Might be unpopular, but...

[calscot 0]

The "famine song" was sung about by Scottish people to Scotttish people so what did we have to fear? We even had that great property lawyer, Donald Findlay, to support the viewpoint. A court decided that Rangers fans were being racist and anti_Irish.

 

It wasn't a kangeroo court and it wasn't Mickey Mouse defending but our viewpoint was ignored and the court reached what seems to me as a ridiculous decision.

 

Great and very relevant example.

[andy steel 0]

You should have taken it to Strasbourg, then, or the Supreme Court in London. Unless they, too, are in on it.

 

To sum up: we stand alone, without any recourse to natural justice from the associate body we are trying to belong to, to legal justice from the courts of Scotland or the UK (and maybe Europe), from the court of public opinion, and are cut adrift from the SPFA, the STUC, the CAB, from anyone. We are completely exposed to the whims of those who hate us and have no alternative but to strike deals which explain nothing and leave everything shrouded in mystery and half-truth. This, reluctantly, is the only road open to us and any other will assuredly mean disproportionate punishment.

 

If that is true, I would be obliged to join you in your camp. But it's too paranoid for me, even with the events of the last six months. What about the media engaging reverse gear over yet more sanctions of late? What about the SFL acting with as near to dignity as you can get in Scottish football? Even Alex Thomson has been investigating the actions of 'enemy' parties in this whole affair. Both SFA and SPL leaderships are on their last legs and hammering us further over dual contracts without absolute, cast iron evidence, which Calscot suggests they cannot have, would leave them weaker and us stronger.

 

I don't think we are as isolated as I myself would have thought we were even just a few weeks ago, and I think any disproportionate sanctions from the utterly discredited SPL would be shouted down, either by the football or the legal authorities. But we have to know whether or not there was wrong doing! That is the bottom line for me and if others disagree that's fine; I'm not trying to change your minds. But I'm not going to sit in silence when I think the club is doing something wrong, either.

[calscot 0]

You should have taken it to Strasbourg, then, or the Supreme Court in London. Unless they, too, are in on it.

 

I don't quite get this but do know that appeals to higher courts require a lot of time, money and appetite for it. And there is court after court that just won't get it. You just have to look at what happened with us with UEFA - they appealed against themselves. You don't have to be paranoid to be wary of not getting justice.

 

To sum up: we stand alone,

 

I looks that way and it's not too surprising. We in competition with 11 other clubs, our only realistic rival has been indoctrinated since birth to want our demise, the rest have no chance of winning the league and often get a doing on the park from us and called "diddy teams" which is just an infitesimal fraction of what causes them ill feeling towards us and yet despite us having about 1/3 of the fans, they get 11 votes about us while we get 1. Not only that, you're average fan is not well known for his objective thinking on his rivals and yet the chairmen supposedly listened to the fans for their votes. Add in the fact that Celtic fans threatened to boycott them and you get the scenario where if they vote for us and we are voted out, not only do they lose the TV money and our fans at their games, they also lose the Celtic fans at their games - add in a boycott from their own fans and they'd be facing armageddon. It seems to me best to play safe and vote us out as it looked like that was what the rest were going to do.

 

Damn right we stood alone.

 

without any recourse to natural justice from the associate body we are trying to belong to,

 

That pretty much seems a fact. We went into administration and were deducted 10 pts, had a poor run due to players not being focused and negotiating 75% pay cuts, then went into pre-liquidation which meant we were banned from Europe for three years and lost most of our players for nothing, we were then voted out of the SPL and demoted to division 3, were fined the maximum amount and given a transfer embargo - and yet our associate body claimed we hadn't actually been punished yet as these were just natural consequences.

 

Damn right we have no recourse to natural justice from our associate body.

 

to legal justice from the courts of Scotland or the UK (and maybe Europe),

 

What legal justice is there from the courts when you agree to abide by the rules of your association which give you sanctions that are not within they powers, lose this principle in court and then use other rules which state that they can do what they like to re-enforce that sanction? Just how can we get justice from the courts. When a body has rules that state, "as they see fit", just where is your case?

 

Damn right we have no legal justice.

 

from the court of public opinion,

 

Public opinion is manipulated by the media and the most of the public we are talking about are rival fans or not really interested and already have the opinion that football is bad. To sell papers, reporters print sensationalist stuff instead of facts and measured opinions. That much is obvious these days and there is no national newspaper that has any integrity in how they present the news. Add to that, that it's generally considered by Rangers fans, with very good cause that many in the media are of the sympathy to the club that bitterly hates us and motivates them to act in ways that are highly unprofessional as well as many others who have sympathy for smaller teams enjoying seeing the mighty fall and you've got an incredible antagonistic media storm.

 

Damn right that public opinion has been turned against us through propaganda.

 

and are cut adrift from the SPFA, the STUC, the CAB, from anyone.

 

The SPFA only care about the rights of their richest members to earn as much money as they can. They have demonstrated that time and again with total disregard for the good of the rest of their members. Why would they help us? They just put the boot in by helping and encouraging our players to leave for nothing.

 

Damn right we're cut adrift from them. I can't see the others being interested.

 

We are completely exposed to the whims of those who hate us and have no alternative but to strike deals which explain nothing and leave everything shrouded in mystery and half-truth. This, reluctantly, is the only road open to us and any other will assuredly mean disproportionate punishment.

 

Alas that is what seems to be happening. It seems you are writing this sarcastically in jest but many a true word said in jest.

 

If that is true, I would be obliged to join you in your camp. But it's too paranoid for me, even with the events of the last six months.

 

You don't have to be paranoid to be caught in a perfect storm. You just need to be in a world where your rivals, who don't like you, are able to decide your fate when you fall and are helpless, at the same time when everyone else either doesn't care or only cares about themselves.

 

It happens all the time in small groups where one person ends up being ostracised. It's a natural occurrence that doesn't need much coincidence, just a bit of human nature.

 

What about the media engaging reverse gear over yet more sanctions of late?

 

Some of the less hateful are sated with their attacks and probably bored. To continue to sell the media they have to change the tune after a while. If they are genuine, shouldn't they be apologising for their part in the kicking we got? You would need a conspiracy for you to be right here but the point is there IS no conspiracy. Just hens at a pecking party (copyright One flew over the cuckoo's nest) or sharks in a blood frenzy.

 

What about the SFL acting with as near to dignity as you can get in Scottish football? Even Alex Thomson has been investigating the actions of 'enemy' parties in this whole affair. Both SFA and SPL leaderships are on their last legs and hammering us further over dual contracts without absolute, cast iron evidence, which Calscot suggests they cannot have, would leave them weaker and us stronger.

 

 

I don't think we are as isolated as I myself would have thought we were even just a few weeks ago, and I think any disproportionate sanctions from the utterly discredited SPL would be shouted down, either by the football or the legal authorities. But we have to know whether or not there was wrong doing! That is the bottom line for me and if others disagree that's fine; I'm not trying to change your minds. But I'm not going to sit in silence when I think the club is doing something wrong, either.

 

The rest requires a conspiracy theory but you're original scenario which fits very well, just doesn't need one.

[foggy dewhurst 0]

the club needs us more than ever lets get behind mr green and see what happens .

Edited July 23, 2012 by foggy dewhurst

[andy steel 0]

Well, I did say it might be unpopular.

[stewarty 2,060]

Thanks for another thought provoking post Andy!

 

I debated this point on twitter. I argued a that it didn't make sense for us to request these proceedings are dropped as part of the bargaining for with the SFA. If we are innocent then we have nothing to fear and are therefore giving up something that, in terms of sanctions, has no value. We would be better then to use something else if we are to gain out of it. Perhaps then this is an admission of guilt, even on a technicality? However, I am far from convinced of our guilt. There has been no clear evidence as far as I have seen, other than a letter of comfort from the club with regards to an EBT.

 

However, I take the point made in the thread about the likelihood of receiving a fair hearing on the matter. And I think given the way the SFA disciplinary tribunal system found us guilty as sin over Craig Whyte's conduct, ignoring almost all mitigating evidence, who could blame anyone for thinking that?

 

Another argument I read was about this being used to flush out the opinion of the SPL and SFA. If they don't think they can make the case stack up, maybe they will appear to concede this in their negotiations knowing that they are going up something with no value. Once we see their hand we then change the goalposts and refuse to agree to it.

 

There are flaws in this argument, but I think there are flaws in the view that we are seriously negotiating for the investigation to be dropped. Ultimately we are being fed little bits of information and drawing conclusions that we camt verify as yet. Perhaps we are all being naive?

[stewarty 2,060]

Apologies for the typos, i posted that from my phone.

[Zappa 0]

However, I take the point made in the thread about the likelihood of receiving a fair hearing on the matter. And I think given the way the SFA disciplinary tribunal system found us guilty as sin over Craig Whyte's conduct, ignoring almost all mitigating evidence, who could blame anyone for thinking that?

 

Go back to the Aluko "dive" appeal and what the SFA's appellate tribunal stitch-up panel ruled in that instance. You're not guilty, but since it's you, we'll hammer you with a punishment anyway.