Jump to content

Livingston - all the threads merged


Recommended Posts

Presumably Cowden and Airdrie will be able to appeal against the decision if they don't like it (as innocent parties in this affair)?

And then re-appeal again? :huh::unsure:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That would be fun! :o

I haven't a clue though, one of P&B's walking SFL rulebooks may have the answer.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the First Division... :huh:

Hibbee Jibbee will know the answer - he knows all the answers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not really good enough for the judge to just not turn up is it? Fair enough he has his priorities but he should still turn up for the appeal which he was allocated to do.

You mean like Livvy turning up to play the Shire? That sort of thing?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the First Division... :huh:

Hibbee Jibbee will know the answer - he knows all the answers

:lol: well no, to be exact I'm sad enough to go and consult the rulebook while everyone else just postulates ;). Cowdenbeath and Airdrie don't have any individual right to appeal Livi being put back into Div 1, as their "promotion" was entirely co-incidental to the punishment of Livi due to breaching rules on insolvency practitionership. However, they could bring a vote to the SFL MC (or even call a SGM) to get the SFL to re-appeal or challenge the SFA tribunal decision... In the highly unlikely event SFA tribunal upholds Livi's appeal in full today, I'd expect SFL to re-appeal anyway.

As I said before, the best scenario I can envisage for Livi is it going back to SFL, with the SFA tribunal making a series of observations on the case, for SFL to look at when reconsidering the punishment they give to Livi. I cannot forsee the SFA tribunal upholding Livi's appeal completely.

Edited by HibeeJibee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight; Rankine complains about MacIntyre placing illegal bets with him...even though he gladly accepts the bets. He also has a problem with McMaster holding shares in two teams at the same time by proxy, even though he himself does the same thing. Ballantyne also comes under fire from Rankine for "participating" in discussions on Livingston's fate, and indeed tried to influence the vote...even though the end result of the meeting was for Livi to remain in the First. Am I correct so far?

Rankine seems to be nothing more than a scumbag of the highest order. And this is the guy who will be part of the consortium running the country's most historically corrupt club.

The vultures are roosting in the rafters at Almondvale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:huh:

Is that aimed at me because I'm a (sweary word) turncoat? :P

No, not at all mate. If anything I was thinking of myself there, as the thought occured to me the other day, that if Livi were reinstated, we would get another bite of the cherry at getting three points instead of the one we took from the Airdrie game. All of this after my principled rants of late July and early August. :lol:

I quickly felt disgusted with myself for thinking in such a way. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So let me get this straight; Rankine complains about MacIntyre placing illegal bets with him...even though he gladly accepts the bets. He also has a problem with McMaster holding shares in two teams at the same time by proxy, even though he himself does the same thing. Ballantyne also comes under fire from Rankine for "participating" in discussions on Livingston's fate, and indeed tried to influence the vote...even though the end result of the meeting was for Livi to remain in the First. Am I correct so far?

Rankine seems to be nothing more than a scumbag of the highest order. And this is the guy who will be part of the consortium running the country's most historically corrupt club.

The vultures are roosting in the rafters at Almondvale.

I think he caused the bother due to the result of the second meeting going against the promise made in the first meeting.

The rest of your quote.... :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think he caused the bother due to the result of the second meeting going against the promise made in the first meeting.

The rest of your quote.... :huh:

Come on PLL, do you actually believe that Rankine is a person of high moral fibre and integrity? Do you think he has Livi's best interests at heart? Isn't it possible that he has another agenda, and that Livi are just a means to an end?

Livi have been living on borrowed time for how many years? It seems they've been living on other people's money as well. How many chairmen have come and gone under a cloud of suspicion and debt? Most, if not all of them, or that's how it appears to me. Do you think I'm wrong in saying that Livi are the most historically corrupt club in Scottish football? How many times have they ran up huge debts, and then performed some escape act where the creditors get screwed, but the club soldiers on like nothing happened? How many times has it been someone else's fault, and how many deluded Livi supporters buy into the vacuous promises of one owner after another?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on PLL, do you actually believe that Rankine is a person of high moral fibre and integrity? Do you think he has Livi's best interests at heart? Isn't it possible that he has another agenda, and that Livi are just a means to an end?

Livi have been living on borrowed time for how many years? It seems they've been living on other people's money as well. How many chairmen have come and gone under a cloud of suspicion and debt? Most, if not all of them, or that's how it appears to me. Do you think I'm wrong in saying that Livi are the most historically corrupt club in Scottish football? How many times have they ran up huge debts, and then performed some escape act where the creditors get screwed, but the club soldiers on like nothing happened? How many times has it been someone else's fault, and how many deluded Livi supporters buy into the vacuous promises of one owner after another?

I agree, all that I've heard is not good, that's why I used the - :huh: which soon will be - :o then- :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: well no, to be exact I'm sad enough to go and consult the rulebook while everyone else just postulates ;). Cowdenbeath and Airdrie don't have any individual right to appeal Livi being put back into Div 1, as their "promotion" was entirely co-incidental to the punishment of Livi due to breaching rules on insolvency practitionership. However, they could bring a vote to the SFL MC (or even call a SGM) to get the SFL to re-appeal or challenge the SFA tribunal decision... In the highly unlikely event SFA tribunal upholds Livi's appeal in full today, I'd expect SFL to re-appeal anyway.

As I said before, the best scenario I can envisage for Livi is it going back to SFL, with the SFA tribunal making a series of observations on the case, for SFL to look at when reconsidering the punishment they give to Livi. I cannot forsee the SFA tribunal upholding Livi's appeal completely.

I disagree with you on that point.

I think it depends. If the SFA refer the punishment back to the SFL Management Committee and, say for example, the SFL MC reinstate Livi but deduct 10 points, any club aggrieved with a decision of the MC can appeal. It doesn't have to be the club punished who appeals, it could be any one of the SFL clubs who can appeal a decision.

Of course, if the decision is made by the SFA, that is a different matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...