SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[Riccarton3]

31 minutes ago, fancy a brew said:

 

Great reference.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Of course we have the right. In a free democracy everyone has the right to go to court for redress. FIFA has a rule against it . Both things are factual

 

I'm not looking for an argument. Just saying Rangers took the SFA to court (and won) and FIFA didn't seem to care.

[jock _turd]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

Not all of them

 

 

For the last time ! This is not totally a sporting issue it is one of company law!!!!  Heart of Midlothian football club and every other club making up the SPFL have not been fairly dealt with by the board of the SPFL according to two senior lawyers one of those two is a very highly placed QC advising the Scottish government and who specialises in company law. Now I ask the question who the F'k are you to question their opinion ? What the F'k is wrong with people on here? Not one of them in anyway close to being able to argue a case with these lawyers... and yet day after F'k day complete joe averages are !

If this goes to court it will be because people who are actually qualified to give a robust legal opinion of the situation say there is a case to be won.

 

[JimmyCant]

5 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

I'm not looking for an argument. Just saying Rangers took the SFA to court (and won) and FIFA didn't seem to care.

Well that’s not strictly true. They told the SFA to deal with it (out of court)or face sanctions. I’m pretty sure one of the possible sanctions mentioned in the press was banning the international team from a qualifying tournament (there’s a laugh) Nothing was ever done officially. No sanctions at any rate. Dont remember why.

Edited May 22, 2020 by JimmyCant

[Pasquale for King]

57 minutes ago, The Verminator said:

Amiens are going to be relegated, French Courts threw it out

 

https://www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/11992991/ligue-1-lyon-amiens-and-toulouse-appeals-rejected-by-french-judge

Relegated to a division that’s not relegating anyone and reconstructing to 22 teams 🤔🤷🏾‍♂️🙈?!?!

[John mcCartney]

2 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

My thoughts exactly. We could do without that type of bigotry on here. John comes across as staunchly old school though, I doubt he'll be changing soon.

haha.its the demographic old boy ,not the religion
 

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

Well that’s not strictly true. They told the SFA to deal with it (out if court)or face sanctions. I’m pretty sure one of the possible sanctions mentioned in the press was banning the international team from a qualifying tournament (there’s a laugh) Nothing was ever done officially. No sanctions at any rate. Dont remember why.

Possibly because no rule made up by anyone connected with football over rides the law of the land.

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

2 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Well I did give you a get out of jail free card early doors in this debate when I asked you if you thought he was a puppet.
 

The man is utterly incompetent at anything beyond the basic function of his role. You have even highlighted some of his deficiencies. When he is required to do anything that requires some finesse or sophistication he is found wanting. 

 

Lawell described Doncaster as a “capable guy”. At £388k a year Scottish football clubs should be getting more than “capable” for their cash.

A puppet, it's difficult to say.

 

I think he probably knows where the power lies. 

 

No dispute on the cash. Certainly a public position with a lot of pressure at certain points. 

 

Last year's Betfred he used common sense......eventually. 

 

Being stuck in between Celtic and Rangers,  taking decisions from a board of 8 members with conflict of interest, and then another 30 odd stakeholders on top.

 

Take a fair bit of work to keep all of that in the box. 

 

No idea why tonight,  I've been fairer. 

 

I really can't stand him 

[Jambo66]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Not all of them

Talk about picky. All "Senior Counsel" are QCs. Of course, Junior Counsel can be senior in terms of experience and/or age. It is generally not possible to become a QC until you have been an advocate for 13 years. Some advocates never become QCs. They remain "junior" for their entire career. Senior and junior counsel are all advocates.

[OldGorgie]

4 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

If this goes to court it will be because people who are actually qualified to give a robust legal opinion of the situation say there is a case to be won.

I don’t think anybody disagrees with that. I’ve been arguing for robust legal action for some time. Reconstruction is simply a means for the SPFL to delay legal action.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

6 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Well that’s not strictly true. They told the SFA to deal with it (out if court)or face sanctions. I’m pretty sure one of the possible sanctions mentioned in the press was banning the international team from a qualifying tournament (there’s a laugh) Nothing was ever done officially. No sanctions at any rate. Dont remember why.

 

I can't see how FIFA have any jurisdiction over businesses that need to protect themselves against damaging decisions. If all they can do is threaten the official body to get them to settle out of court then that surely adds weight to our case.

Edited May 22, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[JimmyCant]

5 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

 

For the last time ! This is not totally a sporting issue it is one of company law!!!!  Heart of Midlothian football club and every other club making up the SPFL have not been fairly dealt with by the board of the SPFL according to two senior lawyers one of those two is a very highly placed QC advising the Scottish government and who specialises in company law. Now I ask the question who the F'k are you to question their opinion ? What the F'k is wrong with people on here? Not one of them in anyway close to being able to argue a case with these lawyers... and yet day after F'k day complete joe averages are !

If this goes to court it will be because people who are actually qualified to give a robust legal opinion of the situation say there is a case to be won.

 

Just answer the very narrow question I asked 

 

In your qualified legal opinion (which I assume you are qualified) does the court have the power, authority, jurisdiction, call it what you will , to order the resolution vote and result to be set aside ?

 

Simple yes or no answer.

[JimmyCant]

4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Possibly because no rule made up by anyone connected with football over rides the law of the land.

You need to look up the Juventus/Italian FA case from a few years back

[jock _turd]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

Just answer the very narrow question I asked 

 

In your qualified legal opinion (which I assume you are qualified) does the court have the power, authority, jurisdiction, call it what you will , to order the resolution vote and result to be set aside ?

 

Simple yes or no answer.

 

What the F are you talking about I am a joe average NOT claiming to know squat! But I have read the opinions given by two highly placed lawyers who have given an opinion to PTFC who both opine that there is a very winnable case... now stop F'kn bothering me and go and ask them the same question! 

[JimmyCant]

5 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

Talk about picky. All "Senior Counsel" are QCs. Of course, Junior Counsel can be senior in terms of experience and/or age. It is generally not possible to become a QC until you have been an advocate for 13 years. Some advocates never become QCs. They remain "junior" for their entire career. Senior and junior counsel are all advocates.

So to be clear, not all senior advocates are QC’s as you stated.

[jock _turd]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

You need to look up the Juventus/Italian FA case from a few years back

Since when was the laws of the UK anything to do with Italian law?

[JimmyCant]

1 minute ago, jock _turd said:

 

What the F are you talking about I am a joe average NOT claiming to know squat! But I have read the opinions given by two highly placed lawyers who have given an opinion to PTFC who both opine that there is a very winnable case... now stop F'kn bothering me and go and ask them the same question! 

Keep the heed auld yin. Quoted the wrong post that’s all

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Just answer the very narrow question I asked 

 

In your qualified legal opinion (which I assume you are qualified) does the court have the power, authority, jurisdiction, call it what you will , to order the resolution vote and result to be set aside ?

 

Simple yes or no answer.

 

Is that what we'd take them to court for? I would have thought we'd try to get an interdict and/or sue for damages. The threat of that seems to have already got the league to reconsider reconstruction. 

[Morgan]

1 minute ago, jock _turd said:

Since when was the laws of the UK anything to do with Italian law?

Since never, Jock.

 

Well said, mate.

[JimmyCant]

3 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

Since when was the laws of the UK anything to do with Italian law?

FFS we’re talking about FIFA forbidding court action no matter what country you’re in. 

[jock _turd]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

FFS we’re talking about FIFA forbidding court action no matter what country you’re in. 

 

Look FIFA can shout as loud as they F'kn like the law of the UK will decide if company law has been infringed or not. This is not a sporting matter!

[TheBigO]

1 hour ago, Sir Gio said:

Its called the hygiene factor. 

 

Any ordinary time we don't even consider Neil Doncaster, because things tick along fine. Same as a referee, nobody applauds a referee for doing their job. 

 

I would say in any given year,  probably at least 350 days of the year we would be oblivious to him or the general administration of the SPFL. 

 

We don't applaud him, great fixture list,  great organisation of match officials. 

 

We didn't actually bother to thank him or his organisation for being extremely supportive when we built a new stand.

 

I will say it one final time,  got no real desire to defend the fud, but I reckon he can administrate and ordinarily well. 

 

But he is a god awful front man. And for the life of me I will never know why he would earn 388k, astonishing. 

 

And he is a ***** 

 

You're no bad Gio but this is mince. He's no a PA. He's an exec on £390k a year.

 

We need a leader. Not an effing admin assistant!!!!

 

350 days a year there's little to be Don. The 15 we need decisions made that matter like negotiating a TV deal or telling the OF  to pipe down, he's playing on outlook calendar yeah?

[Psychedelicropcircle]

Is the SPFL not different from the SFA in a court sense?

 

Edit from a fifa perspective 

Edited May 22, 2020 by Psychedelicropcircle

[OldGorgie]

Just now, JimmyCant said:

FFS we’re talking about FIFA forbidding court action no matter what country you’re in. 

Sorry jimmy but we are talking company law and Court of Session judgements completely override any rules set up by FIFA.

[JimmyCant]

25 minutes ago, Sir Gio said:

Interesting new administration rules with HMRC.

 

CVA can only be agreed upon full tax payments. 

 

I wonder if that will be relaxed with so many companies in difficulty. 

 

Going to liquidate far more 

Is that a change ? They didn’t accept our CVA but they weren’t the main/majority creditor (luckily UBIG were) and HMRC couldn’t stop it going through once UBIG allowed it.

[Guest ToqueJambo]

4 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

FFS we’re talking about FIFA forbidding court action no matter what country you’re in. 

 

But we've proven they can't forbid it as there have been cases. It seems like according to you with the Rangers example all they'll do is pressure the governing body to sort out out before it gets to the courts.

Edited May 22, 2020 by ToqueJambo

[Pasquale for King]

12 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

You need to look up the Juventus/Italian FA case from a few years back

I don’t need to look up anything, the SFA/SPFL/UEFA or FIFA can’t act illegally towards us by imposing their rules.

[JimmyCant]

Just now, OldGorgie said:

Sorry jimmy but we are talking company law and Court of Session judgements completely override any rules set up by FIFA.

Okay I’ll leave it there. FIFA did successfully stop Juventus going to court under threat of expulsion of both Juventus and the Italian FA , but hey they’re Italian so it doesn’t count

[Morgan]

5 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

FFS we’re talking about FIFA forbidding court action no matter what country you’re in. 

Don’t think we are, in this instance, Jimmy.

[davemclaren]

2 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

But we've proven they can't forbid it as there have been cases. It seems like according to you with the Rangers example all they'll do is pressure the governing body to sort out out before it gets to the courts.

Sounds like a plan then. 

[jock _turd]

1 minute ago, Morgan said:

Since never, Jock.

 

Well said, mate.

 

I am not even arguing Morgan... this is not a sporting issue it is based in company law and yet even after stating that the comment is ignored for sake of not being able to argue it. I never gave the opinion two guys who actually know their stuff did. I know it is a Hearts fans forum so why not stick to football because nobody on here, to my knowledge, has the legal experience to out trump PTFC's two lawyers... they will be on her to discuss the outcome of any legal move to question the opinion of the law lord hearing the case!

[Smoked-Glass]

43 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

It’s purely a viewer numbers thing. They get 1.4 million viewers in the UK and many more world wide for an OF game. All other Scottish games are 100,000 viewers or less. The last Edinburgh derby on Sky had 58,000 viewers in the UK

 

To put it in perspective their average Super Sunday UK audience is 2.5 - 3 million Plus worldwide figures Goes to around 4 million UK if it’s a key top 4 game.

Correct.. And the sky deal was negotiatied on the assumption of those 4 games.   Apparently its the best deal we ve ever had. 

[jamboshorty]

Doncaster saying he still hopeful for sponsor. Whose going to sponsor something (unless he offers sky something) where there a court case ongoing and negative press .  I see a narrative increasing about money coming from Scottish government, again can't see Scottish government giving any money if there a live court case.  they not going to give money to clubs if that might end up as part of court resolution. You'd think that might make chairman and spfl think but they so arrogant probably not. 

[Morgan]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

I don’t need to look up anything, the SFA/SPFL/UEFA or FIFA can’t act illegally towards us by imposing their rules.

Getting my goat now.

 

Jimmy Cant is wrong.

 

Sorry, Jimmy, but you are.

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, Morgan said:

Getting my goat now.

 

Jimmy Cant is wrong.

 

Sorry, Jimmy, but you are.

Not everyone else is? Is his middle name unreasonable 🤔😜?

Edited May 22, 2020 by Pasquale for King

[Pasquale for King]

2 minutes ago, jamboshorty said:

Doncaster saying he still hopeful for sponsor. Whose going to sponsor something (unless he offers sky something) where there a court case ongoing and negative press .  I see a narrative increasing about money coming from Scottish government, again can't see Scottish government giving any money if there a live court case.  they not going to give money to clubs if that might end up as part of court resolution. You'd think that might make chairman and spfl think but they so arrogant probably not. 

I’ve had a sneak peak at the new away strip.

[Jambo66]

15 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

So to be clear, not all senior advocates are QC’s as you stated.

In the context of advocates, the word "senior" means QC, the word "junior" means they are not. The ordinary meaning of the two words is different. I was not using the ordinary meaning of the words as should have been clear to you. I'm sorry that it wasn't.

[Nookie Bear]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

I’ve had a sneak peak at the new away strip.

Every time I see that picture I keep thinking we need a new Big Flag...

[JimmyCant]

4 minutes ago, Morgan said:

Getting my goat now.

 

Jimmy Cant is wrong.

 

Sorry, Jimmy, but you are.

Don’t be sorry. If I’m wrong I’m wrong. I’ve been wrong plenty of times before and I’m still living a useful satisfying life. Being wrong is part of life my friend 

[Pasquale for King]

Just now, Nookie Bear said:

Every time I see that picture I keep thinking we need a new Big Flag...

I just saw it on FB, thought I had the scoop 😂🙈.

[Ethan Hunt]

5 hours ago, Deevers said:

Teams like St Mirren and Hamilton want us out purely for their own reasons. They know that we will strengthen before the restart and have a stronger financial power than them. That’s why they will oppose reconstruction. Purely as a measure to save  themselves next season.  I still think that we will be forced to go down the civil action route and force financial carnage on the lot of them.

So, if we are in the Championship who do you think would be relegated from the Premiership next year?

[Morgan]

4 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Not everyone else is? Is his middle name unreasonable 🤔😜?

I’m struggling here to decide if you are either being deliberately obtuse, or agreeing with me.

 

Or agreeing with @JimmyCant.

 

🤷🏿‍♂️

[Francis Albert]

32 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Possibly because no rule made up by anyone connected with football over rides the law of the land.

 The idea that any organisation 

can proclaim itself above the law is ludicrous. The Mafia probably tried that some time ago. Not a bad analogy in fact.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Francis Albert

[Morgan]

2 minutes ago, JimmyCant said:

Don’t be sorry. If I’m wrong I’m wrong. I’ve been wrong plenty of times before and I’m still living a useful satisfying life. Being wrong is part of life my friend 

Philosophy, James.  

 

Nothing personal within my comment, just my own opinion.

[soonbe110]

16 minutes ago, jock _turd said:

 

Look FIFA can shout as loud as they F'kn like the law of the UK will decide if company law has been infringed or not. This is not a sporting matter!

Think that’s the issue. It’s not a football law that is being challenged, it’s a UK company law that’s being challenged. Fifa/UEFA don’t count in this case. 

[jock _turd]

Just now, Morgan said:

I’m struggling here to decide if you are either being deliberately obtuse, or agreeing with me.

 

Or agreeing with @JimmyCant.

 

🤷🏿‍♂️

Bad spelling Morgan he used a "t" where he outa nota

Edited May 22, 2020 by jock _turd

[Nookie Bear]

3 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I just saw it on FB, thought I had the scoop 😂🙈.

Aww....you’re still The Man in my eyes 

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

10 minutes ago, TheBigO said:

You're no bad Gio but this is mince. He's no a PA. He's an exec on £390k a year.

 

We need a leader. Not an effing admin assistant!!!!

 

350 days a year there's little to be Don. The 15 we need decisions made that matter like negotiating a TV deal or telling the OF  to pipe down, he's playing on outlook calendar yeah?

Agreed, not disputing he is overpaid. 

 

I'm surprised just how flimsy the SPFL actually is. A handful of people. 

 

From what I can gather from this debacle,  he doesn't make football decisions though that falls back onto the club's. He simply keeps the process in order. 

 

I think it is barking up the wrong tree to get him. 

 

I also agree we need a leader,  but the constitution and articles of the SPFL are the problem. They prohibit leadership. 

 

It puts it back on the clubs alwaysby proxy,  there's never going to be anything else other than conflict of interest,  and the weighting of the voting is just wrong. 

 

I really don't see it as his fault. 

 

Whoever's going to replace him one day, I hope they go the marketing route for the front man, with a decent straight man behind them. 

 

But sort that voting system,  its power is ruinous 

[annushorribilis III]

16 minutes ago, ToqueJambo said:

 

But we've proven they can't forbid it as there have been cases. It seems like according to you with the Rangers example all they'll do is pressure the governing body to sort out out before it gets to the courts.

Rangers went to court over a footballing matter against the governing body (SFA).

Hearts will be looking at damage to the business. They will be testing the behaviour of the board of the SPFL and fellow member clubs : not the governing body. 

[Pasquale for King]

3 minutes ago, Morgan said:

I’m struggling here to decide if you are either being deliberately obtuse, or agreeing with me.

 

Or agreeing with @JimmyCant.

 

🤷🏿‍♂️

I disagree with JC, I was joking but an emoji probably should’ve been used.

Unreasonable was the first thing that came to mind to make up Jimmy U Cant , maybe if I asked if he was cockney then my poor attempt at humour might’ve been clearer 🤔🤷🏾‍♂️🤪?!?!