SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Jambo-Fox]

44 minutes ago, stuart500 said:

Could Donkee United, Raith Robbers and Covid Rangers' plan be to have the tribunal stopped after only 80% of the evidence, and to give the SPFL nominated Arbitor an extra vote if necessary to ensure defeat of the petition?

 

Guess that would be consistent with their level of sporting integrity and fairness. 

 

 

 

 

Love it, especially COVID Rangers 😂 

[wavydavy]

3 hours ago, neilnunb said:

Here's a cracking tale from Big Alex on the Raith forum.

 

"Just heard from a pal of mine (Bury supporter so he knows how we are feeling) who knows of my Rovers attachment), has been following things from a safe distance! He has slightly different take on things.

He believes that Hearts actually know (or knew) that they were going to get relegated and kick this all off. NOT because they thought that they could actually avoid relegation but if they kicked up enough trouble they would get an out of court settlement in excess of the standard parachute payment. It would be a way to pay off all the debts they have run up. But it morphed into what it is now because they couldn't lose out financially because its not THEIR money they are burning.

FYI my pal is a retired bank manager, so he has a fair handle on the monetary stuff."

 

🤣🤣

 

Your pal is a complete and utter .

[Ethan Hunt]

Has anyone ever seen the resolution briefing papers that were issued to clubs 48 hours prior to the initial vote? I would have thought they’d have been leaked at some point. @Footballfirst ?

Edited July 10, 2020 by Ethan Hunt

[Heartsofgold]

2 hours ago, niblick1874 said:

 

Whatever? Appeared to suggest? 

 

It's not a court. 

The arbitration panel have todecide on the points put forward in our petition under points of law, just like a court.  The main difference is that it the hearing is totally private and not held 'in camera'.  the exact same laws are applied and adjudicated upon as they would be in the Court of Session.

[RobNox]

21 minutes ago, niblick1874 said:

 

It is not open. A court in Scotland is. I see that as a big difference.  

Explain exactly why you see it as a big difference.

 

Are you trying to suggest that experienced legal professionals sitting on the panel are going to piss about because this case is being heard behind closed doors? They are going to risk their reputations somehow?

 

We're not dealing with the Neil Doncasters of this world, who have their own vested interest in getting a particular outcome.  We are dealing with people who actually have some integrity, quite a lot in fact, built over a long number of years.  They certainly aren't going to risk damaging their integrity any time soon.

[JimmyCant]

32 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Has anyone ever seen the resolution briefing papers that were issued to clubs 48 hours prior to the initial vote? I would have thought they’d have been leaked at some point. @Footballfirst ?

I’ve seen part of it. joe black posted a segment on Twitter.

[Unknown user]

2 hours ago, niblick1874 said:

 

It is not kind of. It is not.

 

According to Mirriam Webster it is

 

"an official assembly for the transaction of judicial business"

 

2 hours ago, Boris said:

Because you were slavering?

 

Good to see you back Boris

[bawheed]

2 hours ago, Sir Gio said:

I see Anne (I hate that spelling error) Budge and Robbie the jobbie Neilson have donated to Raith.

 

What fantastic wit

 

Mans a dick

[Jammy T]

8 hours ago, bazman said:

It's all confidential so we won't know who is on the panel

Ffs are you all bipolar? We will find out at the very least that we have a tribunal  - I don’t understand why how many of you are so stupid

[TheBigO]

6 hours ago, niblick1874 said:

 

It is not open. A court in Scotland is. I see that as a big difference.  

Awwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww

 

Shuuuurrrrruuuuup man

 

Jeez

[Deevers]

9 hours ago, neilnunb said:

Here's a cracking tale from Big Alex on the Raith forum.

 

"Just heard from a pal of mine (Bury supporter so he knows how we are feeling) who knows of my Rovers attachment), has been following things from a safe distance! He has slightly different take on things.

He believes that Hearts actually know (or knew) that they were going to get relegated and kick this all off. NOT because they thought that they could actually avoid relegation but if they kicked up enough trouble they would get an out of court settlement in excess of the standard parachute payment. It would be a way to pay off all the debts they have run up. But it morphed into what it is now because they couldn't lose out financially because its not THEIR money they are burning.

FYI my pal is a retired bank manager, so he has a fair handle on the monetary stuff."

 

🤣🤣

 

Ah, rumours from Kirkcaldy - bet this guy has six toes and webbed fingers.

 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

7 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Has anyone ever seen the resolution briefing papers that were issued to clubs 48 hours prior to the initial vote? I would have thought they’d have been leaked at some point. @Footballfirst ?

They were given a summary document,  of around 15 pages in the first instance, the full 100 pages plus too much to read to vote in 48 hours. 

 

That I'm sure is fairly powerful in our defence,  they were acknowledging time constraints and pressure was applied 

[stuart500]

8 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

In fairness it would be the SPFL who would plan to stop the tribunal after it being 80% heard. I appreciate that would have made it more difficult to get your clever Donkee, Robbers and Covid in though 👍

Sussed! ☺

[Horatio Caine]

Well, I wonder what delights are in store for us on Sportsound this afternoon?  What will we be getting the blame of now?  Global warming? Covid?

Edited July 11, 2020 by Horatio Caine

[cheetah]

6 hours ago, Jammy T said:

Ffs are you all bipolar? We will find out at the very least that we have a tribunal  - I don’t understand why how many of you are so stupid

 

There he is, the obnoxious JT is back.

[Portable Badger]

Dundee Untied?   More like Dundee Unhinged with what they’re trying to do

[Turkishcap]

Melon in charge of tangerines, let's make him welcome with a big Jambo raspberrie.

[jamboozy]

1 minute ago, Turkishcap said:

Melon in charge of tangerines, let's make him welcome with a big Jambo raspberrie.

And his next shite is a coconut 👍

[Turkishcap]

3 minutes ago, jamboozy said:

And his next shite is a coconut 👍

Now that's a ring burster.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Turkishcap

[jamboozy]

1 minute ago, Turkishcap said:

Now that's a ring burster.

His erse would shut with a bang😁

[Ethan Hunt]

7 hours ago, JimmyCant said:

I’ve seen part of it. joe black posted a segment on Twitter.

Cheers, I’ll try to find what I can there 👍

[Don Dan]

24 minutes ago, jamboozy said:

And his next shite is a coconut 👍

 A pineapple would clear his piles. 

[Zico's left foot]

31 minutes ago, Portable Badger said:

Dundee Untied?   More like Dundee Unhinged with what they’re trying to do

Wonder if he's got a relegation release clause in his contract?  And will it be activated when we win reinstatement?

[Zico's left foot]

31 minutes ago, Portable Badger said:

Dundee Untied?   More like Dundee Unhinged with what they’re trying to do

Wonder if he's got a relegation release clause in his contract?  And will it be activated when we win reinstatement?

[Zico's left foot]

31 minutes ago, Portable Badger said:

Dundee Untied?   More like Dundee Unhinged with what they’re trying to do

Wonder if he's got a relegation release clause in his contract?  And will it be activated when we win reinstatement?

[Ethan Hunt]

1 hour ago, Sir Gio said:

They were given a summary document,  of around 15 pages in the first instance, the full 100 pages plus too much to read to vote in 48 hours. 

 

That I'm sure is fairly powerful in our defence,  they were acknowledging time constraints and pressure was applied 

It was the summary document I was looking for. I’m sure the omissions from the full blown papers, or the omissions between the papers and the notes supplied to clubs will be crucial.

 

I found this wee gem in the original QC advice given to Partick Thistle. The bit in bold regarding the legislation is particularly useful. The SPFL didn’t even wait until the first review of the COVID19 situation was undertaken by the Scottish Government before the vote to call the leagues was taken. Strangely enough Dundee finally changed their vote and the lower leagues were called on 15th April, a mere 24 hours before the first SG review would have provided more information to allow clubs to be better informed.At the very least the SPFL should have waited 21 days for the SG first review of the situation.

 

20. We understand, moreover, that the Briefing Notes were circulated at or around 1pm on 8 April, at which time a conference call between the Championship Clubs was taking place. We understand that the Scottish Government letter dated 3 April 2020, referred to in the Briefing Notes, was not circulated to SPFL members until the following day. Neither the Briefing Notes nor the Scottish Government letter mentioned that the restrictions imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Restrictions) (Scotland) Regulations 2020 had to be reviewed by the Scottish Ministers every 21 days, with the first review to be carried out by 16 April 2020.

 

[Bazzas right boot]

On 09/07/2020 at 10:15, gashauskis9 said:

Yep.  Reconstruction would have cost us very little, but we’d rather spend more on supporting a group of teams to keep Hearts, PT and Stranraer down.  It’s pathetic.

 

And Denie Kelty and Nora of any opportunity. 

 

I'd like to know why at the very least the play offs never happened. 

 

If the league was as is when the music stopped why were play offs scrapped, a handful of games that could be do e within 2 weeks. 

 

At least then thr league was completed 100% as normal, albeit early. 

 

This isn't discussed enough imo, what was the logic and reasoning to rule out the play Offs completely but make sure relegation had to happen, why is one really important and the other not at all? 

 

[gashauskis9]

1 minute ago, Smith's right boot said:

 

And Denie Kelty and Nora of any opportunity. 

 

I'd like to know why at the very least the play offs never happened. 

 

If the league was as is when the music stopped why were play offs scrapped, a handful of games that could be do e within 2 weeks. 

 

At least then thr league was completed 100% as normal, albeit early. 

 

This isn't discussed enough imo, what was the logic and reasoning to rule out the play Offs completely but make sure relegation had to happen, why is one really important and the other not at all? 

 

It’s the million dollar question.  The play offs, in themselves, are dictated by the end standings in the league rather than part of the domestic fixtures.  The rules have been bent here and nobody seems to want to challenge this particular decision, or the fact that a board member (Brechin bloke) had an absolute conflict of interest in that decision.  
 

Even down south, where they ended leagues 1 and 2, play offs are taking place as normal.  

[MarkDevriesScores4]

I wonder how many Dundee players had their contracts torn up at midnight 🤔

[Seymour M Hersh]

10 hours ago, RobNox said:

 

I'm a retired Senior Bank Manager, so I outrank Big Alex's pal, and I'm calling bullshit.  I'm assuming his Bank Manager friend hasn't bothered to examine our latest accounts, otherwise he would have seen we have no external debt, other than normal trade debt.

 

He's also clearly unaware that we have some serious financial benefactors, one of whom recently donated over £3m to the SPFL to benefit all clubs.  

 

 

[sac]

11 hours ago, jackal said:

Regardless of what folder the email went to it was cast before the 5pm deadline. 

Correct,

It’s the same as voting with a show of hands, you cast your vote & it’s counted at that time, not four hours or five days later.

Any QC or Judge worth his salt will see from the documents what a carve up this was.

[Footballfirst]

9 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Has anyone ever seen the resolution briefing papers that were issued to clubs 48 hours prior to the initial vote? I would have thought they’d have been leaked at some point. @Footballfirst ?

 

It was Appendix 3 of the Rangers dossier, 15 pages of notes and 11 pages of the "written resolution" itself.

 

Warning - it is an OCR conversion from page images so there are formatting and spelling errors. The document claims legal privilege, although it was conceded in the CoS that it is already in the public domain, so that should not be an issue.

2020-04-08 TRFC Dossier App 3 (Briefing paper).docx

Edited July 11, 2020 by Footballfirst

[Allowayjambo1874]

7 minutes ago, sac said:

Correct,

It’s the same as voting with a show of hands, you cast your vote & it’s counted at that time, not four hours or five days later.

Any QC or Judge worth his salt will see from the documents what a carve up this was.

I have no idea if this will be debated at length but suspect the SPFL will argue that the rules state you have 28 days to put in your vote and that Dundee asked them to disregard the vote they had submitted. We all know there was coercion. We all know that the initial request was for vote to be put in by 1700 hours on the Friday. The SPFL may say that the deadline was just a request and that by default the rules should stand. I am only second guessing what argument they are going to use. It absolutely stinks but from a ‘rules are rules’ perspective this may be where they head with this.

 

I am just trying to get my head round what their argument will be in trying to defend the overall decision.

[Italian Lambretta]

23 minutes ago, MarkDevriesScores4 said:

I wonder how many Dundee players had their contracts torn up at midnight 🤔

Maybe they sent there replies by email and its stuck in some obscure spam folder. 

Never mind though they'll get to reconsider in a few days

[Spellczech]

9 minutes ago, Allowayjambo1874 said:

I have no idea if this will be debated at length but suspect the SPFL will argue that the rules state you have 28 days to put in your vote and that Dundee asked them to disregard the vote they had submitted. We all know there was coercion. We all know that the initial request was for vote to be put in by 1700 hours on the Friday. The SPFL may say that the deadline was just a request and that by default the rules should stand. I am only second guessing what argument they are going to use. It absolutely stinks but from a ‘rules are rules’ perspective this may be where they head with this.

 

I am just trying to get my head round what their argument will be in trying to defend the overall decision.

The fact that they had a meeting at 5.10 where the vote was discussed does indicate that 5pm was cutoff and all email boxes should have been swept for votes at that point not 9pm...

 

But this is not merely one error, it is a catalogue of errors, omissions and unanswered questions....

Edited July 11, 2020 by Spellczech

[Ethan Hunt]

14 minutes ago, Footballfirst said:

 

It was Appendix 3 of the Rangers dossier, 15 pages of notes and 11 pages of the "written resolution" itself.

 

Warning - it is an OCR conversion from page images so there are formatting and spelling errors. The document claims legal privilege, although it was conceded in the CoS that it is already in the public domain, so that should not be an issue.

2020-04-08 TRFC Dossier App 3 (Briefing paper).docx 539.14 kB · 14 downloads

Thanks again 👍 There is plenty of flawed thinking and negative commentary in that document. It’s as if they were only looking for one outcome.

[Mikey1874]

1 hour ago, Ethan Hunt said:

It was the summary document I was looking for. I’m sure the omissions from the full blown papers, or the omissions between the papers and the notes supplied to clubs will be crucial.

 

I found this wee gem in the original QC advice given to Partick Thistle. The bit in bold regarding the legislation is particularly useful. The SPFL didn’t even wait until the first review of the COVID19 situation was undertaken by the Scottish Government before the vote to call the leagues was taken. Strangely enough Dundee finally changed their vote and the lower leagues were called on 15th April, a mere 24 hours before the first SG review would have provided more information to allow clubs to be better informed.At the very least the SPFL should have waited 21 days for the SG first review of the situation.

 

20. We understand, moreover, that the Briefing Notes were circulated at or around 1pm on 8 April, at which time a conference call between the Championship Clubs was taking place. We understand that the Scottish Government letter dated 3 April 2020, referred to in the Briefing Notes, was not circulated to SPFL members until the following day. Neither the Briefing Notes nor the Scottish Government letter mentioned that the restrictions imposed by the Health Protection (Coronavirus) (Restrictions) (Scotland) Regulations 2020 had to be reviewed by the Scottish Ministers every 21 days, with the first review to be carried out by 16 April 2020.

 

 

No one anywhere rushed their decision like in Scotland. 

[Boof]

7 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

The fact that they had a meeting at 5.10 where the vote was discussed does indicate that 5pm was cutoff and all email boxes should have been swept for votes at that point not 9pm...

 

But this is not merely one error, it is a catalogue of errors, omissions and unanswered questions....

 

I think you're being very generous to the SPFL board to describe these as errors.

 

I see them as deliberate acts.

[Mikey1874]

17 minutes ago, Allowayjambo1874 said:

I have no idea if this will be debated at length but suspect the SPFL will argue that the rules state you have 28 days to put in your vote and that Dundee asked them to disregard the vote they had submitted. We all know there was coercion. We all know that the initial request was for vote to be put in by 1700 hours on the Friday. The SPFL may say that the deadline was just a request and that by default the rules should stand. I am only second guessing what argument they are going to use. It absolutely stinks but from a ‘rules are rules’ perspective this may be where they head with this.

 

I am just trying to get my head round what their argument will be in trying to defend the overall decision.

 

Everything suggests the SPFL are confident in their Resolution being sound in terms of approving promotion and relegation. 

[mikey51]

20 minutes ago, Allowayjambo1874 said:

I have no idea if this will be debated at length but suspect the SPFL will argue that the rules state you have 28 days to put in your vote and that Dundee asked them to disregard the vote they had submitted. We all know there was coercion. We all know that the initial request was for vote to be put in by 1700 hours on the Friday. The SPFL may say that the deadline was just a request and that by default the rules should stand. I am only second guessing what argument they are going to use. It absolutely stinks but from a ‘rules are rules’ perspective this may be where they head with this.

 

I am just trying to get my head round what their argument will be in trying to defend the overall decision.

If that was the case would they not have had to wait 28 days before announcing the vote? As any club could then have changed their vote in time. Sorry if this has already been answered earlier in the thread. 

[Fitba' broke my Heart]

5 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Everything suggests the SPFL are confident in their Resolution being sound in terms of approving promotion and relegation. 

Very true, yet I'm sure Dundee Utd., Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers were confident that their case was sound.

[jambodoug]

3 minutes ago, mikey51 said:

If that was the case would they not have had to wait 28 days before announcing the vote? As any club could then have changed their vote in time. Sorry if this has already been answered earlier in the thread. 

 

I think it was due to the fact that as Yes votes couldn’t be changed, and No ones could, so with the majority of Yes votes already cast, then the proposal passed.

Edited July 11, 2020 by jambodoug

[mikey51]

Just now, jambodoug said:

 

I think it was due to the fact that as Yes votes couldn’t be changed, and No ones could, then the majority of Yes was already cast, then the proposal passed.

Ah I see, thanks 👍

[jackal]

15 minutes ago, Allowayjambo1874 said:

I have no idea if this will be debated at length but suspect the SPFL will argue that the rules state you have 28 days to put in your vote and that Dundee asked them to disregard the vote they had submitted. We all know there was coercion. We all know that the initial request was for vote to be put in by 1700 hours on the Friday. The SPFL may say that the deadline was just a request and that by default the rules should stand. I am only second guessing what argument they are going to use. It absolutely stinks but from a ‘rules are rules’ perspective this may be where they head with this.

 

I am just trying to get my head round what their argument will be in trying to defend the overall decision.

The 28 day rule is pointless unless everyone votes yes then apparently you cant change it , the results were given and then Dungdee found out they had the supposed vote even though they had technically voted. If everyone then decided to ask to have their votes returned after they knew the results whats the point or the vote results should not be given until 28days later. Its effectively voting once you know if it suits you or not and weighting the vote. On the other hand if everyone votes no do they have 28 days to change their mind.

Tbf the SPFL would muck up peoples requests to return votes. This is why I would have loved this going to CoS rather than arbitration so everyone can see the SPFL/SFA are useless. So many are just happy to accept the status quo just to make ends meet.

[Riccarton3]

19 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

No one anywhere rushed their decision like in Scotland. 

They called it when they were happy enough with the league positions. It protected Hamilton (on the Board) as well as St Mirren, who wil always get  a sympathetic ear. We'll never know if it would have been called later had Hearts won that last game. Given the behaviour of the SPFL, you can't rule out anything . But whoever would have been bottom it was wrong anyway.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Riccarton3

[TheBigO]

My take on the Dundee vote, which I stress again is only a part of our case (the resolution in itself being full of half truths and omissions) :

 

The SPFL maintain their legal counsel advised Dundee could change a no to a yes.

 

This was lazy counsel. It seems quite unprecedented a vote be laid out like this. He's really meant that you can't change a yes. No mention of a no. Very different things.

 

But as things have moved on they've had to bunker down on that opinion and it is flimsy at best.

 

Basically in my view they got a "yeh, seems fine" rather than a thoroughly investigated opinion.

 

It's shoddy, rushed and on assumption of no scrutiny, like everything the SPFL have done for a long long time. That arrogance is about to bite them hard.

 

Yummy.

 

[Jambo61]

24 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

The fact that they had a meeting at 5.10 where the vote was discussed does indicate that 5pm was cutoff and all email boxes should have been swept for votes at that point not 9pm...

 

But this is not merely one error, it is a catalogue of errors, omissions and unanswered questions....

Surely if they argue that 28 days was the actual cut off and votes could be changed until then they had no right to call any result for 28 days until finalised?

[WorldChampions1902]

11 hours ago, RobNox said:

 

More to the point, the SPFL QC admitted in the COS last week that the Dundee no vote was received before the deadline.  Whether it ended up in a quarantine folder or not is irrelevant, though I agree with you and others that this is a highly dubious claim (among many other highly dubious things done by the SPFL in assuring that they got the result they wanted, as insisted on by Peter).

IMHO, one of the reasons the SPFL have “come clean” on that issue, is that admission potentially takes the sting out of the BS around email firewalls and quarantine. I hope our QC doesn’t fall for this tactic because we should absolutely prove whether this was BS or not. The point being that once we prove that lie, it raises a big question in the mind of the panelist’s about what other lies there are and also proves that the SPFL have acted reprehensively.

[TyphoonJambo]

Bearing in mind the absolute stupidity of the situation we, scottish football as a whole, find ourself in. Then, taking into account  the various other options availble and the short shrift they were given and add in the complete lack of guidance and control shown by our governing bodies, it leads to the suspicion that this could all be part of a bigger plan to bring about the collapse of the scottish leagues. Its important to then consider the silence from Celtic and the very real fact that the ultimate puppetmaster, Peter Lawell, a name seldom brought up in any media debate, is the man masterminding all this. 

I genuinely believe theres something bigger, more devious and corrupt going on . A lot of people are being played here. 

[Riccarton3]

5 minutes ago, WorldChampions1902 said:

IMHO, one of the reasons the SPFL have “come clean” on that issue, is that admission potentially takes the sting out of the BS around email firewalls and quarantine. I hope our QC doesn’t fall for this tactic because we should absolutely prove whether this was BS or not. The point being that once we prove that lie, it raises a big question in the mind of the panelist’s about what other lies there are and also proves that the SPFL have acted reprehensively.

That's a good shout. All of a sudden, they were in admission mode. Certainly worth evidencing how that vote was received. Sounds just like lies.

Edited July 11, 2020 by Riccarton3