phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Sir Calum I learned from the master himself. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bryan Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 What about the CVA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I knew i had read something about Thurs and thought it was when the hearing was, but going by that it was the appeal being tendered. Ok then, I apologise for fretting over your words, I thought you were winding me up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) I think I am saying that PH will be paid in full since his outstanding wages come under the heading of football debt. I would presume that the assurances from the administrator on the matter will have been enough to allow Livi to resume playing games under the auspices of the Sfl. Whether or not he has actually received the money I don't know. I do know that the outstanding wages due to present Livi staff have now been paid. I would put it slightly differently to you by saying that the debt to PH is likely to be one that they wish they did not have to honour. They do however realise that they must. How many of the staff released by McGruther have been re-employed? Is it back to one big happy family or full of family? Edited August 21, 2009 by AND180Y 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vikingTON Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 (edited) Football debt at a football club? It is all football debt FFS. Edited August 21, 2009 by vikingTON 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Football debt at a footbal club? It is all football debt FFS. Not in the land of the Living(ston FC) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Not in the land of the Living(ston FC) I feel quite dead myself! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Football debt, in this context, is debt to other clubs and footballers. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I feel quite dead myself! Ocht weesht, you'll be fine once you get on that Livi bus tomorrow (always looks weird Livi and b-u-s with out a T after the s ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Yes I'm sure the sea breeze should breathe some life back into me, also a good win would help. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AND180Y Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Yes I'm sure the sea breeze should breathe some life back into me, also a good win would help. But the win might be scratched next week. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phantoms-livi-lass Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 But the win might be scratched next week. Knowing my luck it will! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVIFOREVER Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 An independent panel won't care about anything but the rules under consideration...and that means Livi haven't a hope in hell's chance of avoiding defeat. Even more so when you consider the panel is being chaired by a Law Lord (because he of all people will know that the SFL acted within their rules). Obviously you have a different view of it than McGruther and the Livi5 consortium then, the SFL's handling of this leaves a lot to be desired and hence the appeal, the rules are so vague they can be manipulated to whatever ends the SFL wanted them and that is where an independant panel should be our best chance, certainly better then the SFL one anyway. Our chances have always been slim, however at least this time it'll be a fair hearing and as such i'm hoping the Livi5 consortium will take whatever verdict they get and end it there. I just want to get on with the football, isn't just you other teams fans that is fed up with it all. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) ...the rules are so vague they can be manipulated to whatever ends the SFL wanted them... Er...no. This appeal is about the actual demotion to to the Third Division and the rule invoked to facilitate that is crystal clear: 76.2 The Management Committee shall also have full power to deal with as it thinks fit,including power to deduct championship points before or during a season and/or to impose a player registration embargo on any club guilty of conduct contrary to the interests of the League and its member clubs or any registered player or former registered player, or potentially likely to prejudice the orderly progress of the League Championship and/or the League Challenge Cup competition in any season. Such conduct, for the avoidance of doubt, may include a club in or going into Administration, Liquidation, Receivership, Sequestration or any other insolvency procedure by whatever means or having a Judicial Factor appointed to its undertaking. For the further avoidance of doubt, a club in or going into any such procedure will remain responsible for the purposes of this Rule for the conduct of its undertaking by any Administrator, Liquidator, Receiver, Trustee in Sequestration, Judicial Factor or other such officer appointed to it. Edited August 22, 2009 by Sir Calum Melville 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The ghost of Jim Morton Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Er...no.This appeal is about the actual demotion to to the Third Division and the rule invoked to facilitate that is crystal clear: You and yer quoting the fucking rules.. Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz's 'Mon the Berwick 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LIVIFOREVER Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Er...no.This appeal is about the actual demotion to to the Third Division and the rule invoked to facilitate that is crystal clear: Exactly, they decide to do one thing then change their mind and relegate us down 2 Div, as i said, the rules are open to do as they please and that's why we had this balls up a couple of days before the season started and continued to date. The appeal is because of the demotion...correct, a points deduction was what they were going to hand us the week before, if you think the SFL handled this correctly then i'm at a loss, because this is one fuckup that could've been avoided if they had just told us we're being relegated to the 3rd at the first meeting, that would still have been a harsh decision but at least it would've been decisive from the start. The rules need to be set out clearly so everyone knows what punishment is going to be set, not a vague clusterfuck to be interpreted several different ways depending how the SFL feel, it covers their ass to hand out points deduction or relegation, or no punishment at all, how is that crystal clear! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Exactly, they decide to do one thing then change their mind and relegate us down 2 Div, as i said, the rules are open to do as they please and that's why we had this balls up a couple of days before the season started and continued to date.The appeal is because of the demotion...correct, a points deduction was what they were going to hand us the week before, if you think the SFL handled this correctly then i'm at a loss, because this is one fuckup that could've been avoided if they had just told us we're being relegated to the 3rd at the first meeting, that would still have been a harsh decision but at least it would've been decisive from the start. The rules need to be set out clearly so everyone knows what punishment is going to be set, not a vague clusterfuck to be interpreted several different ways depending how the SFL feel, it covers their ass to hand out points deduction or relegation, or no punishment at all, how is that crystal clear! Not supposed to be crystal clear,you can't accommodate self-interest in clearly set out rules & punishments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Master Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 Exactly, they decide to do one thing then change their mind and relegate us down 2 Div, They did that because they didn't receive the required assurances from McGruther. SFL: "Can you guarantee that you'll fulfil all your fixtures?" McGruther: "No." as i said, the rules are open to do as they please Well, yes. I don't think anyone has argued against that. And indeed, it's because of that that the appeal will in all likelihood fail. and that's why we had this balls up a couple of days before the season started and continued to date. The fact the SFL can impose any sanction "they see fit" on a team that's insolvent had nothing to do with the time it was imposed. The appeal is because of the demotion...correct, a points deduction was what they were going to hand us the week before, That was before they were told that Livi could not guarantee being able to fulfil all their fixtures. Besides, verbal agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on. if you think the SFL handled this correctly then i'm at a loss, because this is one fuckup that could've been avoided if they had just told us we're being relegated to the 3rd at the first meeting, that would still have been a harsh decision but at least it would've been decisive from the start. And you honestly think the appeals still wouldn't have been forthcoming, disrupting the season anyway? The rules need to be set out clearly so everyone knows what punishment is going to be set, not a vague clusterfuck to be interpreted several different ways depending how the SFL feel, it covers their ass to hand out points deduction or relegation, or no punishment at all, how is that crystal clear! How can you interpret it in different ways? They do can do whatever they see fit. Simple. No ambiguity, no nothing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) They do can do whatever they see fit. Simple. No ambiguity, no nothing. You keep stating this pish and it doesn't change the fact that your reading of this situation is wrong,while the rules are laid out in a fashion that appears to allow them to do as they like that doesn't mean they can do as they like,any set of rules and how they are used must come within the law of the land,if a decision appeared to be made excessively harsh due to giving Livi a kicking for vindictive reasons it could contravene certain Business Law. And your they agreed to them retort is pish also,they still have to work within the law of the land. Civic Government Scotland Act gives LA's autonomy to do as they like in the area of taxis,doesn't actually mean they can do as they like. Edited August 22, 2009 by ayrmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest WJR Posted August 22, 2009 Share Posted August 22, 2009 (edited) They did that because they didn't receive the required assurances from McGruther. SFL: "Can you guarantee that you'll fulfil all your fixtures?" McGruther: "No." Well, yes. I don't think anyone has argued against that. And indeed, it's because of that that the appeal will in all likelihood fail. The fact the SFL can impose any sanction "they see fit" on a team that's insolvent had nothing to do with the time it was imposed. That was before they were told that Livi could not guarantee being able to fulfil all their fixtures. Besides, verbal agreements aren't worth the paper they're written on. And you honestly think the appeals still wouldn't have been forthcoming, disrupting the season anyway? How can you interpret it in different ways? They do can do whatever they see fit. Simple. No ambiguity, no nothing. Well Sir C, there is actually a school of thought interpretation wise that reckons that by adding words such as "including ..." you are actually limiting the preceding wide ranging "as it sees fit". That is usually avoided by adding the words "including, without limitation, ...". The draftsman has not included those words in this case so I'd suggest the wording is not beyond challenge. As for what was said at the first meeting does anyone know if the consortium did actually fail to put up a bond or give a reasonable assurance that the bond (for the 1st Div estimate of costs) would be forthcoming? (Apologies if that has been conclusively dealt with on this thread and I have just missed it). That's the bit I just don't get. If the consortium couldn't put up then fair enough all bets were off and back to the drawing board and the decision to demote Livi Edited August 22, 2009 by WJR 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.