Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 8 minutes ago, TonyFerrino said: I'm pretty sure Budge mentioned about legal action around about the time she was bravely threatening to cancel contracts in order to force players to take a wage cut. This was when she was on several statements a day so I could be wrong here, but it was a while back and long before any other mob came out with it, unsurprisingly. Said we'd consider it. Thistle were the first to publicly say they'd done it. You can correct me. Some Hibs fans always seem to know more about Hearts than Hearts fans. Nice of you to bring Budge and wage cuts up. Absolutely crucified for just saying she was having to look into it and even if it happened it would be after paying up through April. Other teams do the same thing just later... not a peep. Still haven't sacked our kit man and dismantled our youth set up though while paying inflated transfer fees for players. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lebowski Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 Yeah it's a weird system. And Dundee's one vote was still the decider. So here we are.It was the deciding vote cause the boy who didn't order seats for your new stand had hatched a cunning plan. Surprisingly it didn't work out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aim Here Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 1 minute ago, 8GamesToGo said: However true, that's a misleading figure in the context of the vote as everyone who uses it knows. And didn't Aberdeen not vote in the end or considered not voting or something because they were told they didn't need to? It all rested on ONE possibly dodgy changed vote in the end, which is why we're off to arbitration. So I'm not good at maths but if Dundee's original vote had counted would it have been 70-something% of clubs voted for it but it didn't pass? I'm sure everyone would have been perfectly fine with that... The intricacies of the voting system don't matter for the purposes of the argument I was making. This post is pretty much irrelevant piffle. It's a plain and straightforward fact that the proposal was clearly the overwhelming choice of the majority of SPFL clubs. The fact that Aberdeen's vote wasn't decisive - because it was already past the supermajority of Premiership clubs needed for the vote doesn't contradict that point - it bolsters it. So many clubs were for it that Aberdeen's vote wasn't going to make a difference. Whether it did or didn't pass the proposal according to the byzantine SPFL voting rules doesn't matter a toss for the purposes of the argument I was making, which was that the three clubs voting the same way as the overwhelming majority isn't evidence of any kind of bad faith, but merely that their opinions match the majority of SPFL club chairmen. They did the same thing everybody else did - and you single them out as bad actors because of it, because anything they do is now evidence that they're a bad actor. They're in Hearts' way, therefore they are evil. Even stuff they could have done, but you don't know whether they did or not, is also now evidence that they're bad guys (like when you claim the three clubs voted against the reconstruction proposals, something you clearly can't know - and when called out on it, you deflect with the irrelevant piffle above). You're not even trying to make an honest argument anymore. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 4 minutes ago, itzdrk said: And the SPFL are committed to accepting the vote was received when it was sent, it all hinges on the panels take on whether that vote can then be changed or whether the addition of a no option removes that. It all seems to hinge on this as we knew from ages ago. I assume the documentation we've asked for includes which clubs voted for what and when, plus details of communications around the vote, plus meeting minutes and other correspondence and we can cross-check them all to look for patterns and see if anyone's messed up. I've been rewatching the Wire during shutdown so know all this stuff inside out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 Just now, Aim Here said: The intricacies of the voting system don't matter for the purposes of the argument I was making. This post is pretty much irrelevant piffle. Rules are rules 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joey Jo Jo Junior Shabadoo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itzdrk Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 1 minute ago, 8GamesToGo said: It all seems to hinge on this as we knew from ages ago. I assume the documentation we've asked for includes which clubs voted for what and when, plus details of communications around the vote, plus meeting minutes and other correspondence and we can cross-check them all to look for patterns and see if anyone's messed up. I've been rewatching the Wire during shutdown so know all this stuff inside out. You'll be able to outflank Leslie Deans on all the issues now with what you've picked up from that and here! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyFerrino Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 3 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Said we'd consider it. Thistle were the first to publicly say they'd done it. You can correct me. Some Hibs fans always seem to know more about Hearts than Hearts fans. Nice of you to bring Budge and wage cuts up. Absolutely crucified for just saying she was having to look into it and even if it happened it would be after paying up through April. Other teams do the same thing just later... not a peep. Still haven't sacked our kit man and dismantled our youth set up though while paying inflated transfer fees for players. Everybody was going to do it, nobody denied that, it was the way she handled it - publicly and badly, in equal measure. Pretty much her thing. All quiet at the moment while the last futile attempt to reverse a perfectly valid action is undertaken though, thankfully. Let's see how you boys get when the season starts with the adjustment to staffing levels, whenever that might be for you of course. I doubt the pantomime is over, merely on intermission. The 2nd half is going to be a doozy one hopes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 (edited) 8 minutes ago, TonyFerrino said: Everybody was going to do it, nobody denied that, it was the way she handled it - publicly and badly, in equal measure. Pretty much her thing. All quiet at the moment while the last futile attempt to reverse a perfectly valid action is undertaken though, thankfully. Not according to Lord Clark who said they have a case. Or even to the SPFL who investigated themselves over it. It was very clear from the Dundee vote debacle that legal action would result if reconstruction or another solution didn't happen. D td, Raith and co have had months to come up with a strategy. There was nothing stopping those 3 plus Hearts, PT and Stranraer and any other "interested parties" directly affected by the vote fallout and possible legal action coming together and coming up with a joint solution instead of leaving it all to Budge, inevitably making it look like it was Hearts vs the rest. Which I'm starting to think was an SPFL strategy from the start. (And not a bad one to be fair but they do tend to find a way to win at the dodgy stuff.) Edited July 10, 2020 by 8GamesToGo 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Twinkle Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 Yeah United shouldve thought up a plan to keep Hearts in the Premiership. You have outdone yourself this time [emoji38] 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannadeechee Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 (edited) 11 hours ago, 8GamesToGo said: Talk about condescending. Thistle was the first to say they'd taken legal advice I believe. "Wee teams" not allowed to stand up for themselves? Yes, I do still think with a bit of will, planning and cooperation a way could have been found to finish the league or even just play playoffs and the SC if they had decided back in March that was their preference and had at least given it a chance, but I appreciate I'm in a minority on that one in this thread if not in the real world. Thistle themselves had said on 15th June they could not afford court action and would get their justice by gaining promotion back to the Championship. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53052757 They then took up a "generous offer" of funded legal action and were then combining with Hearts who had already said that they had put the matter in hands of solicitors. Again you keep with the line that you believe that the Scot Gov would have allowed football of only they had down what was already being done in speaking between football authorities and Scot Gov. Scot Gov had said no and clubs couldn't afford to play. It must be great telling everyone they are wrong,some of us have spent ages reading through SG, SFA etc announcements, while putting forward the square root of hee haw to show how it could have been done. The bit in bold.. pot kettle black, with regards comments on Raith and Cove situation. Edited July 11, 2020 by Tannadeechee Incompetent typist! 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tannadeechee Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 9 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Not according to Lord Clark who said they have a case. Or even to the SPFL who investigated themselves over it. It was very clear from the Dundee vote debacle that legal action would result if reconstruction or another solution didn't happen. D td, Raith and co have had months to come up with a strategy. There was nothing stopping those 3 plus Hearts, PT and Stranraer and any other "interested parties" directly affected by the vote fallout and possible legal action coming together and coming up with a joint solution instead of leaving it all to Budge, inevitably making it look like it was Hearts vs the rest. Which I'm starting to think was an SPFL strategy from the start. (And not a bad one to be fair but they do tend to find a way to win at the dodgy stuff.) No Lord Clark said that it was a football dispute and should stick to the rules and go to arbitration. With regards the motion that was thrown out, that was because there was not enough time to go through the arguments in court, not that neither side was right or wrong. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insaintee Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 6 hours ago, Mr. X said: It's just not nice to look at. Neither is your shitty new stand, but the banners are away, your stuck with at monstrosity 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arabdelic Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 15 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: Not according to Lord Clark who said they have a case. Or even to the SPFL who investigated themselves over it. It was very clear from the Dundee vote debacle that legal action would result if reconstruction or another solution didn't happen. D td, Raith and co have had months to come up with a strategy. There was nothing stopping those 3 plus Hearts, PT and Stranraer and any other "interested parties" directly affected by the vote fallout and possible legal action coming together and coming up with a joint solution instead of leaving it all to Budge, inevitably making it look like it was Hearts vs the rest. Which I'm starting to think was an SPFL strategy from the start. (And not a bad one to be fair but they do tend to find a way to win at the dodgy stuff.) No he said "I conclude that the nature and relative complexity of these issues makes it inappropriate that I deal with the question of dismissing the petition at this early stage." and "I do not accept the submission for Hearts and Partick Thistle that there is nothing in the SPFL’s articles of association which refers this matter to arbitration. In terms of articles 2 and 196 of the SPFL’s articles, Hearts and Partick Thistle are contractually obliged to comply with the SPFL’s rules. By virtue of rule B4 of the SPFL’s rules, Hearts and Partick Thistle have to comply with the SFA’s articles of association. In my view, it is clear that all of the member clubs and the SPFL have agreed that the articles of the SFA, the articles of the SPFL and the rules of the SPFL are binding upon them." Basically he said he didn't have time to make a judgment in any case it is not for him to decide. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TonyFerrino Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 1 minute ago, Insaintee said: Neither is your shitty new stand, but the banners are away, your stuck with at monstrosity Correction - unfinished monstrosity. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 13 minutes ago, Tannadeechee said: Thistle themselves had said on 15th June they could not afford court action and would get their justice by gaining promotion back to the Championship. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53052757 They took advice mid April and released the findings which was they have a case. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zen Archer (Raconteur) Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 36 minutes ago, 8GamesToGo said: I've been rewatching the Wire during shutdown so know all this stuff inside out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 2 minutes ago, TonyFerrino said: Correction - unfinished monstrosity. I miss the old stand. Nothing like good foot stomp to get the feeling back in your toes. Tynecastle is class now though. Steep stands close to the pitch, can't beat it. Don't expect a Hibs fan to agree obviously. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 5 minutes ago, arabdelic said: Basically he said he didn't have time to make a judgment in any case it is not for him to decide. While also saying he'd make time to bring it to court if arbitration didn't happen properly or quickly. Those two things don't go together. D Utd asked for case dismissal. Clark refused. We won that one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest 8GamesToGo Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 (edited) 39 minutes ago, TonyFerrino said: Everybody was going to do it, nobody denied that, it was the way she handled it - publicly and badly, in equal measure. Pretty much her thing. No doubt she's made some PR missteps and it doesn't help that the media seems to think everything she does is newsworthy. She is coping with a pandemic like the rest of us and trying to run a business and save jobs during it at the same time mind you. So there's that. Edited July 10, 2020 by 8GamesToGo 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.