SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[JI TEES]

3 minutes ago, Radio Ga Ga said:

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?

I don’t think any parties were over the moon but welcomed the referral to

arbitration due to the fact it will be played out behind closed doors rather than our preferred option which was out in the open. The reality of the legal case and costs associated were maybe underestimated by DU, RR and CR this wouldn’t surprise me at all given they are all Mickey Mouse outfits. I can only hope that from reviewing the documentation that there is a major revelation that sways it our way. We know that underhand tactics have been used no doubt but laws been broken I’m not sure but I’m not the expert in law so time will tell I suppose.

[The Mighty Thor]

54 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

10 though Dean ay thats like 2 x 5 

FTH

Its all the fingers on both hands. 

But not the thumbs. 

[Chuck Berry]

20 minutes ago, Celtic1ICT3 said:

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.

 

 

 

 

Interesting, thanks.

[7628mm]

3 minutes 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.

 

 

I would suggest our chances are better than 50/50 due to the HMFC & PT having access to the documentation etc. requested.

If the information requested is not complete or has been obviously tampered with by the SPFL side then on a point of law we can go back to the CoS if the arbitration panel fail to take this into consideration and we lose at arbitration.

 

Still all to play for but IMHO will not be concluded until after the 1st round of SPL games unless we can get an interdict.

It would be quite a call if we apply for an interdict after the 1st round and stop the SPL in it's tracks whilst awaiting the arbitration decision.

 

The SPFL will just kick the can down the road as much as possible.

They will approach the arbitration in the same manner as Dave King did with his court cases re The Rangers share issue.

 

[1953]

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.

 

All they did was pay lip service to finishing the league, if that, and ploughed on with giving Celtic 9iar. It could have been done if they had only given it a chance. Our argument has been that we might have clawed back the 4 points and escaped but Celtic were 13 points ahead so although the same argument applies they weren't taking much of a chance.

[Cigaro]

18 minutes ago, Radio Ga Ga said:

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?

Do they also get access to the documents?

[Bazzas right boot]

31 minutes 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.

 

Unlikely, morality, incompetence etc will Likley not be influential as it maybe should be. 

 

Elections/ national referendums are still won on threats, false and broken promises, nothing done. 

 

The legal argument seems far more narrower and focused. Will that favour us, ****ed if I know. 

[Gershwin]

It should have been ten, Dean. Oh wait, it actually ****ing was  

 

Hibs *****.

[Ethan Hunt]

32 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? 

We need to demonstrate to the tribunal’s satisfaction that the SPFL have acted in an unfair and prejudicial manner to us. If we end up having to bore them to death by demonstrating various ways they did that it matters not that we have a headshot. We do not need a “smoking gun”.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

1 hour ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

Bonnyrigg Rose would not have fought this the way Hearts (and PT) are because they simply wouldn't have had the money to fund the case and the consequences of what is happening to Hearts and PT would not have been severe enough to make it worth their while.

 

If Bonnyrigg Rose or any other club (Stranraer for example) had the resources and financial commitments Hearts have, including 100 or so employees to protect, plus over 8000 fans contributing money every month plus 11k+ season ticket holders every season to represent and fight for, plus all the expenses that go along with being one of the largest clubs in the country of course they would have fought their position.

Bonnyrigg Rose got tax payers money, off Midlothian Council, to "tarmac their car park" and blew the lot on players they otherwise couldn't afford, instead. Meaning they advanced months leagues and into the Scottish cup, at the expense of all other non-league clubs.

As a result of their stealing and cheating, the likes of Dalkeith Thistle, Whitehill Welfare, Nitten Star, etc got refused any council grants of their own.

Bonnyrigg Rose are despised in Midlothian.

 

I'm sure @firsttimecaller will be able to confirm this.

Edited July 7, 2020 by Joey J J Jr Shabadoo

[1874robbo]

2 minutes ago, Joey J J Jr Shabadoo said:

Bonnyrigg Rose got tax payers money, off Midlothian Council, to "tarmac their car park" and blew the lot on players they otherwise couldn't afford, instead. Meaning they advanced months leagues and into the Scottish cup, at the expense of all other non-league clubs.

As a result of their stealing and cheating, the likes of Dalkeith Thistle, Whitehill Welfare, Nitten Star, etc got refused any council grants of their own.

Bonnyrigg Rose are despised in Midlothian.

The last sentence Sounds a bit like their poster On here.

[Joey J J Jr Shabadoo]

1 minute ago, 1874robbo said:

The last sentence Sounds a bit like their poster On here.

Aye, he's full of shite.

[Beast Boy]

1 hour ago, Fluorescent Adolescent said:

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.

Even then, it’s a fair point actually. We’d be training out of furlough and wouldn’t have any games.

[BelgeJambo]

51 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

AD28(splice the mainbrace).

I volunteer to be Tot bosun 😜

[Cruyff]

1 minute ago, Ethan Hunt said:

We need to demonstrate to the tribunal’s satisfaction that the SPFL have acted in an unfair and prejudicial manner to us. If we end up having to bore them to death by demonstrating various ways they did that it matters not that we have a headshot. We do not need a “smoking gun”.

I don't disagree or agree with that Ethan. 

 

If we're looking at blocking Promotions and Reinstatement then we can only do that imo by overturning the resolution. That happens as you know if we prove that Dundee voted No and the SPFL received that vote (saw it) or, we prove they broke various articles of Company Law surrounding the vote.

 

I don't see any other way that reinstatement can happen? 

 

We can convince the Panel however that the SPFL and its members have acted in an unfair and prejudicial manner, (possibly through breach of contract) as they had a "duty of care" to all members. We were unfairly punished along with Partick due to circumstances of force majeure. That outcome imo only results in Unliquidated Damages, not reinstatement. 

[Fluorescent Adolescent]

4 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

Even then, it’s a fair point actually. We’d be training out of furlough and wouldn’t have any games.

👍🏻
 

 

[Bazzas right boot]

49 minutes ago, gjcc said:

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

 

Belter! 

[7628mm]

57 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

AD28(splice the mainbrace).

 

There was me thinking that "Flag Debates" were banned on here 🤯

 

https://www.sailariadne.com/single-post/2016/03/28/Flags-and-an-invitation-for-a-beer

 

[Hagar the Horrible]

Interesting thing about Hamilton, They are not selling season tickets for 20/21, instead having a pay at the gate policy

They play celtic away and rangers home BCD

 

But due to no fans, it wont be until Aberdeen at the end of October will any clubs with a half decent away support visit, and no home games in November, Hibs in December but it is the end of December before celtic come?

[Pasquale for King]

5 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

Interesting thing about Hamilton, They are not selling season tickets for 20/21, instead having a pay at the gate policy

They play celtic away and rangers home BCD

 

But due to no fans, it wont be until Aberdeen at the end of October will any clubs with a half decent away support visit, and no home games in November, Hibs in December but it is the end of December before celtic come?

They’ll be gutted.

[upgotheheads]

malfeasance

[malˈfiːz(ə)ns]

 

NOUN

law

1. wrongdoing, especially (US) by a public official.

   synonyms:

   deceit · deception · duplicity · lying · falseness · falsity · falsehood · untruthfulness · fraud · fraudulence · sharp practice · cheating · chicanery · craft · cunning · trickery · artifice · artfulness · wiliness · guile · double-dealing · underhandedness · subterfuge · 

   [More]

[John Findlay]

3 minutes ago, 7628mm said:

 

There was me thinking that "Flag Debates" were banned on here 🤯

 

https://www.sailariadne.com/single-post/2016/03/28/Flags-and-an-invitation-for-a-beer

 

AD28 is a coded signal from what was then ATP 1C VOLII. ATMSB. Allied Tactical Publication. Allied Tactical Manoeuvring And Signal Book. Classified Nato Confidential. AD from the Administrive section. Could be signalled by flag or more commonly by the Radio Operator(Tactical) over the tactical voice circuit. As signalled by Her Majesty the Queen to Hms Andromeda(F57) on completion of our guard duties when herself and Prince Phillip did a tour of the channel islands in 1989 onboard Hmy Britannia(A00, not painted on her hull). The difference between a warship and a merchant ship.

Warships carry Alphabetical flags, numeral flags and numeral pendants.

Merchant men only carry numeral alphabet flags and numerical pendants, they do not carry numerical flags.

I will bore everyone no more.

[hibsarepants]

Some knicker twisting about Arbitration and the potential outcome. Please note that Lord Clark has framed this Arbitration around UNFAIR PREJUDICE - that party X has taken actions which caused harm to party Y.  If we remain in the Championship then that is undoubtedly what has happened.   Partick knew exactly what they were stating when they said - DO NO HARM. It could well be that the Arbitration panel conclude that the vote process whilst flawed is still in effect. The next question though is much more straight forward - did that vote cause harm when there were alternative options which couold have avoided harm.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

 

I see a lot of arguments right now that there's no way we could have finished the league as the government isn't allowing football until August 1. Doncaster himself said so and Pie and Bovril etc are repeating that.

 

As the Gov allowed professional sport to return from June 22 with the right health and safety protocols, couldn't we have played to a finish if:

 

a) The SPFL hadn't ended the league so early

b ) All clubs had used the last 3 months to work on safety protocols being in place so they could start with a week or so's notice like other leagues did. In that case we could have started at the start of July and could easily have finished the league.

Edited July 7, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Bazzas right boot]

3 minutes ago, hibsarepants said:

Some knicker twisting about Arbitration and the potential outcome. Please note that Lord Clark has framed this Arbitration around UNFAIR PREJUDICE - that party X has taken actions which caused harm to party Y.  If we remain in the Championship then that is undoubtedly what has happened.   Partick knew exactly what they were stating when they said - DO NO HARM. It could well be that the Arbitration panel conclude that the vote process whilst flawed is still in effect. The next question though is much more straight forward - did that vote cause harm when there were alternative options which couold have avoided harm.

 

I hope it comes down that tbh. 

 

 

[davemclaren]

Just now, ToqueJambo said:

 

I see a lot of arguments right now that there's no way we could have finished the league as the government isn't allowing football until August 1. Doncaster himself said so and Pie and Bovril etc are repeating that.

 

As the Gov allowed professional sport to return from June 22 with the right health and safety protocols, couldn't we have played to a finish if:

 

a) The SPFL hadn't ended the league so early

b ) All clubs had used the last 3 months to work on safety protocols being in place so they could start with a week or so's notice like other leagues did. In that case we could have started at the start of July and could easily have finished the league.

An inconvenient fact for some. 

[graygo]

1 hour ago, Bickfest said:

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

 

Which is exactly what the SFA arbitration rules say.

[Baxfee]

17 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

They’ll be gutted.

😂👏

[Bazzas right boot]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I see a lot of arguments right now that there's no way we could have finished the league as the government isn't allowing football until August 1. Doncaster himself said so and Pie and Bovril etc are repeating that.

 

As the Gov allowed professional sport to return from June 22 with the right health and safety protocols, couldn't we have played to a finish if:

 

a) The SPFL hadn't ended the league so early

b ) All clubs had used the last 3 months to work on safety protocols being in place so they could start with a week or so's notice like other leagues did. In that case we could have started at the start of July and could easily have finished the league.

 

 

The clubs didn't have time to work on that the past 3 months, to busy pointing and laughing at us and coming up with silly wee statements to slag Budge off. 

 

 

[neilnunb]

Dean Brett, so shite even the Sportscene commentator didn't have a clue who he was

 

5:30

 

 

 

 

 

[Wee Mikey]

2 hours ago, Debut 4 said:

Thinking back now there was a nippy sweetie in their line up that day acting quite wound up.

 

Must’ve been him

Spot the miscreant. Clue: about 3 mins and 2 secs where he almost shakes his own head off whilst remonstrating with the ref. 🤭

[BelgeJambo]

24 minutes ago, John Findlay said:

AD28 is a coded signal from what was then ATP 1C VOLII. ATMSB. Allied Tactical Publication. Allied Tactical Manoeuvring And Signal Book. Classified Nato Confidential. AD from the Administrive section. Could be signalled by flag or more commonly by the Radio Operator(Tactical) over the tactical voice circuit. As signalled by Her Majesty the Queen to Hms Andromeda(F57) on completion of our guard duties when herself and Prince Phillip did a tour of the channel islands in 1989 onboard Hmy Britannia(A00, not painted on her hull). The difference between a warship and a merchant ship.

Warships carry Alphabetical flags, numeral flags and numeral pendants.

Merchant men only carry numeral alphabet flags and numerical pendants, they do not carry numerical flags.

I will bore everyone no more.

BZ Yeoman 😜

[OTT]

51 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

We need to demonstrate to the tribunal’s satisfaction that the SPFL have acted in an unfair and prejudicial manner to us. If we end up having to bore them to death by demonstrating various ways they did that it matters not that we have a headshot. We do not need a “smoking gun”.

 

Agree entirely. 

 

Folk need to avoid getting themselves worked up over this idea that there needs to be a smoking gun. Its likely there will be lots of small points of action which highlight a pattern of improper conduct. People are looking for a 'Hollywood moment' of Doncaster caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Its not happening that way. 

 

Smoking gun needs dropped from the vocabulary. Its what killed the impact of Rangers dossier. The content highlighted wrong after wrong but because it lacked that killer blow people decided to discount it. 

 

[John Findlay]

1 minute ago, BelgeJambo said:

BZ Yeoman 😜

Not bad for someone 30 years out the service now. We were so well trained.

[stuart500]

53 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

We need to demonstrate to the tribunal’s satisfaction that the SPFL have acted in an unfair and prejudicial manner to us. If we end up having to bore them to death by demonstrating various ways they did that it matters not that we have a headshot. We do not need a “smoking gun”.

Les Gray has gotten us off to a flying start on the unfair part (cheers Les!)

 

We've highlighted his comment about the decision being unfair and I'm sure our legal team will look forward to interrogating him as a witness. Donkey and co will be well versed in their waffle and deflection but I have a feeling Les might just be the weak link for the SPFL. 

 

Stewart Robertson also may be only too happy to throw Donkey under the bus.

 

It really is everything to play for.

 

 

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

18 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

 

The clubs didn't have time to work on that the past 3 months, to busy pointing and laughing at us and coming up with silly wee statements to slag Budge off. 

 

 

 

 

The sad thing is that's an entirely accurate statement. And now fans of other clubs are having a go at us for biting back at the likes of D Utd and Raith after 3 months solid of non-stop nonsense aimed at us.

[Bazzas right boot]

1 minute ago, OTT said:

 

Agree entirely. 

 

Folk need to avoid getting themselves worked up over this idea that there needs to be a smoking gun. Its likely there will be lots of small points of action which highlight a pattern of improper conduct. People are looking for a 'Hollywood moment' of Doncaster caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Its not happening that way. 

 

Smoking gun needs dropped from the vocabulary. Its what killed the impact of Rangers dossier. The content highlighted wrong after wrong but because it lacked that killer blow people decided to discount it. 

 

 

 

Agreed to an extent but lots of small indiscretions, incompetent leadership or examples of poor practice isn't necessarily illegal. 

 

We look like we do need evidence of an illegal action or a breach in the articles of membership from their side. 

I think this concerns most folk, what is this evidence, does it exist, wil we uncover it?

 

If not, tbh just like the rangers dossier it's a good story( one I agree with) but with very little legal consequence or in their case no legal consequence at all. 

 

 

 

 

[Wee Mikey]

13 minutes ago, Wee Mikey said:

Spot the miscreant. Clue: about 3 mins and 2 secs where he almost shakes his own head off whilst remonstrating with the ref. 🤭

ps ... 5:20 when he takes it out on the goal-post after the 5th; 5:40 when he gives away a pen and badgers the ref; the fine shot of his ugly pus at 8:24 after goal #9; showing all the speed of a tortoise whilst jogging back at 9:24 just before goal #10.

 

Nae wonder he's a tad sair, eh? Clearly still haunted. 😋

[OTT]

1 minute ago, stuart500 said:

Les Gray has gotten us off to a flying start on the unfair part (cheers Les!)

 

We've highlighted his comment about the decision being unfair and I'm sure our legal team will look forward to interrogating him as a witness. Donkey and co will be well versed in their waffle and deflection but I have a feeling Les might just be the weak link for the SPFL. 

 

Stewart Robertson also may be only too happy to throw Donkey under the bus.

 

It really is everything to play for.

 

 

 

 

The entire board are weak links

 

Les Gray was daft enough to come out with the unfair quote

Alan Burrows hasn't got a legal background

Stewart Robertson has absolutely no reason to cover Doncaster and Co's arse here

Then I think there are a few diddy club chairmen too. 

 

Expecting this many people to keep their lies straight is funny. It can't be done. I think if our lawyers can get to question them it will be a blood bath. 

[Bazzas right boot]

1 minute ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

 

The sad thing is that's an entirely accurate statement. And now fans of other clubs are having a go at us for biting back at the likes of D Utd and Raith after 3 months solid of non-stop nonsense aimed at us.

 

Raith are irritating me now tbh. 

 

8 games left, 1 point ahead. 

Voted as champions. 

Not only that, voted to replace a team that was 2 behind with a game in hand. 

 

Then, when they got  the chance to at least stop the damage to said club they never. 

And now, despite being warned since April are going on about sporting merit as they need to defend their title and are Suprised it's in court and court costs money. 

 

Sporting integrity / merit, what a brass ****ing neck. 

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

Raith are irritating me now tbh. 

 

8 games left, 1 point ahead. 

Voted as champions. 

Not only that, voted to replace a team that was 2 behind with a game in hand. 

 

Then, when they got  the chance to at least stop the damage to said club they never. 

And now, despite being warned since April are going on about sporting merit as they need to defend their title and are Suprised it's in court and court costs money. 

 

Sporting integrity / merit, what a brass ****ing neck. 

 

 

 

They've always been the chief most undeserving beneficiary of this whole thing, along with maybe whichever of Hamilton, St Mirren or Ross County would have faced a relegation playoff.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

6 minutes ago, Wee Mikey said:

ps ... 5:20 when he takes it out on the goal-post after the 5th; 5:40 when he gives away a pen and badgers the ref; the fine shot of his ugly pus at 8:24 after goal #9; showing all the speed of a tortoise whilst jogging back at 9:24 just before goal #10.

 

Nae wonder he's a tad sair, eh? Clearly still haunted. 😋

 

🤣 6 years of pent-up anger in one Tweet.

[Bazzas right boot]

Just now, ToqueJambo said:

 

 

They've always been the chief most undeserving beneficiary of this whole thing, along with maybe whichever of Hamilton, St Mirren or Ross County would have faced a relegation playoff.

 

And Brechin dodged a bullet!

[Riccarton3]

3 hours ago, Hackney Hearts said:

 

True. But the rules stipulate acting "in good faith" to ALL clubs - which raises the issue of unfair prejudice (perceived or actual, TBC).

Yeah,seems little point in having g rules on such matters of there is no penalty for breaking them. If we broke we get a monetary punishment.

[neilnunb]

1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

Raith are irritating me now tbh. 

 

8 games left, 1 point ahead. 

Voted as champions. 

Not only that, voted to replace a team that was 2 behind with a game in hand. 

 

Then, when they got  the chance to at least stop the damage to said club they never. 

And now, despite being warned since April are going on about sporting merit as they need to defend their title and are Suprised it's in court and court costs money. 

 

Sporting integrity / merit, what a brass ****ing neck. 

 

 

 

Seriously, should they go bust, I'll be down on Pratt Street within 10mins. The Esso near the train station sells flowers so I'll pop in on the way so I have something to lay on their doorstep.

[Jambo in Bathgate]

 

‘Stewart Robertson also may be only too happy to throw Donkey under the bus.’

 

and pay Dundee United back for transgressions in Sevco eyes. 

[Ethan Hunt]

9 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

Agree entirely. 

 

Folk need to avoid getting themselves worked up over this idea that there needs to be a smoking gun. Its likely there will be lots of small points of action which highlight a pattern of improper conduct. People are looking for a 'Hollywood moment' of Doncaster caught with his hand in the cookie jar. Its not happening that way. 

 

Smoking gun needs dropped from the vocabulary. Its what killed the impact of Rangers dossier. The content highlighted wrong after wrong but because it lacked that killer blow people decided to discount it. 

 

This is where I am. The Rangers dossier gave us a starter for ten. We now have access to the documents, and/or the people (Doncaster, Nelms, et al) that will provide the answers to everything Hearts want to know. I’d pay good money to be able to have a seat in that arbitration room.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

2 minutes ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

And Brechin dodged a bullet!

 

Yeah, Brechin and Hamiton. Both on the board. Motherwell, too.

 

50% of the board had a vested financial interest in the league ending early. All 3 benefited financially at our expense, given the financial hit Brechin and Hamilton would have taken if relegated and the Euro money Well will get.

Edited July 7, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Ethan Hunt]

8 minutes ago, OTT said:

 

The entire board are weak links

 

Les Gray was daft enough to come out with the unfair quote

Alan Burrows hasn't got a legal background

Stewart Robertson has absolutely no reason to cover Doncaster and Co's arse here

Then I think there are a few diddy club chairmen too. 

 

Expecting this many people to keep their lies straight is funny. It can't be done. I think if our lawyers can get to question them it will be a blood bath. 

 

[Victorian]

FAO all these other clubs,   their fans and anyone else.

 

Get right to ****.   The arbitration tribunal will come to it's conclusion.    Whichever way it goes,   it will be the legally correct and proper result.    If you think you're in the right and that the tribunal will arrive at a result that goes your way,   you will proclaim that justice has been done.    If it goes against you,   that also means that justice has been done.    It's for people of specific,   professional competence to decide.

 

We'll take our medicine if it comes our way.     Will you?