Jump to content

Jags and Jambos v The Rest - 01/07/20


Dick Dastardly
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, dl1971 said:

Is their QC Woodstock Jag by any chance? 

For those who had taken the time to read my version of War and Peace, they'd know that just about the only thing I haven't expressed a view on is whether the matter ought more properly to go to SFA arbitration (which is what they've been arguing about all day). ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

For those who had taken the time to read my version of War and Peace, they'd know that just about the only thing I haven't expressed a view on is whether the matter ought more properly to go to SFA arbitration (which is what they've been arguing about all day). ;)

And what is your view on that ?

Holds head in hands wondering what he's let himself in for :doh:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

For those who had taken the time to read my version of War and Peace, they'd know that just about the only thing I haven't expressed a view on is whether the matter ought more properly to go to SFA arbitration (which is what they've been arguing about all day). ;)

Are you serious and deal with Ian Maxwell who couldn’t even run the lottery properly at Firhill !

The SFA should have stepped in long before now to mediate , are they not meant to be overseeing all of Scottish Football , if they had it wouldn’t have got to this stage.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dick Dastardly said:

And what is your view on that ?

Holds head in hands wondering what he's let himself in for :doh:

I don't have a firm view on it.

I suspect it will be ruled that we should have gone to arbitration and should have done so two months ago, though.

As best I understand it (I wasn't dialling in) the QC for DUFC/RRFC/CRFC was basically saying exactly that: the only reason there isn't enough time for arbitration to reach a conclusion before next season starts is because the proceedings were only initiated a month or so before the season was due to restart.

If it goes to arbitration the best we can hope for is some sort of ex gratia solidarity payment as a token gesture of how ****** we are.

If it goes to the Court of Session on the substance (as I've said elsewhere) I think our legal case (to annul promotion and relegation) is unlikely to succeed (or at least not in a way that advances our interests).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Are you serious and deal with Ian Maxwell who couldn’t even run the lottery properly at Firhill !

The SFA should have stepped in long before now to mediate , are they not meant to be overseeing all of Scottish Football , if they had it wouldn’t have got to this stage.

For the SFA to arbitrate the Clubs would have had to have raised a dispute with them in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

For the SFA to arbitrate the Clubs would have had to have raised a dispute with them in the first place.

This was the same SFA who actually wrote to UEFA to say they were going to call the Leagues before the Vote had actually taken place , hence one of the reasons why the SPFL were so keen to push through the vote at all costs ( Dundee vote etc )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Woodstock Jag said:

I don't have a firm view on it.

I suspect it will be ruled that we should have gone to arbitration and should have done so two months ago, though.

As best I understand it (I wasn't dialling in) the QC for DUFC/RRFC/CRFC was basically saying exactly that: the only reason there isn't enough time for arbitration to reach a conclusion before next season starts is because the proceedings were only initiated a month or so before the season was due to restart.

If it goes to arbitration the best we can hope for is some sort of ex gratia solidarity payment as a token gesture of how ****** we are.

If it goes to the Court of Session on the substance (as I've said elsewhere) I think our legal case (to annul promotion and relegation) is unlikely to succeed (or at least not in a way that advances our interests).

My memory of the timeline may not be correct. I thought that the legal action was only initiated once the final vote/poll was voted down by the clubs, which is maybe 2 weeks ago ?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Lenziejag said:

My memory of the timeline may not be correct. I thought that the legal action was only initiated once the final vote/poll was voted down by the clubs, which is maybe 2 weeks ago ?

Exactly.

The DU/RR/CR argument will be that arbitration would have been suitable (in terms of timescale) if we took the dispute there immediately after the original SPFL resolution was deemed to have passed.

And that it’s not their fault Hearts and Thistle waited so long to raise a grievance, so they (Hearts and Thistle) can’t now argue “arbitration is unsuitable because there isn’t enough time”.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Woodstock Jag said:

Exactly.

The DU/RR/CR argument will be that arbitration would have been suitable (in terms of timescale) if we took the dispute there immediately after the original SPFL resolution was deemed to have passed.

And that it’s not their fault Hearts and Thistle waited so long to raise a grievance, so they (Hearts and Thistle) can’t now argue “arbitration is unsuitable because there isn’t enough time”.

The original SPFL resolution ? Pretty sure that if we had raised a dispute before the SPFL process was complete, we would have been told to wait. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Woodstock Jag said:

Exactly.

The DU/RR/CR argument will be that arbitration would have been suitable (in terms of timescale) if we took the dispute there immediately after the original SPFL resolution was deemed to have passed.

And that it’s not their fault Hearts and Thistle waited so long to raise a grievance, so they (Hearts and Thistle) can’t now argue “arbitration is unsuitable because there isn’t enough time”.

Why on earth would we want the SFA to arbitrate this when it was obvious re letter of intent that the SFA and the SPFL were working alongside each other . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Lenziejag said:

The original SPFL resolution ? Pretty sure that if we had raised a dispute before the SPFL process was complete, we would have been told to wait. 

That’s the consequence of being part of a member organisation with a broad arbitration agreement at its core.

12 minutes ago, jlsarmy said:

Why on earth would we want the SFA to arbitrate this when it was obvious re letter of intent that the SFA and the SPFL were working alongside each other . 

We don’t. But when we joined the SFA we agreed to be bound by its arbitration rules.

Thats just how it is.

If we don’t like it we are free not to be affiliated. No one is forcing us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Garscube Road End said:

Maxwell being fair to us? Hahaha. He's a pure establishment man and corrupt as the rest.

As I’ve said before, all he is interested in is the blazer; but he’s a man of limited organisational ability. 

Remember when we had that 4 team pre-season tournament a few years ago?  Well he disappeared on annual leave immediately prior to it, leaving others to pick up the loose ends. 

He makes the King of Spain look like Einstein. ;)

Edited by sandy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Woodstock Jag said:

That’s not a legal argument though. That’s a small p political one.

I wasn't suggesting it was a legal argument nor in fact as you describe it, a small p political argument! 

I was simply trying to say that when you enter into a process to find a solution you don't compromise the process by threatening and alternative and aggressive course of action in the event a solution is not attained. That would demonstrate a lack of good faith! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Woodstock Jag said:

That’s the consequence of being part of a member organisation with a broad arbitration agreement at its core.

We don’t. But when we joined the SFA we agreed to be bound by its arbitration rules.

Thats just how it is.

If we don’t like it we are free not to be affiliated. No one is forcing us.

Is there not meant to be some impartiality from both bodies, they should be standalone organisations and if they had been it would have been easier for the SFA to mediate if there was a problem, instead between them Maxwell and Doncaster decided to call the season.

Re the rule book  , I’m sure coercion isn’t amongst the rules .

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Garscube Road End said:

Maxwell being fair to us? Hahaha. He's a pure establishment man and corrupt as the rest.

I'm afraid IM is typical of the breed, that he has found himself in a job that he has little or no  skills to hold, and is getting paid an enormous annual salary .

He will not be the one to 'rock the boat', it's more likely he will keep quiet and just hope he can keep earing his inflated wage for a few more years until he can qualify for an SFA pension. That is his purpose in life .... arbitrate over the current clusterfvck in Scottish football is something he has little interest in doing. [IMO]

 

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...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...