Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

35 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

I do read it. Didn't know that Granny Danger relied upon it though. If Hearts win in court then it is theoretically possible that the courts could specifically implement the reinstatement of Hearts into the Premier League, but given the disruption that that would cause, they'd be way more likely to award damages.In amongst the rage, I think there are some well informed posts.

btw there are at least half a dozen Hibbies stirring it in there.

Is the assumption that this is a criminal or a civil matter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Ric said:

Out of interest, just what legal mechanism do you think could be used to do that? Be quite specific here as the law is clear on where its jurisdiction is in regard to private organisations.

 

You saying it's not possible? Tell me why. Let you into a wee secret - I'm not really a QC

btw I forgot to say, I always said I thought the most practical remedy is/was an order to redo the board paper with full info and to rerun the vote without shenanigans. Possibly with same outcome. But as time slips by, that becomes less appropriate as circumstances change.

Edited by Pet Jeden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

Depends. On technical matters of Scottish criminal jurisprudence, I'm sure he's as good as almost anyone.

On when is the best time to have a good ol' fashioned sash bash, not so much...

tbf, if there was ever a "best time" for that, it probably was when pished and in the company of like-minded people. (Although maybe not since days of mobile phone recordings).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Granny Danger said:

Pet Jeden has as much knowledge of the law as Daniel Stendel has of managing a football team.

 

This thread has been fairly derailed by Pet Jeden making statements and then being forced to admit he's pulled it out of his arse when anyone scratches the surface of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You saying it's not possible? Tell me why. Let you into a wee secret - I'm not really a QC
btw I forgot to say, I always said I thought the most practical remedy is/was an order to redo the board paper with full info and to rerun the vote without shenanigans. Possibly with same outcome. But as time slips by it, that becomes less appropriate as circumstances change.
The redress for that was for Hearts to submit an amendment to the original proposal. Or an entirely new proposal instead. The reason they didn't do that was because they knew it would not get enough support.

Were Hearts stopped from doing that?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Dons_1988 said:

This thread has been fairly derailed by Pet Jeden making statements and then being forced to admit he's pulled it out of his arse when anyone scratches the surface of it.

It's going to be a pretty quiet board if the only views that can be expressed are those of active professionals in the field of the topic. Innit?

But if you are a corporate lawyer specialising in sports litigation , fire on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Pet Jeden said:

You saying it's not possible? Tell me why. Let you into a wee secret - I'm not really a QC

Evidently so.

The issue would fall under contract law, a civil case if you were wondering. Your assumption that any ruling would proscribe what league Hearts play in is fanciful and down right incorrect. The only positive outcome could be compensation. A moral victory, perhaps, albeit a pyrrhic one. No court could stop the league from commencing, nor could they instruct a private body to place a team within a certain position within it's internal structure.

Maybe in the future, you refrain from using terms like "theoretically possible" when it absolutely is not theoretically possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Pet Jeden said:

It's going to be a pretty quiet board if the only views that can be expressed are those of active professionals in the field of the topic. Innit?

But if you are a corporate lawyer specialising in sports litigation , fire on

You're right, every forum needs an ill-informed mouthpiece, so thank you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lebowski said:

The redress for that was for Hearts to submit an amendment to the original proposal. Or an entirely new proposal instead. The reason they didn't do that was because they knew it would not get enough support.

Were Hearts stopped from doing that?

Rangers were. But the point is the board do have responsibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Dons_1988 said:

This thread has been fairly derailed by Pet Jeden making statements and then being forced to admit he's pulled it out of his arse when anyone scratches the surface of it.

His arse? Ooh Matron Kenneth Williams GIF - OohMatron KennethWilliams What GIFs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the good of Scottish football - Hearts taking a stint in the Championship is for the greater good as the Maroon Poond will boost bank balances further down the chain.  Well done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Ric said:

Evidently so.

The issue would fall under contract law, a civil case if you were wondering. Your assumption that any ruling would proscribe what league Hearts play in is fanciful and down right incorrect. The only positive outcome could be compensation. A moral victory, perhaps, albeit a pyrrhic one. No court could stop the league from commencing, nor could they instruct a private body to place a team within a certain position within it's internal structure.

Maybe in the future, you refrain from using terms like "theoretically possible" when it absolutely is not theoretically possible.

You saying specific implement can never be applied in relation to company decisions? Well if that's right, I suppose setting aside the original decision would have the same effect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clubs would've been compensated for restrictions of trade by the government for the season finishing early.
If again they start behind closed doors this is also a restriction of trade plus if they don't start in the championship on the scheduled date will the clubs be in breach of the rules?
 “If we’re in the Championship and the Championship isn’t playing then it’s effectively a restriction of trade.

Edited by wastecoatwilly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, topcat(The most tip top) said:

If there is a championship to take a stint in

If that's really the worry, isn't there more likely to be a 10-team championship than a 14-team one; making the leagues smaller makes it more likely to have a quorum of teams able to finish playing any given league. Is the Budge reconstruction an attempt to sabotage the Championship while keeping Hearts out of it?

 

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...