Jump to content

Coronavirus and the Scottish Championship


Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Poet of the Macabre said:

https://news.stv.tv/sport/dundee-united-ask-for-financial-help-to-oppose-hearts
If Pars give even a quid to this I’d be raging.

Pretending like Hearts are going to get anything like £8million compensation, f**k up.

Yeh Utd can f**k right off with this. They were willing to throw cash at Steve McClaren but are now getting the begging bowl out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://news.stv.tv/sport/dundee-united-ask-for-financial-help-to-oppose-hearts
If Pars give even a quid to this I’d be raging.
Pretending like Hearts are going to get anything like £8million compensation, f**k up.
It is ridiculous though that the 3 clubs cited by Hearts have to foot the legal costs.

What else could they do?

Ignore the citation?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if hearts and partick win compo for being relegated despite it being voted for, would that open the door for all clubs denied the playoffs to ask for the same amount as they all potentially lost out on the same monies by the same vote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

It is ridiculous though that the 3 clubs cited by Hearts have to foot the legal costs.

What else could they do?

Ignore the citation?

Are the costs not incurred because United, Raith, and Cove made their own petition that Hearts and Partick's case should be dismissed, and that was rejected by the court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, DeeTillEhDeh said:

It is ridiculous though that the 3 clubs cited by Hearts have to foot the legal costs.

What else could they do?

Ignore the citation?

Whether it's fair or not it certainly shouldn't be up to the other clubs to stick their hands in their pockets. Most of the sides have a lot less spare change than United, who just pocketed a fair bit of compo for Robbie Neilson.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Boo Khaki said:

Are the costs not incurred because United, Raith, and Cove made their own petition that Hearts and Partick's case should be dismissed, and that was rejected by the court?

The costs are incurred because the requirements of the league and the clubs are not exactly the same. The SPFL of course wants an outcome that respects the league structure as (they see) voted on by the member clubs, but if the wind is pointing towards Hearts and Partick, and the question comes down to a seven figure renumeration or blocking the promotions to keep Hearts and Thistle sweet, then the SPFL priorities may start to diverge from the three clubs.

So it makes sense for the three clubs to want to make their particular case, and they are pissed at being dragged into it, and there are sound reasons why other clubs might want to back them here in case of precedent being set, yet the statements have wrapped it up in terms of absolutes of financial doom and banding around the clearly ridiculous 8 figure sums Hearts are looking for, and it just lays it on so thick as to not come across that well at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Boo Khaki said:

Are the costs not incurred because United, Raith, and Cove made their own petition that Hearts and Partick's case should be dismissed, and that was rejected by the court?

The costs were incurred because all three clubs were specifically named as respondents alongside the SPFL. Doing nothing would've been pretty unwise to say the least, not least since it would've left the SPFL to it to the potential detriment of the other three respondents. 

This could've been partially avoided had Hearts and Partick gone down the route that the judge told them to in the first instance (i.e. arbitration).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Poet of the Macabre said:

Whether it's fair or not it certainly shouldn't be up to the other clubs to stick their hands in their pockets. Most of the sides have a lot less spare change than United, who just pocketed a fair bit of compo for Robbie Neilson.

I agree. No reason for other clubs to specifically back this. 

The outcome potentially affects all the clubs if compo ends up being paid, but there's no danger Hearts are getting £8m or Partick £2m - these are completely made up numbers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is probably as good a thread as any to report that, hidden in the BBC’s announcement about Saturday night Sportscene, it’s been confirmed they’ll still show live Championship games on Friday nights. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53308309

How many and whether it’s a full new deal or just “compensation” for the truncated season isn’t specified, and there’s no mention of it on the SPFL website.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Poet of the Macabre said:

Whether it's fair or not it certainly shouldn't be up to the other clubs to stick their hands in their pockets. Most of the sides have a lot less spare change than United, who just pocketed a fair bit of compo for Robbie Neilson.

True enough, but I suspect a rules change will be in the offing to protect club against this sort of thing again. Otherwise a club with deep pockets might file a suit against a poor club that pipped them for a promotion, hoping the other club will fold rather than pay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, The Master said:

This is probably as good a thread as any to report that, hidden in the BBC’s announcement about Saturday night Sportscene, it’s been confirmed they’ll still show live Championship games on Friday nights. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53308309

How many and whether it’s a full new deal or just “compensation” for the truncated season isn’t specified, and there’s no mention of it on the SPFL website.

 

That's pleasing. Quite enjoyed settling down to watch Scottish games on a Friday tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, RandomGuy. said:

That's pleasing. Quite enjoyed settling down to watch Scottish games on a Friday tbh.

You’ll be able to see your own team involved if they continue for another season.

#LOLZ #BANTZ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am split on this. 

On the one hand the whole legal process is a nonsense. It should never have been in Court in the first place and there's only one club to blame for that. The three specifically named clubs shouldnt have been individually named anyway. Hearts argument is with the League and if they must have the legal equivalent of a toddler throwing a tantrum on a supermarket floor then their action should have been limited to the League and not other clubs who did not unilateraly make the decision.

Given the 3 clubs were effectively sued by Hearts (with Thistle jumping up and down with their arms in the air shouting "me too") they can hardly be blamed for defending themselves. I am not party to the finer details of the court judgement but its disappointing costs were not awarded against Hearts. This is an unnecessary cost and the clubs shouldnt really have to bear it. 

BUT lets not forget all three clubs won promotion as a result and will increase their income as a result. Two of the three are very obviously adopting the spend, spend, spend approach to earning promotion. All three just got a £50k donation from James Anderson, though granted United presumably need to spend that on testing etc and will likely have to play 3 months+ behind closed doors. Raith just sold a player for a reputed £150k (though it was known about months ago and may have been advance spent).  United just got a reputed 6 figure settlement for their manager. They bought their way out of the division spending a very large salary on an international striker and are losing well into 7 figures a year. Its hard to see why other clubs should therefore have to subsidise £30k+ of legal fees for them. 

I wouldnt be completely averse to the League giving a one off grant to the three to cover some basic costs but I also accept that largely amounts to the same thing (would reduce the prize pool) with the disadvantage of costing clubs who voted against such a move rather than just leaving it up to those who want to help to do so. 

So I'm still split on it and more annoyed that at a horrible time for Scottish football Hearts (& Thistle) would rather take hundreds of thousands of cash out of the game to line the pockets of QC's. 🤬

Edited by Skyline Drifter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Skyline Drifter said:

I am split on this. 

On the one hand the whole legal process is a nonsense. It should never have been in Court in the first place and there's only one club to blame for that. The three specifically named clubs shouldnt have been individually named anyway. Hearts argument is with the League and if they must have the legal equivalent of a toddler throwing a tantrum on a supermarket floor then their action should have been limited to the League and not other clubs who did not unilateraly make the decision.

Given the 3 clubs were effectively sued by Hearts (with Thistle jumping up and down with their arms in the air shouting "me too") they can hardly be blamed for defending themselves. I am not party to the finer details of the court judgement but its disappointing costs were not awarded against Hearts. This is an unnecessary cost and the clubs shouldnt really have to bear it. 

BUT lets not forget all three clubs won promotion as a result and will increase their income as a result. Two of the three are very obviously adopting the spend, spend, spend approach to earning promotion. All three just got a £50k donation from James Anderson, though granted United presumably need to spend that on testing etc and will likely have to play 3 months+ behind closed doors. Raith just sold a player for a reputed £150k (though it was known about months ago and may have been advance spent).  United just got a reputed 6 figure settlement for their manager. They bought their way out of the division spending a very large salary on an international striker and are losing well into 7 figures a year. Its hard to see why other clubs should therefore have to subsidise £30k+ of legal fees for them. 

I wouldnt be completely averse to the League giving a one off grant to the three to cover some basic costs but I also accept that largely amounts to the same thing (would reduce the prize pool) with the disadvantage of costing clubs who voted against such a move rather than just leaving it up to those who want to help to do so. 

So I'm still split on it and more annoyed that at a horrible time for Scottish football Hearts (& Thistle) would rather take hundreds of thousands of cash out of the game to line the pockets of QC's. 🤬

Surely the dundee united owner could easily fund the costs? Is he not a multi millionaire. Arbitration the only way to sort this irrespective of the cost. It is let us not forget all about establishing whether football integrity has in fact been applied fairly and legally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, weirdcal said:

So if hearts and partick win compo for being relegated despite it being voted for, would that open the door for all clubs denied the playoffs to ask for the same amount as they all potentially lost out on the same monies by the same vote?

I think that’s fair. The Caley’s, Dundee’s, Ayr’s etc seasons were effectively null and void (I know, I know, prize money etc).

I mean on the park, we effectively played for nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Isn't the whole point of the rule about members clubs abiding by decision of the Board meant to prevent exactly this situation? All disputes should be settled via the internal processes, rather than taken to expensive, external courts??

 

Hearts, Patrick, Utd, Cove & Raith should all be expelled for going outwith the internal processes. Sounds fair…. :whistle

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...