The coronavirus and the sfa

[Dave Hedgehog 10,673]

There are no rules.

There is no precedent.

There is nothing to say that celtic should get called Champions.

If there was it would be all over the social media, newspapers, on TV and it would be confirmed by the football authorities.

But it isn’t. That says it all.

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

4 minutes ago, The Dude said:

"or otherwise as determined by the Board"

The champions are the one with the most points at the end of the Season. the season ends on the date of the last league match or as otherwise determined by the board.

The board will determine the season is now finished, despite not reaching the 38 games prescribed else where in the rules, due to coronavirus.

As a result, rule c38 kicks in and celtic as the club in position one will be the 'Champion Club' as the one with the highest tally of points at the end of the Season.

Whether we agree or not. That's what the SPFL are intending to push forward with. If clubs want to fight it, they can but the people I've spoken to at clubs and elsewhere don't think it would be successful.

The rule states that they can choose the DATE on which the 38 game season ends.

This can be a date AFTER the 38 games have been complete.

The rule does not give them the ability to change the number of games in the season. The number of games in the season is clearly stated in rules as being 38.

It is important that you see this distinction.

The rule you are quoting allows them to change the DATE, not the NUMBER OF GAMES. The number of games is clearly stated in the rules as 38.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Did you think  that re disregarding ?

There was another way of reading it that was explained to me but I'm struggling to explain it properly. But that rule doesn't have any relevance on who wins the title.

[pollok-bear 7,537]

20 minutes ago, The Dude said:

Anyone? 

Hows things Graham? What work u got lined up? Going to be tough for you to write articles on Rangers fans singing with no games playing just now.

[35 Yard Dangerman 3,475]

3 minutes ago, The Dude said:

"or otherwise as determined by the Board"

The champions are the one with the most points at the end of the Season. the season ends on the date of the last league match or as otherwise determined by the board.

The board will determine the season is now finished, despite not reaching the 38 games prescribed else where in the rules, due to coronavirus.

As a result, rule c38 kicks in and celtic as the club in position one will be the 'Champion Club' as the one with the highest tally of points at the end of the Season.

Whether we agree or not. That's what the SPFL are intending to push forward with. If clubs want to fight it, they can but the people I've spoken to at clubs and elsewhere don't think it would be successful.

Everytime I read one of your posts my heart sinks further. 

Sounds like you fucking well want them crowned champions.

Stop talking.

 

 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

The rule states that they can choose the DATE on which the 38 game season ends.

This can be a date AFTER the 38 games have been complete.

The rule does not give them the ability to change the number of games in the season. The number of games in the season is clearly stated in rules as being 38.

It is important that you see this distinction.

The rule you are quoting allows them to change the DATE, not the NUMBER OF GAMES. The number of games is clearly stated in the rules as 38.

It gives them the power to determine when the Season ends. Again, there's nothing in that rule which stipulates the number of games needed to end the Season. That's why it says the defined term Season rather than after 38 games.

 

[Leftpegcoopz11 4,730]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

tbh, I've no idea, I'm not even sure what clubs will still be around come that point, let alone what the schedule will be if delayed further.

Well, does it not perhaps create the same problem as is stands. The Spfl/SFA cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit themselves, or more so, one club in particular... Does the so-called rulebook change nxt year for an unprecedented situation. I'm sorry but that just doesn't wash... 

Like I've said, if a league isn't mathematically won/over it has to be declared null n void. And as much as I wouldn't have minded L/pool winning EPL, such is life. Its a sham otherwise, no matter what may or may not be stated in any rules, which obviously aren't clear nor conclusive. 

[Jimfanciesthedude 24,540]

Imo if it goes to a vote i think the tarriers will find they have less friends than they thought, 

[The Dude 20,026]

3 minutes ago, pollok-bear said:

Hows things Graham? What work u got lined up? Going to be tough for you to write articles on Rangers fans singing with no games playing just now.

Does this clown actually think I'm Graham Spiers, despite the fact that my real name isn't exactly a secret on here?

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, Leftpegcoopz11 said:

Well, does it not perhaps create the same problem as is stands. The Spfl/SFA cannot keep moving the goalposts to suit themselves, or more so, one club in particular... Does the so-called rulebook change nxt year for an unprecedented situation. I'm sorry but that just doesn't wash... 

Like I've said, if a league isn't mathematically won/over it has to be declared null n void. And as much as I wouldn't have minded L/pool winning EPL, such is life. Its a sham otherwise, no matter what may or may not be stated in any rules, which obviously aren't clear nor conclusive. 

It doesn't suit one club in particular.

So you cant move the goalposts to suit 'one club' but you can ignore the rules to the detriment of them? Sounds a bit of a sham itself.

[The Dude 20,026]

5 minutes ago, 35 Yard Dangerman said:

Everytime I read one of your posts my heart sinks further. 

Sounds like you fucking well want them crowned champions.

Stop talking.

 

 

I couldn't care less if they are. It's going to have a big asterisk next to it if they do and if they don't it'll be a laugh seeing just how far they take. If they don't get it this season, they'll insist next season counts as -in-a-row. Either way, its a title that will come with a big asterisk and always be tainted and the fact liverpool could find their first in 30 years have the same is nice.

[Leftpegcoopz11 4,730]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

The 2019/20 SPFL Board is made up of Neil Doncaster (CEO), Murdoch MacLennan (Chairman), Karyn McCluskey (non-executive), Alan Burrows (Motherwell), Les Gray (Hamilton Academical), Stewart Robertson (Rangers), Ross McArthur (Dunfermline Athletic), Ewen Cameron (Alloa Athletic), Ken Ferguson (Brechin City) and Peter Davidson (Montrose).

In an ideal world, no. Far from it but I seriously think null and void will do far more damage other clubs and Scottish football in general than the standings staying as is. I said earlier, I'm not fussed at all if they get it. It looked like they were going to get it anyway. If this season IS voided, you can bet your last that if they win next year then they'll keep counting it regardless.

If its voided, I couldn't give a Fuck, what happens nxt year happens. The problem I have, and have mentioned earlier, if the shoe was on the other foot they would be making a hell of alot more of it than we are... Stemming from our board being weak as piss.

Stewart Robertson will sit there nodding his head like a fucking wind up toy. Gutless to a man unfortunately. 

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

It gives them the power to determine when the Season ends. Again, there's nothing in that rule which stipulates the number of games needed to end the Season. That's why it says the defined term Season rather than after 38 games.

 

That rule does not stipulate 38 games, because it is defining the term 'Season' for all division, which have a mixed number of required games. We play a different number of games than SPFL2 for instance I believe.

There is one rule and only one rule which states the number of required games in a premiership season. That is rule C14:

C14 The Clubs for the time being entitled in terms of these Rules to participate in the Premiership shall, disregarding any abandoned or postponed matches, play in 38 League Matches in any one Season.

I initially though the 'definition of season' was in conflict with Rule C14. I thought C14 stated a defined number of games, and the definition of season said this was discretionary. They are not conflicting, they are talking about different things.

C14 states the number of games there must be in a premiership season. The definition of season explains that the board can change the DATE of the end of the season, but it does not allow them to override C14's stipulation on the number of games. 

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, Leftpegcoopz11 said:

If its voided, I couldn't give a Fuck, what happens nxt year happens. The problem I have, and have mentioned earlier, if the shoe was on the other foot they would be making a hell of alot more of it than we are... Stemming from our board being weak as piss.

Stewart Robertson will sit there nodding his head like a fucking wind up toy. Gutless to a man unfortunately. 

I could. My job depends on it. And believe me, if this goes on a long time, Rangers are far from in the clear finacially. if we're looking at five or six months payroll with little income, some of the directors better star digging very fucking deep.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, mitre_mouldmaster said:

That rule does not stipulate 38 games, because it is defining the term 'Season' for all division, which have a mixed number of required games. We play a different number of games than SPFL2 for instance I believe.

There is one rule and only one rule which states the number of required games in a premiership season. That is rule C14:

C14 The Clubs for the time being entitled in terms of these Rules to participate in the Premiership shall, disregarding any abandoned or postponed matches, play in 38 League Matches in any one Season.

I initially though the 'definition of season' was in conflict with Rule C14. I thought C14 stated a defined number of games, and the definition of season said this was discretionary. They are not conflicting, they are talking about different things.

C14 states the number of games there must be in a premiership season. The definition of season explains that the board can change the DATE of the end of the season, but it does not allow them to override C14's stipulation on the number of games. 

So that's not the the rule which determines the champions?

[mitre_mouldmaster 21,509]

Just now, The Dude said:

So that's not the the rule which determines the champions?

The part that says that the champions are the team at the top at the end of the season?

We are almost there, so stay with me and answer the question with a yes or no. I promise its not a trick and im not going to try and have a go at you. I want you to understand what I am saying.

[Leftpegcoopz11 4,730]

7 minutes ago, The Dude said:

It doesn't suit one club in particular.

So you cant move the goalposts to suit 'one club' but you can ignore the rules to the detriment of them? Sounds a bit of a sham itself.

Let's see what Hearts think aswell at the end of the day. I want to know how they sort that out, because if they say the season has finished, rather than cancelled, then Hearts are relegated. Would that maybe be to their detriment aswell, Or is it just the Taigs that matter? 

[pollok-bear 7,537]

5 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I could. My job depends on it. And believe me, if this goes on a long time, Rangers are far from in the clear finacially. if we're looking at five or six months payroll with little income, some of the directors better star digging very fucking deep.

Why does your job depend on it fanny baws?

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, mitre_mouldmaster said:

The part that says that the champions are the team at the top at the end of the season?

We are almost there, so stay with me and answer the question with a yes or no. I promise its not a trick and im not going to try and have a go at you. I want you to understand what I am saying.

Yes. I understand what you are saying. But the information I have disputes that and given where that has come from I have far more faith in that than you, with all respect. Senior employees at the SPFL who have been told the SPFL's position is this, and have since relayed it to others, carry more weight on how the rules are being interpreted by the people making the decision.

I don't quite get what part of that I've not made clear enough. Virtually all of what I've said in terms of how things are expected to play regards the league standings has come from within clubs. It's not my interpretation of it but the interpretation of the SPFL and their lawyers.

One thing I'm almost certain of though is that, if the decision is left to domestic FA, the season will not be voided.

[The Dude 20,026]

1 minute ago, pollok-bear said:

Why does your job depend on it fanny baws?

Because with no Scottish football, there's no Scottish football to write about. I mean ffs, five minutes ago I was Graham Spiers. Why do you think my job would depend on it?

[The Dude 20,026]

6 minutes ago, Leftpegcoopz11 said:

Let's see what Hearts think aswell at the end of the day. I want to know how they sort that out, because if they say the season has finished, rather than cancelled, then Hearts are relegated. Would that maybe be to their detriment aswell, Or is it just the Taigs that matter? 

Or the other clubs denied promotion?

[pollok-bear 7,537]

1 minute ago, The Dude said:

Because with no Scottish football, there's no Scottish football to write about. I mean ffs, five minutes ago I was Graham Spiers. Why do you think my job would depend on it?

I hope you lose your job over it. Clowns like you dont deserve to get paid to write your shite.

[The Dude 20,026]

Just now, pollok-bear said:

I hope you lose your job over it. Clowns like you dont deserve to get paid to write your shite.

Ah well, who knows, I might. Tell you what though, there's literally millions of people who've read my "shite" from almost every single country on the planet and I've spent the last few years being paid a pretty decent wage to watch, talk about and write about fitba full-time. No complaints on my end.

[Bears r us 30,791]

50 minutes ago, SeparateEntityMyArse said:

Nothing states the league can be shorted.

38 games are to be played. On that basis when looking at the definition of "season" then it's clear the text refers to a period of time between the date of the first (match 1) and last (match 38) , the dates can be changed as directed by the Board. 

As I said, to consider the term implies less than 38 games (let's say 30)  is absurd because rule c13 would by definition read 

Clubs shall play 38 games in a period from 1st game to the 30th and last. It makes no sense.

We have to remember these rules were written by some not very bright people and with Liewell looking over the shoulders of who did it and no doubt putting in anything he thought might come in handy for him in the future.

The season has not been completed and should be made void and players sent home for an early break and IF the virus has peaked by the end of May then pre-season could hopefully start in June sometime.

I just cannot get my head around trying to extend this season into late summer, get it stopped and start the new one as soon as it can be done July/August.  

Maybe and it is a big maybe, UEFA will go down that road on Tuesday, but I am never confident in with what they might do. 

[Leftpegcoopz11 4,730]

8 minutes ago, The Dude said:

I could. My job depends on it. And believe me, if this goes on a long time, Rangers are far from in the clear finacially. if we're looking at five or six months payroll with little income, some of the directors better star digging very fucking deep.

Don't twist my words, I was more so talking about voiding the league. You, me, or the nxt person doesn't know how long this will last. It was a hypothetical question, so don't turn it into something it wasn't meant to come across as.

My main Concern would be, if I were you, you very seldom have anything positive to say with regards to Rangers. I understand you may be trying to be diplomatic/objective, but to me it doesn't really come across that way. 

Don't know if you still write for that rag or not as I don't buy newspapers, but it's amazing the amount of journos that bk them yet most of our supposed ex players/supporting  journos don't do the same for us. Shitebags  to a man.