Kemlin Dan Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 6 hours ago, MAC THE KNIFE said: AT LEAST LL TEAMS HAVE PLAYED AT LEAST 10 GAMES MINIMUM. TO DECLARE BRORA CHAMPS AFTER 3 GAMES IS RIDICULOUS. TEAMS IN PLACES 3 TO 5 HAVE 100% RECORDS FROM 2 GAMES. STRATHSPEY HAVE NOT EVEN PLAYED ONE GAME. THEY COULD HAVE PLAYED A KNOCKOUT CUP STYLE WITH WINNERS DECLARED CHAMPS. ONLY 4 ROUNDS. SURE HL COULD PAY FOR OR GET SOME ONE TO PAY FOR COVID TESTS ETC Brora rightly should be there considering they missed out last season along with Kelty for the play off 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 7 hours ago, Brazilianlex said: I think the legal route could also be made by Club 42 in the spfl.... Think that scenario is why they've been told it can't be null and void. Lawyers have probably advised the SFA that it won't stand up to legal challenge from Club 42 otherwise. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morley Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 1 hour ago, LongTimeLurker said: Think that scenario is why they've been told it can't be null and void. Lawyers have probably advised the SFA that it won't stand up to legal challenge from Club 42 otherwise. Totally agree. And I hope it's because the SFA have cautious governance and not because of any hint Brechin were considering legal action if finish club 42, just how badly would that reflect on Brechin if that was the case. They used their get out jail card last year. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 In the SPFL Play-off there isn't really anything that sets the requirements on what's valid as a champion. Same with Club 42. If anything, whoever finishes Club 42 could argue that they shouldn't be in the play-off due to the curtailed nature of their own season before going after anyone else. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) 12 hours ago, morley said: Listening to George Fraser interviewed on Clyde 1 this evening ("we will go all the way with this") sounds....... Can the league afford to take the SPFL to court? Talk's cheap....... Edited March 31, 2021 by MDM 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dougie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 2 minutes ago, MDM said: Can the league afford to take the SPFL to court? Talk's cheap....... I don’t think anyone mentioned taking the SPFL to court?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MDM Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 1 minute ago, Big Dougie said: I don’t think anyone mentioned taking the SPFL to court?? Just reading Morley's post Big Dougie, he indicated that that may be the thinking...... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Dougie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 2 minutes ago, MDM said: Just reading Morley's post Big Dougie, he indicated that that may be the thinking...... Fair comment. Personally I’m not sure if it would go that far, but you just never know. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bestsinceslicebread Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, Brazilianlex said: I think the legal route could also be made by Club 42 in the spfl. George I suspect will be on a backhander from Rangers re the Colts proposal so is putting as much pressure on as possible to try and frighten L2 Clubs to accept the Colts proposal. I think the last thing on George's mind is the Colts teams. He's not really interested in them, only if it affects the LL and HL promotion /relegation. He's more interested in having a stable, constant relegation/promotion to and from the SPFL 2 and the same at the bottom of the LL with promotion/relegation to and from EOSFL/WOSFL and SOSFL and to a certain extent, the same ide with the HL Edited March 31, 2021 by Bestsinceslicebread 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 (edited) 3 hours ago, morley said: Totally agree. And I hope it's because the SFA have cautious governance and not because of any hint Brechin were considering legal action if finish club 42, just how badly would that reflect on Brechin if that was the case. They used their get out jail card last year. As is pretty much inevitable in these threads a certain poster has muddied the waters a bit since you posted that. This is the relevant rule: https://spfl.co.uk/admin/filemanager/images/shares/pdfs/SPFL Rules and Regulations 16-Mar-21 (MASTER COPY) CLEAN.pdf The League Champions of the SHFL and the SLFL at the end of season 2015/2016 and in each season thereafter will (subject to rule III(f)) take part in the Play-Off Match which shall consist of a home and away two-legged match approved and organised by the Scottish F.A to determine, subject to these rules, which club shall take part in the Pyramid Play-Off Match. A draw supervised by the Scottish FA will determine which club has home advantage in the first match. If they null and voided, the bolded part would no longer be applicable because there would no longer have been a league champion for the 2020/21 season since that season by definition would effectively not have even happened, so Club 42 would get a reprieve. Not for the first time LL officialdom does not appear to have grasped the full implications of what was actually in the relevant rulebooks (e.g. the mess that happened after Selkirk resigned midseason related to the definition of "bottom club"). Edited March 31, 2021 by LongTimeLurker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samsonite Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 12 hours ago, MAC THE KNIFE said: AT LEAST LL TEAMS HAVE PLAYED AT LEAST 10 GAMES MINIMUM. TO DECLARE BRORA CHAMPS AFTER 3 GAMES IS RIDICULOUS. TEAMS IN PLACES 3 TO 5 HAVE 100% RECORDS FROM 2 GAMES. STRATHSPEY HAVE NOT EVEN PLAYED ONE GAME. THEY COULD HAVE PLAYED A KNOCKOUT CUP STYLE WITH WINNERS DECLARED CHAMPS. ONLY 4 ROUNDS. SURE HL COULD PAY FOR OR GET SOME ONE TO PAY FOR COVID TESTS ETC Great post so the HL clubs should have paid for testing so that they could turn the league into a cup competition, cant understand why the clubs never went for this great option...... Could slightly understand your post if LL had played at least 50% of fixtures. Both leagues have explained the reasonings on why they had to come to this outcome pretty well, a decision no doubt made easier due to the fact both teams that "won" last season were top again this time around. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 4 hours ago, morley said: Totally agree. And I hope it's because the SFA have cautious governance and not because of any hint Brechin were considering legal action if finish club 42, just how badly would that reflect on Brechin if that was the case. They used their get out jail card last year. Why throw such nonsense into the ring - when there is no suggestion that Brechin have done any such thing. Let’s keep things sensible - Brora and Kelty were treated last season no more unfairly than Partick, Hearts, Cowdenbeath, Falkirk, Elgin, Stranraer, etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 54 minutes ago, LongTimeLurker said: As is pretty much inevitable in these threads a certain poster has muddied the waters a bit since you posted that. This is the relevant rule: If they null and voided, the bolded part would no longer be applicable because there would no longer have been a league champion for the 2020/21 season since that season by definition would effectively not have even happened, so Club 42 would get a reprieve. Not for the first time LL officialdom does not appear to have grasped the full implications of what was actually in the relevant rulebooks (e.g. the mess that happened after Selkirk resigned midseason related to the definition of "bottom club"). In case this was me. Go and dig up a rule that shows the SPFL Play-off rules sets the requirements of a Champion ifyou can find it. Which is what my comment was about, since talking about hypotheticals like what if they null & voided is all you. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 30 minutes ago, Cowden Cowboy said: Why throw such nonsense into the ring - when there is no suggestion that Brechin have done any such thing. Let’s keep things sensible - Brora and Kelty were treated last season no more unfairly than Partick, Hearts, Cowdenbeath, Falkirk, Elgin, Stranraer, etc This simply isn't true. The 6 clubs you mentioned are all SPFL members, and all participated in the democratic vote which led to the cancellation of the SPFL play-offs. The SPFL also had the legal right to cancel their own Premiership, Championship and League 1 play-offs. Brora and Kelty had no say in the cancellation of the League 2 play-off, and it was not really within the SPFL's power to do so. The only reason there wasn't more of a challenge on this is that it was not practically possible to play the matches. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
craigkillie Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 4 hours ago, FairWeatherFan said: In the SPFL Play-off there isn't really anything that sets the requirements on what's valid as a champion. Same with Club 42. If anything, whoever finishes Club 42 could argue that they shouldn't be in the play-off due to the curtailed nature of their own season before going after anyone else. They voted for the curtailed season, and under the SPFL rules whoever finishes bottom of League 2 will be Club 42. They would have absolutely no basis for this argument. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 29 minutes ago, craigkillie said: ...is that it was not practically possible to play the matches. ...and the games had to take place at the end of season 2019-20 according the rule as written, so that meant Brechin had their escape route because the SFA were not able to hold the HL vs LL playoff game at the appropriate time due to the lockdown. As long as the HL vs LL playoff proceeds this year at the end of season 2020-21 under SFA auspices based on 2020-21 "League Champions" there is no obvious way out for Club 42 this time. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairWeatherFan Posted March 31, 2021 Author Share Posted March 31, 2021 29 minutes ago, craigkillie said: They voted for the curtailed season, and under the SPFL rules whoever finishes bottom of League 2 will be Club 42. They would have absolutely no basis for this argument. I'm not talking about it being valid. I'm throwing it in with the notion of them trying to be against the HL/LL Champion for all these hypothetical "legal challenges" that won't materliase because there's nothing in the SPFL Play-off that defines the HL/LL Champion and Club42 as its the individual leagues that do that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 54 minutes ago, craigkillie said: This simply isn't true. The 6 clubs you mentioned are all SPFL members, and all participated in the democratic vote which led to the cancellation of the SPFL play-offs. The SPFL also had the legal right to cancel their own Premiership, Championship and League 1 play-offs. Brora and Kelty had no say in the cancellation of the League 2 play-off, and it was not really within the SPFL's power to do so. The only reason there wasn't more of a challenge on this is that it was not practically possible to play the matches. It is true by your own admission it simply wasn’t possible - thus the SPFL and other parties had no other choice - so a democratic vote would have had no point 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowden Cowboy Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 The relevant part of the SPFL rules is - The Club occupying position 42 in the League at the end of Season 2014/2015 and in each Season thereafter will take part in a Pyramid Play–Off Competition against a Candidate Club identified by the Scottish FA from and by means of a national competition approved by the Board between clubs which are not members of the League. - Thus the SFA identifies a candidate club by means of a competition that must be approved by the SPFL Board. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballfirst Posted March 31, 2021 Share Posted March 31, 2021 The SPFL did however recognise Brora and Kelty as champion clubs of the HL and LL in the curtailed season that was 2019/20. That is self evident from the SPFL inviting those clubs to participate in the 2020/21 Betfred Cup, the SPFL's own cup competition. There is no reason why they should not do so again this season. 2 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.