IveSeenTheLight
-
Posts
23 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by IveSeenTheLight
-
-
9 hours ago, RossBFaeDundee said:
Honestly surprised someone on Kickback finally got it all figured out.
Its maybe Putin's way to seek revenge for Vladimir Romanov
0 -
6 minutes ago, AJF said:
So, what exactly are you proposing should happen? They’ve already explained why they can’t report it to the Scottish FA.
And don’t make it out as if you care about how youngsters perceive a red card in a friendly match
My proposal would be that there should be consistency and that this should be applied across the board.
There are plenty of instances where players sent off in friendlies have missed the following domestic games. The alternative is that there is an across the board agreement that incidents in friendlies only pertain to the game itself and doesn't inflict consequences in following games.
What doesn't sit well that it is determined by the individual FA's as that leads to inconsistency and potential corroboration / corruption.
As RussellAnderson says above, he's made very little impact on games against Aberdeen (indeed his stats are not impressive overall) and long may that continue
0 -
1 minute ago, AJF said:
You do know the only way for Kent to be suspended was if the French FA reported it to the Scottish FA?
The French FA have since come out and said the game friendly was not played under their jurisdiction (or something to that effect) so they couldn’t report it even if they wanted to.
Yes, I do know. The Veolia Tournament, held in France against French teams with French association officials.
Excellent example of demonstrating consistency and fairness across the board and impressing on youngsters of today watching the televised event that there is no consequence of actions in "some" friendlies
0 -
49 minutes ago, Frank Grimes said:
12.30pm KO time now
Fuming
When do they announce John Beaton as the ref?
0 -
On 16/07/2020 at 22:24, starryfish said:
Kent suspended for this after his red card tonight?
No, SevCo are getting advantages before the season kicks off.
Seems like there is an opportunity to bypass the system and not have players suspended if an agreement can be made for the relevant authority not to report it officially.
0 -
6 minutes ago, welshbairn said:
The French court just sent back a recommendation to the football authority, not an order.
Had the french league previously put it to a vote? I see they did subsequently.
I'd expect the arbitration panel to have a view of the members vote. Now theres the initial vote (Dundeegate) but wasn't there also a subsequent premier league vote some time later that concluded the SPFL (Dundee not involved in that)
0 -
16 hours ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:
The arbitrator can adjudicate on any matter brought before them. Hearts did bring it to court that all promotions/relegations should not happen so I assume that will be under consideration.
Hearts could win and the SPFL is faced with either not promoting Dundee United (and subsequently leaving themselves open to more legal challenges, which they could also lose) or accept Hearts and Dundee Utd will both be in the top division and have to find a solution to make that happen. That would almost certainly force a 14 team league.
And I don't know why people assume the arbitrator cannot force reconstruction. The arbitrator can order the SPFL board to do anything in their power, which would include reconstruction. The SPFL board never denied they had the power when Leslie Deans suggested it. They said they would not use it.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/hearts-dealt-further-blow-spfl-22191688
Did I read something similar happened somewhere else in Europe (France), where the courts blocked relegation and the league still voted and rejected it.
they had 20 teams in the league and said they could not increase the league
1 -
16 hours ago, RandomGuy. said:
Dundee United pretty much did this season, they were 9 clear after 14 matches.
Not done and dusted though.
Good lead maybe, but not mathematically concluded
0 -
16 hours ago, Wilbur said:
Well, I know this is probably a long shot, but imagine the planet gets hit with a pandemic or something, and the entire fixture list couldn't be completed. I don't suppose there's a precedent for a situation like this, but .......
The Season should be put on hold until its completed then.
-1 -
1 hour ago, RandomGuy. said:
Hearts seem likely to have a strikeforce of Boyce and Naismith, and no longer have an absolute clownshoes keeper who'll chuck three in a game, nor do they have a manager who's tactical ability relies entirely on just chucking increasing numbers of attackers on the pitch.
Theyll have the Championship won before its even halfway done.
There's no way they'll have won the championship after 13 games
0 -
1 hour ago, Lebowski said:5 hours ago, IveSeenTheLight said:That is not needed, therefore the funds are available to be used for compensation.
The parachute payments for sides relegated in 11th are funded by gate revenues from playoff games. That doesn't exist.
Fair enough.
That said I though the figures were questionable. If they need to get £750,000 profit out of 6 play off games, it might be a stretch but I take your potential point.
I thought the SPFL took a cut but the remainder (the majority) was retained by the clubs.
0 -
6 minutes ago, welshbairn said:
I would say Falkirk had a far better chance of promotion than Hearts had of avoiding relegation. The financial loss incurred by staying in League 1, with potentially no football being played, compared to playing in the Championship, is huge.
I agree, it is extremely tough on Falkirk. They had the opportunity to get direct promotion.
I said before that the first point should have been to complete the season when they could.
When that was not possible, they should have went with a temporary reconstruction. It was individual club selfishness which stopped that
Then it was down to an agreement of the clubs to call the season as it was, which I agree is harsh on the likes of Falkirk
0 -
37 minutes ago, welshbairn said:
With that logic all the clubs with a chance of a promotion play off spot or automatic promotion would be due compensation, some with a far better chance of promotion than Hearts of avoiding demotion. There would be hardly any clubs left to pay it.
Two thoughts on that.
1) "Potentially" promoted clubs are not materially disadvantaged like relegated clubs are. Yes, they had an opportunity to gain promotion, but that not a guarantee, which leads on to my second point. Yes they would likely to have gained through promotion, but again, that is an advantage, not a disadvantage
2) The rules of probability would play a factor as well
0 -
1 hour ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:
On what basis should Hearts get a penny more than the parachute payment?
If they do then any club disadvantaged eg those teams who lost playoffs, could surely put on a similar claim?
I think on the basis that they still had the opportunity to get off bottom spot in the last 8 games.
Nowhere near £8M though.
0 -
Just now, Ric said:
Not sure what you mean by 11th place parachute payment, as neither Hearts or Partick are in 11th place. Going to arbitration seals the fact that they are 12th placed teams. They have been relegated. That is has now been accepted. The argument now is over compensation.
I mean that is 11th spot had been relegated, there is a £500k parachute payment for them.
I had also linked Flash's post which mentioned the same thing
QuoteA club relegated via the Premiership play-offs, gets £500,000 in the first season down and £250,000 in the second season
That is not needed, therefore the funds are available to be used for compensation.
0 -
1 hour ago, Ric said:
I didn't include the parachute payment, I understand why you'd mention it but I can't see the SPFL using that as "part payment" as that would just kick off more fighting. Like Jim Bowen would tell you, "you've got that, it's in the bank".
Maybe I was not as clear as I had intended, let me try and explain it further.
Its not "in the bank" as you put it.
My point was using the 11th place parachute payment, which is as someone also highlighted below £500k.
That's not in the bank for Hearts, Partick or Stranrear
So immediately you have as a minimum £500k that can be used towards compensation. That along with the £300k for 12th spot, if there is anything in the lower leagues and throw in a bit more to compensate, then you could be looking at around £1M
The money "in Hearts bank" would only be £300k for finishing 12th, with this, they could get that increased to say £800k, with the other £200k going to Partick / Stranrear.
1 hour ago, Flash said:A club relegated via the Premiership play-offs, gets £500,000 in the first season down and £250,000 in the second season, but the payment for season 2 is only made if they haven’t come back up. So those payments won’t be made for 19/20 as there were no play-offs. Eta some of this is funded from the play-off gate money. And it may have already been paid out as part of the prize money for the season paid to all clubs.
A club finishing 12th in the Premiership gets the lower of £300,000 and 2.43% of SPFL net commercial revenues. Season 2 they get the lower of £125,000 and 1.01% of NCR. Again, payment for season 2 is only made if they haven’t come back up.
The only other parachute is for clubs losing the pyramid play-off. They get £40,000 in season 1 and £20,000 in season 2, with the latter only payable if they haven’t come back up. Think this is funded by the SFA making a payment to the SPFL to cover it.
0 -
35 minutes ago, Ric said:
How much can Hearts/Thistle be compensated? Honestly, I don't know. I don't think that any of us think the £10m claim made by Hearts is in any way realistic. Could it be more than £1m or so? Perhaps. Do they deserve it? IMO, no, but then it's not me on the panel. I believe there will be some level of sympathy for the position they are in and the panel will try and address that. Personally I feel a large(ish) payout will only make the Championship a hugely imbalanced league - if it wasn't already - but isn't really the issue here, it's a procedural one regarding the ending of one league, not the balance of another.
Good post, but to highlight one section.
I read somewhere else that the parachute payments for the teams in 11th (not relegated this year and 12th was something like £800k. If you add in whatever Partick would get as a parachute payment (if there is any), lets say £50k, means that there is already funding for about £850k.
Its not outwith the realms of possibility that say £1M could be made available to be split across Hearts, Partick and Stranrear
0 -
14 hours ago, HooseLee said:
St johnstone were bottom of the league at the beginning of the year. I wonder if it took them less that 8 games to get above that
~St johnstone had some fight about them.
You only had 4 wins all season, games where you upped your effort when against Hibs and SevCo. It did not appear that you were able to get enough points against the Ross County's, Hamiltons and St Mirren's that you were up against.
The likelyhood is, you were never equipped to scrap it out at the bottom end of the table
1 -
57 minutes ago, Lex said:
Humiliation after humiliation. On and off the pitch.
You’d think the Jambo fans would be sick of it by now. It would seem not.
They lose every single battle they fight. Don’t you just love to see it.I had some sympathy for Hearts.
They were the worst team in the league over the period played, but shoud have had the opportunity to turn it around in the final 8 games.
i think their form suggests they were unlikely to do so, but you never know.
Don't think their £8M claim was fair though which will have riled up a lot of people
1 -
1 hour ago, Captain_Imra7 said:
Agreed, Hoban could also cover at RB if Logan is to leave. He'd need to be on some kind of fitness based contract. I.e a relatively low base wage which is made up by being available for selection fitness wise and further appearance based bonuses.
Hoban clearly has plenty of ability to play for us (probably at a higher level tbh) but his fitness record terrifies me.
I read somewhere that the wage cuts that Aberdeen players were asked about whilst there are no crowds was appearance and bonus money.
I guess there could be an exception for Hobban based on his previous time here
0 -
1 hour ago, MegaRichJambos said:
You presume wrong.
Rangers are looking stronger than I had initially thought.
Hearts have a lot more money than other teams for many reasons.
Really, so now you think Rangers will be the strongest with Hearts just behind.
I would beg to differ.
[edit] Out of interest, what makes you think that SevCo are faring so strongly?
Is it because they continue to spend money on tick that they don't have? (Kicking the can down the road)
Is it because they deferred half their wages for three months? That time must be coming to an end, so are they deferring further. (again kicking the can down the road)
Do you believe that they are about to sell Morelos for £30M (or whatever the latest made up valuation is?
Do you not think things might take a turn for the worse for them if their marquee signings fail to stop 10 in a row
I find it strange to think that SevCo are faring the best at this moment, but not surprising coming from a Hearts supporter
0 -
47 minutes ago, MegaRichJambos said:
I've spent the last 3 weeks educating the inbred people on this forum.
I'd always thought Hearts and Celtic would come out of this as the strongest however the child abuse payouts will nullify Celtic's financial advantage.
So you now think that Hearts will come out of this the strongest?
I presume you are basing this on being awarded and unjustifiable £8M.
0
Aberdeen vs Rangers - 1st of August
in Scottish Premiership General Chatter
Posted
I’ll take that, breakaway goal to win 1-0.
It could go in off the new boys arse for all I care