SPFL and Covid ( Leagues 1 and 2 to restart )

[gashauskis9]

12 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

I hope some posters on here are correct and Ann budge is playing a great game but I honestly don’t see it.

i think the offer of the help for other clubs hinders our chances of staying in the premiership.

all my opinion of course and would love to be proved wrong.

I don’t think staying in the Premiership is a viable option now.  This plan guarantees we have a championship to play in next season and puts money in the pockets of clubs who’ll be handing it back to us in compensation when we drag their arses through the courts. 

[Turkishcap]

Glad I am back to kickback, stupidly looked at other media and the remarks have done ma heid in. Not doing that again. Its here or nowt.

[Francis Albert]

36 minutes ago, Jambo66 said:

I think having the deeper pockets helps, but it is not as important as having a solid case. Not only do I think we have a solid case, I am pretty sure we have deeper pockets. Remember that all of the member clubs will be equally liable in a court action. I reckon we have considerably deeper pockets than at least 35 of them.

Do the  other clubs individually have equal liability with us or do they collectively have equal liability with us? I think the latter certainly  on legal costs so I doubt we outgun the other 41 in terms of depths of pockets.

 

I really have no idea of the strength of our case. Morally it is unanswerable. But legally?

[Mikey1874]

40 minutes ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

Having a central fund to pay for C-19 testing would help all clubs...

 

And supporting the extra running costs and new arrangements for grounds / hubs.

[Birregrande]

7 hours ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Listen mate. I am just a guy watching the events unfold and basing my opinion on what I have heard, read and seen. I look at who we have on our side and ask myself, are these extremely successful people making this up as they go along, or is there a strategy to all this. I block out the Cosgrove, Miller, Young, DR, Sun, chat and opinion as just noise. It’s their to deflect, confuse, and deflate. If you focus on what we are doing, what we are saying, and who is saying it, a pattern becomes clear.  Just as importantly I look at influential Hearts people who are saying nothing, in public at least. Are they just accepting this, or are they working the strategy quietly in the background.  Because we cant be heard making a huge amount of noise doesn’t mean that people aren’t being noised up.

 

Look at Doncaster et al. They’ve been more inconspicuous than Osman bin Laden ever was. Their silence has - in the main - been deafening. Why is that? If you are so sure of yourself why conduct Q and A’s with yourself, not release Deloitte audits, only allow Dick Gordon or David Currie to interview you, while you set the agenda?Why do that? How many interviews and invites onto radio shows have they declined? Why decline? What are you hiding? or who are you hiding from?

 

We are following a path that takes us to destination forced reconstruction or court. I personally think the driving factor for all our actions has been for the good of the game. Some people just can’t see that. Ann Budge, and those standing alongside her, and she’ll have many, are not going to allow us to be turned over without a fight. She’ll fight for the good of the game, and when that fails it’s only Hearts, and let loose the dragons.

 

I could be wrong about it all. Time will tell. But I refuse to believe that with who we have on our side, the resources available, and the strength that is generated by pointing all of those guns at the same target, that this is all being made up on the hoof. 

 

 

 

This is where I am.  I think things will accelerate now.

[Unknown user]

Just now, Francis Albert said:

Do the  other clubs individually have equal liability with us or do they collectively have equal liability with us? I think the latter certainly  on legal costs so I doubt we outgun the other 41 in terms of depths of pockets.

 

I really have no idea of the strength of our case. Morally it is unanswerable. But legally?

The spfl is liable, the clubs are only liable to the limit of their investment in the company, which I believe is zero.

 

I don't know where this shared liability thing comes from, companies are started to keep liability at arm's length.

[Ethan Hunt]

1 hour ago, communist said:

 

In an unprecedented time with an unprecedented case?  Not sure. 

 

Donald findlay defended rangers in the ebt case, no doubt knowing it would fail, as one example of QCs defending a sinking ship. 

 

It could only bring reputational damage if it was a supposed clear cut, easy case, this won't be, it would drag on for ages, and at huge expense, that's from Ann's own mouth.

 

 

Donald Finlay was blinded by his blue tinted glasses. Poor example to give. 

 

QC’s spend years getting to that position. They value their reputation and make a very good living from it. To suggest that it is simple just money they are interested in is complete nonsense. Who would want to employ a QC that never wins a case? How much can a QC that wins cases charge? The reason for asking for two QC’s legal option is to confirm the strong parts and identify the weak. When two QC’s agree on the majority of evidence I’d suggest we have a strong case.

[luckydug]

24 minutes ago, communist said:

 

I have no idea. 

 

Pretty sure he done it for free too, so rangers may have let him run as far as he could with it?

 

Either way I still don't believe there are many cases of QC's or lawyers turning down many jobs. 

 

I'd think its just another job for them, and I can't see any reputational damage after a case like this, resulting from a pandemic, without any previous precedent. It's a win win for the lawyers, as is always the case. 

 

They win they get paid, they loose they get paid. Do you really think many would think twice about hiring a lawyer that lost a case about a shambolic vote surrounding Scottish football based on a virus, missing/lost emails and wee clubs feeling pressurised either way? I don't. 

 

But really I'm just rambling, I have no legal expertise or experience at all. Although clearly based on what others are saying with experience, I'm not alone. 

 

I'd love it if I were wrong, and if we could stick it to the weasels in court. But I'm a pessimist about it all now. 

 

I'd prefer the club concentrated on first team football matters, recruitment and making plans for getting back to the spfl by winning matches. Winning football matches is what matters most to me for the coming season, and we won't be playing in the SPFL as far as I can see. 

The benefactors help should enable a second tier to operate. 

All the compensation in the world would be no good to us if there was no Championship to gain promotion from. 

First and foremost we want and need to play football. 

[Francis Albert]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

The spfl is liable, the clubs are only liable to the limit of their investment in the company, which I believe is zero.

 

I don't know where this shared liability thing comes from, companies are started to keep liability at arm's length.

But in acting on behalf of its members doesn't the SPFL rely on funds from its members? If not we can bring the whole house of cards down simply be taking the SPFL to court.

And if so, why haven't we? 

[Kiwidoug]

10 minutes ago, Boof said:

 

And then bring on James Anderson to bowl the next over? 

I'm never at my best first thing in the morning.  Reading all this somehow didn't connect with me that our benefactor shares the name of one of my favourite cricket players of all time.  On his day, and he has them often, he is unplayable.

 

I suspect this namesake benefactor is exactly the same.  Clearly a man of great integrity and wisdom.  Like me, he will understand that you can't win a trophy you didn't win and you can't be relegated if you didn't meet the relegation criteria.  Another chapter opens in this incredible saga.  Can't wait to see how it unfolds.

[GinRummy]

Don’t often look in on hibs.net but those silly ******* seem to think the boy owns Baillie Gifford and that’s it’s ‘his company’. Everybody just seems to make their own mind up without doing any research and then make a total **** of themselves. 

[Maple Leaf]

6 minutes ago, Turkishcap said:

Glad I am back to kickback, stupidly looked at other media and the remarks have done ma heid in. Not doing that again. Its here or nowt.

 

Only sensible, constructive posts are permitted on JKB. 

 

 

[Francis Albert]

3 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Donald Finlay was blinded by his blue tinted glasses. Poor example to give. 

 

QC’s spend years getting to that position. They value their reputation and make a very good living from it. To suggest that it is simple just money they are interested in is complete nonsense. Who would want to employ a QC that never wins a case? How much can a QC that wins cases charge? The reason for asking for two QC’s legal option is to confirm the strong parts and identify the weak. When two QC’s agree on the majority of evidence I’d suggest we have a strong case.

All QCs win some and all lose some. 

[Class of 75]

17 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

It is... it’s basically a case of inviting them all over for dinner to celebrate putting a bit of financial backing in. How these people now decide to conduct themselves, will play a major role in whether or not there will be another celebratory dinner. 😎

Yes, indeed. 😎

[Ethan Hunt]

1 minute ago, Francis Albert said:

All QCs win some and all lose some. 

But they don’t take cases based purely on money, and that was The OP’s point.

[7628mm]

1 hour ago, John Findlay said:

You dont do politics, do you?

I firmly believe that when the new season kicks off, Neil Doncaster will not be in a job.

 

Surely you are not suggesting that our very own, well just departed, Craig Levein for CE of the SPFL is going to be 1 of the strings attached to the deal?

 

[Beast Boy]

9 minutes ago, Turkishcap said:

Glad I am back to kickback, stupidly looked at other media and the remarks have done ma heid in. Not doing that again. Its here or nowt.

The only other sizeable Hearts forum is a cesspit. Total vermin with Hibs-esque  patter.

[Mikey1874]

27 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

I hope some posters on here are correct and Ann budge is playing a great game but I honestly don’t see it.

i think the offer of the help for other clubs hinders our chances of staying in the premiership.

all my opinion of course and would love to be proved wrong.

 

Maybe.

 

But the alternative is no Championship to play in. Maybe no promotion or relegation. What then?

[Class of 75]

3 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Don’t often look in on hibs.net but those silly ******* seem to think the boy owns Baillie Gifford and that’s it’s ‘his company’. Everybody just seems to make their own mind up without doing any research and then make a total **** of themselves. 

Mate, that lot are still writing with crayons. One brain cell between the lot of them 

[communist]

6 minutes ago, Ethan Hunt said:

Donald Finlay was blinded by his blue tinted glasses. Poor example to give. 

 

QC’s spend years getting to that position. They value their reputation and make a very good living from it. To suggest that it is simple just money they are interested in is complete nonsense. Who would want to employ a QC that never wins a case? How much can a QC that wins cases charge? The reason for asking for two QC’s legal option is to confirm the strong parts and identify the weak. When two QC’s agree on the majority of evidence I’d suggest we have a strong case.

 

You seem to know more than me, I've looked for the records of QCs, there's over 120 in Scotland and I can't see any records of wins or losses, but feel free to correct me. 

 

Remember it's a career for them ultimately. 

[SUTOL]

Just now, Ethan Hunt said:

But they don’t take cases based purely on money, and that was The OP’s point.

 

I think it was more a case of they tell you what you want to hear. 

 

Which IMO is not the case. 

[Rods]

Why would a QC not want a high profile case like this if it comes to court. We will have q’s at the door.

[GinRummy]

1 minute ago, Class of 75 said:

Mate, that lot are still writing with crayons. One brain cell between the lot of them 

Was on pie and Bovril earlier and it’s actually worse. Just full of conspiracy theorists and Dunfermline guys saying that sinking millions in isn’t enough and a waste of time 😀. They’ve no money but money isn’t the answer 🤔

[1874robbo]

3 minutes ago, Mikey1874 said:

 

Maybe.

 

But the alternative is no Championship to play in. Maybe no promotion or relegation. What then?

How does this offer of paying for the testing ensure that championship clubs can still fulfill a full seasons fixtures behind closed doors?

 

[neilnunb]

7 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Don’t often look in on hibs.net but those silly ******* seem to think the boy owns Baillie Gifford and that’s it’s ‘his company’. Everybody just seems to make their own mind up without doing any research and then make a total **** of themselves. 

 

 

Used to work in Baillie Gifford years and years ago and it was full of Hibs fans. Hopefully any that work there are all penning resignation letters in protest. 😀

[Lfhearts]

2 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

How does this offer of paying for the testing ensure that championship clubs can still fulfill a full seasons fixtures behind closed doors?

 

Exactly

[Beast Boy]

1 minute ago, GinRummy said:

Was on pie and Bovril earlier and it’s actually worse. Just full of conspiracy theorists and Dunfermline guys saying that sinking millions in isn’t enough and a waste of time 😀. They’ve no money but money isn’t the answer 🤔

A total failure to recognise the fact he’s ploughed millions in to Hearts, and that has been down to how we conduct ourselves as a club (thankfully not as a support [online at least]). They will get their wee “footy up”, and whether or not anything else is forthcoming will depend upon their actions after they receive it.

[south morocco]

2 minutes ago, Lfhearts said:

Exactly

Forced reconstruction with teams able to complete all fixtures 

[GinRummy]

3 minutes ago, neilnunb said:

 

 

Used to work in Baillie Gifford years and years ago and it was full of Hibs fans. Hopefully any that work there are all penning resignation letters in protest. 😀

A friend of mine works in IT there and he’s a hibby. Lovely bloke tbf but he’ll not be happy at this 😀

[south morocco]

2 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

A total failure to recognise the fact he’s ploughed millions in to Hearts, and that has been down to how we conduct ourselves as a club (thankfully not as a support [online at least]). They will get their wee “footy up”, and whether or not anything else is forthcoming will depend upon their actions after they receive it.

In other words, this is all they’re getting😀

[GinRummy]

3 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

A total failure to recognise the fact he’s ploughed millions in to Hearts, and that has been down to how we conduct ourselves as a club (thankfully not as a support [online at least]). They will get their wee “footy up”, and whether or not anything else is forthcoming will depend upon their actions after they receive it.

Would imagine that’s close to the mark 👍

[1874robbo]

5 minutes ago, south morocco said:

Forced reconstruction with teams able to complete all fixtures 

So exactly the situation we’d have without the offer of paying for the testing?

[niblick1874]

13 hours ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

All Jackson and Ralston have done for me now, is to make me want the reconstruction talks to fail. Anderson can save the lower league clubs from oblivion, and Hearts can take the SPFL to court. Legal action now my preferred choice.

 

13 hours ago, redjambo said:

 

This for me, but with a huge number of exclamation marks and a tonne of swear words added.

 

[south morocco]

1 minute ago, 1874robbo said:

So exactly the situation we’d have without the offer of paying for the testing?

And helping clubs out with testing 

[1874robbo]

9 minutes ago, Lfhearts said:

Exactly

We are getting pumped here make no bones about it.

we might get the wee benny hill pat on the head at any court case for being nice guys to the other clubs but it will still be “thanks hearts but now off you pop to the championship” 

[milky_26]

14 minutes ago, neilnunb said:

 

 

Used to work in Baillie Gifford years and years ago and it was full of Hibs fans. Hopefully any that work there are all CRAYONING resignation letters in protest. 😀

FTFY

[1874robbo]

1 minute ago, south morocco said:

And helping clubs out with testing 

Yeh but the testing is pointless if teams can’t afford to play behind closed doors anyway.

 

[Beast Boy]

3 minutes ago, south morocco said:

In other words, this is all they’re getting😀

 

2 minutes ago, GinRummy said:

Would imagine that’s close to the mark 👍

I could be well off the mark. I often am. What we do know however, is this:

 

Anderson pitched up at HMFC because of Budge and the community/charitable ethos she wanted to promote.

 

He’s only looking at the rest of Scottish Football because of Budge/Hearts.

 

He’s agreed to keep supporting Hearts financially for the next five years.

 

He’s agreed to help all 42 SPFL clubs to some degree. 
 

In order to agree the SPFL funding, he had to meet and chat with a deplorable OF puppet who is bleeding our league dry for his £400k p/a, and a man who is never out of Private Eye for being a risible crooked Celtic-minded scumbag.

 

...

 

So what happens next? 🤷‍♂️
 

The SPFL clubs now have a chance to vote upon how they want to proceed in terms of league set-up, division of funds, and how to protect all member clubs.

 

Lets see how some of those utter scumbags, brought together by the EEN today in an article vote...

 

Then let’s see how much money comes their way after the money they have been gifted has been spent... 🤔

[SUTOL]

2 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

We are getting pumped here make no bones about it.

we might get the wee benny hill pat on the head at any court case for being nice guys to the other clubs but it will still be “thanks hearts but now off you pop to the championship with at least £5,000,000.” 

 

FTFY

[Jambo66]

26 minutes ago, Francis Albert said:

Do the  other clubs individually have equal liability with us or do they collectively have equal liability with us? I think the latter certainly  on legal costs so I doubt we outgun the other 41 in terms of depths of pockets.

 

I really have no idea of the strength of our case. Morally it is unanswerable. But legally?

The general view seems to be that each club is liable for an equal share. The reason being that the decision to expel us was effectively taken by the members, rather than the Board. And I know that the decision in the premiership was left to the board, but that doesn't really change very much given the context.

I genuinely don't know if that is correct as I haven't looked at the legal position, but it certainly appears to be the view of Celtic. I am sure they will have taken advice. In any event, if the liability is collective, that only really changes things for us. We would go after Celtic (the richest) and they would then go after everyone else.

Lots of different views on this thread as to the strength of our case. I am firmly in the camp that thinks it is a strong one. Others disagree.

[1874robbo]

1 minute ago, SUTOL said:

 

FTFY

Dream on 

[Jambo66]

32 minutes ago, Smithee said:

The spfl is liable, the clubs are only liable to the limit of their investment in the company, which I believe is zero.

 

I don't know where this shared liability thing comes from, companies are started to keep liability at arm's length.

The point is that limited liability only takes you so far. It doesn't protect directors in every situation. And where the directors are doing the bidding of the shareholders, it doesn't protect them either.

[Beast Boy]

Personally, I hope the SPFL clubs vote to expell us and not restructure. I hope this because it would be for no other reason than a mistaken belief that we deserve to be punished unfairly. What that will mean, is the SPFL will get no future help after what has been agreed with Dodgy Doncaster and Minky McLennan.

 

I’d prefer these ***** to never get another bean again personally, bring on the courts.

[SUTOL]

5 minutes ago, 1874robbo said:

Dream on 

 

Based on? 

[will-i-am-a-jambo]

10 minutes ago, Special Officer Doofy said:

 

I could be well off the mark. I often am. What we do know however, is this:

 

Anderson pitched up at HMFC because of Budge and the community/charitable ethos she wanted to promote.

 

He’s only looking at the rest of Scottish Football because of Budge/Hearts.

 

He’s agreed to keep supporting Hearts financially for the next five years.

 

He’s agreed to help all 42 SPFL clubs to some degree. 
 

In order to agree the SPFL funding, he had to meet and chat with a deplorable OF puppet who is bleeding our league dry for his £400k p/a, and a man who is never out of Private Eye for being a risible crooked Celtic-minded scumbag.

 

...

 

So what happens next? 🤷‍♂️
 

The SPFL clubs now have a chance to vote upon how they want to proceed in terms of league set-up, division of funds, and how to protect all member clubs.

 

Lets see how some of those utter scumbags, brought together by the EEN today in an article vote...

 

Then let’s see how much money comes their way after the money they have been gifted has been spent... 🤔

 

The bit in bold, lm assuming you are referring to Neil Doncaster? Have there really been articles in Private Eye about him? If so, l would be interested in what they had to say. Thanks.

 

ps you don't need to give me any quotes l can look for them. 

Edited June 1, 2020 by will-i-am-a-jambo

[Jambo66]

28 minutes ago, communist said:

 

You seem to know more than me, I've looked for the records of QCs, there's over 120 in Scotland and I can't see any records of wins or losses, but feel free to correct me. 

 

Remember it's a career for them ultimately. 

I appreciate you're not going to do this - I assume you have a life 😁😁, but you can find out quite a lot if you look at an advocates profile. Many of them list high profile cases in which they have been involved and don't limit them to successes. The profile may not always say if they won, but you can then find out by checking the case report.

As I said, not something I'd recommend that you do!

What I would say is that normally, clients don't choose an advocate, their solicitor does it for them. The solicitor will do a bit of due diligence before recommending a suitable advocate.

[John Findlay]

32 minutes ago, 7628mm said:

 

Surely you are not suggesting that our very own, well just departed, Craig Levein for CE of the SPFL is going to be 1 of the strings attached to the deal?

 

No. I think he will go manage Cowdenbeath again.

[1874robbo]

1 minute ago, SUTOL said:

 

Based on? 

There is no chance we’d get anywhere near that figure 

there’s no guarantee we’d even win any case.

dont get me wrong I’d love you to be correct but I think £5 million is fantasy stuff.

[Pilmuir]

1 hour ago, SUTOL said:

 

 

On the face of it, it is not designed/meant to help "us". 

 

It is to help all clubs survive and assist as many as possible to play as much football as they can for the next season (or two).

Maybe, but it’s “us” I am worried about. And so should we all be.

[milky_26]

3 minutes ago, will-i-am-a-jambo said:

 

The bit in bold, lm assuming you are referring to Neil Doncaster? Have there really been articles in Private Eye about him? If so, l would be interested in what they had to say. Thanks.

 

ps you don't need to give me any quotes l can look for them. 

he means mclennan not doncaster