Jambos Legal Challenge

[NC1875]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have been rubbish but I think our demotion is harsher than hearts.
We had a game in hand and were 2 points behind the second bottom team. Why did we have the game in hand? Because the SFA asked us to postpone because the opposition were in the cup.
Also hearts relegation means they lose money but could still survive.
We on the other hand had teams like Forfar come out and say they were desperate to vote focus down so they could benefit from the size of the away support. Now the same Forfar are saying they want league one to mothball for a season that’s fine for them but it puts our own existence in jeopardy. Clyde are exactly the same.
The Forfar chairman couldn’t give a stuff about Partick Thistle other than to financially benefit from them(albeit he was stupid to admit it on radio).
The jags are not interested in a hearts v Hibs rivalry- it’s about fighting potentially for the clubs own existence

Yes yous had a game in hand. But the league was decided on points per game average and yous had the worst over the season. Who was the game in hand against out of curiousity ?

[steviehibsleith]

Must behave towards the Scottish FA and other members with the utmost good faith.

This is from SFA rules.

Haven’t see yet exactly what Hearts/PT court actions are but surely when this happens all the SFA have to do is Cancel their License. Inform UEFA/FIFA what is happening confirm they support it.

No court case as why would Hearts go to court win or lose they won’t play football again . SFA UEFA FIFA will not approve a Licencse.

[Spike Mandela]

UEFA’s 2 criteria for ending the season early were as follows......

-Existence of an official order prohibiting sports events so that the domestic competitions cannot be completed before a date that would make it possible to complete the current season in good time before the next season to start.
-Insurmountable economic problems which make finishing the season impossible because it would put at risk the long-term financial stability of the domestic competition and/or clubs.

I presume the SPFL have enough evidence to prove one or both of these criteria were met.

The reconstruction issue was thoroughly considered, a variety of proposals put forward and I can’t see how a court can overturn a democratic decision that had well over 50% of all clubs backing it.

The only weakness I can see in the SPFL’s defence is the whole Dundee voting farce. If Hearts or Partick can prove voter fraud or some kind of invalidity of the outcome this would be a matter of complete incompetence by the SPFL board.
I would presume the SPFL have their ducks in a row and are confident of the integrity of the vote and wil have explained this satisfacorily to all the clubs..

[weecounty hibby]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

UEFA’s 2 criteria for ending the season early were as follows......

-Existence of an official order prohibiting sports events so that the domestic competitions cannot be completed before a date that would make it possible to complete the current season in good time before the next season to start.
-Insurmountable economic problems which make finishing the season impossible because it would put at risk the long-term financial stability of the domestic competition and/or clubs.

I presume the SPFL have enough evidence to prove one or both of these criteria were met.

The reconstruction issue was thoroughly considered, a variety of proposals put forward and I can’t see how a court can overturn a democratic decision that had well over 50% of all clubs backing it.

The only weakness I can see in the SPFL’s defence is the whole Dundee voting farce. If Hearts or Partick can prove voter fraud or some kind of invalidity of the outcome this would be a matter of complete incompetence by the SPFL board.
I would presume the SPFL have their ducks in a row and are confident of the integrity of the vote and wil have explained this satisfacorily to all the clubs..

You have time to research that and type it up but not to answer my texts!!

Of course they have their ducks in a row. Doncaster is making complete tits out of hearts. I think that is why it has dragged on so long. He had to allow them every opportunity to put forward a case for reconstruction that would be acceptable to enough clubs using the current voting set up. Hearts are a complete laughing stock but their cheerleaders in BBCjambo will make them out to be martyrs on a crusade to save Scottish football

[Aldo]

I’m late to this party but is this a joint effort or is Budge just finding PTFC legal bid?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EI255]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Partick Thistle only have themselves to blame, backed Hearts when should have gone alone for 12-12-10-10

I've not much time for PTFC now.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

[bingo70]

I feel a bit sorry for Partick as I think the SPFL could have used a more advanced method of average points per game that took into account the games that each team still had left to play. If that would have made a difference to them I don’t know but we had plenty time on our hands so it’s something that could have been calculated.

Other than that though, if they didn’t want relegated they should have won more games, or put forward a proposal for a 12-12-10-10 league set up. The fact they never suggests they were just wanting to hang onto Hearts cost tails and presumably want them to front the legal challenge.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Partick are going to, unfairly lose a lot more money than us. They are a different league from hearts when it comes to being treated.

Harshly maybe but not unfairly. The agreed way to end the season was the fairest way to do it.

They will lose a lot more money than us (relatively) due to being the worst team in their league. We weren't.

And actually now I consider it, we could have had a European qualification and run in Europe so who knows how much we've potentially missed out on?

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think it's fair to say they got relegated because of it - they were relegated due to all the other games they lost in the season that put them bottom at that point. Given their record, nothing to suggest with confidence they'd win the game.

This is exactly what the average points per game is all about. It takes into the account the likely points they'd have got from that game.

[ballengeich]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

UEFA’s 2 criteria for ending the season early were as follows......

-Existence of an official order prohibiting sports events so that the domestic competitions cannot be completed before a date that would make it possible to complete the current season in good time before the next season to start.
-Insurmountable economic problems which make finishing the season impossible because it would put at risk the long-term financial stability of the domestic competition and/or clubs.

I presume the SPFL have enough evidence to prove one or both of these criteria were met.

The reconstruction issue was thoroughly considered, a variety of proposals put forward and I can’t see how a court can overturn a democratic decision that had well over 50% of all clubs backing it.

The only weakness I can see in the SPFL’s defence is the whole Dundee voting farce. If Hearts or Partick can prove voter fraud or some kind of invalidity of the outcome this would be a matter of complete incompetence by the SPFL board.
I would presume the SPFL have their ducks in a row and are confident of the integrity of the vote and wil have explained this satisfacorily to all the clubs..

Given that it's not certain even now that the new season will begin on 1st August I'd say that the first of the UEFA criteria is definitely satisfied.

If the procedure round the Dundee vote was declared invalid couldn't the SPFL simply repeat the vote with proper attention to admin details? To be successful I reckon Hearts/PT would have to establish that the substance of the vote infringed either the SPFL's own constitution or some broader legal principle.

We'll find out before too long whether they really think they have a case or are just trying to be a sufficient nuisance to attract a payoff to shut up.

[Andy74]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Given that it's not certain even now that the new season will begin on 1st August I'd say that the first of the UEFA criteria is definitely satisfied.

If the procedure round the Dundee vote was declared invalid couldn't the SPFL simply repeat the vote with proper attention to admin details? To be successful I reckon Hearts/PT would have to establish that the substance of the vote infringed either the SPFL's own constitution or some broader legal principle.

We'll find out before too long whether they really think they have a case or are just trying to be a sufficient nuisance to attract a payoff to shut up.

Deloitte reviewed that vote process and found it to be in order. As you say, worst case the vote is retaken. Doesn't help Hearts either way.

[blackpoolhibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Harshly maybe but not unfairly. The agreed way to end the season was the fairest way to do it.

They will lose a lot more money than us (relatively) due to being the worst team in their league. We weren't.

And actually now I consider it, we could have had a European qualification and run in Europe so who knows how much we've potentially missed out on?

I've said this already on other threads, every club could say they might have finished further up the leagues they are in, which all carry bigger prize money.

[Aldo]

Do PTFC actually realise their football licence could be at risk here.

They’ve went from having some class to selling their soul!

Budge btw has played a blinder and is not only going to shaft hearts but PTFC too.

Mind you PTFc are their own entity but I really do wonder what advice they have taken.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[007]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Partick Thistle only have themselves to blame, backed Hearts when should have gone alone for 12-12-10-10

I think it was right that Hearts, Partick and Stranraer stuck together regarding reconstruction, maybe it would have worked out better for them if Partick had led it given their circumstances with the game in hand. Certainly Partick's style (the diplomatic statement at the weekend) would have been better than Hearts overly aggressive approach but probably still wouldn't have been enough to get it over the line.

I did think if the vote was against reconstruction then Partick (and Stranraer) should then suggest the 12-12-10-10 structure however that doesn’t stand much chance either because the 16-26 result means it wasn't just the Premiership against it.

[JimBHibees]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We have been rubbish but I think our demotion is harsher than hearts.
We had a game in hand and were 2 points behind the second bottom team. Why did we have the game in hand? Because the SFA asked us to postpone because the opposition were in the cup.
Also hearts relegation means they lose money but could still survive.
We on the other hand had teams like Forfar come out and say they were desperate to vote focus down so they could benefit from the size of the away support. Now the same Forfar are saying they want league one to mothball for a season that’s fine for them but it puts our own existence in jeopardy. Clyde are exactly the same.
The Forfar chairman couldn’t give a stuff about Partick Thistle other than to financially benefit from them(albeit he was stupid to admit it on radio).
The jags are not interested in a hearts v Hibs rivalry- it’s about fighting potentially for the clubs own existence

Huge sympathy for Thistle especially given the game in hand and only a couple of points behind however I am not sure that there could have been another alternative. As others have said got the impression that Hearts railroaded any reconstruction discussion with possibly 12 12 10 10 not able to be put forward in saying that the 11 1 premiership is a major hurdle to change and should have been changed when Rangers out of the league unfortunately Aberdeen decided otherwise. Obviously hugely worrying given the doubt when league 1 will start hopefully that is at same time as championship.

[Keith_M]

I think Thistle should now make a proposal for a 12-12-10-10 structure for next season.

It would have wide ranging benefits without any down sides for the current 12 premiership teams.

• Kelty and Brora would be promoted.
• Thistle and Stranraer wouldn't be relegated.
• The Premiership wouldn't be subject to the ridiculous 6-8 split from the 14 team proposal.

The fact that the only club to gain no benefit would be Hearts is irrelevant. Just pay them a wee bit compo and tell them to get on with it.

[660]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think Thistle should now make a proposal for a 12-12-10-10 structure for next season.

It would have wide ranging benefits without any down sides for the current 12 premiership teams.

• Kelty and Brora would be promoted.
• Thistle and Stranraer wouldn't be relegated.
• The Premiership wouldn't be subject to the ridiculous 6-8 split from the 14 team proposal.

The fact that the only club to gain no benefit would be Hearts is irrelevant. Just pay them a wee bit compo and tell them to get on with it.

Plus it would be hilarious

[Alan62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I think it was right that Hearts, Partick and Stranraer stuck together regarding reconstruction, maybe it would have worked out better for them if Partick had led it given their circumstances with the game in hand. Certainly Partick's style (the diplomatic statement at the weekend) would have been better than Hearts overly aggressive approach but probably still wouldn't have been enough to get it over the line.

I did think if the vote was against reconstruction then Partick (and Stranraer) should then suggest the 12-12-10-10 structure however that doesn’t stand much chance either because the 16-26 result means it wasn't just the Premiership against it.

Nobody has had the opportunity to vote on a 12-12-10-10 reconstruction so we don't know how a vote would go on that. Break it down though. Premiership clubs, no change, so no reason to vote against. Next 12, one big greetin' face, everyone else, tickety boo. Next 10, none relegated, two effectively promoted. Next 10, two new lads delighted, one saved from the wilderness, 7 in the same league they expected to be in.

Have I missed something here?

[Lunatic]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

No, over the season they where bottom with a game in hand. They win that then over the season that finished they aren’t the worst team in the league.

Yeah, but it was a game in hand against a playoff team. They were bottom for a reason and almost certainly would have lost it anyway.

[Waxy]

We’ve been going round in circles for weeks. Could have would have should haves dont cut it. The season ended abruptly with current places final for a few very good reasons.
There is no case.

[Iain G]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I've not much time for PTFC now.

Sent from my LG-H840 using Tapatalk

They are changing their name to PTSD after what the nasty other clubs did to them

[Danderhall Hibs]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yeah, but it was a game in hand against a playoff team. They were bottom for a reason and almost certainly would have lost it anyway.

I think I read that they had already beaten them (ICT) twice this season?

[Nakedmanoncrack]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We’ve been going round in circles for weeks. Could have would have should haves dont cut it. The season ended abruptly with current places final for a few very good reasons.
There is no case.

Correct.
If there was a case, then none of the final places can be accepted, however I dont see the likes of Tom English risking upsetting the likes of Celtic by, recognising this is the logic of where they are going.
Why should everyone have to accept a final table based on average points, except the worst teams in each league? The ones who do deserve to be losers.
Its a nonsense.

[hibeerealist]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Nobody has had the opportunity to vote on a 12-12-10-10 reconstruction so we don't know how a vote would go on that. Break it down though. Premiership clubs, no change, so no reason to vote against. Next 12, one big greetin' face, everyone else, tickety boo. Next 10, none relegated, two effectively promoted. Next 10, two new lads delighted, one saved from the wilderness, 7 in the same league they expected to be in.

Have I missed something here?

I posted on here at the start of all this that 12-12-10-10 was the most sensible restructure and I think it would have got support however as you say Budge was controlling the reconstruction process (for the good of the game in Scotland) and 12-12-10-10 was not on her radar cos it did not save Hertz!!

It was all targeted to save one club and one club only I hope the SFA (go on Rod) have briefed UEFA and serious sanctions can be implemented very soon.

[Waxy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Correct.
If there was a case, then none of the final places can be accepted, however I dont see the likes of Tom English risking upsetting the likes of Celtic by, recognising this is the logic of where they are going.
Why should everyone have to accept a final table based on average points, except the worst teams in each league? The ones who do deserve to be losers.
Its a nonsense.

More likely hearts and Partick will be shown up in court as chancers trying to avoid relegation on a technicality.They cant go unpunished for this surely?

[Keith_M]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

More likely hearts and Partick will be shown up in court as chancers trying to avoid relegation on a technicality.They cant go unpunished for this surely?

Possibly, but I have a feeling that it'll never reach that stage.

I think the most likely outcome, after much greeting and wailing from Thistle and Hearts, will be that the SPFL will announce that they've come to an amicable agreement regarding compensation, Hearts will announce that they've won the war, and that'll be an end to it

[Alan62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Correct.
If there was a case, then none of the final places can be accepted, however I dont see the likes of Tom English risking upsetting the likes of Celtic by, recognising this is the logic of where they are going.
Why should everyone have to accept a final table based on average points, except the worst teams in each league? The ones who do deserve to be losers.
Its a nonsense.

This, to me, is the key point. If the formula for ending the league season is wrong for the bottom clubs, it's wrong for all the clubs. If reconstruction is the method used to compensate the injustice to the relegated clubs then it must equally benefit all the other clubs. This is, of course, impossible.

The two other options available were playing the league to a conclusion - which was deemed to be impossible - and declaring the league null and void. The downside of null and void was that the prize money couldn't have been paid for something that didn't happen.

So, to re-iterate, what's the least awful option for Scottish football? And the answer is reconstruction on a 12-12-10-10 format.

[Radium]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This, to me, is the key point. If the formula for ending the league season is wrong for the bottom clubs, it's wrong for all the clubs. If reconstruction is the method used to compensate the injustice to the relegated clubs then it must equally benefit all the other clubs. This is, of course, impossible.

The two other options available were playing the league to a conclusion - which was deemed to be impossible - and declaring the league null and void. The downside of null and void was that the prize money couldn't have been paid for something that didn't happen.

So, to re-iterate, what's the least awful option for Scottish football? And the answer is reconstruction on a 12-12-10-10 format.

Null and void would have opened the league and individual clubs to claims from companies and individuals who had paid into the league season. Tickets, sponsorship, advertising.

That was the Hearts/ ICT/ TTRFC plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Alan62]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Null and void would have opened the league and individual clubs to claims from companies and individuals who had paid into the league season. Tickets, sponsorship, advertising.

That was the Hearts/ ICT/ TTRFC plan.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I absolutely agree. Null and void solves the sporting problem but creates much worse financial problems. Once it has been set aside as being unviable, then there has to be a formula for creating the final league positions. Once that has been set, there are winners and losers from the formula. It really isn't anything more than a logical process.

Nobody seems to be complaining about the method, just about the outcome.

[Eyrie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I’m late to this party but is this a joint effort or is Budge just finding PTFC legal bid

That was my initial reaction. If Hearts are seriously taking the case to court, then the additional cost to add Partick's name won't be that much but it would allow them to argue that the principle of relegation is wrong instead of only that their own relegation was "unjust".