-
Posts
991 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Everything posted by stuartcraig
-
No you weren't. Your team chose to do it. Maybe, they did think it through, saw what Partick and Hearts would do and still thought it was the right course of action. They have no responsibility to save you from relegation. Beyond that, there isn't much to discuss.
-
Define "realistic" with your Doncaster head on and then, with swapping your Budge head on, decide whether you're willing to accept it when, really, what you want is relegation to be cancelled. I love the utter certainty with which you make all of these predictions.
-
Imagine that you're Ann Budge and then define "reasonable". While you're at it, imagine you're the chair of one of the clubs in play off positions, watching while relegated teams receive offers of compensation while your team isn't and then think how you're planning to respond.
-
What's my point? Well you ignored it but the main point was that no-one "forced" Hearts and Partick to launch a legal action. They chose to. The incidental point you seem to be responding to is the fact that this court action is throwing the start of the new season into doubt at a time when clubs will be trying to figure out their budgets and plan accordingly. Any delay will impact revenue and cashflow position and that will, in turn, impact when and if clubs are able to pay the wages of the players that they need to sign for next season. I can't imagine anyone being so naive that they would fail to make the connection.
-
I love the way that Thistle and Hearts have absolutely no agency in this worldview of yours. When clubs voted against reconstruction it left them with absolutely no choice except, perhaps, accepting their relegation and just getting on with planning for 2020/21, the same way that clubs who missed out on promotion (via 1st place or play offs) took their medicine like big boys.
-
It isn’t proven that there is a general consensus that those 3 don’t deserve to be relegated. In here it seems to be the consensus with Stranraer and Patrick fans (and the odd Falkirk fan who sees the solution of reconstruction as a way of getting back to the Championship) but I’m guessing the rest of us are either ambivalent or see it as the correct outcome. No-one is saying much about Cove or Dundee Utd because it seems to be the settled view that those promotions are justified. Raith is more controversial but we’re all bored debating that one.
-
Dundee Utd, Raith & Cove Rangers will 'robustly defend' right to promotion https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53111932 So it sounds like Budge is trying to force the null and void option.
-
Why? Because the HYS section of the BBC website is the most toxic shitpool of arsehole opinions known to humankind and it'll turn into a debate about Rangers' tax affairs within seconds.
-
You want a HYS section under this? Are you f*cking mental?
-
The crisis part refers to folk dying in their thousands, not the bit where the season was concluded with games still to be played. That’s pretty trivial in the grand scheme of things.
-
I assume those are the outcomes you consider sensible. Any object reason that the approach the member clubs voted for isn’t sensible?
-
What bit or bits? And what does a sensible outcome look like?
-
I didn't say any law had been broken, I was talking in hypothetical terms.
-
I'm going to take a wild punt in the dark here and guess that he was contractually obliged to do the latter and not the former. Call me crazy if you want.
-
I see Ms Budge cleared up that question from earlier on. Sounds very much like they are open to blocking the start of the season if they don't get the outcome they want.
-
"Unfortunately, Scottish football has been unable to pull together at this time of national crisis to prevent the need for this legal challenge. We desperately hoped Court action would not be necessary, but we were left with no other option. " I'll rewrite that for them: Unfortunately, at this time of national crisis that has f**k all to do with Hearts being rank and getting relegated this season, not enough Scottish clubs voted for the outcome that we wanted so we've taken an entirely voluntary course of action but we still have massive brass neck so will claim we were forced to do it.
-
What a car crash of a public statement. Did they phone Jim Traynor for advice?
-
A decision in favour of Hearts / Partick may set a precedent that Stanraer could take advantage of. The clubs in the play off spots would likely have to make an independent case.
-
So they definitely haven't ruled it out. Has either party definitely said that they're only seeking compensation through the courts? The courts can rule that the decision to relegate broke the law and leave it at that. It'll be up to the SPFL to go away and find a different approach.
-
Have they categorically said that they won't be seeking an injunction to prevent the leagues from going ahead until the case is completed, coz I wouldn't bet on any outcome until then.
-
Nope. The clubs will be challenging the decision. It'll be up to the courts to decide how the matter will be settled if the plaintiff challenge succeeds. That may involve cancelling relegation, paying compensation or both.
-
I'm guessing from the statements in the press the legal challenge is against the decision to relegate (with the season unfinished). I can't see the challenge being against the decision to reject a reconstruction proposal, unless the SPFL failed to follow their own rules in reaching the decision. If it had passed, reconstruction would only have rendered the original decision to relegate a moot point.
-
Who said anything about reconstruction? Yon Clyde boy asked. The statement from Partick's Chief Exec says they are indeed "challenging .... relegation". Seems pretty cut and dried.
-
"Yesterday, we said that court action was our preferred route to challenging our relegation to League One," chairman Jacqui Low said on behalf of the board.