Golden Gordon Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 2 hours ago, AJF said: I see, thanks for explaining. I’m not convinced this potential liability would be enough to convince Rangers to support the SPFL’s defence given they’d like to see a complete overhaul of the organisation. Can't see Rangers* willingly assisting United to be fair. Heard they had a slight disagreement previously, which led to some ill feeling between the clubs. 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannadeechee Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 23 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Did the Scottish gov not say schools would reopen part time then changed to a completely different strategy after lobbying? If the SPFL had paused the league instead of calling it so soon MAYBE the gov could have been persuaded to play closed door games starting July. Because the SPFL had already called the league the focus was on a later timeline. Again,you are just going with the same thing "lobby" . They did. Journalists asked questions. The reponse was effectively, it's sport not really a priority. We also had responses from Sturgeon herself that she did not want football full stop due to in her view fans going round folks houses to watch on tv. What about ALL the other situations? You have to include those too. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Gordon Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 2 hours ago, stumigoo said: Edit - I should also say that the idea of United, Cove and Raith asking other clubs for money, especially when clubs are all struggling doesn’t sit well with me, but as I mention in my post, it’s a terrible scenario with no real answer as to how it is best funded. You are asking for it nicely though & don't believe you are entitled to it. That is the difference for me in this scenario. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AJF Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said: Can't see Rangers* willingly assisting United to be fair. Heard they had a slight disagreement previously, which led to some ill feeling between the clubs. Haha, yes, I think that may be a slight contributing factor in their thought process 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannadeechee Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, 8GamesToGo said: A lot seems to have gone on behind the scenes. Or if not why have the SPFL been so scared of an inquiry, documents being released to Hearts and co and a public court hearing? All of what they didn't want to output in public was confidential contracts between BT Sport, Sky etc. We have already seen Hearts court action leaked by someone. That could only have come from Hearts, Thistle, Stranraer, United,Rovers, Cove or SPFL. I seriously doubt anyone from the Courts would have considering the handle this sort of suff all the time and it would be gross misconduct and P45 time. SPFL made a big point about not giving documents to clubs due to Contempt of Court issues. That leaves. one of the clubs. That is why they didn't. If taken at face value and they didn't lie to Lord Clark. Edited July 9, 2020 by Tannadeechee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannadeechee Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 36 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Did the Scottish gov not say schools would reopen part time then changed to a completely different strategy after lobbying? If the SPFL had paused the league instead of calling it so soon MAYBE the gov could have been persuaded to play closed door games starting July. Because the SPFL had already called the league the focus was on a later timeline. Schools still aren't definitely open. It is still back to normal for schools IF medical/scientific advice allows. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SilverWolfe Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 Yes but wot if this & the SPFL get emptied £955 is less than 960. No idea what any of that means pal 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 (edited) So if I could side step the broken sewer pipe that seems to have flooded the floor of this thread, and to maybe move the debate on from repeating the same tired old broken arguments, does anyone have any ideas of what is going on with the arbitration process? I get it's in private, but has there been representatives put forward by the parties yet and if so do we know who they are? Edited July 9, 2020 by Ric 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Ric said: So if I could side step the broken sewer pipe that seems to have flooded the floor of this thread, and to maybe move the debate on from repeating the same tired old broken arguments, does anyone have any ideas of what is going on with the arbitration process? I get it's in private, but has there been representatives put forward by the parties yet and if so do we know who they are? Rumoured to be ready to go on Monday and after the Sevco death and arson threats on a previous occasion, the panellists can choose anonymity if they wish. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golden Gordon Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 4 minutes ago, Ric said: So if I could side step the broken sewer pipe that seems to have flooded the floor of this thread, and to maybe move the debate on from repeating the same tired old broken arguments, does anyone have any ideas of what is going on with the arbitration process? I get it's in private, but has there been representatives put forward by the parties yet and if so do we know who they are? No idea Ric, have been looking out for news on this front too, but have not yet been able to find anything. I'm aware that the longer it takes for the two respective arbiters to be appointed & the agreed chairperson, that this will cut into the amount of time available to hear the case. But I know I'm into granny egg sooking territory here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Rumoured to be ready to go on Monday and after the Sevco death and arson threats on a previous occasion, the panellists can choose anonymity if they wish. I just can't imagine they would be able to remain anonymous. Not only would the Scottish media go on a hunt you'd have certain supporters claiming a conspiracy if they weren't told who they were. 3 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said: No idea Ric, have been looking out for news on this front too, but have not yet been able to find anything. I'm aware that the longer it takes for the two respective arbiters to be appointed & the agreed chairperson, that this will cut into the amount of time available to hear the case. But I know I'm into granny egg sooking territory here. Timing is the reason I mentioned it. I know it's only Thursday, but I thought both parties had an idea of who they'd put forward - maybe I picked that up wrongly. There is still the haggling over the 3rd member of course. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FTOF Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 54 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Did the Scottish gov not say schools would reopen part time then changed to a completely different strategy after lobbying? No. They did not. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, Ric said: I just can't imagine they would be able to remain anonymous. Not only would the Scottish media go on a hunt you'd have certain supporters claiming a conspiracy if they weren't told who they were. Their names wouldn't mean anything to the vast majority and it would just lead to the internet blowing up from people trying to find out what school they went to. They're probably retired and likely wouldn't relish unpleasant parcels delivered in the post. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 3 minutes ago, welshbairn said: Their names wouldn't mean anything to the vast majority and it would just lead to the internet blowing up from people trying to find out what school they went to. They're probably retired and likely wouldn't relish unpleasant parcels delivered in the post. That's going to happen no matter what, you _know_ what Scottish football supporters can be like. Do you know if they are being given anonymity? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shotgun Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 It would be brilliant if the three of them were chosen from posters on here. Suggestions on a postcard to... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 18 minutes ago, FTOF said: No. They did not. Fair enough I thought there was a change around schools going back. I'm not having a go at the Gov. I'm a supporter of them in general and especially in the way they've handled this. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
welshbairn Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, Ric said: That's going to happen no matter what, you _know_ what Scottish football supporters can be like. Do you know if they are being given anonymity? They have that choice, it's been mentioned in the coverage, the rules changed after Sevco. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Coventry Saint said: What I find weird is that I don't believe the fundamentals of the case are (or, should be) affected by anything that these clubs have to say. This. I think it's a sign they don't trust the SPFL but I do think they're being used here in terms of building a picture of Hearts/PT vs Scottish football as a whole. And at least they will see the documents too. Edited July 9, 2020 by 8GamesToGo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ric Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 2 minutes ago, Shotgun said: It would be brilliant if the three of them were chosen from posters on here. Jinkies, I'd hope not! Imagine the mess of that. 1 minute ago, welshbairn said: They have that choice, it's been mentioned in the coverage, the rules changed after Sevco. Who would have thought, eh? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDonald Jardine Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 11 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: This. I think it's a sign they don't trust the SPFL but I do think they're being used here in terms of building a picture of Hearts/PT vs Scottish football as a whole. And at least they will see the documents too. This is where I am. If the three named clubs were satisfied the SPFL would represent their interests, and their argument does seem to be entirely the same, they had no need to enter the proceedings themselves. 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.