SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[brunoatemyhamster]

3 minutes ago, Rogue Daddy said:

That was our reasoning for taking our case to the CoS. It wasn't a 'footballing matter'. However, Lord Clark didn't agree... but obviously could see there was a case to answer.

We can ask him to double check that when we go back. 

[One five]

1 minute ago, AlphonseCapone said:

Can't wait to be back in a full Tynecastle and hear how venomous the "**** the SFA" chants will be. I hope this ignites a fire in the support and Tynecastle becomes a horrible place to visit. 

Me to , I’ve a feeling Tynecastle will be a very noizzzzzy and uncomfortable place for the visitors.

 

[Rogue Daddy]

1 minute ago, brunoatemyhamster said:

We can ask him to double check that when we go back. 

Defo! 👍

[colinmaroon]

I posted this under the National Team thread but it really belongs here:

 

Its not really about the team.  Its about the archaic cabal that is the SFA.

 

Just look at the level of CEO for example.  The likes of Fuhrer Ferry, Gordon Smith, Maxwell.  Filled with "Brechin-like" blazers.  A refereeing politburo, which operates under a cloak of darkness, according to their own rules, differing somewhat from the actual rules of Association Football. 

 

Changing the rules to hit Hearts under Vlad and this latest of "perfectly timed" protectionism of the "establishment."  And yet, when King came in at Ibrox, no sign of "fit and proper" person.

 

The timing and the time frame of this latest piece of blatant officialdom thuggery is a disgrace and i cant wait to see the MSSM leaping to our defence at this equivalent of sending the thugs to dissuade the witness from testifying against the Mafia bosses.

 

Although the degree is different, the exact same principle applies in Scottish football as in Hong Kong, with the new supreme leader in waiting, Comrade Llawell, ensuring the one party state rules. (Even the other half of the Bigot Brothers are all wind and no substance).

 

SCOTTISH FOOTBALL STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN!!!

[Deevers]

1 minute ago, colinmaroon said:

I posted this under the National Team thread but it really belongs here:

 

Its not really about the team.  Its about the archaic cabal that is the SFA.

 

Just look at the level of CEO for example.  The likes of Fuhrer Ferry, Gordon Smith, Maxwell.  Filled with "Brechin-like" blazers.  A refereeing politburo, which operates under a cloak of darkness, according to their own rules, differing somewhat from the actual rules of Association Football. 

 

Changing the rules to hit Hearts under Vlad and this latest of "perfectly timed" protectionism of the "establishment."  And yet, when King came in at Ibrox, no sign of "fit and proper" person.

 

The timing and the time frame of this latest piece of blatant officialdom thuggery is a disgrace and i cant wait to see the MSSM leaping to our defence at this equivalent of sending the thugs to dissuade the witness from testifying against the Mafia bosses.

 

Although the degree is different, the exact same principle applies in Scottish football as in Hong Kong, with the new supreme leader in waiting, Comrade Llawell, ensuring the one party state rules. (Even the other half of the Bigot Brothers are all wind and no substance).

 

SCOTTISH FOOTBALL STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN!!!

100% correct Colin. It’s a cesspit.

[Hearts1975]

1 hour ago, TWF said:

The AXIS POWERS -  SPFL, SFA and DAILY RECORD - What a Trio of Fascists. Consider themselves above and beyond the Law of the Land.

Just wonder if they would "take on" the OF with such  determination????

To the M8 Alliance- Take it ALL THE WAY

 

 

1 hour ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

No, because they are the power behind the “axis powers” you referred to.
 

 

You are both bang on the money putting to one side the suttle differences in the posts 

 

a few posters suggested yesterday i was way off beam suggesting that we wouldn’t get a fair hearing and they made valid points tbf 

 

I will put this one down to “compliance officers” following the rule book but I do wonder at times what a club should do if they feel that the biased decision making lies within the organisation or umbrella organisation, now the SFA are involved 

 

My issue is this. The SFA wait until arbitration proceedings are confirmed and now they say we will be investigated.

 

Why not before ? They knew we went straight to the COS and well before LC’s hearing so why wait until now to make their statement 

 

 

[TyphoonJambo]

3 minutes ago, colinmaroon said:

I posted this under the National Team thread but it really belongs here:

 

Its not really about the team.  Its about the archaic cabal that is the SFA.

 

Just look at the level of CEO for example.  The likes of Fuhrer Ferry, Gordon Smith, Maxwell.  Filled with "Brechin-like" blazers.  A refereeing politburo, which operates under a cloak of darkness, according to their own rules, differing somewhat from the actual rules of Association Football. 

 

Changing the rules to hit Hearts under Vlad and this latest of "perfectly timed" protectionism of the "establishment."  And yet, when King came in at Ibrox, no sign of "fit and proper" person.

 

The timing and the time frame of this latest piece of blatant officialdom thuggery is a disgrace and i cant wait to see the MSSM leaping to our defence at this equivalent of sending the thugs to dissuade the witness from testifying against the Mafia bosses.

 

Although the degree is different, the exact same principle applies in Scottish football as in Hong Kong, with the new supreme leader in waiting, Comrade Llawell, ensuring the one party state rules. (Even the other half of the Bigot Brothers are all wind and no substance).

 

SCOTTISH FOOTBALL STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN!!!

Totally correct. Can't you use your contacts for a bolt of lightning or maybe just a wee plague of locusts, even something as trivial as a rash of puss filled boils? 

[colinmaroon]

1 minute ago, Hearts1975 said:

 

 

My issue is this. The SFA wait until arbitration proceedings are confirmed and now they say we will be investigated.

 

Why not before ? They knew we went straight to the COS and well before LC’s hearing so why wait until now to make their statement 

 

 

 

 

That really is a hypothetical question.  The answer is obvious!

 

 

[Hearts1975]

3 minutes ago, colinmaroon said:

 

 

That really is a hypothetical question.  The answer is obvious!

 

 

If that’s the case then it looks like we will need to go back to the COS 

I hope LC and the courts take note of  what has happened today 

it’s now way past being even remotely excusable 

[Hagar the Horrible]

99.15 A member or an associated person may not take a Football Dispute to a court of law except with the prior approval of the Board.

 

We argued that this was NOT a football dispute but a Company Law dispute; A fact recognised by LC, we ensured that the case would be heard by a legal team. An act that ensured by law we forced them to reveal all documentation related to this case.

Had we not interpreted this rule this way, and we asked permission first, It would have been refused, the case would have been heard. No witnesses would have been interviewed.   No emails, text messages, phone call listings and the contracts with the TV companies would have been provided. The exact same football people that we have a complaint regarding! Are the exact same people who would have sat on panel and decided our fate.

 

Yes the court had to refer the case back to the SFA as per Scots Law 2010 but by doing so we got the CoS to keep a watchful eye over the proceedings!  We obtained all relevant documentation; we ensured the case would be heard by qualified independent people? We can call witnesses?  None of which the SFA had that power? 

 

For the Compliance Officer to present this now and clearly have not read the written verdict from LC  Item7  pretty much takes a dim view of Law 99.15 a point now in case law that the Calpol 3 made which was thrown out Item 8.  The court would clearly welcome to challenge the legality of 99.15.

 

I think the SFA panel need to have a word with the SFA, to ensure that their actions may be deemed as contempt of court.  The court case in the Court of Session has been Sisted, Not suspended nor concluded.   I also think we need to return this to court to challenge Rule 99 and its legality for the sake of Scottish football and other bowling clubs all over the country.

[jbee647]

32 minutes ago, One five said:

Me to , I’ve a feeling Tynecastle will be a very noizzzzzy and uncomfortable place for the visitors.

 

Don’t care if it’s Hibs or Albion Rovers.....every single team should get dogs abuse from now on, they have all shat on us, I want 27 straight wins next season, shame and humiliate every opponent, no letting up, no mercy, minimum of 5 goal victories every week 

[Diadora Van Basten]

53 minutes ago, Lemongrab said:

I was just looking at that. The SFA articles talk about 'Football Disputes'. Could our dispute be classed as a business one?

The Legal definition is “any dispute arising out of football” So not really.

[jr ewing]

4 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

99.15 A member or an associated person may not take a Football Dispute to a court of law except with the prior approval of the Board.

 

We argued that this was NOT a football dispute but a Company Law dispute; A fact recognised by LC, we ensured that the case would be heard by a legal team. An act that ensured by law we forced them to reveal all documentation related to this case.

Had we not interpreted this rule this way, and we asked permission first, It would have been refused, the case would have been heard. No witnesses would have been interviewed.   No emails, text messages, phone call listings and the contracts with the TV companies would have been provided. The exact same football people that we have a complaint regarding! Are the exact same people who would have sat on panel and decided our fate.

 

Yes the court had to refer the case back to the SFA as per Scots Law 2010 but by doing so we got the CoS to keep a watchful eye over the proceedings!  We obtained all relevant documentation; we ensured the case would be heard by qualified independent people? We can call witnesses?  None of which the SFA had that power? 

 

For the Compliance Officer to present this now and clearly have not read the written verdict from LC  Item7  pretty much takes a dim view of Law 99.15 a point now in case law that the Calpol 3 made which was thrown out Item 8.  The court would clearly welcome to challenge the legality of 99.15.

 

I think the SFA panel need to have a word with the SFA, to ensure that their actions may be deemed as contempt of court.  The court case in the Court of Session has been Sisted, Not suspended nor concluded.   I also think we need to return this to court to challenge Rule 99 and its legality for the sake of Scottish football and other bowling clubs all over the country.

Agree entirely but don't want my bowling club dragged into it. 

[manaliveits105]

The sooner we lose bowling club metal mickies wearing more metal on their blazers than Louis Mountbatten the better imo.

[OldGorgie]

7 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

The Legal definition is “any dispute arising out of football” So not really.

Hearts case was based on company law not footballing disputes. This was acknowledged by LC and the only reason it went to arbitration was that Hearts had signed up to the SFA articles. Arbitration will decide the case on law not football. We have to trust the three experts who will rule on the arbitration case.

[TWF]

1 hour ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

No, because they are the power behind the “axis powers” you referred to.
 

Excellent correction to my post. Worth pursuing do you think? Maybe extend the life of this topic for some time to come!!

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

Are they feeling threatened? Not so sure. I just think they’re taking the piss now because they know they’re untouchable

 

Time for Elliot Ness.

[One five]

9 minutes ago, jbee647 said:

Don’t care if it’s Hibs or Albion Rovers.....every single team should get dogs abuse from now on, they have all shat on us, I want 27 straight wins next season, shame and humiliate every opponent, no letting up, no mercy, minimum of 5 goal victories every week 

Spot on mate I hate them all except the ICT , partick etc I honestly want as many to go down own the tubes and never return I’ve never felt so much anger at so many clubs at the same time sometimes I’ve got to try and calm myself down big time.

[wavydavy]

41 minutes ago, colinmaroon said:

I posted this under the National Team thread but it really belongs here:

 

Its not really about the team.  Its about the archaic cabal that is the SFA.

 

Just look at the level of CEO for example.  The likes of Fuhrer Ferry, Gordon Smith, Maxwell.  Filled with "Brechin-like" blazers.  A refereeing politburo, which operates under a cloak of darkness, according to their own rules, differing somewhat from the actual rules of Association Football. 

 

Changing the rules to hit Hearts under Vlad and this latest of "perfectly timed" protectionism of the "establishment."  And yet, when King came in at Ibrox, no sign of "fit and proper" person.

 

The timing and the time frame of this latest piece of blatant officialdom thuggery is a disgrace and i cant wait to see the MSSM leaping to our defence at this equivalent of sending the thugs to dissuade the witness from testifying against the Mafia bosses.

 

Although the degree is different, the exact same principle applies in Scottish football as in Hong Kong, with the new supreme leader in waiting, Comrade Llawell, ensuring the one party state rules. (Even the other half of the Bigot Brothers are all wind and no substance).

 

SCOTTISH FOOTBALL STINKS TO HIGH HEAVEN!!!

 

 

Well said.

[OldGorgie]

3 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The sooner we lose bowling club metal mickies wearing more metal on their blazers than Louis Mountbatten the better imo.

The sad fact is that Scottish football is ruled by a bunch of selfish no-marks , most of whom made their money through dubious dealings or screwing their local workforce. You would struggle to find one decent human amongst them.

[Mikey1874]

12 hours ago, jambostevo said:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but is this not exactly what we have done?
 

99.12 A member, an associated person and/or the Scottish FA shall not take a Scottish FA Dispute to a court
of law except with the prior approval of the Board. For the avoidance of doubt, this Article 99.12 does
not prevent a member, associated person and/or the Scottish FA from raising proceedings for time bar purposes, subject to such proceedings being sisted at the earliest opportunity for resolution in accordance with this Article 99.

 

See what this guy comes up with (when free to view)

 

 

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Mikey1874

[TWF]

37 minutes ago, Hearts1975 said:

 

 

You are both bang on the money putting to one side the suttle differences in the posts 

 

a few posters suggested yesterday i was way off beam suggesting that we wouldn’t get a fair hearing and they made valid points tbf 

 

I will put this one down to “compliance officers” following the rule book but I do wonder at times what a club should do if they feel that the biased decision making lies within the organisation or umbrella organisation, now the SFA are involved 

 

My issue is this. The SFA wait until arbitration proceedings are confirmed and now they say we will be investigated.

 

Why not before ? They knew we went straight to the COS and well before LC’s hearing so why wait until now to make their statement 

 

 

How difficult would it be to modernise and re-write the Rulebook? The blatant attempt to influence matters follows on from a similar attempt by SPFL to influence LC. A total disregard for the Law of the Land and possibly contempt of Court and Legal protocol. I'm sure some legal experts on this thread can provide some clarity 

[wavydavy]

10 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The sooner we lose bowling club metal mickies wearing more metal on their blazers than Louis Mountbatten the better imo.

 

Not sure if this has been mentioned as I have just seen it today but for once this guy seems to be talking some sense.

 

Scottish football should appoint a US-style commissioner as part of a shake-up of SPFL leadership, say two club chairmen.

Ayr United's Lachlan Cameron, who is based in the US, and Donald Findlay of Cowdenbeath believe decision-making powers should be taken away from clubs.

The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.

"We've got 42 clubs all with their own self-interest," Cameron said.

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.

"You then take the vested, self-interest out of it. You have someone making decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole and they don't take individual clubs into consideration. It just makes it much cleaner in my opinion."

• Transfer window & League Cup dates confirmed

At the moment major decisions for the SPFL, led by chief executive Neil Doncaster and a board, must be put to a vote of all 42 clubs, which has caused controversy amid the vote to curtail the season.

It ended with relegated clubs Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action, and they now await their arbitration case being heard.

"You need somebody in charge of the organisation," Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay told the BBC's Scottish football podcast.

"For a long time what I thought bedevilled Scottish football was that nobody was in charge and that's why I very much agree with Lachlan's model.

"We need strong leadership, but we haven't had it, we need it now and we absolutely need to get this right before we start the next season."

Meanwhile, Cameron confirmed that he would give financial help to Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who asked for support in their legal battle, as Hearts and Thistle attempt to stop the trio's promotions.

However the money will not come from Ayr's funds.

"I just think it's the right thing to do," Cameron said. "I think its important to support the clubs that are, in my opinion, being unfairly persecuted here, which are the three promoted clubs."

[manaliveits105]

Thank goodness its the Calpol 3 that are being persecuted I thought it was us Partick and Stranraer glad fatty has put us right

[1874robbo]

3 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Not sure if this has been mentioned as I have just seen it today but for once this guy seems to be talking some sense.

 

Scottish football should appoint a US-style commissioner as part of a shake-up of SPFL leadership, say two club chairmen.

Ayr United's Lachlan Cameron, who is based in the US, and Donald Findlay of Cowdenbeath believe decision-making powers should be taken away from clubs.

The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.

"We've got 42 clubs all with their own self-interest," Cameron said.

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.

"You then take the vested, self-interest out of it. You have someone making decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole and they don't take individual clubs into consideration. It just makes it much cleaner in my opinion."

• Transfer window & League Cup dates confirmed

At the moment major decisions for the SPFL, led by chief executive Neil Doncaster and a board, must be put to a vote of all 42 clubs, which has caused controversy amid the vote to curtail the season.

It ended with relegated clubs Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action, and they now await their arbitration case being heard.

"You need somebody in charge of the organisation," Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay told the BBC's Scottish football podcast.

"For a long time what I thought bedevilled Scottish football was that nobody was in charge and that's why I very much agree with Lachlan's model.

"We need strong leadership, but we haven't had it, we need it now and we absolutely need to get this right before we start the next season."

Meanwhile, Cameron confirmed that he would give financial help to Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who asked for support in their legal battle, as Hearts and Thistle attempt to stop the trio's promotions.

However the money will not come from Ayr's funds.

"I just think it's the right thing to do," Cameron said. "I think its important to support the clubs that are, in my opinion, being unfairly persecuted here, which are the three promoted clubs."

So we aren’t being persecuted here you fat odious prick!!!

[graygo]

30 minutes ago, Hagar the Horrible said:

99.15 A member or an associated person may not take a Football Dispute to a court of law except with the prior approval of the Board.

 

We argued that this was NOT a football dispute but a Company Law dispute; A fact recognised by LC, we ensured that the case would be heard by a legal team. An act that ensured by law we forced them to reveal all documentation related to this case.

Had we not interpreted this rule this way, and we asked permission first, It would have been refused, the case would have been heard. No witnesses would have been interviewed.   No emails, text messages, phone call listings and the contracts with the TV companies would have been provided. The exact same football people that we have a complaint regarding! Are the exact same people who would have sat on panel and decided our fate.

 

Yes the court had to refer the case back to the SFA as per Scots Law 2010 but by doing so we got the CoS to keep a watchful eye over the proceedings!  We obtained all relevant documentation; we ensured the case would be heard by qualified independent people? We can call witnesses?  None of which the SFA had that power? 

 

For the Compliance Officer to present this now and clearly have not read the written verdict from LC  Item7  pretty much takes a dim view of Law 99.15 a point now in case law that the Calpol 3 made which was thrown out Item 8.  The court would clearly welcome to challenge the legality of 99.15.

 

I think the SFA panel need to have a word with the SFA, to ensure that their actions may be deemed as contempt of court.  The court case in the Court of Session has been Sisted, Not suspended nor concluded.   I also think we need to return this to court to challenge Rule 99 and its legality for the sake of Scottish football and other bowling clubs all over the country.

 

The make up and powers of the arbitration panel would be the same whether we had went to the CoS or not. You're right about the producing of documents though.

[wavydavy]

2 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

So we aren’t being persecuted here you fat odious prick!!!

 

Yes, it was actually the bit about the Commissioner I was thinking would be better than we have at the moment. That would get rid of Doncaster and probably the Board.

 

The only problem would be that no doubt the SFA would be allowed to get their choice of who the Commissioner would be and appoint Lawell.

[Spellczech]

7 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Not sure if this has been mentioned as I have just seen it today but for once this guy seems to be talking some sense.

 

Scottish football should appoint a US-style commissioner as part of a shake-up of SPFL leadership, say two club chairmen.

Ayr United's Lachlan Cameron, who is based in the US, and Donald Findlay of Cowdenbeath believe decision-making powers should be taken away from clubs.

The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.

"We've got 42 clubs all with their own self-interest," Cameron said.

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.

"You then take the vested, self-interest out of it. You have someone making decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole and they don't take individual clubs into consideration. It just makes it much cleaner in my opinion."

• Transfer window & League Cup dates confirmed

At the moment major decisions for the SPFL, led by chief executive Neil Doncaster and a board, must be put to a vote of all 42 clubs, which has caused controversy amid the vote to curtail the season.

It ended with relegated clubs Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action, and they now await their arbitration case being heard.

"You need somebody in charge of the organisation," Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay told the BBC's Scottish football podcast.

"For a long time what I thought bedevilled Scottish football was that nobody was in charge and that's why I very much agree with Lachlan's model.

"We need strong leadership, but we haven't had it, we need it now and we absolutely need to get this right before we start the next season."

Meanwhile, Cameron confirmed that he would give financial help to Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who asked for support in their legal battle, as Hearts and Thistle attempt to stop the trio's promotions.

However the money will not come from Ayr's funds.

"I just think it's the right thing to do," Cameron said. "I think its important to support the clubs that are, in my opinion, being unfairly persecuted here, which are the three promoted clubs."

It is clear that he is remote from the situation in USA and just reading the media coverage, if he thinks the promoted clubs are the ones being persecuted... How did he vote on reconstruction out of interest? 

 

The big problem with Scotland and Scottish football is that we are all talk and no action. This is why other clubs' fans hate Hearts - because our fans stepped up and put their money where their mouth was when required. They talk about how rubbish the SFA and SPFL are but then jump to their defence, again with their words...

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

3 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

The make up and powers of the arbitration panel would be the same whether we had went to the CoS or not. You're right about the producing of documents though.

I may be wrong, but could it also be the case that had we not gone to the CoS first that the SFA would have been free to set the parameters of the arbitration?

[maroonlegions]

22 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The sooner we lose bowling club metal mickies wearing more metal on their blazers than Louis Mountbatten the better imo.

My grand dad got a medal from Lord Mountbatten and was also his personal chauffeur in Calcutta.  

[Hearts1975]

13 minutes ago, TWF said:

How difficult would it be to modernise and re-write the Rulebook? The blatant attempt to influence matters follows on from a similar attempt by SPFL to influence LC. A total disregard for the Law of the Land and possibly contempt of Court and Legal protocol. I'm sure some legal experts on this thread can provide some clarity 

The timing alone is suggestive that there is already an alternative agenda in play.

 

[RobNox]

5 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

The make up and powers of the arbitration panel would be the same whether we had went to the CoS or not. You're right about the producing of documents though.

 

That assumes that the SFA agreed to an arbitration panel.  They may well have determined that it was a footballing matter, therefore referred it to themselves to rule on, which is what the Calpol 3 were arguing for at the CoS.  In which case, we'd have had no chance of an impartial hearing.

[TWF]

13 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Not sure if this has been mentioned as I have just seen it today but for once this guy seems to be talking some sense.

 

Scottish football should appoint a US-style commissioner as part of a shake-up of SPFL leadership, say two club chairmen.

Ayr United's Lachlan Cameron, who is based in the US, and Donald Findlay of Cowdenbeath believe decision-making powers should be taken away from clubs.

The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.

"We've got 42 clubs all with their own self-interest," Cameron said.

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.

"You then take the vested, self-interest out of it. You have someone making decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole and they don't take individual clubs into consideration. It just makes it much cleaner in my opinion."

• Transfer window & League Cup dates confirmed

At the moment major decisions for the SPFL, led by chief executive Neil Doncaster and a board, must be put to a vote of all 42 clubs, which has caused controversy amid the vote to curtail the season.

It ended with relegated clubs Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action, and they now await their arbitration case being heard.

"You need somebody in charge of the organisation," Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay told the BBC's Scottish football podcast.

"For a long time what I thought bedevilled Scottish football was that nobody was in charge and that's why I very much agree with Lachlan's model.

"We need strong leadership, but we haven't had it, we need it now and we absolutely need to get this right before we start the next season."

Meanwhile, Cameron confirmed that he would give financial help to Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who asked for support in their legal battle, as Hearts and Thistle attempt to stop the trio's promotions.

However the money will not come from Ayr's funds.

"I just think it's the right thing to do," Cameron said. "I think its important to support the clubs that are, in my opinion, being unfairly persecuted here, which are the three promoted clubs."

This is what happens when you have a "The DONALD" supporting tosser in a position of "power.

WPOFODYNU

[Diadora Van Basten]

“The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.“

 

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.”

 

So Americans have commissioners for each club (democracy) but we should have a commissioner (dictator) this just doesn’t make sense and Donald Findlay agrees with him.

 

[graygo]

11 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

I may be wrong, but could it also be the case that had we not gone to the CoS first that the SFA would have been free to set the parameters of the arbitration?

 

As far as I'm aware the arbitration is completely independent from the SFA, you could well be right.

To clarify my thoughts, I'm delighted we went to the CoS, if we are to win this then it was essential.

[graygo]

11 minutes ago, RobNox said:

 

That assumes that the SFA agreed to an arbitration panel.  They may well have determined that it was a footballing matter, therefore referred it to themselves to rule on, which is what the Calpol 3 were arguing for at the CoS.  In which case, we'd have had no chance of an impartial hearing.

 

That is also true, I think there's a rule that they can decide that a case should be dealt with by other means than an arbitration hearing.

[TheBigO]

14 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

It is clear that he is remote from the situation in USA and just reading the media coverage, if he thinks the promoted clubs are the ones being persecuted... How did he vote on reconstruction out of interest? 

 

The big problem with Scotland and Scottish football is that we are all talk and no action. This is why other clubs' fans hate Hearts - because our fans stepped up and put their money where their mouth was when required. They talk about how rubbish the SFA and SPFL are but then jump to their defence, again with their words...

Exactly.  It always mystifies me when I go to Scotland games and talk to my mates who I go to the games with.  Mostly Aberdeen supporters, but a few other clubs thrown in.

 

I get really easily wound up when talking about Scottish football and want to rant about the big picture about why we're so shite and how the system is totally knackered and guys like Doncaster are a disgrace.  I've been beating the drum for years.  None of them seem angry.  It's like, aye it's shite, but what ye gonny do eh...

 

I just don't get that.  They're good lads (despite their allegiances!), love the game, love Scotland.  But seem genuinely like they are happy to accept our game as it is.  I would honestly be embarrassed and disgusted by the current situ if it was another club, not Hearts.  Christ, on PT's behalf, I'd be fuming.  The rest of Scottish football are somewhere between oblivious, apathetic and happy to just go with the red top headlines.

 

I mean, I've never done anything about changing our game, right enough, but at least i'm blooming angry!!!!!!!!!!!

[Cruyff]

Wasn't the whole 2004/2005 season in NHL hockey cancelled because of "commissioners? 

 

Fat ****ing lardy ersed oaf that he is. 

[DETTY29]

48 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

The sooner we lose bowling club metal mickies wearing more metal on their blazers than Louis Mountbatten the better imo.

Bowling club committees wouldn't dare act like this lot.

 

 

[Big Slim Stylee]

13 minutes ago, Diadora Van Basten said:

“The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.“

 

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.”

 

So Americans have commissioners for each club (democracy) but we should have a commissioner (dictator) this just doesn’t make sense and Donald Findlay agrees with him.

 

You’ve got the wrong end of the stick there. Each sport has a commissioner not each club.

[mitch41]

The SFA’s actions brings the whole system into disrepute. Every football fan in Scotland should be disgusted by the SFA’s decision to charge Hearts & Partick Th. Now obviously I’m talking about fair minded fans which I’m sure will outnumber the idiots. This action by the SFA has infringed my and every Hearts fans rights by the SFA threatening the existence of our club. I don’t know of any legal reason why a group of Hearts fans, Supporters Club, or others could not raise an action in the Court of Session against the SFA.

OK we may need a few quid but if after legal advice that the case had legs I’m sure the money could be raised.

Is there anyone legal eagles out there please comment.

[Lone Striker]

Thinking ahead here  (so a couple of  ifs)    ....

 

While I think we had a sound moral argument for seeking our petition to be heard in the CoS, Lord Clark did agree that the SFA rule needed to be adhered to (i.e. seek judgement  in their Arbitration process).  As some have alluded to here, the bonus we got by going to the CoS was his ruling that all relevant documentation around the vote must be made available to both parties  - documents which would not have been available if we'd gone straight to SFA Arbitration.    That fact needs to be emphasised  to the SFA Compliance Officer on August 6th - and if (*)  we actually achieve a win (or even a partial win) at Arbitration on legal grounds (with the help of said documentation), then that very fact becomes crucial on August 6th.

 

 If (*) we then get hit with a massive fine (or worse) by that SFA Compliance process , how would that look to anyone who cared about the concept of justice and impartiality within a sports organisation ?    Seems to me you could sum such an outcome up as -   

 "Our rule states that you need to ask our permission to take your case outside of the SFA for legal judgement - and if we think there might be some incriminating documents which undermine the legality or self-compliance of SFA / SPFL actions, then we'll simply  refuse permission  because we don't want  law lords telling us how to run our Arbitration process.  If you have the temerity to try to bypass this rule, we'll hammer you."

 

It's a model of pure protectionism on the part of the SFA.              

[ToadKiller Dog]

Its a giant protection racket our game ,its set up to protect the ugly sister that's most powerful at that time ,currently Celtic and the jobs for the boys at the sfa/spfl table 

It works as they know full well self interest is the strongest way to divide and rule .

They knew full well that we would stand up for ourselves they didn't count on Partick having the ability to join us .

Hence why now they are getting angry with us .

Dundee United fans were one of the most vocal against the bias in our game when under the Thompsons , During the death of rangers he stated he couldn't vote to keep them in the top league as his support were enmasse going to stop him.But as the power of self interest works you now hear arabs calling for us to get kicked out and unquestioning their new owners decisions ,why because they have got a prize from the spfl, I get that to an extent .

But next time they scream unfairness I won't be offering any support.

We shouldn't expect fans of other clubs to fall in line behind us ,no matter how right we may be .

 

We and Partick are doing the right and honest thing here ,win or lose .

We are a target for them crooks don't forget

Edited July 15, 2020 by ToadKiller Dog

[JimmyCant]

4 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

At least Les Deans doesn’t talk down to his fellow Hearts supporters, nor act like a condescending chuff... 🤷‍♂️

Really. His last 3 communications have included a dig at members on here. Guy should have the guts to post as a member rather than posting using a proxy where he can’t have his posts answered or challenged.

Edited July 15, 2020 by JimmyCant

[Lone Striker]

50 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

Not sure if this has been mentioned as I have just seen it today but for once this guy seems to be talking some sense.

 

Scottish football should appoint a US-style commissioner as part of a shake-up of SPFL leadership, say two club chairmen.

Ayr United's Lachlan Cameron, who is based in the US, and Donald Findlay of Cowdenbeath believe decision-making powers should be taken away from clubs.

The major American sport leagues - the NFL, NBA, MLB and NHL - have commissioners who act for clubs.

"We've got 42 clubs all with their own self-interest," Cameron said.

"I think we'd be better off putting a person in a position to make decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole. The way you would change that commissioner would be to vote them out.

"You then take the vested, self-interest out of it. You have someone making decisions for the benefit of the league as a whole and they don't take individual clubs into consideration. It just makes it much cleaner in my opinion."

• Transfer window & League Cup dates confirmed

At the moment major decisions for the SPFL, led by chief executive Neil Doncaster and a board, must be put to a vote of all 42 clubs, which has caused controversy amid the vote to curtail the season.

It ended with relegated clubs Hearts and Partick Thistle taking legal action, and they now await their arbitration case being heard.

"You need somebody in charge of the organisation," Cowdenbeath chairman Findlay told the BBC's Scottish football podcast.

"For a long time what I thought bedevilled Scottish football was that nobody was in charge and that's why I very much agree with Lachlan's model.

"We need strong leadership, but we haven't had it, we need it now and we absolutely need to get this right before we start the next season."

Meanwhile, Cameron confirmed that he would give financial help to Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers, who asked for support in their legal battle, as Hearts and Thistle attempt to stop the trio's promotions.

However the money will not come from Ayr's funds.

"I just think it's the right thing to do," Cameron said. "I think its important to support the clubs that are, in my opinion, being unfairly persecuted here, which are the three promoted clubs."

 

Unbelievable !!             So these 2 twats want someone in charge of a guy  who earns £400k  for not being in charge of anything ?

 

Unfairly persecuted .... aye ?    Try mentioning that  to the democracy protestors in Hong Kong.  

 

 

[jackal]

So the SFA complaint is to cover any win against SPFL at arbitration, we get reinstated then we get expulsion by SFA, we get compensation we get fined and possibly expelled.

The SFA/SPFL are more or less destroying any chance Scotland has to return to normal football at the expense of a few clubs.

The SFA/SPFL is more or less the same but both can punish you independently so if you defeat one the other punishes you on something else.

[Homme]

There are only two commissionera worthy of taking on this shambles:-

 

Mick Foley or Stone Cold Steve Austin

 

[Jambo Mac]

100% correct JC. I said exactly this in a previous post last night

[JimmyCant]

2 minutes ago, jackal said:

So the SFA complaint is to cover any win against SPFL at arbitration, we get reinstated then we get expulsion by SFA

CoS would never let that stand.

[Jambo Mac]

12 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Really. His last 3 communications have included a dig at members on here. Guy should have the guts to post as a member rather than posting using a proxy where he can’t have his posts answered or challenged.

 

Just now, Jambo Mac said:

 

100% correct JC. I said exactly this in a previous post last night