RedV Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 (edited) Airdrie's the one club he's yet to white knight for so I'm afraid it's a real possibility. Can we get him on a Bosman? Incidentally, did you know that Meher Baba is the "Baba" part of the Who classic "Baba O'Riley"? Edited August 8, 2009 by RedV 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Can we get him on a Bosman?Incidentally, did you know that Meher Baba is the "Baba" part of the Who classic "Baba O'Riley"? I did indeed. I love that song. There's some awesome live versions on Youtube. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgf Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 (edited) Does this mean the SFL have finally had their heads surgically removed from their arses. I'm a thick cnut and I can see that forcing Livi to play today would get blown out the water in a higher court as it shows that the result of the appeal has probably been pre-determined and as such unlawful/unjust. Think I mentioned it about a dozen pages ago but the chunters on here prefer to rant n rave with their brains in neutral. Longmuir even stated b4 all this blew up that if Livi appealed their game would not go ahead,so I can only assume that some decision makers can't keep their personal dislike for Livi or consortium members out of their decision making process. Cosgrove was obviously trying to take the populace approach on Footloose earlier by ranting n raving while his arse is still planted up wee Pats arse(obviously he's read too many of the posts on here and tried to gain popularity). One of the Management Committee managed to knock back Sir David Murrays bid for Ayr,so his decision making skills are not always to be relied upon. Edited August 8, 2009 by ayrmad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swampy Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 5 minutes of hot air. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongTimeLurker Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 You should read The Unbearable Lightness of Being, the part about the Communist sympathisers confronted with the horrors of revolutionary murders, and their subsequent cries of "We didn't know!" That was the bit about some guy prying his eyes out in ancient Greek mythology? Have to admit the photography of "naked vimen" part of the film is what sticks in my mind more. As for the topic of the thread it looks to me like the consortium are probably not interested in investing if they have to start in the third division but don't want to lose face by admitting that. A league expulsion for failing to show up for the Shire game allows them to exit stage right with a bit of dignity with people in Livingston remembering them as the guys who could have saved the club if only the SFL had been more reasonable etc etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yoss Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Among the stuff on livilions there's an actually quite useful thread here: http://www.livilions.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=16860 It's a report of a conversation with David Thompson, SFL Operations Director, and while it's not an official source of info and we can't be sure anyway that the comments have been correctly reported, there are a couple of things there worth noting. He can confirm livi's appeal has been receivedThis mornings statement regarding fixtures on saturday will go ahead stand,if we had appealed earlier games would have been called off but managment committee decided this morning due to no appeal being submitted by the time they had ther meeting. If that's the case the the SFL were apparently prepared to postpone the game anyway (and the other two) had the appeal been submitted earlier in the day in which case they may not deem the latest offence too serious even if Livingston have acted unilaterally. If there's another set of fixtures to be held before the appeal is heard it'll be interesting to see if there are any postponements, and if so how many. He informs me of guarantees of bond not given so decision of demotion taken. Maybe I've just missed it among all the talk but that's the first I've heard of this, and the first I've heard of any concrete reason for the Management Committee taking a different line this week other than just attitudes having hardened or a change of mind. That makes this week's decision a bit more understandable and they should maybe have made it clearer. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LLD Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 LLD, and presumably Livi themslves, are interpreting "The appeal shall, however, be deemed to have succeeded unless the decision of the Management Committee is supported by a majority of the votes cast at the said Special General Meeting" as "The appeal shall, however, be deemed to have succeeded until the decision of the Management Committee is supported by a majority of the votes cast at the said Special General Meeting." Got it in one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 (edited) Fraser Wishart was the man I meant (stop being so pedantic would you!!)... I believe he held a meeting with the SFL today, regarding the players (this has been mentioned elsewhere). It looks as if the administrators also held some kind of contact, seperately, about the game being put off.If the SFL had made it clear they'd considered and rejected these moves... it would have taken a lot of the sting out of McGruther's last-minute appeal submission IMO. Not because it would've stopped the appeal being submitted at 4:50pm or anything, but because it would've been clear to all that something was afoot. As it was - the SFL put out an incorrect statement at 11am: it was correct in literal terms (all games are on), but clearly others were proposing different ideas. I wasn't being pedantic (though Jesus, pot and kettle!), I had no idea what you were talking about. I thought it was some new member of the consortium or something. I thought we'd agreed all this nonsense regarding players was just that, nonsense. Is there any evidence at all that Fraser Wishart spoke to the SFL? And if so what was the outcome? Given Livingston are still claiming they'd be able to field a team at Dingwall I don't see what discussions Wishart had with the SFL, if he did, had to do with anything? Edited August 8, 2009 by Skyline Drifter 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Get over yourselves,even to my untrained eye the end result will be Livingston starting the season in the 1st Division. No points deduction can be applied. As for the not fulfilling a fixture!what fixture? Livingston are a 1st Division club who for some reason were asked to play a team from Division 3.I am not defending Livingston,just stating obvious facts. Well you are wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Perhaps this was rather simplistic of me but I now see 4 options that could happen to the club, short-term.1. We are allowed to play in Division 1 with the bond in place. 2. We are allowed to play in Division 1 with the bond in place and a points penalty. 3. We lose the appeal and have to play in division 3. 4. We lose the appeal, are assigned to Division 3 and the SFL decide to punish us further for not playing tommorow. Which does everyone think is the most likely option? I'm thinking #3 myself but you never know with the SFL. I don't think there's any chance you'll now avoid a points penalty so depending on the outcome of the appeal, either 2 or 4. Personally I can't see any grounds to win the appeal so 4. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Among the stuff on livilions there's an actually quite useful thread here: http://www.livilions.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=16860It's a report of a conversation with David Thompson, SFL Operations Director, and while it's not an official source of info and we can't be sure anyway that the comments have been correctly reported, there are a couple of things there worth noting. If that's the case the the SFL were apparently prepared to postpone the game anyway (and the other two) had the appeal been submitted earlier in the day in which case they may not deem the latest offence too serious even if Livingston have acted unilaterally. If there's another set of fixtures to be held before the appeal is heard it'll be interesting to see if there are any postponements, and if so how many. Maybe I've just missed it among all the talk but that's the first I've heard of this, and the first I've heard of any concrete reason for the Management Committee taking a different line this week other than just attitudes having hardened or a change of mind. That makes this week's decision a bit more understandable and they should maybe have made it clearer. I've met and spoken to David Thompson on more than one occasion. He's a decent guy and an excellent football administrator. If that's an accurate report of what he said then it'll be right enough. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brummo Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Should the Shire not just do a Estonia v Scotland style Talinn special, namely kick off against the Danny Invisible and his pals a.k.a. Livi. and take the points! I know it's a total farce but the precedent has been set, so why not? (Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I couldn't be bothered reading all 750 pages of posts re. the Livi. swan song.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skyline Drifter Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Should the Shire not just do a Estonia v Scotland style Talinn special, namely kick off against the Danny Invisible and his pals a.k.a. Livi. and take the points! I know it's a total farce but the precedent has been set, so why not?(Sorry if this has been mentioned before, but I couldn't be bothered reading all 750 pages of posts re. the Livi. swan song.) There's no precedent in Scottish football and, Scotland DIDN'T get the points in that incident. Estonia were allowed to replay the tie with no punishment (other than the fact it was played on a neutral venue) so even if it was considered a precedent it's a precedent for the complete opposite. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GARDENING-GLOVES Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Is anyone else fed up with the whole Livi "SAGA" , APPEAL . WON'T PLAY?...Really looking forward to this season and hope it is a cracker with or without Livingston.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pickledtink1881 Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 We're gonna fucking hump ye's!!!!!!And it won't even matter... lol dont think so , you will be in for a shock the shire will win IF you lot turn up i hear your playing at the " were not playing boo hoo hoo" childish capers, livi got what they deserved there lucky to still be alive, but doing things like not turning up will get them kicked out of the league., good luck tae shire we had some good scraps last season.dont worry we will get stenny for you until u come up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brummo Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 There's no precedent in Scottish football and, Scotland DIDN'T get the points in that incident. Estonia were allowed to replay the tie with no punishment (other than the fact it was played on a neutral venue) so even if it was considered a precedent it's a precedent for the complete opposite. That's a pity, as I would have liked them to rack up exactly 37 goals - can't think why? That is all! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aloysius Snuffleupagus Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 Grrrrrrrr! I quite agree. Shire are the only real losers in all of this and should be compensated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 [*]in 1915-16 a game between Morton and Hearts was unplayed (due to transport difficulties resulting from World War I, it was impossible to play the tie before the 30th April cut-off) We finished third in the Premier that season, but second the next cos most of the Hearts team were dead. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTON Posted August 8, 2009 Share Posted August 8, 2009 There's no precedent in Scottish football and, Scotland DIDN'T get the points in that incident. Estonia were allowed to replay the tie with no punishment (other than the fact it was played on a neutral venue) so even if it was considered a precedent it's a precedent for the complete opposite. And we still couldn't beat them in Monaco... 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.