Frankie 8,674 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 That's my take on it, I also don't understand how we can accept a sanction that a judge has ruled illegal. You can't just pick and chose which judge you like the best. Well, Green et al seem to think that's possible going by their presentation. I'd agree our club must not accede to any further sanction (especially not an embargo) and I'd hope the document in the Telegraph article was only relevant to our SPL application. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
craig 5,199 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 You cant mate the same as you cant pick and choose what debts you pay. Yes you can. The club, as far as I am aware, can agree to not follow the judge's ruling. Somebody would have to refer it back to the Court of Session and if both club and SFA agree on the sanction then nobody would refer it, leaving them free to accept the "illegal" ruling. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
onevision 1,596 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Winning the appeal against the illegal transfer embargo is what has Uefa is a hissy and they are surely the ones pushing to ensure the SPL/SFA have it included no matter what division we end up in. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GovanAllan 0 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Winning the appeal against the illegal transfer embargo is what has Uefa is a hissy and they are surely the ones pushing to ensure the SPL/SFA have it included no matter what division we end up in. They didn't go in a hissy at the court case as such they went in a hissy at the SFA for letting it get that far. Every person, club or any organisation has a right to legal recourse stopping them from that right is beyond low. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
simplythebest 0 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 It doesn't matter if the presentation was a crayon drawing, made 0 difference. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbernauldGers 0 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 Yes you can. The club, as far as I am aware, can agree to not follow the judge's ruling. Somebody would have to refer it back to the Court of Session and if both club and SFA agree on the sanction then nobody would refer it, leaving them free to accept the "illegal" ruling. You miss what i mean mate, of course anybody can do anything the want, what i meant was i dont think we will and i dont think we would get away with it. Plus you cant agree on something that a court has declared illegal, otherwise the courts would just shut down. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CumbernauldGers 0 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 One point i think we have all missed is this, there seems to be alot of talk about accepting the transfer ban but we would be allowed to replace the leaving players anyway? If this is the case would this just be a deal done that saves the face of the SFA but we get new players anyway? 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_2010 0 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 My interpretation is that the punishment we were given was not within the SFA rule book. Therefore the ruling was not against the law of the land - but against the membership rules. If we agree to accept (which I don't think we should) the original punishment, we are not breaking any legal laws (other than perhaps contempt of court?) and are just accepting a private punishment (even though it is not in the membership rule book), which is not illegal. To confuse matters, I believe there is uncertainty on the legality of a transfer embargo regarding the freedom of employment rules... So perhaps the transfer embargo is illegal, but this cannot be argued after the court ruling on the membership rules and punishments available under these rules. 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darthter 542 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 I think if it really came down to it, the club could accept transfer restrictions: - only free agents - under 18's (any value) - anyone up to a certain price ie £500k - only Scottish players This would still limit transfer activity, but at the same time allow the squad to rebuild.... 0 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
forlanssister 3,114 Posted July 6, 2012 Share Posted July 6, 2012 (edited) Although it doesn't say it in the article my understanding of Green's acceptance of the registration ban was that it would run from 1/9/12 to 1/9/13 ergo allowing us to register new signings in this window but not the following two. I don't think Lord Glennie would be best pleased having decided that the SFA acted ultra vires would be amused at the waste of his and his courts time if it were decided to ignore his ruling. http://www.gersnetonline.co.uk/vb/showthread.php?44437-Daily-Record&p=341092&highlight=#post341092 Edited July 6, 2012 by forlanssister 0 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.