SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[1953]

21 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I don’t understand why those three clubs took legal action separately. Makes no sense

Imo it's so that they can look after their own interests because they don't trust the SPFL not to throw them under the bus if it suits them.

[Gambo]

Did the SPFL* not tell Lord Clark that Arbitration could be organised very quickly?

 

1 week down and nothing seems to be happening quickly.

 

* would expect that to come from the SFA but they were not involved in court case.

[GorgieRules22]

7 minutes ago, Gambo said:

Did the SPFL* not tell Lord Clark that Arbitration could be organised very quickly?

 

1 week down and nothing seems to be happening quickly.

 

* would expect that to come from the SFA but they were not involved in court case.

This is just it, should we not now be making contact back with the court as yet again nothings happening quick enough.

[Rods]

16 minutes ago, Poseidon said:

Looks like in France the judge couldn't force reinstatement and so Amiens are resigned to playing in Ligue 2 but will still take it to the highest level and at least seek compensation if I've understood it correctly.

 

This is the way we will go.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Rods

[Spellczech]

2 hours ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

Small but important question. Our statement today seems to imply that the SPFL is required to show utmost good faith (UGF) to the clubs (and vice versa) and similarly the clubs to each other. But my reading of the rule that has been quoted on here was that it isn’t  two-way: the clubs have to behave with UGF  to the SPLF but no mention of the other way round!
 

Is there another rule that requires UGF by the SPFL to the clubs? Shocking if not and presumably wouldn’t over-rule a general legal requirement to behave in a fair and unprejudiced way but....

You cannot have a clause about UGF without inferring reciprocity. Same with the clause which stated that a Yes vote is irrevocable, so must a No vote be inferred to be irrevocable...

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

2 hours ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

Small but important question. Our statement today seems to imply that the SPFL is required to show utmost good faith (UGF) to the clubs (and vice versa) and similarly the clubs to each other. But my reading of the rule that has been quoted on here was that it isn’t  two-way: the clubs have to behave with UGF  to the SPLF but no mention of the other way round!
 

Is there another rule that requires UGF by the SPFL to the clubs? Shocking if not and presumably wouldn’t over-rule a general legal requirement to behave in a fair and unprejudiced way but....

I would imagine that, at the very least, it would be held that there is an implied requirement for the recipient of good faith to act in the same manner to those it demands to always act in good faith towards it, whether or not it is written into the rules. But, of course, written clearly into the rules would make it so much neater. 

[Australis]

9 minutes ago, Gambo said:

Did the SPFL* not tell Lord Clark that Arbitration could be organised very quickly?

 

1 week down and nothing seems to be happening quickly.

 

* would expect that to come from the SFA but they were not involved in court case.

They did, but everyone the SPFL has contacted so far has probably said we have a case and are in the right.

They will be trying to recruit new members and get their story right.

[Spellczech]

43 minutes ago, weegie jambo said:

Don't worry mate, just read thru a few threads and you'll catch up. Welcome aboard

You just set him 3 months homework if you include this one...

[GMEdinburgh]

1 hour ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

The compliance officer wrote to us for an explanation.  The C3 went to court to litigate directly against us, which was thrown out by the CoS. 

Did they though.  I only seen this in the papers and have asked on here several times as there was nothing on either the SFA or Hearts website at the reported time, happy to be corrected. 

[Poseidon]

4 minutes ago, Rods said:

 

This is the way we will go.

Yep, if arbitration is as useful as I'm expecting, then we'll go back to the CoS on a point of law (not fully exploring the legality etc of the Dundee vote).

 

I don't think Ann will put in an interdict to stop the season, but will go through the courts to ensure we get appropriate compensation. We are more that set up to win the championship at a canter and come back stronger. As much as we'd have a legitimate case for halting everything and causing many teams serious harm, that's not the kind of person she is, even despite all the shite in the last 3 months.

[Clerry Jambo]

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5795695/hibs-gordon-bonuses-appearance-fees-nisbet-wright/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1594374035

[gjcc]

1 minute ago, Clerry Jambo said:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5795695/hibs-gordon-bonuses-appearance-fees-nisbet-wright/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1594374035

“Its awrite boys I’ll pay you more if you get top 4.”
 

Safe bet Ron, safe bet.  

[Stuart71]

Could the SPFL  be waiting to till the last minute to reconstruct the league or reinstate us knowing we will not be ready for the 1st of August as we are not aloud to train and say that what you wanted.

[MarkDevriesScores4]

4 minutes ago, Clerry Jambo said:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5795695/hibs-gordon-bonuses-appearance-fees-nisbet-wright/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1594374035

“Bonuses” would indicate that they would win something occasionally. No costs cut there 😂

[hughesie27]

24 minutes ago, Gambo said:

Did the SPFL* not tell Lord Clark that Arbitration could be organised very quickly?

 

1 week down and nothing seems to be happening quickly.

 

* would expect that to come from the SFA but they were not involved in court case.

At the xourt case it was suggested that next week would be the likely start date for both Arbitration and Court if it was granted.

[Ethan Hunt]

19 minutes ago, Rods said:

 

This is the way we will go.

 I know you regularly make this type of comment. What exactly do you base it on?

Edited July 10, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[Spellczech]

31 minutes ago, Fitba' broke my Heart said:

 I'm catching up apologies for any repetition.

Bill Clark total ****ing roaster.

If he is that bothered what people think of him he should say why he voted the way he did and not be too frightened to put it into the public domain.

Unless of course he would not like his reputation to be fainted by the truth.

Or indeed, have it adversely influence the course of arbitration. 

 

It is just another attempt to set the other clubs up to align with the C3 against Hearts and Partick. First there was Doncaster's letter, then the media commentary, then the request for help, then the confirmation that help has come in from many sources across the leagues and country. Fact that it is all in breach of the SPFL rules seems to be beyond both SPFL board and the C3 chairmen...

[troy]

2 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

https://www.heartsfc.co.uk/news/article/joint-club-statement-1-2-3

 

The first five words of the statement “As a matter of urgency” suggests to me the arbitration tribunal will commence imminently, perhaps Monday.

 

It is a great slap down to the SPFL. We have highlighted that the organisation that is the SPFL have ignored their own rules and regulations by allowing the C3 to act in the manner they have. If other clubs have indeed contributed to their legal costs they have again shown unfair prejudice toward Hearts and Partick Thistle. The fact that the SPFL have allowed us to become alienated and treated unfairly by other shareholders of the company only helps us.

 

At the the risk of repeating myself (and upsetting some by providing evidence) the elements for section 994, Companies Act 2006, are:

 

that the companies affairs are being or have been conducted in a manner that is unfairly prejudicial to the interests of members generally or some part of its members (including at least himself).

 

Our target rich environment gets bigger every day 😊

Or it could be underway 

[Cruickie's Moustache]

20 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

I would imagine that, at the very least, it would be held that there is an implied requirement for the recipient of good faith to act in the same manner to those it demands to always act in good faith towards it, whether or not it is written into the rules. But, of course, written clearly into the rules would make it so much neater. 

 

Just remember that Doncaster keeps telling anyone who will listed that,  the SPFL is the clubs. Therefore, as you say, it must surely be implied that individual clubs and the clubs as an SPFL collective act in UGF to each other.

[bean counter]

8 minutes ago, Stuart71 said:

Could the SPFL  be waiting to till the last minute to reconstruct the league or reinstate us knowing we will not be ready for the 1st of August as we are not aloud to train and say that what you wanted.

 

Short answer is no

Edited July 10, 2020 by bean counter

[doctor jambo]

5 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

It is just another attempt to set the other clubs up to align with the C3 against Hearts and Partick. First there was Doncaster's letter, then the media commentary, then the request for help, then the confirmation that help has come in from many sources across the leagues and country. Fact that it is all in breach of the SPFL rules seems to be beyond both SPFL board and the C3 chairmen...

So in any given season all the clubs could pump money into a rival to ensure getting the league outcome they wish?

so ross county are at the bottom come Xmas, only able to catch Motherwell, and hearts could donate £4million to Motherwell- and that would be OK in theory according to the C3?

Sorry, the SPFL need to stamp all over this rivals donating to rivals in order to wreck competitors

[Ethan Hunt]

4 minutes ago, troy said:

Or it could be underway 

It could be, although I don’t know why the public wouldn’t have the right to know that proceedings had commenced, despite us not knowing anything else that will be occurring in relation to it until it is finalised.

[Nookie Bear]

Just now, doctor jambo said:

So in any given season all the clubs could pump money into a rival to ensure getting the league outcome they wish?

so ross county are at the bottom come Xmas, only able to catch Motherwell, and hearts could donate £4million to Motherwell- and that would be OK in theory according to the C3?

Sorry, the SPFL need to stamp all over this rivals donating to rivals in order to wreck competitors

A good point. I could certainly see a scenario where celtic help hibs in that way. 

[Rods]

12 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

 I know you regularly make this type of comment. What exactly do you base it on?

 

Just a feeling I always felt after reconstruction was knocked back by the clubs that was the last chance saloon. 

 

Know its about maximum money we can get ride out this storm in the championship and come back stronger.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

17 minutes ago, gjcc said:

“Its awrite boys I’ll pay you more if you get top 4.”
 

Safe bet Ron, safe bet.  

 

Hibs players go through the history books to see how often they finish top 4. "Ah, no sorry Ron we'll take the regular bonuses thanks"

 

Fraser Wishart still nowhere to be seen.

[Ethan Hunt]

1 minute ago, Rods said:

 

Just a feeling I always felt after reconstruction was knocked back by the clubs that was the last chance saloon. 

 

Know its about maximum money we can get ride out this storm in the championship and come back stronger.

It’s still about re-instatement, then if that fails, compensation money. Our desired outcome is no different to what it was regardless of reconstruction being kb’d.

[Jambo66]

1 minute ago, Ethan Hunt said:

It’s still about re-instatement, then if that fails, compensation money. Our desired outcome is no different to what it was regardless of reconstruction being kb’d.

Succinct and to the point.

[doctor jambo]

4 minutes ago, Nookie Bear said:

A good point. I could certainly see a scenario where celtic help hibs in that way. 

Quite,

St Mirren bottom at Xmas? Dont worry, here's several million to buy and pay players so you can overtake the team above- all legit

[RobNox]

1 hour ago, Jimmy Jimmy said:

Morning all - newbie here so a bit of background info. Just moved to Edinburgh from Northern Ireland (one son in Aberdeen, one in Newcastle so here is in the middle) so have decided to follow Hearts mainly because of the high percentage of NI players here although Boyce rarely starts for NI.

 

I was going to do an introductory thread but could not see how to, maybe I have to serve a period of time first.

 

And as this was the biggest thread, I thought I would start here. What on earth is going on with Scottish Football.

 

My username is also a reference to my favourite Undertones song although it could be a tribute to our rich friend!

 

Welcome aboard JJ.  You don't have a cousin called Kevin by any chance?

[troy]

4 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

It could be, although I don’t know why the public wouldn’t have the right to know that proceedings had commenced, despite us not knowing anything else that will be occurring in relation to it until it is finalised.

Just that if lord clark has kept the 15th free it needs to be underway and that would explain the five words at the start of the statement 

[RobNox]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

Its quite funny that Dundee Utd have inadvertently broken the rules  

 

I thought clubs would have someone on hand to advise on these matters? Like an in house lawyer who is fully clued up on the ins and outs of the SPFL/SFA rule book?

 

I'd be careful if I was Budge though. If we fight it hard it might inadvertently build support for them. If they've managed to get a pittance then just leave them with it, or possibly make the complaint afterwards. 

 

I'd be very interested to know which club can even afford to contribute (as will that clubs players!). You can't very well be asking players to take deferrals and cuts then be donating to a legal defence which has jack shit to do with you. Hibs for example, cuts and deferrals and have just spent £250k+ on a striker. If they've contributed I dare say the players will be livid. My guess is Ayr and Ross County though. Both Chairmen were pretty open about their dislike for us. 

 

 

How ironic is it that in seeking to raise money for legal fees, they break the rules, and could end up facing a fine from the compliance officer.

 

[7628mm]

15 minutes ago, troy said:

Or it could be underway 

 

If the arbitration was underway it would have been reported by the SMSM.

The proceedings are behind closed doors so no reporting on what happens blow by blow but absolutely no reason not to say "we are underway" and "we are finished" .

If we are NOT underway on Monday 13/07/2020 the HMFC and PT are entitled to ask the CoS to look into it as Lord Clark has made available the dates 14-16 July 2020 if no progress has been made.

 

TICK f'in TOCK

[Ethan Hunt]

8 minutes ago, troy said:

Just that if lord clark has kept the 15th free it needs to be underway and that would explain the five words at the start of the statement 

Possibly. Lord Clark also acknowledged there was significant public interest. While I know he meant that in relation to the ins and outs of the case itself, I would be surprised if we weren’t least made aware when proceedings were to start. The Arbitration Tribunal is in private, not in secret, we are surely entitled to know the start date.

Edited July 10, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

12 minutes ago, Rods said:

 

Just a feeling I always felt after reconstruction was knocked back by the clubs that was the last chance saloon. 

 

Know its about maximum money we can get ride out this storm in the championship and come back stronger.

We are not petitioning for reconstruction, just reinstatement to the Premiership. If we win, and the order is given to reinstate us, only the C3 have anything to worry about over reconstruction.

[graygo]

3 hours ago, Niemi’s gloves said:

Small but important question. Our statement today seems to imply that the SPFL is required to show utmost good faith (UGF) to the clubs (and vice versa) and similarly the clubs to each other. But my reading of the rule that has been quoted on here was that it isn’t  two-way: the clubs have to behave with UGF  to the SPLF but no mention of the other way round!
 

Is there another rule that requires UGF by the SPFL to the clubs? Shocking if not and presumably wouldn’t over-rule a general legal requirement to behave in a fair and unprejudiced way but....

 

Probably covered but it's in the SFA articles of association which includes all footballing bodies.

 

5.1 (f)  behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.

[Captain Canada]

Just now, 7628mm said:

 

If the arbitration was underway it would have been reported by the SMSM.

The proceedings are behind closed doors so no reporting on what happens blow by blow but absolutely no reason not to say "we are underway" and "we are finished" .

If we are NOT underway on Monday 13/07/2020 the HMFC and PT are entitled to ask the CoS to look into it as Lord Clark has made available the dates 14-16 July 2020 if no progress has been made.

 

TICK f'in TOCK

 

There is clearly no urgency to get arbitration started. They can drag it out by 'needing more time to get all requested documents etc' so I hope the wheels are already in motion to take it back to Lord Clark next week. 

 

As mentioned above, I'm sure if it was starting on Monday, we'd already know about it. 

 

 

[troy]

5 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Possibly. Lord Clark also acknowledged there was significant public interest. While I know he meant that in relation to the ins and outs of the case itself, I would be surprised if we weren’t least made aware when proceedings were to start. The Arbitration Tribunal is in private, not in secret, we are surely entitled to know the start date.

I get that but I just think things will never be done by the 16th if they are not underway ,the statement given at the start said there would be no more comments 

[DETTY29]

Wow on Sportsound podcast.

 

SPFL board members have been going out clubs to ask them to support the C3 financially.

 

But not in their capacity as SPFL board members. 

Edited July 10, 2020 by DETTY29

[doctor jambo]

1 minute ago, DETTY29 said:

Wow on podcast.

 

SPFL board members have been going out clubs to ask them to support the C3 financially.

 

But not in their capacity as SPFL board members. 

So we are suiing the SPFL, and have made clear that we are NOT suing other clubs, and now SPFL board members are encouraging all the other clubs to put money in to fund 3 clubs suing us?

"unfair prejudice" indeed

[GorgieRules22]

5 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Wow on Sportscene podcast.

 

SPFL board members have been going out clubs to ask them to support the C3 financially.

 

But not in their capacity as SPFL board members. 

Sportsound ?

[DETTY29]

Just now, GorgieRules22 said:

Sportsound ?

Sorry.  Yes.

[niblick1874]

3 hours ago, One five said:

I don't know about anyone else but I'm sick of all this (although I enjoy the entertainment on KB ). I'm just looking forward to a Saturday home game whatever league we are in a few pints maybe a pie in the diggers or a breakfast in the caley sample room before the game , gid laugh wi the mates, opinions on how shit we are playing, what we would do if we where the manager we all do it eh 😂it just seems like a different life time now. Our good days will be back soon regardless of all of all them clubs trying to **** us over .

We are the FAMOUS

WE are the BEST supported club in the world.
WE are are the HEART OF MIDLOTHIAN.
Only Hearts
Forever Hearts
FTSPFL
FTSFA
FTH

 

We are the only Club that are taking on the corruption. We now, after everything, have them by the you know whats while they run around like headless chicken and you are sick of it. WTF. That makes no sense whatsoever to me, unless. Can you explain please because you are not the only one on here that has come out with that.     

[Guest ToqueJambo]

7 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Wow on Sportscene podcast.

 

SPFL board members have been going out clubs to ask them to support the C3 financially.

 

But not in their capacity as SPFL board members. 

 

I'm starting to think this might end up getting thrown back to CoS. The SPFL is supposed to be spending their time facilitating a very quick arbitration process, not using the time to make this into a full on Scottish football civil war and help some clubs over others, which is against their own rules surely?

Edited July 10, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Guest ToqueJambo]

16 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

We are not petitioning for reconstruction, just reinstatement to the Premiership. If we win, and the order is given to reinstate us, only the C3 have anything to worry about over reconstruction.

 

Exactly if we win it's a 13 team Premiership. It's the SPFL's problem to make that work. 

[Nookie Bear]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I'm starting to think this might end up getting thrown back to CoS. The SPFL is supposed to be spending their time facilitating a very quick arbitration process, not using the time to make this into a full on Scottish football civil war and help some clubs over others, which is against their own rules surely?

I am starting to think Ann needs to have a word with UEFA. 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

26 minutes ago, doctor jambo said:

Quite,

St Mirren bottom at Xmas? Dont worry, here's several million to buy and pay players so you can overtake the team above- all legit

 

It indirectly happens through the loan system.

[OTT]

9 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

Wow on Sportsound podcast.

 

SPFL board members have been going out clubs to ask them to support the C3 financially.

 

But not in their capacity as SPFL board members. 

 

How many times do they try and play this card? The Dunfermline clown did similar when bullying for votes. 

 

You cannot do that. If you're on the board there is an expectation that you are speaking on behalf of the board. You don't get to take hats off. 

 

Put it this way, would their lobbying hold any weight if they weren't on the board? No. So, what they are doing is wrong. 

 

 

[Guest ToqueJambo]

1 minute ago, Nookie Bear said:

I am starting to think Ann needs to have a word with UEFA. 

 

Article 5 [Principles of conduct]:

“1 Member associations and clubs, as well as their players, officials and members, shall conduct themselves according to the principles of loyalty, integrity and sportsmanship.

[Hagar the Horrible]

I am going to clarify a few points here: 

It was/is legal for the SPFL to defend our petition against them.  The decision and their reputations are depending on their actions being legal.

 It was also legal for the C3 to litigate against us in law.  But their petition failed. 

They did not seek approval from the SFA to do so and have breached that rule. Compliance officer?

The C3 are legally and lawfully entitled to argue their case in the arbitration process.

The board by their actions may have acted illegally/unlawfully by the Doncaster letter offering assistance in legal support from  SPFL lawyer Rod McKenzie who  was willing to provide advice to clubs who wish to go up against us in court.  Even the timing of the letter during a live court case is questionable?

The C3 may have acted unlawfully or illegally in soliciting other clubs to assist in funding their case against us. 

The board by not condemning the C3 appeal have by omission condoned and even supported their act.

My point is that once this case is concluded that there might be separate case for us pursue via a civil court damages against individuals or clubs, who have acted in part or whole to our detriment?  I would therefor advise that any club assisting in the funding of the C3 case reconsider?

[Nookie Bear]

1 minute ago, OTT said:

 

How many times do they try and play this card? The Dunfermline clown did similar when bullying for votes. 

 

You cannot do that. If you're on the board there is an expectation that you are speaking on behalf of the board. You don't get to take hats off. 

 

Put it this way, would their lobbying hold any weight if they weren't on the board? No. So, what they are doing is wrong. 

 

 

It depends if it is just the Board members doing the speaking or if any other clubs (or just Dundee Utd, Raitth and Cove) are doing this. 
 

It stinks, frankly.