Jump to content

Cornishman

Gold Members
  • Content Count

    73
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

60 Excellent

About Cornishman

  • Rank
    Sunday League Starter
  • Birthday 15/01/1964

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Malvern
  • Interests
    Non-League footy
    Stamp Collecting
    Reading
    (ex) Cartoonist
    Poet/Songwriter
    Cartophile (maps)
  • My Team
    Ross County

Recent Profile Visitors

1,390 profile views
  1. Northern Counties East League wouldn't have them. They'd have to try for Northern League!
  2. When will we know who goes where in EoSFL?
  3. A rule book doesn't trump the law, regardless of any 'catch all' clause. Hearts will almost certainly be arguing there's a disconnect between the rule book and the law in their particular situation (as opposed to arguing the rule book wasn't properly followed). In what regards we can only guess. Nick de Marco QC recently wrote a piece in the Sports Law Bulletin about the implications of the failed South Shields appeal. His final concluding paragraph indicates areas where such disconnects may occur: "The case is not, however, a carte blanche to governing bodies in these uncertain times. The FA, and other regulators in sport, remain bound by ordinary public law and contractual principles. Irrational decisions will continue to be challenged; and procedural fairness must be achieved notwithstanding the unprecedented times in which we live. The ability to amend or vary rules due to COVID-19 must be exercised in accordance with the rules or articles of association of each relevant league. Where decisions are made collectively by votes of member clubs (as is the case in levels above those considered in this case) unfair prejudice and/or competition law principles may also come into play." The full article is at: https://www.sportslawbulletin.org/football-time-covid-19-lessons-be-learned-recent-decision-south-shields-fc-v-fa/ thanks to Paulh66 at Non League Matters for this.
  4. It wasn't a 'relegation' as that requires the season being complete, not truncated' as has happened. Neither is it an 'expulsion', as that would require no longer being part of the SPFL organisation. The correct term for Hearts' fate should be 'demotion', which I've not yet seen written here.
  5. In among all the fairness drama, there was one 'f**k nobody over' reconstruction solution... 14-18-12 All perfectly do-able fixture wise.
  6. No... no I will not. I will continue to insert my t'uppennyworth in this forum with ideas as and when they arise, whether they're serious ones, or more lighthearted. I will not take umbrage at any anal-retentive/po-faced individual who puts me on 'ignore', which, of course, you are also free to do. Good day.
  7. If you follow hugely experienced Europe-wide groundhopper, Leo Hoenig, you'll know that he has a fairly accurate theory that team/match quality bears a strong positive corelation with average attendances, wherever you go.
  8. In England the 400th.-odd team would be playing in the 8th.-tier of their pyramid. Average attendances vary from 820 at Guernsey, 607 at Hastings, down to 54 at FC Romania.
  9. Actually, let's go for a 20-20 league, excluding the gruesome twosome from the tables... but, every team in the two divisions gets one home & one away match against an ugly sister each season to make a total of 40 matches. Old Firm thus get 40 matches and could have four games against each other thrown on at Xmas/Easter, say to make 44 matches.
×
×
  • Create New...