Could this ever Happen here?

[MB62]

Been reading this on the BBC web pages and thought it was a bold dramatic move by the Aussie admins.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/8636565.stm

Then I started wondering, would the SFA or SPL ever have the guts to do this if one of our clubs severely fell foul of our rules and regulations?
Could you imagine for example der hun being stripped of a title or the Yams losing the cup they won because they failed to submit audited accounts in the correct time scale?

[Sylar]

Unless it was the OF, undoubtedly.

Christ, Livingston were relegated 2 divisions and weren't even in administration, but "deemed to be on the brink".

Yogi was banned for 6 games from the touchline for disagreeing with a ref.

Punishment is subjective in this country, so the only limits to penalty are the imagination of the blazers.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Unless it was the OF, undoubtedly.

Christ, Livingston were relegated 2 divisions and weren't even in administration, but "deemed to be on the brink".

Yogi was banned for 6 games from the touchline for disagreeing with a ref.

Punishment is subjective in this country, so the only limits to penalty are the imagination of the blazers.

So are you saying the penalties are pretty limited then?

[broonie27]

Unless it was the OF, undoubtedly.

Christ, Livingston were relegated 2 divisions and weren't even in administration.

They were in administration.

[Sylar]

So are you saying the penalties are pretty limited then?

Touche :greengrin


They were in administration.

"In July 2009 liquidation proceedings began and then stopped a day later once an agreement was reached between the SFA, the administrators and potential investors to keep the club afloat. However, the club was then demoted to the Third Division."

They also posted a £720k bond to confirm the finances were available via the new owners to maintain their season payments up front.

[--------]

"In July 2009 liquidation proceedings began and then stopped a day later once an agreement was reached between the SFA, the administrators and potential investors to keep the club afloat. However, the club was then demoted to the Third Division."

They also posted a £720k bond to confirm the finances were available via the new owners to maintain their season payments up front.


I hold no brief for Livingston FC, but they were treated very badly on that occasion. :agree:

[Caversham Green]

Touche :greengrin



"In July 2009 liquidation proceedings began and then stopped a day later once an agreement was reached between the SFA, the administrators and potential investors to keep the club afloat. However, the club was then demoted to the Third Division."

They also posted a £720k bond to confirm the finances were available via the new owners to maintain their season payments up front.

That's liquidation proceedings that were stopped rather than administration. Liquidation means they were about to go out of business completely - presumably because the administrator who was already in place saw no prospect of the club continuing to operate at the point the proceedings began.

There's no doubt though that the SFA were at best incompetent, at worst corrupt in the way that they dealt with it.

[broonie27]

Touche :greengrin



"In July 2009 liquidation proceedings began and then stopped a day later once an agreement was reached between the SFA, the administrators and potential investors to keep the club afloat. However, the club was then demoted to the Third Division."

They also posted a £720k bond to confirm the finances were available via the new owners to maintain their season payments up front.

Administration and liquidation are two completely different things mate. The clues in there "an agreement was reached between the SFA, the administrators and potential investors to keep the club afloat."

They were already in administration. Anything after that was to make sure the team actually stayed in existence.

[Hibs On Tour]

Unless it was the OF, undoubtedly.

Christ, Livingston were relegated 2 divisions and weren't even in administration, but "deemed to be on the brink".

Yogi was banned for 6 games from the touchline for disagreeing with a ref.

Punishment is subjective in this country, so the only limits to penalty are the imagination of the blazers.

No quite. IIRC he got the six game ban for having fell foul of the beaks for the third time within X period. It wasn't just a straight - argue with the ref, have a six game ban - situation. The argue with the ref was what brought him in front of the beaks for the third time.

[Mixu62]

Been reading this on the BBC web pages and thought it was a bold dramatic move by the Aussie admins.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/8636565.stm (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_league/8636565.stm)

Then I started wondering, would the SFA or SPL ever have the guts to do this if one of our clubs severely fell foul of our rules and regulations?
Could you imagine for example der hun being stripped of a title or the Yams losing the cup they won because they failed to submit audited accounts in the correct time scale?

Must say I was actually quite happy when I heard about this, not only cos Melbourne are the dirtiest team in the NRL, but also cos, finally a sports governing body has had the balls to dish out punishment that actually means somthing. It'd never happen here if it was the OF. Or even in Engerlund if it was one of the big 4 or 5 or 6 or whatever it is this week.