Jump to content

The New Raith Rovers Thread


Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, Michael W said:

Agreed. Capital City Press (CCP) are usually very reliable in addition to the FFP and Courier. If none of those three are going with it, I think it's just standard tabloid sensationalism. 

Well CCP has published an article on this now. Not quite as alarmist as The Sun would have you believe, but still pretty downbeat. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

‪Inverness continued their strong home form with a win over Raith thanks to goals from Ross Tokely and Stuart McCaffery.‬



‪Rovers were left furious as St. Mirren kept possession to score a late winner after the ball had been put out of play for an injury.‬



Queen of the South benefitted from a defensive error to leave Kirkcaldy with three points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ro Sham Bo said:

I saw Skyline Drifter sum it up well in another thread when he said QoS would volunteer for relegation if they were given £2 million in compensation. 

And I absolutely guarantee we would. So probably would Alloa. The numbers are fantasy, plucked from thin air. £2m would fund our potential losses a division below for many seasons.

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rovers_Lad said:

It seems ourselves United and Cove are carrying the can for all the other teams who voted against reconstruction,a vote that ultimately relegated Hearts and Partick

Well no, whilst I absolutely understand why you did, nobody forced you to answer the petition with your own legal reps. You could have left it to the SPFL and then, in the unlikely event of promotion being reversed, considered whether to take your own legal action at that point. The clubs should never have been individually named by Hearts imo.

4 hours ago, CALDERON said:

Whole situation is a mess tbh. 

Budge always threatened legal action, and it was always going to happen after the reconstruction didn't. Aware the club will have their reasons for not going for it, but being supporters of reconstruction then changing our stance after the leagues were called does not look good, in my opinion. Now, Hearts and Partick were absolutely fucking awful and would have likely got relegated, but if reconstruction had happened we would be talking about and planning for football. If we end up in League 1 after publically declaring we didn't vote for reconstruction, we will look very stupid indeed.  At the end of the day we acted in self interest, and in the grand scheme of things our vote would have done little, but we can have little complaints if Hearts and Partick win their case. They are acting in self interest to the potential detriment of others, like we did. 

Also don't really like any idea of crowdfunding. We've taken over 100k from fans during an absolutely awful time, really tough to ask for more. And would I f**k give any money to another club in a similar position.

Cant agree with that. You can favour reconstruction if you like of course but doing so expressly because Ann Budge was threatening legal action is all wrong. Thats as much self interest as anything that went before.

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well no, whilst I absolutely understand why you did, nobody forced you to answer the petition with your own legal reps. You could have left it to the SPFL and then, in the unlikely event of promotion being reversed, considered whether to take your own legal action at that point. The clubs should never have neen individually named by Hearts imo.

 

Fair enough comment but you cant blame them for defending the petition.We are now back to where we/this case should have been to start with,arbitration but double the costs

Totally agree with your last sentence

Do you have an opinion on why the SFA seem to be silent on all of this or is diddly squat to do with them?Was under the impression Hearts and Partick breached SFA rules by going  straight to the courts when arbitration was the route

Edited by Rovers_Lad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rovers_Lad said:

Fair enough comment but you cant blame them for defending

I dont blame them at all. I would have too but its not because other clubs voted against reconstruction, its because Hearts saw fit to individually name you in legal action. See if Ann Budge will pay your bill. To be fair, in introducing James Anderson she to an extent, has.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Definitely not liking the idea of another crowd funder.

 

The fans have done fantastically during a global pandemic filled with uncertainty - and after raising such a substantial amount, to then go back out with the begging bowl again - nah no for me.

 

I even cringe like f**k every time I see the wee update thing of how much has been raised so far.

 

No to mention the fans will probably get stung again on season ticket prices/streaming so that we are able to compete next season.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Skyline Drifter said:

Well no, whilst I absolutely understand why you did, nobody forced you to answer the petition with your own legal reps. You could have left it to the SPFL and then, in the unlikely event of promotion being reversed, considered whether to take your own legal action at that point. The clubs should never have been individually named by Hearts imo.

Totally agree, we shouldn’t have touched this with a barge pole.

Big supporter of our board in the main, but we have chosen the wrong course on this one

Edited by Beastie Russell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael W said:

Well CCP has published an article on this now. Not quite as alarmist as The Sun would have you believe, but still pretty downbeat. 

http://www.deadlinenews.co.uk/2020/07/06/raith-chairman-admits-club-could-have-to-pull-out-of-legal-battle/?platform=hootsuite

Sounds like the article must have been written before we issued our statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Beastie Russell said:

Totally agree, we shouldn’t have touched this with a barge pole.

Bug supporter of our board in the main, but we have chosen the wrong course on this one

I can only assume that the clubs wanted to put on a united (no pun intended) front given that anyone not getting involved would lead to increased cost for the others. 

The guy representing us doesn't seem to have done much of a job so I'd be sceptical of us getting value for money from him at the tribunal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was the main reason for joining not so we could ensure we could participate in arbitration if it came to it, rather than having the SPFL v Hearts/Partick? 

Either way, the decision to join doesn't exactly look great at the moment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I dont blame them at all. I would have too but its not because other clubs voted against reconstruction, its because Hearts saw fit to individually name you in legal action. See if Ann Budge will pay your bill. To be fair, in introducing James Anderson she to an extent, has.

No but Hearts reasoning behind this is to stop promotion/relegation and the reason behind them being relegated indirectly or directly was because that decision was made by the SPFL after the majority of clubs voted against reconstruction not just ourselves,Utd and Cove.For some reason they saw fit to name three clubs in their legal action

Sure  Anderson would be chuffed if we threw his grant on helping to pay our legal bill.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, Beastie Russell said:

Totally agree, we shouldn’t have touched this with a barge pole.

Big supporter of our board in the main, but we have chosen the wrong course on this one

Hindsights a wonderful thing

They have time to cut their losses and pull out of the arbitration process and quite frankly I think they should if the costs could put the club down the flusher

Edited by Rovers_Lad
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we are due a Frank appraisal of the club's finances and the risks here, to be honest. This is a lot of money we're talking but things aren't stacking up. 

1) We've raised £100k through crowdfunding. 

2) 80% of our wage bill covered by furlough.

3) VAT payments were deferred. They will be payable again, but we'll have incurred next to zero since the shutdown. 

4) Bowie's transfer went through (over £100k)

5) we've sold 700 shirts.

6) SPFL prize money paid out and half the Challenge Cup money paid out also.

7) We were eligible for a government grant which we applied for.

8) Business rates holiday.

9) I was under the impression that Hearta/Partick had a benefactor paying their legal bills for this challenge. If so, why are we needing to pay their legal costs (which will be zero) if we lose at arbitration? 

10) A Raith bulletin had the costs of the court case as £25k. Why did this double to £50k?

Clearly all of our bills didn't stop just because of coronavirus, but it seems to me that our outgoings should be minimal at the moment meanwhile the club has received quite a lot money. Something isn't stacking up for me here and I would rather like to know why the tone has been so downbeat here. 

Edited by Michael W
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...