HibeeJibee

Keeps promotion/relegation fair + it's viable for SFL to compensate 3rd Div clubs for 2 lost games.

They aren't bound by the rules to do that - but it's a hell of a lot cheaper in Div 3 than in Div 1!!

Well the last time it happened, Airdrie United came riding out of the sunset to step in when their Airdrieonians forebears went bust... and Airdrie United lost the vote to Gretna FC. My hunch will be that (with potentially 2-3 decent applicants for any vacancy), the same can easily happen again.

Putting off the game helps no-one but Livi (moreso the administrator, Rankine and McDougall...) and disadvantages clubs and fans. The games should go ahead - and in the unlikely event that Livi overturn today's punishment, the affected games can be annulled and new games played...

Another why reason all games should be played - then annulled + replayed if Livi win any appeal.

Yes - but if the alternative is oblivion I can't see Livi being that worried about Blatter & Co ... I don't see why the SFL should be putting any games off. I wouldn't have relegated Livingston at all, but the decision has been taken. There isn't anything in the SFL rules which entitle Livi to have games put off... and in the unlikely event they pursue a successful appeal through the SFL SFA or Courts, then the games in question can simply be annulled and replacement matches held in the spring? We shouldn't be dancing to Livingston FC's tune by postponing matches in August.

The SFL could do nothing until some form of established legal action had occurred. They could have relegated them last week... but tbh it was probably better for the rescue package to be given the chance to happen - then the penalty handed down - then the rescuers decide to walk away or stay / rather than simply relegate them last week, which would have = Livi's demise. If they demise as a result of today's actions, so be it, but it was better to 'wait and see' I believe. If the folk of West Lothian want an SFL football club, they'll be at perfect liberty to form Livingston United and join an application process - alongside those non-league clubs who have been waiting for years or decades to join the SFL due to the lack of a pyramid system. If Livingston United do not win that vote, then I suppose you could always 'do an Airdrie Utd' and try to buy up Clyde... Personally, I think the likelier option wil be for Livingston 2009 to look to join the East of Scotland.

Firstly to the appeal situation: Livingston have 2 routes of appeal, footballing and in the courts. Appeal to the SFL - is possible, but needs to be ratified or rejected by a Special GM of clubs (at which Annan will have no vote btw), and my understanding is that a Special GM takes 14 days to be called. I presume the SFL clubs could meet earlier, but it's been a stick point before. Livingston have 10 days to lodge an appeal against the sanction, alongwith a bond of £500.00. Under rule 76.3 of the SFL rules (see link), there is no right of appeal of Management Committee decisions regarding rules 28, 31, 32 or 70. In this case the rule is 76.2 but the league can surely make alterations to fixtures (28), promotion / relegation (31 and 32), and club registration (70) which would further hamper an attempted appeal. But they do have a right to appeal today's sanction, provided they do so within 10 days and lodge that £500 appeal bond when doing so. Appeal to the SFA - is possible, but would take time. The SFA is sovereign over all football here - and in non-league football, does quite often rule on points deductions/re-awarding cups/taking decisions where dispute has occurred etc. But this would be a confusing and frought approach. Appeal to the courts - can presumably bring the whole SFL to a standstill in fixture terms, but I'm unsure about the timescales of this, or the practicalities of the club launching such an bid?

Another interesting point here... do Livingston enter the Scottish Cup in R2 or R3? If they go bust in the next couple of weeks, do 2 extra clubs get a bye from R1 into R2? The rules are unclear... At least Livi were KO of both the other cups, which avoids any possible gaps in their later rounds... EDIT TO ADD: Further to the issue of match postponements... any games put off due to appeal of the punishment will have to be played midweek. Will clubs be compensated for reduced revenue?

I agree with you WJR, relegating them is an OTT reaction. Especially 3 days before the season is supposed to begin. A fine of 15 points + transfer embargo (excluding amateurs) + a requirement for the SFL Management Committee to closely monitor the situation would IMO have been best. My understanding is that any appeal to the Court of Session would have to be on Friday (at the earliest?): it may thus be physically too late for the administrator to stop this weekend's games. If this highlights one thing it is the fact that (yet again) our football rules are woefully outdated.

In a strange way, I don't feel that sorry for Livi ... Looking back, the general populus across West Lothian have simply not got behind the club. The club has become a magnet for a motely collection of rogues. Even the rescue plan was based on sand. The bell seems to have tolled... In recent times, we've seen ICT, Ross County, Gretna (before Mileson took over), Peterhead and Annan all bring fresh impetus to the SFL. Personally, I'd like a pyramid system: but until that can be put in place, we rely on clubs dying off. There are many good clubs out there who will look to take Livi's place if you fold - and, in my heart-of-hearts, I think that is the final justice of today.

Well I have to say I'm dumb-founded by this . Incredible. In a way I'm over the moon that - despite all the predicitions - the Scottish Football League showed some back-bone. Thankfully. Today's decision may have (once again...) saved the grand old lady from the scrap-heap, as I really did believe that a failure to punish Livi in a meaningful way could see a major rift develop. At the same time, I think the actual punishment is OTT - especially bearing in mind the season begins in about 60-odd hours time!! Livi haven't been punished for financial problems before, so personally I thought a 15-point fine + transfer embarge + mandate SFL Management Committee to keep an eye on them would be fair. I think that promoting 2 clubs, and altering all fixture lists at 3 days notice, is a very poor way to do things. It makes Scottish football look amateurish... What I find more worrying is the appeal's process. I've heard that the administrator may launch an appeal both to the SFA and in the Court of Session... if this is the case, what happens if [1] Livi win the appeal; or [2] the severity of it is reduced (for example, relegation to Second)? Do we cancel all the games played involving Livingston, and make them catch up on midweek? Do we alter promotion and relegation to keep Livi in the Second for 2010-11? Does SFL hand out money to Livingston as compensation? A number of vital questions still need to be resolved here IMO. If there is a vacancy in the Third Division - due to Livingston folding - it should be filled by the usual (disappointing...) method of bids and votes. There are non-league clubs desperate to join the SFL, and their only way of doing so is waiting for a club like Livingston to die. West Lothian has proved totally incapable of running a football club competently for 14 decades - it is just not fair to then bungee them straight back in, as if nothing has happened, as Airdrie United originally tried to do. Livingston supporters (and the great Ged Nixon) should perhaps now move their attentions to a Livingston 2010 FC. There's a vacancy in the East of Scotland League which may be attractive...

Hopefully, there is something deeply disturbing about investors who came riding out of the night literally a couple of weeks ago, sitting and making conditions about no further penalties, and in doing so going further and actually saying they will appeal against them if they are handed out.

As has been pointed out already, the idea that the club in breach of the rules and the governing body intended to enforce them somehow sit down and find common ground is quite disturbing. I can't see a judge sitting down with a burglar to discuss the practical severities of the sentence. I think in reality the only people experiencing a loss of credulity are the fans... and in this case I'm reasonably confident that the SFL are not particularly concerned about what the fans think. I think they'll be reasonably confident of avoiding 1oth, if necessary by signing players during January. (I can't see the SFL imposing a strict transfer embargo). That is why McDougall and Rankine had to make it clear to the SFL that they couldn't impose demotion or big points fine. Nice in theory, in reality can you find 1 instance of the SPL or SFL listening to supporter views? Justice would IMO be... a 15-point fine, a ban on transfer activity during the period of CVA (bar amateur contracts), and a mandate of the SFL Management Committee to monitor their activity. Of course not. If Livingston get away with, for example, a warning + a suspended points fine (or a minor points fine which they later over-turn) + a bond paid back in installments, it is little or no punishment whatsover. If effectively says that if you're club is [1] not in the bottom tier; [2] is regarded as not being a 'diddy'; and [3] you have the right contacts... you'll get away with it. I don't think today is really that big a judgement on the SFL, they've made big mistakes before. Although this won't happen, they can appeal to the SFA. As happened with that 'arbitration' on whether or not the SPL are bound by their agreement with the SFL. In that case, 3 experts sat for about 2 years, and eventually (and incredibly...) found the SPL are not bound by it. Livi can appeal to the SFA to overturn the sanction - the SFA is soveriegn over it component members. In fairness it is better to have no club meeting, than one which is in breach of the time period and risks not every club being able to attend. Particularly smaller clubs without full-time heads. Undoubtedly, and in fact of the group of men sitting discussing this issue at this very moment, few have no interests in the outcome. Longmuir and the office bearers for the SFL; Division 1 clubs for their club interests; Leishmann; Ballantyne... so it should be an interesting event IMO. My fear is that the SFL will not be strong enough today... and as a result, the 1 & only realistic footballing disincentive over running with unsustainable debts will be shown to be a paper tiger. Should this occur, the only way for the SFL to save the situation long-term would IMO be to go and adopt a set procedure (like SPL has done), making it explicity clear what the sanctions are.

Fair points regarding the bond, but I just feel it's a rule being conjoured up out of nowhere for Livi and would not normally be applied to other clubs... I don't see how you can accurately calculate a fair rate anyway (attendances always vary, according to performance) and I just don't like it at all.

They've never been punished before, chucking them out of the league would be ridiculous. We've got to the stage where relegation isn't possible. A points deduction is a fair and measured action. Regarding the bond... I just think it's a stupid and unfair thing to do. Stranraer looked like they'd collapse before the end of last season, or not start this one: they'd never have been required to put up a bond. It's simply majority SFL clubs demanding cash from clubs who struggle to raise it. EDIT TO ADD: I mean how do you calculate the bond? Why not make every club put up a bond?

I think it's a nonsense they're having to put up a bond. As no-one else was ever asked to do so. Expelling a club for entering administration would be massively OTT. A big points fine will not be. There are plenty other clubs now skating towards ice as thin as Livi's. Livi's happened to break.

Whatever the situation, the SFL have the power to impose a penalty (which can be effectively in any form they see fit), as Livingston have been in a form of insolvency... It doesn't have to be administration, just being run by an insolvency practitioner. One saving grace of the lax rules...

I have to say that I'd be appalled if no punishment is applied... and since the only realistic and fair punishment is a points deduction, that's what it has to be surely? Personally I'd say 10 pts.

Clyde were in a similar position, and have had to slash the playing budget... but recently reported that they still envisage running at a loss next season. Now OK, Livingston will have higher crowds due to being in the First Division: but they've a higher wage bill and may be relegation dead-certs. Perhaps a luck-of-the-draw tie v an OF club in the Scottish Cup is their only way of breaking even?

Yes and no, but regardless... Gretna were handed totally different treatment to Livi by the SFL.

OK I didn't appreciate that. But I'm still confused as to what's been taken away from Airdrie - as Livi haven't been liquidated, in fact have got new investors and may not be in long-term admin?

I wasn't aware that David Longmuir had the power do do that. Ultimately the clubs decide. And since Livingston have not gone out of business, I'm confused as to what Black actually means... Black's gripe is that Livi remain in a higher division than his club, because they've dodged being wound up. 'Football in Airdrie' did pretty much the same thing: going bust > forming a new firm and buying up another club not in the bottom tier > running along fine in their old stadium. The road taken may be different, but the results are essentially the same. 'Football in Airdrie' moved in murky waters, and came out with a fish (having avoided giving fish to their creditors) - now, 'Football in Livingston' has done the same. Livingston happen to have kept their original disguise. Not quite, but I'm not wanting to get into a debate on this. Ultimately, Livingston FC have found a new set of investors who will avoid the club being liquidated or suffering prolonged admin. It is bad if they are dodging creditors but giving a bond to the SFL - but frankly I don't see why the SFL should be taking a bond off them. If you're policy to a club entering financial trouble is going to be "give us a huge sum of money to sit in our bank account", I can't see it being used much. And as a second point on this: if precedent is to be observed, how do Gretna FC fans feel now? Were they given an opportunity to "do a Livingston"? Or even the opportunity to "do an Airdrie"?

15 point deduction at a stretch... But what if there was 30 or 40 years between the admins? Well, that may be fair enough. I still think it's arrogant for Kenny Black to be going on as is his club have been robbed of a mandatory entitlement. Particularlt when that club is Airdrie Utd... I agree that establishing a holding company, which pays money to the SFL, thus allowing Livi FC to avoid paying anything to its creditors, is very dodgy. The holding company concept is dodgy.

Is this actually true though? The Management Committee simply passed the matter onto an EGM of clubs... That isn't now required, because Massone has gone and the take-over will go through - and the take-over going through means they are not insolvent. That's my intepretation of it... The Management Committee did not have the power to green-light them before Massone left. It is now not required to get an EGM of clubs to green-light them because Massone has left...?