phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 "The" is the definite article. That is, in the context of an appeal, it is definitely a decision being appealed against."A" is an indefinite article. That is, in the context of an appeal, it's not necessarily a decision that's being appealed against, but if it was then these actions can be carried out. Thanks, my head is numb with all this going on. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) No it wouldn't be revolutionary HJ. Sir Calum is basing his posts on his interpretation of the rules. You need to look at all the dealings between parties on any dispute, phone calls, meetings, correspondence as well as the rules. I was meaning in the context of the SFA over-ruling a governing body, WJR. No-one doubts that in it's 136-year history the SFA has, well, ahem... bent the rules from time to time ... but never in recent memory have they taken a decision of a League or regional FA; found that decision to be wholly in order as regards rules + procedures; but then elected to keep a sanction, yet alter it. In that respect it would be wholly revolutionary. For example, it effectively means setting any sort of sanction yourself is pretty pointless: everyone would just appeal to SFA for the final decisions!! In theory, any non-leaguer could apply to join the SFL; be rejected; then appeal to the SFA on a ground of not being entitled access as we have no pyramid. If the SFA could just step in and force any League/Regional FA to do anything, it's a break from the past, and creates great uncertainty. Not sure how Livi will do but they are not stupid people. Of course. And I don't for one minute doubt the capability of Livingston FC to win this appeal. They shouldn't win this appeal IMO, but they might. They were never in a million years going to win that appeal today, because of the rules themselves and the power-politics at play (and the need for a substantial proportion of the SFL clubs to rebel against their own Management Committee). But... McDougall, Rankine, Nixon & Co think they can win this appeal. They can win it... And they might... Edited August 13, 2009 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) "The" is the definite article. That is, in the context of an appeal, it is definitely a decision being appealed against."A" is an indefinite article. That is, in the context of an appeal, it's not necessarily a decision that's being appealed against, but if it was then these actions can be carried out. thanks for the English lesson SCM... but the Appeals Panel will interpret it as they like, IMO... Edited August 13, 2009 by HibeeJibee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 ). But... McDougall, Rankine, Nixon & Co know they can win this appeal. They can win it. And they will. sorted for you 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 Livingston Football Club have taken a course of action which clearly demonstrates that they have no confidence in their governing body. It is now time for their governing body to return this mindset in kind, and declare it no longer has any confidence in Livingston Football Club. Anyone unfortunate enough to have come into contact with this Football Club in a manner which extends beyond being a spectator at a game will know through personal experience how distasteful such contact can be. Regardless of owner, the very structure of this club brings out the very worst traits of the human condition.........perhaps in all of us. Voyeurism, deceit, lying, cheating, stealing, greed, envy, double standards, selfishness, corruption. They have all played a part in the regrettable first fourteen years of this tawdry club. In a right thinking and ordered world, they would have been expelled from our presence a long time ago. As mentioned previously, in our world (including the little Scottish world of football), doing the right thing isn't always that easy. The set up in West Lothian will always be used by someone to twist, turn and squirm their way out of responsibility for anything and everything they see as preventing them from doing what they want to do. New owners have changed nothing. They are simply a re-generation of all that has gone before. I'm sorry, but I always thought "football people" meant people who loved the game, and put its wellbeing somewhere pretty high up on their priority list. MacDougall has debased that concept today. Previous owners of the most awful club ever to make it to the SFL must be really proud that their legacy lives on. This is what WLC has begat. I hope they too are proud of where they have pumped public money in exchange for a pie and seat and the chance to seem important and be lauded every second Saturday. Roget's Thesaurus could undoubtedly offer me several alternate words for what it is I think I feel about this "club". I didn't think it was possible to think any less of them than I did 5 years ago. I was wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HibeeJibee Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 sorted for you Fair enough !! Curtains for SFL credibility if they do + brave new era in governance. Night all!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 sorted for you What has convinced you that this appeal will be won? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted August 13, 2009 Share Posted August 13, 2009 (edited) thanks for the English lesson SCM... but the Appeals Panel will interpret it as they like, IMO... They'd be on dodgy ground doing that, especially if they do interpret it in a way that contradicts what it's actually saying (as dictated by the rules of the English language). I believe it's called a "technicality" Incidentally, the last four appeals against the decision of an association against a club (Motherwell staying in the SPL, Partick being relegated, Dunfermline's pitch and the Hassan Kachloul* affair) have all seen those decisions either upheld, or referred back where it's been upheld. *Whilst looking back over this, I was reminded that Livi tried to take the SFA to court. Although I would imagine the Appeals Committee is different now, I wonder there's anyone else still hanging around that has a long memory... Edited August 13, 2009 by Sir Calum Melville 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingfaetheSooth Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 For it to be overturned, the SFA has to do something it has never done in living memory. It has to directly contradict and over-rule a major decision of a member league - despite that member leaguehaving complied fully with it's own rules and the SFAs. Understand well what that means in practical terms. It's like Charles I raising his standard at Nottingham, on 22nd August 1642... Worth noting that the English FA have fined the Conference over the Chester City affair? Every case is different but there may be parallels! Even a "rules are rules" man like yourself HJ is starting to hint on a successful appeal. Maybe the clown is right.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Worth noting that the English FA have fined the Conference over the Chester City affair? Every case is different but there may be parallels!Even a "rules are rules" man like yourself HJ is starting to hint on a successful appeal. Maybe the clown is right.... The clown is very bizarre, always asking questions but never answers any asked of him/her. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedV Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Hey! I'm not banned, and they obviously still like me: Hello RedV, We at LiviLions.co.uk would like to wish you a happy birthday today! Aw, thanks guys! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Hey! I'm not banned, and they obviously still like me:Hello RedV, We at LiviLions.co.uk would like to wish you a happy birthday today! Aw, thanks guys! Happy birthday RedV! the big 40! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Now, now - some of the 'true Livi fans' have been following their team for all of errrr 14 years. It's their birthright don't you know. Well apart from Judas Jude, her birthright was to follow the bhoys to paradise. Dickhead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 So McGruther's "we will accept our punishment and move on" translates as "we will NOT accept our punishment, we will NOT move on, and we will take our case to the Intergalactic Court of Appeals if necessary." Perhaps that's why the sale was rushed through at 11:30pm,so the consortium could appeal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Well, that's for the SFA to decide.If you're appealing the punishment, you're not allowed to do it. If you're appealing the decision to find you guilty, you are...but don't really have any grounds. Unless of course they weren't technically insolvent after the consortium became involved. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doink Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Might be sorted next week then again might not. I get the impression that Livingston will be back in Division 1 with zero points deduction. No sympathy from me. If the SFL had just docked points the situation would not have occured. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 You're making that last one up, and probably most of the rest as well. Perhaps Rankine has Donny's arse for toast. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Is the chairman in any way known to Rankine?Given both are former Dumbarton board members not infeasible. Although the SFA is as corrupt as any organisation you will find including the churches so shouldnt be a surprise. Rightly or wrongly I'm assuming that Donny was perhaps one of the reasons the 1st meeting was lenient. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 Having a change of mind I now hope LIvi take SFL to the cleaners and perhaps we can all follow teams under the auspices of a fit and proper organisation. FWIW if Livi go to the law courts I think the SFL will get their arse felt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted August 14, 2009 Share Posted August 14, 2009 An alternative to the Livingston are appealing because they know they can win at the SFA level scenario would be that they are appealing because they believe they have no chance of getting a CVA approved in a third division context and these appeals are seen as their only chance to stave off liquidation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.