SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[rory78]

what these cretins don't grasp is that if the SPFL hadnt been so corrupt and obvious regards the Dundee vote none of this would've been necessary as the vote would've been dead in the water 

[Cruyff]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

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

 

 

 

Whoever this guy is, he puts journalists in this Country to shame. 

[Mr Rabbit]

When is this meant to be starting?

 

I was under the impression it was meant to be kicking off today?

[gnasher75]

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

Edited July 15, 2020 by gnasher75

[wavydavy]

15 minutes ago, Lone Striker said:

 

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.  

 

 

 

My take on the Commissioner would be to replace Doncaster and the Board completely. 

[Forza Cuore]

2 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

this made me laugh.

[poultry]

The SFA and the SPFL are one and the same. These corupt individuals think they are above the law and that no one can touch them, no new news there I suppose.

I just hope certain influential people like Lord Clark are keeping a close eye on the story line and given the chance will rectify it, and restore sanity to the governing of our great game.

[mitch41]

25 minutes ago, ToadKiller Dog said:

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

We are a target for them crooks don't forget

There must be a few clubs/owners out there that are not happy with the SPFL and SFA. Time for them to speak up against this injustice.

[Debut 4]

5 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

Would it have been more clever to ask permission , and even if it wasn’t granted,  stick 2 fingers up and press ahead?

 

We’d probably have still been charged by the SFA anyway and maybe that was in our thoughts? 

[Spellczech]

1 minute ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argumentwl why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

The timings and communications make this all a bit more grey than black and white. Ann Budge gave plenty of notice and mentioned publicly several times that she was willing to take this to the courts. Did the SFA contact her then privately, or did they sit back and go "feed her some rope and let her hang herself for threatening our pal, and fellow board member, Doncaster".  Both SFA communications have then been timed to influence court and arbitration decisions, as Leslie Deans notes. This cannot be a coincidence...

 

I really hope we bring the whole rotten system to book for this fiasco. It would be for the good of Scottish football, which is currently dying a slow and painful death under SFA & SPFL's OF-centric watch...

[maroonlegions]

5 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

So the Hearts legal team, either chose to gamble on going to court , knowing we could be taken to court  ourselves by the SFA over breaking a rule. Or they were simply naive or  stupid  and forgot about that rule.

 

Either of the above two just seems fecking reckless.  

[Seymour M Hersh]

1 hour ago, wavydavy said:

 

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.

 

You do realise that in actuality the owners in MLB & NFL still call the shots and not the Commissioners. I agree we desperately need an independent set up to run Scottish Football for the clubs not by the clubs but in all honestly I don't know how we would ever achieve this with the bigot sisters and SMSM still around. 

[Rods]

8 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

 

Agree with this there are still rules in place and I may be wrong but is it not something to do with UEFA? Either way they had to act within the letter of the rulebook.

 

These rules do not allow for whistleblowing or conflicts of interest so this I would hope will be challenged by Hearts. Able assisted by Lord Clarks judgement it will be an open and shut case. 

 

 

[dazinho88]

3 minutes ago, Rods said:

 

Agree with this there are still rules in place and I may be wrong but is it not something to do with UEFA? Either way they had to act within the letter of the rulebook.

 

These rules do not allow for whistleblowing or conflicts of interest so this I would hope will be challenged by Hearts. Able assisted by Lord Clarks judgement it will be an open and shut case. 

 

 

FIFA insist upon a rule for each association that clubs should not use the court system for disputes, rightly or wrongly. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by dazinho88
.

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

[Rods]

1 minute ago, dazinho88 said:

FIFA insist upon a rule for each association that clubs should not use the court system for disputes, rightly or wrongly. 

 

Thanks I was sure I had read that somewhere.

 

Maybe the not going to the SFA was actually a calculated move by us know well and fine they would act and then after arbitration we could at least bring the governance to the forefront. 

[maroonlegions]

2 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

 

So does the SFA not have a leg to stand on then.

[Pilmuir]

13 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

Hearts and Thistle are right to be angry at the timing. The SFA could have intervened at any point to try to mediate or to call parties to arbitration. The Compliance Officer should have acted as soon as Hearts and Thistle had papers served, or even better to issue a warning when Hearts and Thistle first indicated their intention to go to court. Waiting until now and expecting a response at the same time as the arbitration case is being heard smacks of deliberate mischief making. However it could simply be that the Compliance Officer is in her own wee world and issued these notices of complaint without a thought for the timing.

It is without doubt mischief making. This is how the SPFL/SFA have acted throughout this debacle. Anyone with no axe to grind can see they are scheming bullies.

[Spellczech]

2 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

You do realise that in actuality the owners in MLB & NFL still call the shots and not the Commissioners. I agree we desperately need an independent set up to run Scottish Football for the clubs not by the clubs but in all honestly I don't know how we would ever achieve this with the bigot sisters and SMSM still around. 

Agreed - they'd want the Commissioner role to rotate between Celtic-minded and Rangers-minded, as they could then say the old classic that it "evens itself out over the piece".

 

If you brought in a foreigner they would complain that he "does not understand the unique elements of Scottish football and society" ie their bigotry...

 

And then you have an additional layer of big v wee clubs - say what you like about US sport but it is on a more even-footing to start with than clubs with 60k stadia and clubs with 150 supporters...

[Hashimoto]

20 minutes ago, wavydavy said:

 

My take on the Commissioner would be to replace Doncaster and the Board completely. 

I like the idea of an independent, impartial Commissioner. It works really well for the NFL. 

Al 32 teams are treated with impartiality, Profits shared equally amongst all teams irrespective of who sells the greatest number of merchandise. 

A bit too much for a forward thinking SFA and SPFL!.

Edited July 15, 2020 by Hashimoto

[Kidd’s Boots]

The more I read about the behaviour of the SFA, SPFL and SMSM partisan reporting of the case, the more I come to the conclusion that their race is run and they are desperately trying to save as much face as possible. Whoever has advised the SFA (my money would be on Moynihan) to persue this notice of complaint has drawn them on to the thinnest ice possible. How any company Director of a Members organisation or National Association fails to understand that the Companies Act 2006 and Arbitration (Scotland) Act 2010 are the only legal authorities under which the tribunal will be heard is beyond me. Let them take as much rope as they feel nessecary in this matter.

 

When it comes to arguing the case in front of the Tribunal, I'd take our man Thomson over Moynihan every day of the week and twice on Sunday. To use a horse racing analogy, he rode it hands and heels, quietly and with authority in the Court of Session, and when he had to go for the whip, it was the other horses in the race that spooked, not ours. It's such a pity that we won't be able to listen to the last furlong being called, that would have been an interesting day! But, that day is coming, it's the same runners and riders, and despite their best efforts, the handicapper hasn't managed to catch up with us yet. 

[Malinga the Swinga]

I love how actions such as this charge bring out the interlopers and miscreants of the board. They just can't help siding with Scottish football authorities and love to take opportunity to put boot into Mrs B and Hearts. 

 

I no longer consider cancellation of our being expelled from top league, the payment of compensation or even reconstruction as being my main wish from arbitration court case. I want the whole lot, SPFL and SFA completely destroyed, reputations trashed, board members sacked in disgrace and clubs bus wiped from existence. **** the whole lot of them.

[McCrae]

28 minutes ago, gnasher75 said:

Hearts and Thistle were right to take the case to the CoS as it offered the best chance of winning, either by Lord Clark deciding to hear it himself or by ensuring a fair process of arbitration, including the release of all documents.

 

The Compliance Officer is right to call Hearts and Thistle to account for going to court without asking the permission of the SFA. According to the letter of the law, we should have done that, although we may have a strong argument why we didn't. Whether or not the SFA would have granted permission is a moot point. Regardless of whether other clubs have been penalised for going to court in the past, the Compliance Officer has an obligation to bring this case, not least so that all clubs know that the articles of association will be enforced in the future.

 

 

This is a high risk strategy from the SFA. They could end up losing all authority. Lots of things go on in football that wouldn’t be accepted in any other industry. They get away with it because clubs and players don’t challenge them. If Hearts decide to fight the SFA, Article 99 will almost certainly be ruled illegal.  Transfer fees, suspending/fining players are all things that could be challenged.  Our game is changing forever.

Edited July 15, 2020 by McCrae

[ToadKiller Dog]

25 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

There must be a few clubs/owners out there that are not happy with the SPFL and SFA. Time for them to speak up against this injustice.

Falkirk certainly have shown support amongst a few others Inverness but I sense the threats made against them quieted them.

I'm sure some clubs will have a cheer if we do win ,some have shown sympathy even Les Gray of Hamilton . I just can't see them taking the jump to stand up beside us .

Doesn't seem to be in their nature .

Edited July 15, 2020 by ToadKiller Dog

[JimmyCant]

10 minutes ago, McCrae said:

This is a high risk strategy from the SFA. They could end up losing all authority. Lots of things go on in football that wouldn’t be accepted in any other industry. They get away with it because clubs and players don’t challenge them. If Hearts decide the fight the SFA, Article 99 will almost certainly be ruled illegal.  Transfer fees, suspending/fining players are all things that could be challenged.  Our game is changing forever.

I’d like to see us really push on this article and get it into court. Every football association in the world (attached to FIFA) has a form of this clause in their articles. It’s a ridiculous clause and takes away a basic human right. The Man City case will almost certainly see the end of the FFP. I’d love to see us at the forefront to get this unfair restriction shown the door too

Edited July 15, 2020 by JimmyCant

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

1 hour ago, graygo said:

 

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.

There could be little doubt that it was essential, Graygo, and now the SFA's intimidation removes any little doubt there was.

[Riccarton3]

The whole idea that you must seek authority from the SF A for court action never had and never will have any credibility. The rule was introduced for no positive reasons. Simply it allows for abuse by those in charge. The idea that clubs would forever be seeking  external jurisdiction is an insult to those clubs. Just used as an excuse to  apply such rules. 

Edited July 15, 2020 by Riccarton3

[primrose]

Is it a football dispute? Or do Hearts and Thistle consider it a business dispute under company law?

 

Does that make a difference re the SFA articles? 

[mitch41]

12 minutes ago, Pilmuir said:

It is without doubt mischief making. This is how the SPFL/SFA have acted throughout this debacle. Anyone with no axe to grind can see they are scheming bullies.

And yet Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Hibs sit back and stay silent. They leave it to their ex-players and media friends to spread the poison against Hearts & Partick Th. After the Arbitration is over and no matter the outcome I’d love Ann Budge to come out and thank Scotland’s so called big clubs for all their lack of support. Heart of Midlothian F.C. who have been leaders and promoters of Scottish Football since 1874 have been treated to a level of disrespect that would never be given to the ugly sisters from Glasgow. I hope from now on whatever the outcome we only help our friends Falkirk, Inverness CT, and a few more. 

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

Just now, Riccarton3 said:

The whole idea that you must seek authority from the SF A for court action never had and never will have any credibility. The rule was introduced for no positive reasons. Simply it allows for abuse by those in charge. 

I'm pretty sure it was introduced for a positive reason, Ricc, it just depends on which side you are on whether or not it is seen as positive. Viewed from the SFA and/or SPFL's side, then it's certainly a positive for them, for it is there to allow them great latitude in their dealings with members by using it as a tool to keep the unfavoured clubs in their place.

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

4 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

And yet Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Hibs sit back and stay silent. They leave it to their ex-players and media friends to spread the poison against Hearts & Partick Th. After the Arbitration is over and no matter the outcome I’d love Ann Budge to come out and thank Scotland’s so called big clubs for all their lack of support. Heart of Midlothian F.C. who have been leaders and promoters of Scottish Football since 1874 have been treated to a level of disrespect that would never be given to the ugly sisters from Glasgow. I hope from now on whatever the outcome we only help our friends Falkirk, Inverness CT, and a few more. 

I think you’re being a bit naive there. It’s not their fight and wtf would Hibs in particular try to help us?

[DETTY29]

We may or not win in Arbitration but by going to the CoS gives us at least a puncher's chance.

 

Going straight to the SFA arbitration process where they can manipulate the terms, we didn't have a hope in hell.

 

 

[wavydavy]

33 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

So does the SFA not have a leg to stand on then.

 

We will know soon enough.

[Riccarton3]

Just now, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I think you’re being a bit naive there. It’s not their fight and wtf would Hibs in particular try to help us?

Yes, what the poster is probably looking for is a level of something - find a name for it - that does not exist within these clubs. This is exceptional stuff. This is the club/membership  they are happy in. 

[Byyy The Light]

23 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

I love how actions such as this charge bring out the interlopers and miscreants of the board. They just can't help siding with Scottish football authorities and love to take opportunity to put boot into Mrs B and Hearts. 

 

I no longer consider cancellation of our being expelled from top league, the payment of compensation or even reconstruction as being my main wish from arbitration court case. I want the whole lot, SPFL and SFA completely destroyed, reputations trashed, board members sacked in disgrace and clubs bus wiped from existence. **** the whole lot of them.

 

Amen

 

[Riccarton3]

9 minutes ago, AllyjamboDerbyshire said:

I'm pretty sure it was introduced for a positive reason, Ricc, it just depends on which side you are on whether or not it is seen as positive. Viewed from the SFA and/or SPFL's side, then it's certainly a positive for them, for it is there to allow them great latitude in their dealings with members by using it as a tool to keep the unfavoured clubs in their place.

So, generally corrosive.

[Hungry hippo]

42 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

So the Hearts legal team, either chose to gamble on going to court , knowing we could be taken to court  ourselves by the SFA over breaking a rule. Or they were simply naive or  stupid  and forgot about that rule.

 

Either of the above two just seems fecking reckless.  

 

Or more likely that we had strong legal advice that this was the best way to proceed.

[wavydavy]

28 minutes ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

I love how actions such as this charge bring out the interlopers and miscreants of the board. They just can't help siding with Scottish football authorities and love to take opportunity to put boot into Mrs B and Hearts. 

 

I no longer consider cancellation of our being expelled from top league, the payment of compensation or even reconstruction as being my main wish from arbitration court case. I want the whole lot, SPFL and SFA completely destroyed, reputations trashed, board members sacked in disgrace and clubs bus wiped from existence. **** the whole lot of them.

 

 

I don't think there will be too mnay on here that would not wish for this.

[DETTY29]

46 minutes ago, maroonlegions said:

So the Hearts legal team, either chose to gamble on going to court , knowing we could be taken to court  ourselves by the SFA over breaking a rule. Or they were simply naive or  stupid  and forgot about that rule.

 

Either of the above two just seems fecking reckless.  

Or they understood exactly what would happen if it was kept 'in-house'

 

 

[Brave Hearts]

2 hours 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!!!

spot on

 

however i would say

 

Scottish Football stinks to Low Hell

 

 

[Riccarton3]

13 minutes ago, DETTY29 said:

We may or not win in Arbitration but by going to the CoS gives us at least a puncher's chance.

 

Going straight to the SFA arbitration process where they can manipulate the terms, we didn't have a hope in hell.

 

 

They must be bristling. I would be if my whole culture was being tested. Clark would have been as well saying their articles are for a different age but he was diplomatic. Their fear is life outside their suffocating rules, fear of scrutiny from 'non football people'. The judge must look at Moynihan and think, really, in 2020?

[j1964m]

 

[JamboAl]

Dundee Utd, Raith and Cove were annoyed we went to the CoS and they joined us there to state their case.

Why did they not go through the SFA's arbitration process?

and

have they also been cited for not going through "the proper channels"?

 

PS:   By way of analogy

On the field of play, if A whacks B and B retaliates, both are likely be sent off.  You can't just claim self defence.

[AlphonseCapone]

1 hour ago, Homme said:

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

 

Mick Foley or Stone Cold Steve Austin

 

 

And that's the bottom line... 

[7628mm]

Just listened to some sports news on radio Scotland and in Hearts news JJ is back as we already knew. However when a reporter was asked about Arbitration he had no idea what stage we are at as it is all in private unlike the CoS the other week. He did however say he hoped there would be a decision soon.

 

As I have said before I think the SFA/SPFL are just kicking the can down the road until the SPL has started thinking that everything will be OK and the season cannot be stopped.

 

I still think we may go for an interdict but leave it until after the 1st round of fixtures just to get it right up them

 

 

Edited July 15, 2020 by 7628mm

[Tommy Brown]

1 minute ago, 7628mm said:

 I have said before I think the SFA/SPFL are just kicking the can down the road until the SPL has started thinking that everything will be OK and the season cannot be stopped if it has already started.

 

My dream outcome, is reinstatement after season has started. Glorious mayhem.

Dundee Utd winning first couple of games and getting ejected.

[SectionDJambo]

3 hours 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!!!

Absolutely agree with you.

But the propaganda machine, that is the frightened and corrupt Scottish sports media, will side with the will of the supreme leader.

[Maple Leaf]

47 minutes ago, McCrae said:

This is a high risk strategy from the SFA. They could end up losing all authority. Lots of things go on in football that wouldn’t be accepted in any other industry. They get away with it because clubs and players don’t challenge them. If Hearts decide to fight the SFA, Article 99 will almost certainly be ruled illegal.  Transfer fees, suspending/fining players are all things that could be challenged.  Our game is changing forever.

 

I hope that you're right.  Change is long overdue.  The state of Scottish football is pathetic beyond description.

[Dia Liom]

Wondered this myself.

[Spellczech]

34 minutes ago, mitch41 said:

And yet Celtic, Rangers, Aberdeen, Hibs sit back and stay silent. They leave it to their ex-players and media friends to spread the poison against Hearts & Partick Th. After the Arbitration is over and no matter the outcome I’d love Ann Budge to come out and thank Scotland’s so called big clubs for all their lack of support. Heart of Midlothian F.C. who have been leaders and promoters of Scottish Football since 1874 have been treated to a level of disrespect that would never be given to the ugly sisters from Glasgow. I hope from now on whatever the outcome we only help our friends Falkirk, Inverness CT, and a few more. 

Hibs are silent as their fans would not accept them siding with us, in fact want them to stick the knife in which their owner duly did.

 

Aberdeen are parochial and only interested in things concerning Aberdeen.

 

Celtic are pulling strings behind the scenes for sure.

 

Rangers are trying to work out if this is an opportunity for them to wrest back control of the SFA from Celtic. They already have a whistleblower at the SPFL who was straight on the blower to Douglas Park over the Dundee vote, and they likely see an opportunity to become the "Establishment" club once again, which Celtic managed to pinch from them following the Referees Strike and Rangers liquidation.