Stag Nation

And if they want to take part in any competitions at all they have to abide by the law of the land. There is nothing wrong with internal SFA tribunals and the CAAS (and indeed the courts encourage parties to use such routes), but the ultimate arbiter of any dispute in Scotland is the court system. The SFA cannot legally deny their members access to that. FIFA and EUFA are not above national and international law, as some of their officials have found to their cost.

They've probably been advised that courts will take a very dim view of the rule in question, which effectively challenges their jurisdiction.

Perth would be equally (or possibly more) convenient for Brora, and for Kelty.

The SPFL money doesn't help if you're rubbish. Berwick vs Cove anyone?

They may have tried, but orange - and the reason for it - is enshrined in the Irish Constitution.

You may be right. But there was no "change at the top and proper leadership". If anyone "forced" the clubs it was the existing, leaderhip, which by your own logic was inadequate. But the poor leadership can't have been only at the top. If the clubs themselves had decent leadership they would have elected better league and JFA committees.

Only if their directors want to be jailed for contempt of court.

We are reminded every day that the current situation is UNprecedented. What is your legal precedent?

No, the socks are fine.

Why? OK, there has been no team training, but there's been nothing to stop the players working out individually. They are (allegedly) professional athletes after all - anyone who has spent lockdown watching TV and eating junk food should be sacked.

Have I understood this correctly? You're being promised large sums of money from a club that has made substantial losses every year since its foundation in 2012 and is, by all reports, teetering on the brink of insolvency. What could possibly go wrong?

Generally we get taxed on the money we receive, not what we give away. Don't give the Chancellor any ideas!

What tax did you have in mind? The clubs will treat it as they would any other income, and they will have to pay corporation tax on any profit at year end. Probably the least of their worries in the present circs.

What makes you think that? In England she'd have six years to bring action - is it really one minute in Scots law?

50 years? A mere moment in time. I remember it was Stade de Reims that beat them in the SEMI-FINAL of the first European Cup in 1956.

Why would that be awkward? They "think they were blocked " by their interpretation of the 2018 rules. This is 2020, different rules apply.

Let's hope the new secretary can spell better than Mr Napier. Or maybe they really do mean ham, cheese, egg and cress ...

Give it time.

I'm not as imaginative as Mrs Budge, that's for sure. There may be some mileage in her challenging the voting structure, on the basis that all shareholders should have the same voting rights. But giving the D1 and D2 clubs a vote each probably wouldn't help Hearts! You're absolutely right about the basic remit

But it's not a members' organisation. It's a limited company, and therefore subject to various Companies Acts. I'd imagine Hearts have identified some real or imagined breaches.

Contract law doesn't apply, as there is no such contract. The SPFL is a limited company, and the 42 clubs are its shareholders. The applicable rules are the Memorandum and Articles of Association of the company

Eh? What about Tom Johnson? And the committees in the other regions? I thought the Juniors were one big family?

Make the players redundant?

The original post was about a perimeter fence (1 meter?) on private land.

So the committee wouldn't have encouraged a vote of no confidence in themselves? I think that's a pretty safe analysis.