GLASGOWRFC 101 Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 The court will see that as two sides of the same coinNot allowing to register = restriction of tradeIs this some cryptic psychological type of fuckin anagram mate I don't have a fuckin clue what you're taking to post this.... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECW1972 13 Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 1. Can the trust afford the legal fees2. The ban is not restricting people i.e players from work, its stopping us from buying3. Have the QCs arguing against ban said anything outwith meeting Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
trevelyan 44 Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 Is this some cryptic psychological type of fuckin anagram mate I don't have a fuckin clue what you're taking to post this....I couldnt give a fuck if you are confused As long as I know.Seems you dont like it up youOr maybe you do Goodnight Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWRFC 101 Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 I couldnt give a fuck if you are confused As long as I know.Seems you dont like it up youOr maybe you do Haha I got you there!Some right touchy cunts on here Your point is ab correct bud ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWRFC 101 Posted May 20, 2012 Share Posted May 20, 2012 1. Can the trust afford the legal fees2. The ban is not restricting people i.e players from work, its stopping us from buying3. Have the QCs arguing against ban said anything outwith meetingPoint 2; it is restricting people from work.. If Gattuso wants to sign he can't because he's been restricted from signing to work! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECW1972 13 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Point 2; it is restricting people from work.. If Gattuso wants to sign he can't because he's been restricted from signing to work!No way would any court or employment tribunel concur with you. Only argument is, was it just? and the CAS dont usually go against governing bodies Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 No way would any court or employment tribunel concur with you. Only argument is, was it just? and the CAS dont usually go against governing bodiesYou tell us, was it just ? or a massive own goal by a shithead sfa who think they are above the law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWRFC 101 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 No way would any court or employment tribunel concur with you. Only argument is, was it just? and the CAS dont usually go against governing bodiesMaybe you're right...but that doesn't make it right !What makes you say that any court wouldn't agree?..is it wrong if you want a job but can't get it because the potential employer is banned from employing new staff...tell me an instance where you've heard this before? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ObanBoy 74 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Didn't Chelsea have a transfer embargo that got lifted? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASGOWRFC 101 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 I can't fuckin wait to post in " pay back time" I really have the bit between my teeth on this one...Goodnight bears sleep well! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KingBillyLives 27 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 If we sign a player and he is not allowed to earn a win bonus, then I believe he can take it to the big court right awayBig court can close the whole lot down until it is resolvedIn that case couldn't he also sue the club if the manager didn't pick him? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 On a similar note, I think we would be able to make a decent legal challenge against the ten point administration penalty. The whole point of going into administration is that it's a legal way to get your house in order financially. However, the loss of points means there's a chance you lose out on prize money for finishing lower down the league, which just damages matters further.Important to add that this is just a general thought applying to all clubs in administration, not just ourselves.It's not compulsory for us to be a member of the SFA, but when we signed up, we had to tick the box which said that we agreed to the terms and conditions of membership. It's no different to joining a gym or the RAC.Even without being a member, you can still play football, exercise and drive a car, respectively. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLawMan 6,240 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Despite what people think, HR rules in football are different. 2 examples1) If the freedom of movement from one workplace to another applied, then there could be no transfer windows. If player x wants to move to a different job in October then he should be allowed to, just as he would if he worked for McDonalds and wanted to move to KFC. In football, he cant.2) In any normal job, if you fail to perform or miss targets/goals, then you can go through a disciplinary process whereby you are removed from the job. It doesnt happen in football.Lets face it, if they uphold the embargo, then there is hee haw we can do about it unless their is a court argument specific to how they reached the penalty, rather that the penalty itself. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Legend 1 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 In my opinion a case against the sfa could only be brought forward based on the legality on the punishment . Was it within the panels remit to hand down such a punishment . As for legal arguments regarding the registration of players, I would be very surprised if it ever got of the ground . We are not banned from employing or playing footballers over 18 in general , just within the sfa structure . Which as an organisation has rules and regulations that each club signs up to. We signed up to the independent panel so would be legally obliged to adhere to their findings as long as it was in there remit to hand them down. which is contested by the administrators . Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 It's not compulsory for us to be a member of the SFA, but when we signed up, we had to tick the box which said that we agreed to the terms and conditions of membership. It's no different to joining a gym or the RAC.Even without being a member, you can still play football, exercise and drive a car, respectively.The rules must be fair and equitable not made up to suit who ever may be sitting on the kangaroo court for those appearing.The kangaroo judgement would be laughed out of open court and there is one sure way of finding out, our esteemed supporters associations should be challenging this kangaroo decision in court even if the club won't, it is after all is said and done our club. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Everyone seems to live in fear that if we do this and that re taking the sfa to court, UEFA will punish us.......well what about Bosman they said the same thing about that and the European Courts told them no way they cannot prevent this decision from the court, and did they put a fight up or was Bosman brought into football.If the law of the land(s) in Europe case decide this is something they want then no one can go against it. They no doubt can appeal , but one would have to think that European Courts are just as stubborn as UEFA if not more so. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 The rules must be fair and equitable not made up to suit who ever may be sitting on the kangaroo court for those appearing.The kangaroo judgement would be laughed out of open court and there is one sure way of finding out, our esteemed supporters associations should be challenging this kangaroo decision in court even if the club won't, it is after all is said and done our club.All clubs signed up to give the Judicial Panel those unlimited powers, so I fail to see how the judgement itself could be challenged successfully. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 All clubs signed up to give the Judicial Panel those unlimited powers, so I fail to see how the judgement itself could be challenged successfully.Self explanatory.The rules must be fair and equitable not made up to suit who ever may be sitting on the kangaroo court for those appearing.PS they can give the kangaroo mob all the fancy names they like, it was not a Judicial panel, that structure is the remit of the Judicial system, the law. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Self explanatory.The rules must be fair and equitable not made up to suit who ever may be sitting on the kangaroo court for those appearing.The rules were agreed by all parties prior to any of this starting. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 The rules were agreed by all parties prior to any of this starting.There must be some difficulty in you being able to understand the meaning of "fair and equitable" you may get there eventually. PS the rules weren't in place when we signed up, not all of them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 There must be some difficulty in you being able to understand the meaning of "fair and equitable" you may get there eventually. PS the rules weren't in place when we signed up, not all of them.If they were regarded as fair and equitable at the time of the agreement, when did that change? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edmiston Drive 3,846 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 The rules were agreed by all parties prior to any of this starting.Do you have a link as to dates of this agreement and copies of all clubs signing up to this. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ray 105 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 If they were regarded as fair and equitable at the time of the agreement, when did that change?Because something is signed it does not make it fair and equitable, perhaps you also missed the rule they made up for the kangaroo hearing, are you following or shall I read War and Peace. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Do you have a link as to dates of this agreement and copies of all clubs signing up to this. http://www.scottishfa.co.uk/scottish_fa_news.cfm?page=1957&newsCategoryID=3&newsID=7920 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
caseyjones 3,009 Posted May 21, 2012 Share Posted May 21, 2012 Because something is signed it does not make it fair and equitable, perhaps you also missed the rule they made up for the kangaroo hearing, are you following or shall I read War and Peace. What rule did they make up for the hearing?Your wee smartarse routine doesn't cut any ice with me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.