EdinburghPar1975

Have the SPFL and Hearts chosen their arbitrators yet? I can't remember seeing anything but thought they wanted to move quickly? Am i correct in assuming that once chosen they'll be discussing the case for a few days with the QCs and we'll just find out the outcome as opposed to any snippets being leaked?

Pretty good day all in all.....some good business, would be nice to see a keeper announced soon just to ease the fear on that front...

I'd imagine hee-haw but a sell on percentage instead maybe?

I haven't seen O'Hara play so can't comment on that side ot things but i'm sure he'll be aware that he'll need to start well. If he is as good as folks think then potentially he could just be next Summer/ Winters Nisbet - brought in from a club for minimal outlay, given a chance and sold on for a decent fee and potential further income. It's a good plan when it works and surely can only help attract younger players to the club if they know that the club will sell on if they do well. Looks like some other decent signings as well. Fingers crossed for a good season..

This is not something that is off Raith's doing. FWIW i'd happily chuck a few quid in a crowdfunder to help cover fee's of the three named teams. It's one thing being pushed close to the line by the pandemic, totally another when it's caused by the actions of another team.

If one things for sure it's that Anne Budge's money is nowhere near this...

I'm assuming Dundee Utd are asking for contributions for all three of the clubs named? surely the fees wouldn't be around £150k for each team? Can arbitration request/tell Hearts/ Partick to pay all legal costs if this goes the SPFLs way? If so then i'm sure the mysterious benefactor will happy to be stumping up the cash for both 'their' teams as well as the other clubs and the SPFL (and associated fines)?...(should it be needed of course)

China you say.....

I can understand the frustration of the slow move from lockdown that the Scot Gov seem to be taking but if it can help prevent the scenes from down South from happening then i'm all for it. For me a slow, structured re-opening is far better than a 'super-Saturday' approach. No issue with face masks/ coverings either, if the social distancing is reducing then this is a better time to bring in mandatory use as 'crowds' will be getting more common place. I might be stupidly optimistic but i'm hoping that by the time the kids go back to school we can be pretty much back to some normality albeit with masks on public transport, no large crowds for now and monitoring of any 'outbreaks' to help the impact nationally.

Surely more like this....?

I'm assuming this is one of the reasons for having three arbiters (one chosen by each side and one by both) - to lessen the likelihood of any decision being challenged?

As a slightly serious point, if Hearts were even anywhere near losing that amount from being relegated then i sincerely hope that the Foundation of Hearts guys who are looking to take over are asking some serious questions of Anne Budge and the board. The FoH have been amazing at pumping cash in there and if it has been mis-spent or not managed 'correctly' then they may end up getting control of the club in as bad a state as it was when Ann Budge came in (albeit with fan backing). I'm assuming there was no real relegation contingencies put in place for the business planning...?

I've probably misunderstood but i think it only goes back to the court for further 'action' if Hearts and Partick think it's not been correctly dealt with - is that correct? Also, what's to stop the SPFL/ SFA placing a sanction that says that if Hearts/ Partick wish to go back to court after arbitration they can but that they would then need to forego their places in the 2020/21 season as it will be starting as planned? Still think it'll be a slap on the wrists and a suspended points action at the end of all this...

I understand the SPFL would want to stop clubs using the courts like this but even though i don't think they should have went down this route it is exceptional circumstances and thats why i reckon a suspended points deduction/ fine would be imposed....if it goes that way

Even if it goes to arbitration and the SFA side with the SPFL (which i think they would) i cant see Hearts and Thistle getting any more than a slap on the wrists. A lot has happened and the quickest way to get on with things would be to just issue a warning/ suspended action that would allow everyone to get on with things.

Really?

I'm assuming he's forgotten that the Lone Ranger wore the mask over his eyes? As for the Biden clip showing '120 million', folks ripping him for that are aware that the actual footage (not clipped) showed him immediately correcting himself to 120,000? Going to be an interesting few months now till the election and still not seeing bit Trumpy actually showing leadership to try and get COVID under control, more than 50k new cases yesterday alone....is he still stopping the test funding?

...and they cheated so well that the 'wronged' team took their manager off them just to get them telt!

Does the Wigan situation finally end the argument that there was a possibility the league up here could've been completed? The costs of bringing the players back, testing and playing games with no income (and at least 6 still to go) shows that unless the clubs have seriously rich owners and very small wage bills then there's a good chance this will not end well for quite a few teams

I've probably watched too much telly but i thought the people bringing the action presented their case first. I'd have expected the SPFL, DU, Cove and RR just to sit tight and watch the arguments (such as they are) for reversing the decision made or handing out wads of cash...

so who's doing all the talking just now?

Any party going into the Court of Session should have strong legal arguments for bringing a case (or for defending one). If true that this was brought as an alternative then it seems to be trying to again show that it isn't fair - that isn't a legal argument and PPG was used to try and level that out as fairly as possible - again, this was voted on by all members and the majority was passed... What benefit does this actually have if it is just passed back to the SFA to adjudicate, they'll surely back the SPFL anyway?

I know, but if the argument is simply that they need a solution to save them then saying both teams in an unplayed match should both get 3pts (which as we all know isn't the way points are awarded) seems a weird way to go about it. If anything that would seem to me to weaken their argument. A draw where neither team loses (or wins) seems what would be a more appropriate approach to bringing teams to level games...even if it didn't save Partick

..but surely the 'best' option for an unplayed game would be for 1pt each...?

So both teams in the unplayed game would get 3 points....how does that even make sense?