jimbo

Yeh, lets just throw the rule book out the window. Who needs it when the blazers at the SFL can chop and change them according to their moods. They are such an upstanding group of people, of course, that their judgements would better those of Solomon.

The concept of consistency however is something the SFL might at some point aspire to. The reason Livi were demoted 2 divisions was for the simple reason that those in judgement feared they might not be able to complete their fixtures and that compensation payable to the other teams in the league would be a lot less in the bottom division than in the first. The fact that Livi managed to survive on the non existent away crowds in the 3rd gave the lie to their supposition. On that basis then judging each case on its merits depends on the whims of those on the committee who make the decision. In other leagues the rules and penalties are clearly set out as indeed they should be in the SFL.

I dont think there is a lot of difference between the 2nd and 3rd divisions so, with this team, if we had been relegated one division instead of the harsh two division relegation we could well be sitting in the top 4 with a good chance of getting back into the 1st for next season. However what's done is done and we have performed as well as could be expected given where morale was in early August. Trying to overcome a points penalty would have had us struggling in the 1st with relegation almost a certainty. The knock on effect that would have had on players and fans would be less pleasant than the mood around the club at present.

May I be the first to congratulate you on your appointment as spokesman for the the rest of the world.

Yes I had booked a hotel and transport for the Ross County game we had been scheduled to play but which was scrapped at short notice by the SFL. But I suppose being a Livi fan that's ok. Have you noticed which team you were playing when you recorded your highest league attendance so far this season?

It would have to go some to beat the stuff on this thread.

Definitely mad!

Aw naw! Gutted.

Aargh! The Master has spoken. Again.

See, we also make you smile. You love it here don't you.

Aye but we played for the greater good of the game in spite of the disadvantage to ourselves. I think the sacrifice was well worth it.

The Special General Meeting of the SFL hastily convened on Thursday 13th August had already rejected the appeal. The decision to play the game against Montrose on Saturday 15th was taken because it was seen to be in the best interest of all concerned. No game was played while the appeal to the SFL was in progress.

Ooh! You've rattled him this time EL.

Administration, the appeal against the severity of the punishment and postponement of the fixture were all related. Valid reason was given in plenty time for all parties to know what was happening.

Hallelujah! Waited so long for a voice of reason to be heard.

An important body which sees the sense of fairness in not prejudging while an appeal is in progress SFL = incestuous Mickey Mouse organisation CAS = legal organisation run by people conversant with what is correct in law Aye cheers Martin one of the Stasi of Scottish football. I'm sure it was done without any eye on gaining an advantage. Just coincidence that your team and mine are in the same league of course.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/8319573.stm I see Fifa have suspended the Chelsea signing ban pending their appeal being heard. Seems the status quo is to prevail while the appeal is pending.

Yoss not quoting the whole of it since it's there for all to see but your post is a pretty fair assessment of a lot of what has gone on. We will agree to disagree on the precedent thing (I cant be bothered going over the old ground again anyway) The punishment was harsh but having accepted it and got on with things I am enjoying life in the third division. I'll wait till things have settled down next season before I make any judgement on the financial running of the club by the present consortium.

Not needed. Once under the auspices of that governing body.

Fingers in my ears. Humming a loud tune.

Everybody hates us. We don't care.

Double *sigh* It is patently obvious that the MC can do whatever the hell it likes. Therein lies the problem.

Yes I am. They were already financially committed to the club. But then again that incestuous bunch who make up the MC knew this. However it is done now and all the debate on here won't change the decision. The point of my post was that the Gretna and Livi situations were very different and as such the previous year's judgement did not need to be held as a precedent. After the Livi decision however they have set it in stone for any other club that gets into bother.

As expected Livi has shown that the club have been able to fulfil their games (and in division one it would have been easier financially given the bigger crowds) The MC were well aware that the consortium were in the process of raising the bond at the time of the decision and the ground has a safety certificate. In addition there was no group or individual ready to step in at Gretna as there was at Livi. As you well know the circumstances between Livi and Gretna were very different.

Gretna went to the third division because their ground was not fit for first division football.