Jump to content
Sinner-to-Saint

League Reconstruction 20/21 season

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, strichener said:

We will see what the SPFL think if they release a set of fixtures that never l have Hibs and Dundee United at home on the same weekend.

That isn't how it works.  The judge will make his ruling on the basis of fact.  It doesn't matter the number of arguments or parties in the action.

He will base his judgement on subjective interpretation of facts and arguments presented. There is a whole field of jurisprudence that studies what influences judicial reasoning.

If it was just feeding facts into the system we could run courts via an algorithm.

Having various parties responding to a petition gives the petitioner much more of a problem if those respondents are making different points

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Bohemian said:

Who do the RAF fight at the weekends? Is it on telly?

In fairness most weekends I’m fleeing then quickly followed by a bout of RAF😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said:

Yes, I understand the point you are making, they are providing the judge with more rope to hang them with if one approach is on weaker ground than the other.

The burden of proof is on Hearts. Hearts have to provide a chain of reasoning (and suitable factual backup) to show that the SPFL's process was unlawful and unfair and warrants compensation of £10 million quid. If the SPFL or United knock one link out of that chain, they win. If United's lawyers convince the judge that, say, the outcome of the season end vote was entirely fair, it doesn't matter if Kevin Clancy, acting for the SPFL, puts on a pair of clown shoes, blows a whistle and awards a penalty to Ann Budge. The case still gets chucked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Both sides are doing this on here. Nobody has a clue how the court will act, its a pretty much unprecedented situation in Scotland, and court decisions can be unpredictable at the best of times.

My hope is that if Hearts do win their massive £8m compensation, the SPFL clubs en masses invoke the Articles of Association point that enables clubs to be punished for taking legal action against the body, and remove Hearts from the league.  They can only start in league two on payment of £8.1m to buy back a place in the league.

The legal points are not unprecedented. The Court are being asked whether a group of minority shareholders have suffered an unfair prejudice. That's a statutory test with plenty of caselaw to guide the  Court. Hearts and Thistle clearly have been prejudiced (suffered a detriment) so the question is whether that's unfair. If the Court find that there is unfairness then they look to see what remedy, if any, would be appropriate. 

United, Rovers and Cove only get involved at that stage in arguing that the remedy shouldn't unfairly prejudice them. I'd say that there's at least three hurdles for Hearts to overcome to get back into the top flight  (1. to prove unfairness, 2. to show that the unfairness is sufficiently material to demand a remedy, 3. to somehow convince the Court that a remedy which denies promotion to United, Rovers and Cove - in the immediate short-term lending a new vote - is more fair than leaving things as they are). If they cross the first two hurdles but fall at the third then they might get some cash. Personally I would be very surprised if they even got past the first hurdle.

Actually, there's a hurdle before they even get to that first - convincing the Court that it has jurisdiction when the parties have arguably contracted to binding arbitration. 

I don't see Hearts being punished for this, other than in an award of costs. If the Court orders arbitration then there's been no real prejudice to the SPFL in the action (a minor admin issue). If the Court decides it can hear the case then it doesn't really support an argument that Hearts breached the Articles by raising the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, strichener said:

We will see what the SPFL think if they release a set of fixtures that never l have Hibs and Dundee United at home on the same weekend.

There are too many moving parts to consider to try to produce a fixture list that avoids Hearts/Hibs, Dundee/Dundee United, Dundee United/Hibs and Dundee/Hearts clashes. The fixture list will be drawn up based on the current make-up of the leagues and in the unlikely event that clubs have to swap divisions then any clashes will require games being moved to a Friday night or a Sunday. That's what happened in 2012, and Killie ended up going to Tannadice on a Friday night and Dens on a Sunday as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

The legal points are not unprecedented. The Court are being asked whether a group of minority shareholders have suffered an unfair prejudice. That's a statutory test with plenty of caselaw to guide the  Court. Hearts and Thistle clearly have been prejudiced (suffered a detriment) so the question is whether that's unfair. If the Court find that there is unfairness then they look to see what remedy, if any, would be appropriate. 

Unprecedented in football terms I was saying*. Something most of us have limited experience of, so the outcome is largely guesswork for the majority of us on here.

 

* if not unprecedented, then certainly a rare occurrence in Scottish football.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

There are too many moving parts to consider to try to produce a fixture list that avoids Hearts/Hibs, Dundee/Dundee United, Dundee United/Hibs and Dundee/Hearts clashes.

Not really. It's common practice for schedulers to pair off clubs with two teams - one is their closest city rival, and the other is some other team in the same league, if these happen to be different. For next season, it's just a case of the two sets of pairings will be between the Dundee and Edinburgh teams. Basically, for every matchweek, Hibs play at home at the same time as Dundee, and likewise for Heats/United. There might be issues of local scheduling (for instance, you might want having Hearts play at home at the same time as some big event at Murrayfield, but there's no corresponding Dundee issue) but those can be adjusted by ad hoc devices like moving a game to a Sunday or weekday evening.

I'm sure fixture scheduling is a complicated business, but team-pairing between two leagues is one of the simpler aspects.

Edited by Aim Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, craigkillie said:

There are too many moving parts to consider to try to produce a fixture list that avoids Hearts/Hibs, Dundee/Dundee United, Dundee United/Hibs and Dundee/Hearts clashes. The fixture list will be drawn up based on the current make-up of the leagues and in the unlikely event that clubs have to swap divisions then any clashes will require games being moved to a Friday night or a Sunday. That's what happened in 2012, and Killie ended up going to Tannadice on a Friday night and Dens on a Sunday as a result.

Thats right - the guy (Blair?) was on the radio yesterday explaining the complexities - indeed although I didnt catch it all, I think they contract much of it out to an IT co in USA?

He was asked about the - widely reported - scenario that Rangers/Celtic matches might be crowbarred into a time when crowds are allowed back fully.

H laughed this off  and explained that - as there are so many factors, Euro matches etc, the fact that they have to have one of these matches in the first 11 fixtures - it cant be fixture 1 as Celtic will get the title flag etc - that to game the system this was nigh on impossible as there will be so few match days available.

Euro matches aside, many of the same factors come into play and any assumption that dates are being kept "as options" for Hearts / Thistle/ Dundee Utd or whoever are way off the mark.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Aim Here said:

Not really. It's common practice for schedulers to pair off clubs with two teams - one is their closest city rival, and the other is some other team in the same league, if these happen to be different. For next season, it's just a case of the two sets of pairings will be between the Dundee and Edinburgh teams. Basically, for every matchweek, Hibs play at home at the same time as Dundee, and likewise for Heats/United. There might be issues of local scheduling (for instance, you might want to avoid some big event at Murrayfield if Hearts are playing at home) but those can be adjusted by ad hoc devices like moving a game to a Sunday or weekday evening.

The more teams you start doing these things for, the more knock-on issues you create, such as the one you described where you're looking at trying to factor rugby internationals into two different sets of fixture lists. Then you might have the same problems which matches which would normally be televised and trying to fit them into a schedule which works for Sky. I'm not saying it's completely impossible, but I think it is a lot of effort to go to for a very unlikely outcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, PauloPerth said:

Unprecedented in football terms I was saying*. Something most of us have limited experience of, so the outcome is largely guesswork for the majority of us on here.

 

* if not unprecedented, then certainly a rare occurrence in Scottish football.

Every legal action is unprecedented in terms of the facts but thankfully not unprecedented in terms of the law. The suggestion that it's impossible to know how the Courts will react is just wrong. The Courts have a statutory formula and caselaw which allow them to focus on discrete questions so you don't have to say "woah this has never happened in Scottish football before" , instead you can examine the discrete question of "was the process and outcome one which a reasonable person might consider fair". If so the Court won't interfere.

The process was certainly flawed but was it sufficiently flawed as to materially affect the validity of the decision? The outcome wasn't ideal but was it even handed and based on fair criteria? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think discussion of the fixtures is a red herring. If Hearts get everything that they've asked for then the  vote in April will be void and we're back to the leagues simply being suspended with every option back on the table.  Re-writing the fixtures will be the least of their worries at that stage.

Edit: I've now read the petition and this is wrong. Hearts just looking to cherrypick the bits they like. A bold strategy.

Edited by Pull My Strings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pull My Strings said:

I think discussion of the fixtures is a red herring. If Hearts get everything that they've asked for then the  vote in April will be void and we're back to the leagues simply being suspended with every option back on the table.  Re-writing the fixtures will be the least of their worries at that stage.

No. They're not trying to void the vote or suspend the league. They're asking either for promotion/relegation to not happen, or alternatively, for £10 million to be divvied up between them and Thistle.

 

Edited by Aim Here

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

The facts aren't likely to be much in dispute in this case, so the judge will almost certainly be ruling on the basis of law (in jury trials, judges don't even rule on the facts,  juries do).

The arguments of the parties involved will mostly be two sets of legal theories as to which side is in the right, and it's a case of which one persuades the judge is the winner.

or Lord Clark could wipe his hands of it and refer it back to the SPFL....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, C4mmy31 said:

or Lord Clark could wipe his hands of it and refer it back to the SPFL....

I think you mean SFA. Referring the matter to the SPFL would certainly be dispositive of the matter, but I suspect Hearts would have immediate grounds for appeal...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



during the week I’m a brain surgeon


That lobotomy you performed on yourself has been successful judging by your most recent posts.

Well done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

No. They're not trying to void the vote or suspend the league. They're asking either for promotion/relegation to not happen, or alternatively, for £10 million to be divvied up between them and Thistle.

 

Does the court have to award one of the things they have been asked for? Section 996 says the court may make such order as it thinks fit. But I don’t know if that means it has to be from the choices they have been offered or if they could order some other kind of remedy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Flash said:

Does the court have to award one of the things they have been asked for? Section 996 says the court may make such order as it thinks fit. But I don’t know if that means it has to be from the choices they have been offered or if they could order some other kind of remedy.

I'm sure they have a lot of scope for judicial action, but the notion of a judge going way over and beyond the petitioner's demands to inflict a ton of damage on Scottish football seems like we're straying into 'maverick judge' territory.

It would be like a small claims dispute between a homeowner and a plumber where the plumber asks for his £500 bill to be paid and the judge orders the demolition of the house instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did we ever find out how hearts arrived at £8 million? What do they tangibly stand to lose? 5 home gates, tv money, prize money (although they should have a parachute payment)? Don’t see how that comes to 8. What else am I missing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ribzanelli said:

Did we ever find out how hearts arrived at £8 million? What do they tangibly stand to lose? 5 home gates, tv money, prize money (although they should have a parachute payment)? Don’t see how that comes to 8. What else am I missing?

 

Numberwang.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Aim Here said:

No. They're not trying to void the vote or suspend the league. They're asking either for promotion/relegation to not happen, or alternatively, for £10 million to be divvied up between them and Thistle.

 

Aye, I've just read the petition and you're quite right. I'm sure it has been reported that Hearts were looking to have the entire resolution reduced but it seems like they are only seeking to delete three clauses. I think there was some merit to their action  as I understood it, although I thought they'd lose. Their actual craves are bonkers. 

Share this post


Link to post
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...