Arbritration

M

Midfield General

Well-Known Member
Now this debacle is going to Arbritration instead of open court,it should be open to the public.Afterall we are always being told we are the lifeblood of the game.So we have a right to know what is going on.
Instead we will have 3 unamed "legal experts" operating behind closed doors.What is it that they don't want us to know?
We need a total clear out of the executive board and their current legal representative.
 
Get Hamish whateverhisname, pie and Bovril, Scottish supporters United, Spiers and Spence onside and it will happen.
 
I read online that its behind closed doors but I don't know if that means the genral public aren't allowed in or a total media blackout as well. I could hazzard a guess mind.
 
Midfield General said:
Now this debacle is going to Arbritration instead of open court,it should be open to the public.Afterall we are always being told we are the lifeblood of the game.So we have a right to know what is going on.
Instead we will have 3 unamed "legal experts" operating behind closed doors.What is it that they don't want us to know?
We need a total clear out of the executive board and their current legal representative.
Click to expand...
Agreed the putrid-3 must go.
 
It’s the same shite every time though isn’t it? The scum have got their people in all the right places so as long as the SPFL are doing their bit for them there was no chance of any of this being aired publicly and with transparency. Same reason the victims of their pedo ring will never see true justice either.
 
Midfield General said:
Now this debacle is going to Arbritration instead of open court,it should be open to the public.Afterall we are always being told we are the lifeblood of the game.So we have a right to know what is going on.
Instead we will have 3 unamed "legal experts" operating behind closed doors.What is it that they don't want us to know?
We need a total clear out of the executive board and their current legal representative.
Click to expand...
my understanding is that if hearts or partick arent happy with arbritration outcome, it goes back to court so could get interesting
 
I think the judge wants them unnamed because their may be “threats”.

Anyway Hearts/Partick get their own pick. The SPFL get their own pick and they both have to agree on the final pick for the three man panel.

I can’t see Hearts/Partick rolling over to the SPFL.
 
Gibraltar Loyal said:
Im no expert but i think that is wrong. Im sure judge has left court action open if required
Click to expand...

From BBC website so might be rubbish.

Crucially for clubs hoping to start the season on time there is no appeal for an arbitration decision, barring exceptional circumstances. So whatever the outcome, it will be binding.

www.bbc.co.uk

What next in the Hearts & Thistle case?

Advocate Paul Reid explains the next steps in the SPFL legal case after a court ruled it should be heard by an arbitration panel.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
 
If the Arbitrators find the Dundee 1st vote to not be flawed and the SPFL was correct in dismissing it then, This episode can be brought back to the CoS if a legal error has occurred with regards to an appeal on that judgment.

Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This legally means the motion fails.

We also have the SPFL heavily defending no documents be released. They failed. Dont for 1 minute think the SPFL QC was nor directing the promoted clubs QC. They wanted this case dismissed. The SPFL did not want arbitration this was their back up. And knew it was the worst case legally they could get. As Lord Clark ruled.

We now look at the Scottish law on Arbitration. Partick Thistle and Hearts will be utilising the Rangers dossier in their defence. In fact, they may even call Mr Robertson. Their main defence is dundeegate,

The deliotte report will be brought to the arbitrators attention. And as I say will either be found in the petitioners favour or brought back to CoS in regards an appeal on a legality. Resulting in an open court hearing. Never happening - SPFL will bribe and settle out of court.

So whats next.

1. Arbitrators find in petitioners favour.
- Reconstruction - highly unlikely
- No promotion - likely if Hearts dont budge
- Financial reward - highly likely if Hearts accept 2nd best

2. Arbitrators find in SPFL favour
- case dismissed and a possible penalty to the petitioners for taking to court (Lord Clark looking on).

All in All, its win win for Hearts. Their case surrounds the dundeegate. And now they have documents and witnesses to utilise. And if this is rejected they have a route to appeal under the arbitration on a legality.

Lord Clark has done Hearts well. And if not resolved before the 1st August has made it clear its not on Hearts shoulders but on the SPFL and Promoted clubs QCs for suggesting that timescale.

Dont read mainstream Mhedia they have an agenda. They will be eating their words,




- from the download hearts/pt forum yesterday dont believe bbc bullshit medhia
 
dh1963 said:
From BBC website so might be rubbish.

Crucially for clubs hoping to start the season on time there is no appeal for an arbitration decision, barring exceptional circumstances. So whatever the outcome, it will be binding.

www.bbc.co.uk

What next in the Hearts & Thistle case?

Advocate Paul Reid explains the next steps in the SPFL legal case after a court ruled it should be heard by an arbitration panel.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...

The rest of the article is fair but that last paragraph is not strictly true. The case CAN go back to the Court of Session if either party is unhappy. It would have to be on a point of law though, not just discontentment with the outcome. So its possible it could go back but, in reality, highly unlikely.
 
Don't rule out the SPFL caving in before any arbitration hearing. That sensitive documents may be revealed just might spook them to rather hand over compensation than have their dirty little secrets laundered in public.
 
bearspakora said:
Don't rule out the SPFL caving in before any arbitration hearing. That sensitive documents may be revealed just might spook them to rather hand over compensation than have their dirty little secrets laundered in public.
Click to expand...
I don’t believe we will ever see these sensitive documents, one way or the other they will get round about it.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
The rest of the article is fair but that last paragraph is not strictly true. The case CAN go back to the Court of Session if either party is unhappy. It would have to be on a point of law though, not just discontentment with the outcome. So its possible it could go back but, in reality, highly unlikely.
Click to expand...
I would go further than "not strictly true"! The last paragraph is a nonsense. The last sentence contradicts the last part of the sentence before it. It is nonsense!
 
cochise said:
I would go further than "not strictly true"! The last paragraph is a nonsense. The last sentence contradicts the last part of the sentence before it. It is nonsense!
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on your definition of 'exceptional circumstances'. Say they find in favour of Hearts but award compensation. Hearts may not think they've been awarded enough. That isn't grounds to take it back to the CoS. In that sense the judgement of the panel would be 'binding'. However, if the panel deem the Dundee second vote to be valid, for example, and Hearts consider that to be an incorrect interpretation of the law then they would have a case to take it back to the CoS seeking to have that overturned/clarified. Its unlikely, though not impossible, that the learned Chair of the panel will make an error in Law. If he does, some would consider it 'exceptional circumstances'.
 
dh1963 said:
From BBC website so might be rubbish.

Crucially for clubs hoping to start the season on time there is no appeal for an arbitration decision, barring exceptional circumstances. So whatever the outcome, it will be binding.

www.bbc.co.uk

What next in the Hearts & Thistle case?

Advocate Paul Reid explains the next steps in the SPFL legal case after a court ruled it should be heard by an arbitration panel.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk
Click to expand...
The article is misleading.

Hearts went to court.

Court sent it for Arbitration.
Arbitration doesn't have an appeals process.

But if it fails Hearts, they can go back to court if they feel the arbitration decision is flawed.

With the judge already backing them in Dundee Gate.
The arbitrators not doing so would give hearts the right to go back to court I'd think.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
I guess that depends on your definition of 'exceptional circumstances'. Say they find in favour of Hearts but award compensation. Hearts may not think they've been awarded enough. That isn't grounds to take it back to the CoS. In that sense the judgement of the panel would be 'binding'. However, if the panel deem the Dundee second vote to be valid, for example, and Hearts consider that to be an incorrect interpretation of the law then they would have a case to take it back to the CoS seeking to have that overturned/clarified. Its unlikely, though not impossible, that the learned Chair of the panel will make an error in Law. If he does, some would consider it 'exceptional circumstances'.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I was referring to the conclusion they drew not being logical. Irrespective of the case, if there are any possible circumstances where a decision can be appealed then the last sentence "So whatever the outcome, it will be binding." does not follow or make sense. The journalist should have added the caveat. Unless of course they know something we don't...
 
The abritation might be held in secret, but does that mean Hearts and Partick Thistle are forbidden to talk about it to their shareholders and support?
Valley Bluenose said:
The rest of the article is fair but that last paragraph is not strictly true. The case CAN go back to the Court of Session if either party is unhappy. It would have to be on a point of law though, not just discontentment with the outcome. So its possible it could go back but, in reality, highly unlikely.
Click to expand...
VB there are many appeals made each year, where highly respected Judges and QC's can make mistakes on points of law in court. What's the chances of Arbitration Solicitors, QC or panel Judge making wrong decisions here, highly possible?
 
Last edited:
jweebear said:
The abritation might be held in secret, but does that mean Hearts and Partick Thistle are forbidden to

VB there are many appeals made each year, where highly respected Judges and QC's can make mistakes on points of law in court. What's the chances of Arbitration Solicitors, QC or panel Judge making wrong decisions here, highly possible?
Click to expand...

Guess we will find out in about 3 weeks mate. Personally, I don't see it going beyond the decision of the Arbitration Panel. We should find out tomorrow who the two Junior Members are and maybe even who the Chair will be.

I have no interest in what happens to Hearts and Thistle to be honest. All I'm interested in is the exposure of the shenanigans of the SPFL and that has been hampered by the decision to put it to Arbitration. The more 'chaos' that can ensue from this the better as far as I'm concerned.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
Guess we will find out in about 3 weeks mate. Personally, I don't see it going beyond the decision of the Arbitration Panel. We should find out tomorrow who the two Junior Members are and maybe even who the Chair will be.

I have no interest in what happens to Hearts and Thistle to be honest. All I'm interested in is the exposure of the shenanigans of the SPFL and that has been hampered by the decision to put it to Arbitration. The more 'chaos' that can ensue from this the better as far as I'm concerned.
Click to expand...

I genuinely don't see it going to arbitration. The SPFL have far too much to lose if the documents are revealed, showing their crookery and connivance. There could also be financial horse trading going on behind the scenes right now.
 
andrew anderson said:
If the Arbitrators find the Dundee 1st vote to not be flawed and the SPFL was correct in dismissing it then, This episode can be brought back to the CoS if a legal error has occurred with regards to an appeal on that judgment.

Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This legally means the motion fails.

We also have the SPFL heavily defending no documents be released. They failed. Dont for 1 minute think the SPFL QC was nor directing the promoted clubs QC. They wanted this case dismissed. The SPFL did not want arbitration this was their back up. And knew it was the worst case legally they could get. As Lord Clark ruled.

We now look at the Scottish law on Arbitration. Partick Thistle and Hearts will be utilising the Rangers dossier in their defence. In fact, they may even call Mr Robertson. Their main defence is dundeegate,

The deliotte report will be brought to the arbitrators attention. And as I say will either be found in the petitioners favour or brought back to CoS in regards an appeal on a legality. Resulting in an open court hearing. Never happening - SPFL will bribe and settle out of court.

So whats next.

1. Arbitrators find in petitioners favour.
- Reconstruction - highly unlikely
- No promotion - likely if Hearts dont budge
- Financial reward - highly likely if Hearts accept 2nd best

2. Arbitrators find in SPFL favour
- case dismissed and a possible penalty to the petitioners for taking to court (Lord Clark looking on).

All in All, its win win for Hearts. Their case surrounds the dundeegate. And now they have documents and witnesses to utilise. And if this is rejected they have a route to appeal under the arbitration on a legality.

Lord Clark has done Hearts well. And if not resolved before the 1st August has made it clear its not on Hearts shoulders but on the SPFL and Promoted clubs QCs for suggesting that timescale.

Dont read mainstream Mhedia they have an agenda. They will be eating their words,

- from the download hearts/pt forum yesterday dont believe bbc bullshit medhia
Click to expand...

Spot on, Andrew. Lord Clark did as much as he could to indicate he thought there were serious questions to be asked and answered. Legally, he couldn't get round the arbitration clauses but did the next best thing. He forced the arbitration along a legal, not football, route, emphasised the arbiters independence of the SFA, ruled that the requested, and fundamental to the case, documentation be made available and indicated he had a watching brief on it. Finally, he indicated a degree of legal concern at the “put out of the game” implications and the possibility it may affect the lawfulness of part of Clause 99. In doing so, he seemed to be gving a legal "nod" in the right direction.
 
An arbitrator’s decision (the award) is final and binding on the parties. The court retains a supervisory jurisdiction over the arbitration process, which means that the court can be asked to intervene but only in very limited circumstances. Successful challenges to arbitration awards are rare. The arbitration process will be confidential unless agreed otherwise by the parties.

The above are some of the key features of arbitration.
 
Here Anne Hen just take this envelope with a check inside but don't tell Patrick thistle, cash that in say nothing pull your court grievances and we will see you in the prem next season all the best peter
 
It still rankles with me that these SPFL crooks are still to answer for this scumbaggery. Blackmailing member clubs to end the season early was bad enough, as was the Dundee vote scam, but trying to con UEFA was sickening behaviour.

www.newsbreak.com

Rangers claim SPFL tried to 'influence' Uefa into allowing early end to season - NewsBreak

A letter from the chief executives of the Scottish Professional Football League and Scottish Football Association to Uefa, claiming majority club support to end this season before a vote had been taken, forms a key part of a much-anticipated dossier distributed by Rangers to fellow...
www.newsbreak.com www.newsbreak.com
 
Dundee United lost their court case, which two premiership clubs will they be sending the invoice too? ;-)

If I was the arbitrator I would be calling up 3 witnesses.

1. Stewarts Robertson to explain the dealings of the SPFL board and why minutes where not signed off.
2. Eric Drysdale and his dealings regarding dundeegate
3. Nelms in why he changed his vote for reconstruction yet never voted for reconstruction

These 3 witnesses will bring others into the equation. We know Doncaster will be the main culprit but who else?

Arbitration will bring a lot of answers and a lot of p45s in my view. We might even see a criminal case thereafter. No matter what. Im 100% sure Dundeegate will be found in Hearts favour, and if not will be taken back to CoS on legal grounds.

I honestly believe the SPFL will try and settle in regards to "the benefit of other clubs". Hearts must stand strong. Financial rewards is not the goal. Once Dundeegate is concluded then they have the aces. They can push for no relegation and ensure the poisons within the SPFL are removed. Im sure Rangers will be wanting that whistleblower to have his day.
 
"Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This" " means the motion fails
andrew anderson said:
If the Arbitrators find the Dundee 1st vote to not be flawed and the SPFL was correct in dismissing it then, This episode can be brought back to the CoS if a legal error has occurred with regards to an appeal on that judgment.

Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This legally means the motion fails.

We also have the SPFL heavily defending no documents be released. They failed. Dont for 1 minute think the SPFL QC was nor directing the promoted clubs QC. They wanted this case dismissed. The SPFL did not want arbitration this was their back up. And knew it was the worst case legally they could get. As Lord Clark ruled.

We now look at the Scottish law on Arbitration. Partick Thistle and Hearts will be utilising the Rangers dossier in their defence. In fact, they may even call Mr Robertson. Their main defence is dundeegate,

The deliotte report will be brought to the arbitrators attention. And as I say will either be found in the petitioners favour or brought back to CoS in regards an appeal on a legality. Resulting in an open court hearing. Never happening - SPFL will bribe and settle out of court.

So whats next.

1. Arbitrators find in petitioners favour.
- Reconstruction - highly unlikely
- No promotion - likely if Hearts dont budge
- Financial reward - highly likely if Hearts accept 2nd best

2. Arbitrators find in SPFL favour
- case dismissed and a possible penalty to the petitioners for taking to court (Lord Clark looking on).

All in All, its win win for Hearts. Their case surrounds the dundeegate. And now they have documents and witnesses to utilise. And if this is rejected they have a route to appeal under the arbitration on a legality.

Lord Clark has done Hearts well. And if not resolved before the 1st August has made it clear its not on Hearts shoulders but on the SPFL and Promoted clubs QCs for suggesting that timescale.

Dont read mainstream Mhedia they have an agenda. They will be eating their words,




- from the download hearts/pt forum yesterday dont believe bbc bullshit medhia
Click to expand...
"Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This legally means the motion fails"

That's an interesting section of the post, So the SPFL has conceded the Dundee vote was received at 16.48pm. Could that have been because the SPFL don't want exposed, what went on after that vote, the phones calls from Doncaster and any relevant emails.

That's a massive point to concede, just shows how scared they are of Doncasters methods being exposed imo. So what are they trying to say, that vote shouldn't carry and the resolution failed. But rather the second changed vote, should carry and the resolution then passed?
 
My take on this case is that Lord Clarke knows that there is wrongdoing at all levels with the way in which the SPFL carried out the motion and "lost" the vote. In fact I think he has ascertained that the vote was in fact received on time. This raises huge questions as to what the hell the Deloite investigation was all about and how come they were then able to say all is good nothing to see here move along. The big mouth frog McLuskey should really be shitting herself, no doubt she thought she was some kind of big time media celebrity thinking she could gain some kudos, for making such bold statements. Sorry dear you can fool some of the people some of the time but you will never fool all of the people all of the time.
He has acknowledged that arbitration should be the primary way that this is dealt as per the existing rules of the association etc, however he has set it up in such a way that this is no longer under the control of the SFA rather each side picks one panel member and then they both have to agree to the Chair, so it will be as independent as possible. This is not what the SPFL/SFA would have wanted or expected and should avoid the overbearing reach of the corrupt cabal.
Next he ruled that all documents must be provided which they definitely did not want. Their motion for documents to remain confidential obviously rung alarm bells with the Judge and he ruled against this.
He has also said in effect he is watching and if things arent satisfactory then he will be more than happy to take this case back under the court for a full hearing.
In my humble opinion the judge has done everything in his power to allow football one last chance to deal with this mess and has tipped the odds away from the SPFL/SFA to ensure a fair crack of the whip for Hearts and Partick and if they dont get what the seek then he is happy to help them achieve their aims.
Overall I think he has given the best possible judgement under the circumstances.
 
dh1963 said:
I got told last night the decision is binding with no right of appeal.

Is that right?
Click to expand...
I am pretty sure a part of Hearts argument was that Arbitration was just wasting time as it would probably end up in court anyway.
 
I see 2 -1 is sufficient for success.

Is it possible that one arbitrator might be unable to come to a decision and in that case a 1 -1 where one of those is the Chairman is sufficient for a determination?

99.21
The Tribunal may adopt such procedures as it considers appropriate for the resolution of the Football
Dispute to ensure its just, expeditious, economic, and final determination and may proceed by way of oral
hearing or by written submission and by such manner of evidence as it considers appropriate. Any award
or procedural decision of the Tribunal shall if necessary be made by a majority and, in the event that no
majority may be formed, the Tribunal Chairman shall make his determination as if he were a sole arbitrator.
 
A particular aspect of this whole case is where will the compensation money come from?

It might be worth finding out if ALL the prize money has been paid out to ALL clubs, or has some of it been held back as compensation payments, not the £8M and £2M, and I've not heard an actual figure, will be the outcome.
 
andrew anderson said:
If the Arbitrators find the Dundee 1st vote to not be flawed and the SPFL was correct in dismissing it then, This episode can be brought back to the CoS if a legal error has occurred with regards to an appeal on that judgment.

Now we already have the SPFL QC not wanting to argue this point. Obviously due to the fact that underhand dealings were in play. They basically agreed to Lord Clark the Dundee vote was received before 5pm. This legally means the motion fails.

We also have the SPFL heavily defending no documents be released. They failed. Dont for 1 minute think the SPFL QC was nor directing the promoted clubs QC. They wanted this case dismissed. The SPFL did not want arbitration this was their back up. And knew it was the worst case legally they could get. As Lord Clark ruled.

We now look at the Scottish law on Arbitration. Partick Thistle and Hearts will be utilising the Rangers dossier in their defence. In fact, they may even call Mr Robertson. Their main defence is dundeegate,

The deliotte report will be brought to the arbitrators attention. And as I say will either be found in the petitioners favour or brought back to CoS in regards an appeal on a legality. Resulting in an open court hearing. Never happening - SPFL will bribe and settle out of court.

So whats next.

1. Arbitrators find in petitioners favour.
- Reconstruction - highly unlikely
- No promotion - likely if Hearts dont budge
- Financial reward - highly likely if Hearts accept 2nd best

2. Arbitrators find in SPFL favour
- case dismissed and a possible penalty to the petitioners for taking to court (Lord Clark looking on).

All in All, its win win for Hearts. Their case surrounds the dundeegate. And now they have documents and witnesses to utilise. And if this is rejected they have a route to appeal under the arbitration on a legality.

Lord Clark has done Hearts well. And if not resolved before the 1st August has made it clear its not on Hearts shoulders but on the SPFL and Promoted clubs QCs for suggesting that timescale.

Dont read mainstream Mhedia they have an agenda. They will be eating their words,




- from the download hearts/pt forum yesterday dont believe bbc bullshit medhia
Click to expand...
Thanks mate for such a detailed and clear summation of the current position. It confirms my belief that Doncaster is not in a corner he can't get out of.
He can't settle out of court as they have no money. They would have to get all clubs to agree to pay out of future income
We all know the Dundee vote will be found to be illegal even if Hearts need to go back to COS.
Releasing the documents potentially gives Rangers and others the ammunition to get rid of the exec through a no confidence vote
 
okbear said:
A particular aspect of this whole case is where will the compensation money come from?

It might be worth finding out if ALL the prize money has been paid out to ALL clubs, or has some of it been held back as compensation payments, not the £8M and £2M, and I've not heard an actual figure, will be the outcome.
Click to expand...

SPFL are due to receive the first payment from Sky early in August, amounting to circa £12.5m. If required, that’s where compo will come from.
 
bearspakora said:
Don't rule out the SPFL caving in before any arbitration hearing. That sensitive documents may be revealed just might spook them to rather hand over compensation than have their dirty little secrets laundered in public.
Click to expand...
They would need all clubs to agree in that case. They just can't decide to do a pay out. Would be another vote
 
Albertz Loyal said:
They would need all clubs to agree in that case. They just can't decide to do a pay out. Would be another vote
Click to expand...

I‘ve seen this posted about a vote being required numerous times. There was no vote before they gave up the cash to Sky for unscreened games -nearer £7m than the reported £1.5m. Nor a vote for giving up circa £2.3m to BT Sport.

As far as I can gather the SPFL prize money is paid out after ‘expenses’. My guess is they would simply put any compo down to ‘expenses’. I’m happy to be corrected on that though if anybody can point me to a relevant extract of the Articles.
 
Valley Bluenose said:
I‘ve seen this posted about a vote being required numerous times. There was no vote before they gave up the cash to Sky for unscreened games -nearer £7m than the reported £1.5m. Nor a vote for giving up circa £2.3m to BT Sport.

As far as I can gather the SPFL prize money is paid out after ‘expenses’. My guess is they would simply put any compo down to ‘expenses’. I’m happy to be corrected on that though if anybody can point me to a relevant extract of the Articles.
Click to expand...
Fair point, but surely there would be a vote of no confidence or something
 
Albertz Loyal said:
Fair point, but surely there would be a vote of no confidence or something
Click to expand...

I‘d hope that, ultimately, there will indeed be a vote of No Confidence at the conclusion of all this. There will never be a better opportunity, particularly if there is yet more ‘chaos’ arising out of the Arbitration. Sadly though, it will need a significant number of the other clubs to stop cowering in the corner and show some balls.
 
Yorkshire Blue said:
Thanks mate for such a detailed and clear summation of the current position. It confirms my belief that Doncaster is not in a corner he can't get out of.
He can't settle out of court as they have no money. They would have to get all clubs to agree to pay out of future income
We all know the Dundee vote will be found to be illegal even if Hearts need to go back to COS.
Releasing the documents potentially gives Rangers and others the ammunition to get rid of the exec through a no confidence vote
Click to expand...
I think the SPFL are on a damage limitation exercise now VB, they have given ground that the Dundee No vote for the resolution was received on time. The SFA can't pick the panel in its entirety, also the panel have been given court guidelines how to proceed and conduct proceedings, i can imagine that's unusual for a arbitration panel in itself. The SPFL as you say haven't the money to pay both Hearts and Partick Thistle court costs and damages, i think the best result the SPFL can hope for other than a win for them, is a reinstatement for Hearts and PT, it's the easiest way out and back for them now. If information of Doncaster gerrymandering the vote gets out, that's his reputation ruined, and may implicate others in the shenanigans too, so they will not be wanting that to happen.
 
Last edited:
Received just means arrived on the SPFL server. It doesn't mean they have conceded that it was read at that time. Its not new news.

I think the arbitration panel will rule that Dundee's original vote should have been taken as final regardless of any other circumstances which may have persuaded them to change vote.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Latest posts

Back
Top