Lenziejag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 14 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: No one has sacked us. We are still in the SPFL. That analogy is bunk. A more apt analogy would be a workplace with pay determined aggressively by performance related bonuses. Normally a bonus might be based on your annual performance but the company had everyone on furlough for four months so it’s no longer fair to base performance on the full year. So they paid you a ranked bonus based on how you did in the first 8 months, you were shit, so you got less money. We need to reckon with this reality. We were shit. We deserved to be roughly where we were. I am not sure that is a fair analogy at all. We may not have been sacked but we have been demoted on uneven circumstances. The proper analogy is of sales bonuses. Our rival had an extra pitch and as a result had made higher sales, even on a sales per pitch basis. However, our outstanding pitch was with a customer that so far in the year had returned maximum bonus points both in terms of amount and per pitch. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 1 hour ago, scotty said: But if you were part of a seasonal business, say a greetings card company and your responsibility was for Christmas sales while others' were for Easter and Valentine's day then it wouldn't be fair if bonuses were decided in July! It’s not their fault you became a Christmas card specialist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Lenziejag said: I am not sure that is a fair analogy at all. We may not have been sacked but we have been demoted on uneven circumstances. The proper analogy is of sales bonuses. Our rival had an extra pitch and as a result had made higher sales, even on a sales per pitch basis. However, our outstanding pitch was with a customer that so far in the year had returned maximum bonus points both in terms of amount and per pitch. But the bottom line is you hadn’t brought home the bacon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Very Bitter Jag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: This analogy is a really bad one 2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: If 81% of the shareholders in a company want someone sacked for being late to work, then yes they should be allowed to do that and yes you should probably accept that and move on Well I think your answer is a really bad one! What I actually said was "were last in the office that day". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Very Bitter Jag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said: Oh you sweet naive child. Bless you. This is just pathetic, WJ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 3 hours ago, East Kent Jag II said: I would add to what WJ has just said in that Lord Clark directed that all of the SPFL material relating to the vote be disclosed to the petitioners (Jags / Hearts). If the written material is unclear or needs clarification, witnesses can be asked to give evidence to the arbitration panel (probably via Zoom). Doncaster and Nelms are potential candidates. In the unlikely event that full disclosure is not made, we could end up back at the Cof S, as there would be a breach of Lord Clark's Direction. If, as is extremely likely, the matter is concluded at Arbitration, the Cof S proceedings, having been cisted "paused", will need formal closure, probably administratively. Witness statements have already been taken from a number of those involved Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 53 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: But the bottom line is you hadn’t brought home the bacon. I am glad you are not my boss. Hopefully not anybody’s Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 5 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: I am glad you are not my boss. Hopefully not anybody’s He's our public servant ! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peaty FC Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: There’s no such thing as the interests of the game. There is only power and there is only money and there is only status. And if no one tries at all to challenge that seemingly unholy trinity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 1 hour ago, Very Bitter Jag said: Well I think your answer is a really bad one! What I actually said was "were last in the office that day". Last in is late in a dog-eat-dog world. 32 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: I am glad you are not my boss. Hopefully not anybody’s Business isn’t fair. 15 minutes ago, Peaty FC said: And if no one tries at all to challenge that seemingly unholy trinity? Then less money is wasted on lawyers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 4 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said: Last in is late in a dog-eat-dog world. Business isn’t fair. Then less money is wasted on lawyers. Some business isn’t fair - not all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
East Kent Jag II Posted July 12, 2020 Report Share Posted July 12, 2020 Saw in the Sun this morning that that much decorated Knight of football, K Dalgliesh felt it time to claim that a Thistle / Hearts victory could open up questions on the league championship award, and European competition places. Why now - months after this debacle started, and on the eve of the Arbitration panel has so distinguished a football personality "stuck his neb in?" A Selllik man trying to influence an arbitration panel? Surely not? He seems to think that he has the lovely touch of that marvellous defence barrister of the Victorian and Edwardian era, Marshall Hall. (Hall was a theatrical barrister, who used all sorts of tricks to distract and influence juries. A case study even for barristers today!!) Look him up. A hero. As he's trying to influence a coterie of legal professionals of long standing, I'm disappointed at his amateur intervention. Thistle / Hearts have said on many occasions that they have made no Petition to null and void any league. But he is right in one sense. He could have opened up the chance for Sevco to have a go at the Premiership title, should we win. Wonder if they didn't think of this?!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 (edited) 12 hours ago, East Kent Jag II said: Saw in the Sun this morning that that much decorated Knight of football, K Dalgliesh felt it time to claim that a Thistle / Hearts victory could open up questions on the league championship award, and European competition places. Why now - months after this debacle started, and on the eve of the Arbitration panel has so distinguished a football personality "stuck his neb in?" A Selllik man trying to influence an arbitration panel? Surely not? He seems to think that he has the lovely touch of that marvellous defence barrister of the Victorian and Edwardian era, Marshall Hall. (Hall was a theatrical barrister, who used all sorts of tricks to distract and influence juries. A case study even for barristers today!!) Look him up. A hero. As he's trying to influence a coterie of legal professionals of long standing, I'm disappointed at his amateur intervention. Thistle / Hearts have said on many occasions that they have made no Petition to null and void any league. But he is right in one sense. He could have opened up the chance for Sevco to have a go at the Premiership title, should we win. Wonder if they didn't think of this?!! Or we could go with the much more likely explanation, which is that Dalglish has a column in the Sunday Post and so writes about Scottish football on Sundays, and that he's written about this saga in previous weeks for exactly the same column. The point is a legitimate one: why aren't we asking for the whole resolution to be annulled if the way it was arrived at was defective? This is, I think a very telling weakness in our case: we want lawyers to impose a solution the clubs wouldn't themselves vote for if asked, even given what they know now. Edited July 13, 2020 by Woodstock Jag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 21 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: This is, I think a very telling weakness in our case: we want lawyers to impose a solution the clubs wouldn't themselves vote for if asked, even given what they know now. Seems quite a smart strategy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 19 minutes ago, javeajag said: Seems quite a smart strategy No, it advertises the weakness of our case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 2 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: No, it advertises the weakness of our case. In your opinion.....in my opinion it does nothing of the kind Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Col Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 I see that Man City have won their case at arbitration and successfully overturned their punishment. And some thought that would never happen. Just shows it can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 13 minutes ago, javeajag said: In your opinion.....in my opinion it does nothing of the kind Yes I am disagreeing with you. You don't need to explain to the forum every time I'm disagreeing with you that I'm expressing my view. They're not thick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
javeajag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 17 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said: Yes I am disagreeing with you. You don't need to explain to the forum every time I'm disagreeing with you that I'm expressing my view. They're not thick. You have a tendency to state your opinion as fact as a few people have pointed out 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, javeajag said: You have a tendency to state your opinion as fact as a few people have pointed out If you say someone's strategy is shit that is definitionally expressing an opinion. I do not need to add the caveat "in my opinion" to everything I say. If I'm saying it and not being sarcastic it is really obvious it is my opinion. Edited July 13, 2020 by Woodstock Jag 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Big Col said: I see that Man City have won their case at arbitration and successfully overturned their punishment. And some thought that would never happen. Just shows it can. But they used the OJ Simpson defence .... buy the best lawyers around. Like OJ, City were as guilty as satan. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 While I'm sure a lot of people are bored senseless by my contributions on here I'm also pretty sure they are tired of javeajag's effort to be a shite Jeff Bridges from The Big Lebowski every time I say something he doesn't agree with. For the avoidance of doubt this post expresses an OPINION. 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emsca Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 On 7/11/2020 at 10:23 PM, Lenziejag said: Also, If they couldn’t afford the legal costs should they have taken legal action before they had the funding ? Good God man, surely you are not advocating that someone should decide if they can afford something before they buy it? That is not the way of the modern world, Good God No!!. You plough straight ahead signing up to whatever you want- dont worry about how you are going to pay for it- that will sort itself out and if it gets too messy you just declare yourself bankrupt or claim discrimination. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
e4b Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said: While I'm sure a lot of people are bored senseless by my contributions on here Correct. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gianlucatoni Posted July 13, 2020 Report Share Posted July 13, 2020 I want us to win the case to mainly get it right up... A - the SPFL B - WJ straw poll 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.