and Falkirk I would assume.

 

They'll have a good idea of what they're expecting to see handed over, and have a fair idea of where this will lead.  Smoking gun? I guess we'll see. 

 The SPFL may have been very careful not to incriminate themselves. We might be left with documentation that suggests there is foul play but as you say, we need the smoking gun and we can't say for certain that would be forthcoming. 

John Nelms might of course be that smoking gun. As you say, we'll see. We'll never know the evidence though. 

5 minutes ago, buzzbomb said:

If the Dundee vote is the smoking gun that we all hope and is illegal, why are the SPFL allowing this to go to even go to arbitration ? Surely their QC has told them the chances of losing? And in the process, they will have to reveal their confidential documents, which may contain nothing illegal, but they clearly don't want seen. Yet, they seem happy to go to court, risking losing and exposing their documents. They are either stupid (don't think so) or very confident in their case.

I don't know if they were confident or not of winning a motion of the documents. 

 

If we had gone to Arbitration minus the court ordered documents then we'd most likely get stuffed. 

 

As you say, they'd be a bit daft if they wrote in their minutes - "at 4.48pm we received Dundee's no vote. At 5.30pm Neil Doncaster then phoned Mr. Nelms and asked him to change his vote." 

 

No one is that stupid or lucky, surely? 

[Jambo-Fox]

1 hour ago, Newton51 said:

I’m similar but surely there would be compensation offered at least. Maybe not the figures we have been asking about tho

If the panel judges everything to be legal and fair (albeit with some bad behaviours) then Hearts will not get a penny in compensation! And we will have to meet the other parties costs!

[Chuck Berry]

10 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

But if the clubs vote for it, they vote for it. That’s the mechanism for decisions. The question has to be, did Dundee vote yes or no?

 

If there is a gun being held to their heads - vote for it or no cash - that will also form part of the considerations I would assume.

 

Also a vote of this nature is in itself greatly flawed. Any one club knows if they vote for it, it saves their skin/gives them promotion/has no effect.  These clubs will always greatly outnumber the clubs who will stand to be harmed if it is passed ie 3 out of 42.  It was never a level playing field.

[Ex member of the SaS]

23 minutes ago, RobNox said:

 

We could actually produce a list of all the fixtures that were moved around in the last completed season to accommodate TV companies, or European ties etc.  That would demonstrate beyond doubt that having to rejig the fixture list is not a major problem, as it actually happens routinely every season.

Not to mention the fiddle of changing fixtures to accommodate Celtic's friendlies after the league start.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 minute ago, Chuck Berry said:

 

If there is a gun being held to their heads - vote for it or no cash - that will also form part of the considerations I would assume.

 

Also a vote of this nature is in itself greatly flawed. Any one club knows if they vote for it, it saves their skin/gives them promotion/has no effect.  These clubs will always greatly outnumber the clubs who will stand to be harmed if it is passed ie 3 out of 42.  It was never a level playing field.

Of course not but listen to what that Malone guy said about arbitration not focusing on morality or fairness. It’ll all be about the letter of the law

[Celtic1ICT3]

As an ICT supporter and a long time ago a qualified company secretary, the key objective issue for me is - did Dundee meet the Friday 17.00 BST deadline? The answer is 'Yes they did (but the SPFL's legal advice seems to be that they could change their mind - that evidence will be interesting in Arbitration. Where in the Articles or Companies Act does it allow this? Can you imagine someone in the House of Commons or a large company returning shortly after the votes had been counted and saying I would like to change my mind. Or turning up at the Polling Station at 22.10 saying I have a late vote or can I get my ballot paper back to change it?  Decisions can be reversed but there is normally a procedure to follow if there has been legal compliance in the original vote.)'.

 

Dundee on the face of it  voted in accordance with  Company law and the SPFL's instructions and articles of association. MacLennan subsequently said that: 'The SPFL should not have placed a Friday 17:00 BST deadline on ballot responses'. That suggests there was a deadline to me!!!

 

The SPFL did therefore set a deadline - the Chairman said as much, and Dundee were fully compliant. Failure to vote would have  meant it could not be counted as a vote. The arrangement was that you had one vote and Dundee used it. 

 

They then asked, after the deadline, to vote again.   This request was under the  directors written resolution procedure.

 

The Companies Act - 

291(4)  The copy of the resolution must be accompanied by a statement informing the member–

(a)how to signify agreement to the resolution (see section 296), and

(b)as to the date by which the resolution must be passed if it is not to lapse (see section 297).

291(5)  In the event of default in complying with this section, an offence is committed by every officer of the company who is in default.

 

There has been a focus on the Dundee vote but there is potentially another significant vote which may have been over looked in the public domain but not by the QCs.  Murdoch MacLennan : 'At the time of the 5pm Board meeting on Good Friday, the SPFL had received 38 returns from clubs. One further return came in during the meeting.'  In law, that vote is potentially more significant than the Dundee vote because it missed the deadline. Yet it was counted. Maclennan added : 'This meant that the one outstanding Ladbrokes Championship return was key to the adoption or rejection of the resolution.'

 

However, had this been a physical meeting, that vote would not have been counted because no one was present to vote. 

 

This bit from MacLennan is quite important : 'The legal advice we received was that Dundee FC were entitled to change their mind and to submit a second return in favour of the resolution and that the SPFL Board should accept that as a valid return.'

 

I am not a legal expert but I have attempted to put forward an objective contribution to what is a key moment in Scottish football history.

 

 

 

[gjcc]

Imagine betting against your own team. And getting sacked for it.  

[Heartsmad1874]

4 minutes ago, Cruyff said:

 The SPFL may have been very careful not to incriminate themselves. We might be left with documentation that suggests there is foul play but as you say, we need the smoking gun and we can't say for certain that would be forthcoming. 

John Nelms might of course be that smoking gun. As you say, we'll see. We'll never know the evidence though. 

I don't know if they were confident or not of winning a motion of the documents. 

 

If we had gone to Arbitration minus the court ordered documents then we'd most likely get stuffed. 

 

As you say, they'd be a bit daft if they wrote in their minutes - "at 4.48pm we received Dundee's no vote. At 5.30pm Neil Doncaster then phoned Mr. Nelms and asked him to change his vote." 

 

No one is that stupid or lucky, surely? 

When you have such a monopoly of the game here you are surely bound to get sloppy. Theres no way they would have expected such a legal action forthcoming. They probably thought they could shaft us and we’d move on with our scraps of the table like everyone else.

[Chuck Berry]

1 minute ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Of course not but listen to what that Malone guy said about arbitration not focusing on morality or fairness. It’ll all be about the letter of the law

 

That was only because of the perceived "lack of time" he claims.

[Cruyff]

Just now, Heartsmad1874 said:

When you have such a monopoly of the game here you are surely bound to get sloppy. Theres no way they would have expected such a legal action forthcoming. They probably thought they could shaft us and we’d move on with our scraps of the table like everyone else.

They knew there could be a legal action against them. Their QC told them there might.

 

I don't think they ever expected a Court ruling against them where they had to hand over all documentation though. 

 

Because it was a vote and there were outside parties not employed by the SPFL involved (Dundee) there could be someone willing to speak up. It may be that Nelms regrets his decision given that reconstruction collapsed and wants revenge. 🤷

 

I dunno. We can merely speculate. 

[August Landmesser]

42 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

10 though Dean ay thats like 2 x 5 

FTH

It's 4+0+5+1 too

[Radio Ga Ga]

57 minutes ago, JI TEES said:

It was Brandon Malone that made the statement. Just with his standing it

must carry some credence and I got the impression from listening to him that our side of the argument will not be strong enough. Really hope our Legal team are on point and can somehow achieve relative success.

Not a dig, however, why do you think that DU, RR and CR have gone from being over the moon on Friday to shitting themselves on Monday after having time to reflect on Lord Clarke's judgement if our argument is not strong enough?

[7628mm]

32 minutes ago, Gordon Ramsay said:

Is the crowd funding page up and running yet I've got 10p I want to contribute? 🤣🤣

 

That sounds like 9p too much to me.

Is 10p the minimum donation?

[Roxy Hearts]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Arbitration is generally binding though so we would have to go back to court on a specific procedural issue I assume. 

Yes it is binding other than some legal/law issue which if couldn't be resolved, Lord Clark would make time to look into. I'm a little unsure but was mentioned a while back. 

[John Findlay]

6 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Of course not but listen to what that Malone guy said about arbitration not focusing on morality or fairness. It’ll all be about the letter of the law

If that is the case then Lord Clark wouldnt have sent it to arbitration and our petition would have been dismissed.

Lord Clark believes we have, how shall I put it a sporting chance. 

So much so that he ensured that the arbitrators are as fair and as independent from the footballing governing bodies that he could.

It's now upto the QCs again to argue their clients cases and upto the three arbitrators to arbitrate under the rules of law and the COS. Our chances are the same as they were before we went in front of Lord Clark  50/50.

 

[Chuck Berry]

1 minute ago, John Findlay said:

If that is the case then Lord Clark wouldnt have sent it to arbitration and our petition would have been dismissed.

Lord Clark believes we have, how shall I put it a sporting chance. 

So much so that he ensured that the arbitrators are as fair and as independent from the footballing governing bodies that he could.

It's now upto the QCs again to argue their clients cases and upto the three arbitrators to arbitrate under the rules of law and the COS. Our chances are the same as they were before we went in front of Lord Clark  50/50.

 

 

He has no input into that, conditions are stipulated in the SFA Articles on Arbitration and he didn't contradict them.

[Bickfest]

Just now, Chuck Berry said:

 

He has no input into that, conditions are stipulated in the SFA Articles on Arbitration and he didn't contradict them.

I think he did. He specified the experience required, especially by the arbitral chairman.