SFA Membership close

[the gunslinger 3,366]

My take on it was that one of the conditions they conjured up out of thin air for our transfer of SFA membership is that they wanted us to sign an agreement not to appeal SFA decisions via the courts again like we did with the transfer embargo when the RFFF paid for a QC to take the SFA to the Court of Session.

 

If I'm wrong, then fair enough, but I see that as a completely separate condition regarding our right to appeal as to what's being discussed regarding the SPL's dual contract investigation. If the SPL find us guilty of breaking their rules they can try to strip us of titles and if they do that, then our route for appeal will be via the SFA in the form of one of their new appellate tribunals.

 

Back in October 2010 Dundee went into administration whilst playing in the SFL first division. They'd previously been in administration in 2003/04, but that was while they were in the SPL. In November of 2010 the SFL ruled that Dundee would be deducted 25 points, an unprecedented sanction for a Scottish club and Dundee were forced to appeal via the SFA.

 

We'll have to do likewise if the SPL hammer us for the cooked-up dual contracts crap. We'll have to appeal via the SFA except that in our case we won't actually be appealing via the SFA at all, we'll be appealing via one of their new so-called impartial independent appellate tribunals.

 

Now here's the most important thing (IMO).... We haven't heard anything about it yet, but has Green agreed to the SFA's condition of us not challenging them in a real Court again? This is very important because should the SPL hammer us and our SFA appeal fail at an appellate tribunal we'd previously have been within our rights to challenge the decision of the appellate tribunal, but if this right has been signed away then an SFA kangaroo court can uphold any decision reached by the SPL (and they can essentially make their decision before there's even a hearing as they've done with us previously) and we wouldn't be able to challenge it.

 

Not trying to scaremonger btw and please correct me someone if I'm wrong about any of that!

 

I'm not so sure zappa the sfa seemed happy a full week ago.

[aweebluesoandso 290]

The Assembly have asked for a full judicial review, this must be backed by everyone in the first instance. Secondly as a matter of urgency, we the support through the auspices of the Assembly, RSA, RFFF. Take the SPL's biased investigation into the EBT's/dual contracts to the Court of Session to gain an immediate interdict halting their investigations, to allow the court to settle this once and for all time.

[andy steel 0]

Now here's the most important thing (IMO).... We haven't heard anything about it yet, but has Green agreed to the SFA's condition of us not challenging them in a real Court again? This is very important because should the SPL hammer us and our SFA appeal fail at an appellate tribunal we'd previously have been within our rights to challenge the decision of the appellate tribunal, but if this right has been signed away then an SFA kangaroo court can uphold any decision reached by the SPL (and they can essentially make their decision before there's even a hearing as they've done with us previously) and we wouldn't be able to challenge it.

 

This has worried me too, but at the end of the day you cannot sign away your right to legal redress. You can write your name on a bit of SFA headed paper, but it doesn't remove your absolute right to use the law of the land - be it Scotland, the EU or European - should you wish to.

 

Any body which (a) insists or suggests such a move and (b) punishes the signatory(ies) for subsequently reneging on such a move would stand guilty of breaking the law. It would be like agreeing with a blackmailer to pay up, refusing to do so and being fined by the blackmailer.

[bluebear54 0]

The Assembly have asked for a full judicial review, this must be backed by everyone in the first instance. Secondly as a matter of urgency, we the support through the auspices of the Assembly, RSA, RFFF. Take the SPL's biased investigation into the EBT's/dual contracts to the Court of Session to gain an immediate interdict halting their investigations, to allow the court to settle this once and for all time.

 

Totally agree.

Add to that the SFA being in contempt of Court.

It's irrelevant iwhether Green accepted to embargo or not.

Until the SFA follow the determination of the Court, they are in contempt.

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

Have the SFA/SPL actually investigated the dual contracts yet?

 

About a month ago I recall them saying Rangers had to supply them with information which they got as I understand. I also recall them saying Rangers had a case to answer. Jump forward a couple of weeks and the talk was that Rangers had to be stripped of titles. (Mostly from current and ex Celtic players).

 

Then jump forward to this week and all the talk has been Rangers had to accept any decision made as a condition of SFA membership.

 

Last nights statement said "The SPL has reserved its position in relation to the on-going investigation into employee benefits trusts"

 

Is it possible the decision has been made?

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Have the SFA/SPL actually investigated the dual contracts yet?

 

About a month ago I recall them saying Rangers had to supply them with information which they got as I understand. I also recall them saying Rangers had a case to answer. Jump forward a couple of weeks and the talk was that Rangers had to be stripped of titles. (Mostly from current and ex Celtic players).

 

Then jump forward to this week and all the talk has been Rangers had to accept any decision made as a condition of SFA membership.

 

Last nights statement said "The SPL has reserved its position in relation to the on-going investigation into employee benefits trusts"

 

Is it possible the decision has been made?

 

hearings on the 12th Aug IIRC.

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

hearings on the 12th Aug IIRC.

 

Thanks.

 

Does anyone know what format the hearing will take? Will Rangers be allowed to defend themselves for example? Most of these things seem to be kangaroo courts. Where the decision has already been made before the hearing/meeting takes place.

[the gunslinger 3,366]

Thanks.

 

Does anyone know what format the hearing will take? Will Rangers be allowed to defend themselves for example? Most of these things seem to be kangaroo courts. Where the decision has already been made before the hearing/meeting takes place.

 

I think we get to put our case with a qc etc.

[forlanssister 3,114]

Thanks.

 

Does anyone know what format the hearing will take? Will Rangers be allowed to defend themselves for example? Most of these things seem to be kangaroo courts. Where the decision has already been made before the hearing/meeting takes place.

 

"Independent tribunal" apparently which is code for hand picked by Lieswell, given that the evidence is being gathered and presented by Celtic's lawyers it's pretty much a forgone conclusion as is any subsequent appeal to the SFA.

[Blue Moon 1,291]

"Independent tribunal" apparently which is code for hand picked by Lieswell, given that the evidence is being gathered and presented by Celtic's lawyers it's pretty much a forgone conclusion as is any subsequent appeal to the SFA.

 

If our previous experience is anything to go by, I would have to agree. It is shocking that this situation exists and I think the club should be vocal in pointing out our concerns. Rest assured, if the shoe had been on the other foot the lawyers would have been changed. We should make a lot of noise about receiving justice and a fair hearing.