Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 9 minutes ago, welshbairn said: That's democracy for you. From the start to the end it was clear to everyone that there would be no majority for reconstruction. There were more important matters to deal with. The judge said that the arbitration panel would be entitled to demand the same, but he thought he'd speed it up a little to help them out. Nice of him to throw Hearts a few sweeties after telling them where they should have gone in the first place, and gently asking the SFA not to be too harsh on them for breaking the rules. He actually said we went about things the right way waiting to see the result of reconstruction. If the club shad been up front about their intentions never to seriously consider it maybe it would all be sorted by now. reconstruction was a total charade. A number of clubs that voted for it were surprised how little support there was so you have to wonder why clubs intending to vote no went along with it. My (no doubt crackpot) theory is the SPFL has been playing for time this whole time, hoping to stretch it as close to the season start as possible. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilbur Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: It's hard keeping track. I'm not the lawyer mate. It's not my case. We've all accused the SPFL of various things over the years I'm sure. Budge gets accused of all sorts right now. I've said it's dodgy and the judge agreed it's dodgy enough to go to arbitration to sort out. Maybe they genuinely didn't know where the Dundee vote was for 4 hours. I'm sure it was all above board. So made up shite from you then ? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 (edited) Just now, Wilbur said: So made up shite from you then ? Maybe. We'll find out. I'm just another football fan spouting shite and views like all of us. Edited July 8, 2020 by 8GamesToGo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: He actually said we went about things the right way waiting to see the result of reconstruction. He said that you hadn't delayed, but you had taken it to the wrong court. That's why he directed you to arbitration, which could end up being a costly diversion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 9 minutes ago, welshbairn said: He said that you hadn't delayed, but you had taken it to the wrong court. That's why he directed you to arbitration, which could end up being a costly diversion. I know he said it was a matter for arbitration. We thought it was worth going for a public trial and wanted to get the documents released. Not sure why any Scottish football fan wouldn't want that? The SPFL having to explain themselves - what's wrong with that? We won 2 out of 3 motions and he said he could make time to hear the case in the CoS if needed. Having him say we have a case was the important thing for me. I thought the hordes of Daily Record headline readers screaming we are wasting everyone's time would have quietened down after that but they haven't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 50 minutes ago, kingjoey said: This person appears to have been going strong for well over 24 hours now, with only around 6 hours off for a sleep It's pretty sad when you put it like that. Such is life during lockdown with not much to do except obsess over something extremely important to my football team. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, 8GamesToGo said: I know he said it was a matter for arbitration. We thought it was worth going for a public trial and wanted to get the documents released. Not sure why any Scottish football fan wouldn't want that? The SPFL having to explain themselves - what's wrong with that? We won 2 out of 3 motions and he said he could make time to hear the case in the CoS if needed. Having him say we have a case was the important thing for me. I thought the hordes of Daily Record headline readers screaming we are wasting everyone's time would have quietened down after that but they haven't. He said the Arbitration Panel could and probably would have demanded the documents anyway. It was a pointless exercise that wasted a lot of money, and made you liable for severe penalties. You gained nothing, the CoS was always an option if the panel ignore the law, or fail in some way. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
500ClubCraig Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 21 minutes ago, welshbairn said: The judge said that the arbitration panel would be entitled to demand the same, but he thought he'd speed it up a little to help them out. Nice of him to throw Hearts a few sweeties after telling them where they should have gone in the first place, and gently asking the SFA not to be too harsh on them for breaking the rules. At the Court of Session hearing, Lord Clark ruled in favour of Hearts and Partick Thistle's motion to release certain documents relating to the case. The clubs have succeeded in their petition for the recovery of documents relevant to orders they sought in terms of the Companies Act 2006. He noted that, by default, rule 28 of the Scottish Arbitration Rules allowed an arbitration tribunal to grant disclosure of documents, but that this rule could be excluded by the parties. Putting all that aside the point I was making is that Scottish Football didn’t need to be in this position. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 5 hours ago, 8GamesToGo said: Is the correct answer (after a playoff in Hamilton's case) if all the rules were followed to the letter in terms of who "deserves" what as everyone seems to think they should be. f**k off you rocket 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, 500ClubCraig said: He noted that, by default, rule 28 of the Scottish Arbitration Rules allowed an arbitration tribunal to grant disclosure of documents, but that this rule could be excluded by the parties. It would have been a bit unlikely for Hearts and Partick Thistle to exclude it. It was a fig leaf to grant to cover for a total waste of time and some serious wedges for the QCs and their firms. And he asked the SFA not to be too harsh with the sanctions for taking it to court I suppose, that was nice of him. Edited July 8, 2020 by welshbairn 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 9 minutes ago, 500ClubCraig said: Putting all that aside the point I was making is that Scottish Football didn’t need to be in this position. I've been trying to make that point all day about having various options at the start of this whole thing. Good luck! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 He actually said we went about things the right way waiting to see the result of reconstruction. If the club shad been up front about their intentions never to seriously consider it maybe it would all be sorted by now. reconstruction was a total charade. A number of clubs that voted for it were surprised how little support there was so you have to wonder why clubs intending to vote no went along with it. My (no doubt crackpot) theory is the SPFL has been playing for time this whole time, hoping to stretch it as close to the season start as possible.This is the worst one yet. 6 club representatives from the top league told Budge to her face that they wouldn't support her reconstruction plan before there was even a formal vote taken. That was when Budge was supposed to be presenting the outcome of the reconstruction panel. Her masterplan after that was presenting the same plan for the top league another two times with the only substantive change being that they were a fortnight after the previous one. Budge 100% knew reconstruction wasn't happening. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyFerrino Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 8 minutes ago, 500ClubCraig said: At the Court of Session hearing, Lord Clark ruled in favour of Hearts and Partick Thistle's motion to release certain documents relating to the case. The clubs have succeeded in their petition for the recovery of documents relevant to orders they sought in terms of the Companies Act 2006. He noted that, by default, rule 28 of the Scottish Arbitration Rules allowed an arbitration tribunal to grant disclosure of documents, but that this rule could be excluded by the parties. Putting all that aside the point I was making is that Scottish Football didn’t need to be in this position. If these documents are as explosive as the **** dossier then you're in for a bit of a disappointment, bud. End result of these weeks and weeks of Jambos tears and snotters will be no more than your parachute payment. What a massively entertaining waste of time. It was a good laugh, wasn't it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 hours ago, Wilbur said: Mother Theresa Budge should have taken her "case" to the Belgian courts. Big mistake. She should have taken it to Jesus 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: It would have been a bit unlikely for Hearts and Partick Thistle to exclude it. It was a fig leaf to grant to cover for a total waste of time and some serious wedges for the QCs and their firms. Did you think the D Utd QC needed to go on and on as long as he did? It was his fault it lasted 3 days instead of a few hours. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buchan30 Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 She should have taken it to JesusShe would have been crucified for that. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, Lebowski said: 37 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Budge 100% knew reconstruction wasn't happening. What option did she have? Even Neil Doncaster said he thought there was support. Quite a number of clubs are quoted as saying they were surprised how little support there was in the end. Anonymous sources were quoted in the Record saying some chairmen had decided they wouldn't vote for anything that benefitted Caley. It seems to have been a total charade. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 1 minute ago, 8GamesToGo said: Did you think the D Utd QC needed to go on and on as long as he did? It was his fault it lasted 3 days instead of a few hours. Of course he did, His kids' school fees wont pay themselves 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 (edited) 4 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Did you think the D Utd QC needed to go on and on as long as he did? It was his fault it lasted 3 days instead of a few hours. It was masterful, directed the judge straight to approving the SPFL motion, and got Hearts to pay half the SPFL costs. They were a tag team. Edited July 8, 2020 by welshbairn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 Just now, welshbairn said: It was masterful, directed the judge straight to approving the SPFL motion, and got Hearts to pay half the SPFL costs. That's some spin. He lost his motion to have it dismissed. 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.