Jump to content

League Reconstruction 20/21 season


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

I'm concerned potential it won't start. Particularly after Rangers behaviour this week. 

Total disregard for rules/procedures which I can imagine won't have gone down well with the Government. If there's another covid spike or issue the start will be blocked. 

Motherwell & Hibs also asked to explain themselves for similar issues as well apparently. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, JimmyMirren said:

Okay...for the first time in a long time you’ve actually raised something resembling a good point, though judging by your other posts in the last 12hrs it seems it was by complete accident while spewing your usual tripe.

So if this whole situation isn’t entirely about self interest on the part of Hearts and Partick Thistle but is actually a thinly veiled crusade against the idea of some clubs benefitting from the Covid-19, I’m assuming you would be delighted with and wholly accept if the league said that your relegation was to stand, but that they would reinstate the play off matches for those who were in the relevant positions at the date games finished?

As HoM are the last bastion of integrity in Scottish football I’m sure they would sleep soundly knowing that their hard work and effort over the past three months did nothing to change their own fate, but instead was altruism of the highest order on behalf of clubs who “may” have been promoted via the playoffs.

Or theres option B, where if any of this happened you would still be on here whining like a b*tch with a skint knee because it ‘isn’t fair’, or because everyone else in the league didn’t back your CEOs crackpot reconstruction plans, or because the SPFL are a secretive cabal run by the Illuminati who are trying to destroy HoMFC, or whatever other mind-bending theory you have that day.

Please, if not for the sake of your own mental health then at least for mine as I feel I’m dropping at least 50IQ points everytime I read one of your comments...f*ck back off under whichever bridge you came from!

1558524_f0daaa6f.jpg.4f6ba303d3dfbbe6ade661235873da0c.jpg

Location found.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

Motherwell & Hibs also asked to explain themselves for similar issues as well apparently. 

Nah. I am going with the "We were waiting on the **** clearing cos we were feart" line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

She's not really fooling anyone - I'll always be grateful to her for coming up with the cash when it really mattered, but she's made too many mistakes since then. 
No she isn't.
For me her credit has been exhausted.
What I'm not seeing in all the talk of arbitration is that while we clearly could have avoided relegation, the signs weren't exactly encouraging.
Legally compensation is to put you in the position you would have been in.
We lost the chance to avoid relegation, not the certainty we wouldn't go down.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Aim Here said:

If you're going to pedant at us, then it's acronyms, not anagrams. Anagrams are where you make a new phrase out of existing letters, like "bang nude" from "Ann Budge".

Continuing the pedantry, it's not an acronym either. An acronym is where the initial letter of a phrase make a word. DSFAS is not a word, in any order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, welshbairn said:

Could be that the BBC are getting ready to try to be first to report the result. Brian McLaughlin seems to have a holding place ready for it on the website, this page originally had Hearts and Thistle insignia at the top, now replaced with "dsfas" whatever that means, probably "leave this alone, incoming".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53526061?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/scotland&link_location=live-reporting-story

Curiouser and curiouser.. Looks like this is what was originally written on the "dsfas" page. So either it's been decided and there's an embargo on it, or he was just getting prepared to post it asap if that is the result.

image.thumb.png.3caa9cf353d4649c15106aea8d7cd6c8.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

Motherwell & Hibs also asked to explain themselves for similar issues as well apparently. 

Yeah. Seems to me that the SFA/SPFL are questioning any team who had delayed results to find out the reason behind it, not necessary as a punishment. The issue with Rangers is that some of the players also played against Dundee United prior to this and that could mean some of them were playing without tests being confirmed.

That isn't an accusation. Those who played against Dundee united could have been cleared before the match and it was only players who were due to face Motherwell that were still waiting on results, but the SFA/SPFL is still demanding some answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Curiouser and curiouser.. Looks like this is what was originally written on the "dsfas" page. So either it's been decided and there's an embargo on it, or he was just getting prepared to post it asap if that is the result.

image.thumb.png.3caa9cf353d4649c15106aea8d7cd6c8.png

Certainly strange, just did the same google search.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Mr Positive, sometimes. said:

Motherwell & Hibs also asked to explain themselves for similar issues as well apparently. 

Similar in so much as there was a delay but Hibs called their game off, Motherwell didn't leave Fir Park until they had the results. That's a straightforward "there was a delay at the test lab - it was out of our hands". AFAIK Motherwell sent their round of tests away on Monday ahead of the game on Wednesday - that seems entirely reasonable.

The question that's being asked of Rangers is "If there was a delay in receiving the test results for the Motherwell game, how/why did you field a team against United earlier the same day?". That's a far more problematic question.

Edited by capt_oats
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Golden Gordon said:

Certainly strange, just did the same google search.

A bit like when famous people die.  There is an obituary for the Queen in every newspaper office waiting for the day.  I wonder if he has been setting up pages to run when the story actually hits?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, welshbairn said:

Curiouser and curiouser.. Looks like this is what was originally written on the "dsfas" page. So either it's been decided and there's an embargo on it, or he was just getting prepared to post it asap if that is the result.

image.thumb.png.3caa9cf353d4649c15106aea8d7cd6c8.png

The cached version of the article, few bits missing, but seems like they've got most of it prepped ready to go. 

 

The relegations of Hearts and Partick Thistle to the Scottish Championship and League One respectively have been confirmed by an arbitration panel.

The two challenged their demotions at the Court of Session after the season was curtailed early and asked that the promotions of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers were scrapped.

However, a three-strong panel has ruled that

adjudicating on the relegations of Hearts and Partick Thistle got under way on Friday.

After a Court of Session hearing earlier this month, Lord Clark decreed that an independent tribunal should hear the case under Scottish FA rules.

That started last Friday, with both sides selecting a QC from an approved list, and agreeing on a chair.

That panel has deliberated over the evidence and delivered its conclusion - little over a week before the Premiership season is scheduled to start on 1 August..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Golden Gordon said:

Certainly strange, just did the same google search.

Just a placeholder article. They'll have one with the opposite news on, too - it's just that they've accidentally made this version live, and once the metadata pulls through, it tends to stay there for a while.

Obviously that is all irrelevant to the JKB conspiracy melters and flat-earthers who will see this as proof of khdlhvdskdsfj;a....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would imagine there are two stories sitting on the BBC internal CMS ready for publication, providing coverage of whichever outcome with both of them missing the "the panel ruled that.." bit which will be put into place once the ruling is made official. It just so happens that the previously cached version (as posted) was on the same URL as the initial relegation story.

I don't think there's legs to this "press embargo" claim to be honest.

 

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...