Jump to content

Heart of Midlothian 2014-


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, johnnydun said:

But what exactly to Hearts have to go to the court with?

They haven't pushed the button yet but Budge said today that they will if talks break down.  I would think we would have to wait for that to happen to get their full complaint on what they are challenging. I assume it will be about being relegated. No matter if you agree with whatever their legal challenge is its still a racket a football body punishes a business for looking to settle a dispute via the court of a land. Effectively fifa and eufa (two proven corrupt organisations) in collusion with our national body are saying they are above the law of the land. I think they punish clubs because they know the courts trump them and don't want clubs going to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Fifes Elite Force said:

They haven't pushed the button yet but Budge said today that they will if talks break down.  I would think we would have to wait for that to happen to get their full complaint on what they are challenging. I assume it will be about being relegated. No matter if you agree with whatever their legal challenge is its still a racket a football body punishes a business for looking to settle a dispute via the court of a land. Effectively fifa and eufa (two proven corrupt organisations) in collusion with our national body are saying they are above the law of the land. I think they punish clubs because they know the courts trump them and don't want clubs going to them.

So why is she threatening court if they have nothing to go to court with apart from being relegated in line with the rules they signed up for at the start of the season?

As much as it initially sounds ridiculous, it has some merit (the sanctions for taking the governing body to court). Where do you draw a line? You could have teams going to court over wrong offside goal decisions or incorrect sendings off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Fifes Elite Force said:

its still a racket a football body punishes a business for looking to settle a dispute via the court of a land. Effectively fifa and eufa (two proven corrupt organisations) in collusion with our national body are saying they are above the law of the land. I think they punish clubs because they know the courts trump them and don't want clubs going to them.

I suspect that the prescription drugs that were being sent to Prince have found a new home................

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pet Jeden said:

Yes. Companies Act stuff I would think. Against SPFL, not SFA.

Did you catch the word 'exactly' in the post from @johnnydun ?

There's a distinct lack of specificity about what cause of action Hearts could conceivably win a lawsuit with. There's lots of fantasy powerwank stuff about delaying the league with lawsuits and injunctions and forcing teams to go bust, and extracting £10 million quid from the SPFL, but not a lot of what specific legal wrongdoing that Hearts can write down in lawyerspeak that could actually make it's way into a courtroom without being laughed straight out again.

So far, I get the impression that Hearts fans are imagining the behind closed doors legal conversation is going to go something like:

Hearts: "We want £10 million quid for what you did to us and the law should prevent you all from working until I get it, or you go bankrupt whichever is first"

SPFL: "Good grief. What did we ever do to you?"

Hearts: "I dunno. Some Companies Act stuff, I would think. Something something Restraint of Trade something maybe"

SPFL: "Blimey! It's a fair cop, guvnor, you've got us bang to rights. We definitely are guilty of mumble mumble *cough*Duty of Care*cough*. Tell you what, here's £5 million quid and a Get out of Relegation Free card"

Hearts: "Haha, In your face rest of Scottish fitba! We really a mighty, and powerful Establishment Club and not a bunch of shrill hysterical chancers after all!" <Hearts fans proceed to gloat insufferably for next 25 years>.

Would that be a fair characterization of your line of thinking?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Fifes Elite Force said:

They haven't pushed the button yet but Budge said today that they will if talks break down.  I would think we would have to wait for that to happen to get their full complaint on what they are challenging. I assume it will be about being relegated. No matter if you agree with whatever their legal challenge is its still a racket a football body punishes a business for looking to settle a dispute via the court of a land. Effectively fifa and eufa (two proven corrupt organisations) in collusion with our national body are saying they are above the law of the land. I think they punish clubs because they know the courts trump them and don't want clubs going to them.

The court won't refuse to hear a case just because FIFA say it shouldn't happen. Attempted punishment - particularly suspension/expulsion - would lead to another, even bigger court case. It's SPFL, not SFA that is being challenged and if it is re Companies Act breaches, not sure if that is actually a "football-related" dispute. Unless the story is made up nonsense (well, it's the Sun) then somebody's getting worried about it going to court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

So why is she threatening court if they have nothing to go to court with apart from being relegated in line with the rules they signed up for at the start of the season?

As much as it initially sounds ridiculous, it has some merit (the sanctions for taking the governing body to court). Where do you draw a line? You could have teams going to court over wrong offside goal decisions or incorrect sendings off.

Not really a question for me to answer given I am not Anne Budge. I suppose it will depend on these two legal opinions they have as a starting point.

 

I think on your example I think the courts would accept it was a genuine mistake by a referee as part of a game of football rather than being in breach of the law in some way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fifes Elite Force said:

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/sport/football/5648689/hearts-sfa-membership-revoked-court/

 

See hearts might get their membership revoked if they go to the courts. What a racket football is when you get punished for going to the courts of the land to resolve a dispute.

Scare tactics?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

Companies Act stuff

Oooft, I can imagine that Doncaster and McLennan are utterly shiting themselves about Budges QCs sending strongly written letters about "companies act stuff". 

steve.gif.236e04d40d1c25975041614e33f58a52.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pet Jeden said:

The court won't refuse to hear a case just because FIFA say it shouldn't happen. Attempted punishment - particularly suspension/expulsion - would lead to another, even bigger court case. It's SPFL, not SFA that is being challenged and if it is re Companies Act breaches, not sure if that is actually a "football-related" dispute. Unless the story is made up nonsense (well, it's the Sun) then somebody's getting worried about it going to court.

I think you are right where it would mean a bigger court case. Fifa have a rule that football clubs do not go to external courts and get involved in their affairs. They make the national governing bodies enforce this. Which is why the SFA may get involved if Hearts go via a legal route;.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Green Day said:

What exactly are they?

Not seen it. Maybe a jambo might be more informed on what they are going to go with.

 

Budge did say today they got two opinions and both are consistent with each other, the content I have no idea. She seems intent on taking some sort of legal action if reconstruction fails

Edited by Fifes Elite Force
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

Did you catch the word 'exactly' in the post from @johnnydun ?

There's a distinct lack of specificity about what cause of action Hearts could conceivably win a lawsuit with. There's lots of fantasy powerwank stuff about delaying the league with lawsuits and injunctions and forcing teams to go bust, and extracting £10 million quid from the SPFL, but not a lot of what specific legal wrongdoing that Hearts can write down in lawyerspeak that could actually make it's way into a courtroom without being laughed straight out again.

So far, I get the impression that Hearts fans are imagining the behind closed doors legal conversation is going to go something like:

Hearts: "We want £10 million quid for what you did to us and the law should prevent you all from working until I get it, or you go bankrupt whichever is first"

SPFL: "Good grief. What did we ever do to you?"

Hearts: "I dunno. Some Companies Act stuff, I would think. Something something Restraint of Trade something maybe"

SPFL: "Blimey! It's a fair cop, guvnor, you've got us bang to rights. We definitely are guilty of mumble mumble *cough*Duty of Care*cough*. Tell you what, here's £5 million quid and a Get out of Relegation Free card"

Hearts: "Haha, In your face rest of Scottish fitba! We really a mighty, and powerful Establishment Club and not a bunch of shrill hysterical chancers after all!" <Hearts fans proceed to gloat insufferably for next 25 years>.

Would that be a fair characterization of your line of thinking?

I have asked the question 3 times now, once open to all, a second time direct to @Pet Jeden and a third time to @Fifes Elite Force a guy who (and I'm not trolling) claims to have a legal qualification.

The only answer I had was the third time and this was only to surmise. (Fair play for his thoughts though).

Nobody has a clue what they would go to court with, as they have not been wronged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Green Day said:

Oooft, I can imagine that Doncaster and McLennan are utterly shiting themselves about Budges QCs sending strongly written letters about "companies act stuff". 

steve.gif.236e04d40d1c25975041614e33f58a52.gif

Yup. Companies Act stuff.

https://cdn-5dd296c4f911cc1c581d2ef3.closte.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020.04.14-FINAL-Rev_Redacted-Joint-Opinion-PTFC-.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

I have asked the question 3 times now, once open to all, a second time direct to @Pet Jeden and a third time to @Fifes Elite Force a guy who (and I'm not trolling) claims to have a legal qualification.

The only answer I had was the third time and this was only to surmise. (Fair play for his thoughts though).

Nobody has a clue what they would go to court with, as they have not been wronged.

I only posted the article to show the corruption of the  SFA, Fifa and Uefa who think they are above the law. I havnt offered an opinion on if hearts should or shouldn't go to court or if they will have a case on the relegation front.

 

I will though since you are asking, for me, so far I don't see a way Hearts can challenge it, and have said that to my jambo supporting mates who seems convinced . However if they have received legal opinions from Qcs that far outweighs my knowledge. So, I'm interested to see what the challenge will be if they decide to go down this route.

Edited by Fifes Elite Force
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, johnnydun said:

So why is she threatening court if they have nothing to go to court with apart from being relegated in line with the rules they signed up for at the start of the season?

As much as it initially sounds ridiculous, it has some merit (the sanctions for taking the governing body to court). Where do you draw a line? You could have teams going to court over wrong offside goal decisions or incorrect sendings off.

That would be 

a) Petty

b) Against the SFA

c) Clearly "football-related"

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...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...