SFA refuse to fine Hearts and Dunfermiline

[ian1964 10,761]

its time for us to move on but never forget the ones that put the boot in as for hearts and the pars I don't think they have a pot to piss in they would need to pay any fine with ginger bottles

 

I would say have moved on tbf,however we all know our punishment was an agenda driven one and it needs to be investigated,this is a decent statement from Mather,he is simply asking questions.

[andy steel 0]

Tricky one because I certainly feel annoyed at the double standards but keen that we show the class these other clubs and SFA so sorely lacked last year.

[ian1964 10,761]

Tricky one because I certainly feel annoyed at the double standards but keen that we show the class these other clubs and SFA so sorely lacked last year.

 

The thing is I agree with not fining them,however we should not have been fined either!,blatant double standards

[ian1964 10,761]

Be interesting if/when Hearts get liquidated?

[Darthter 542]

Be interesting if/when Hearts get liquidated?

 

keep in mind though, that the league structure has changed. When our CVA failed, there were 2 distinct bodies running the Scottish game. We were voted out of one body, and voted into the other in the bottom tier. Now, there is only one body - if they are liquidated & assets bought, they will most likely carry on as normal, maybe relegated down one league...they will most certainly not be booted to the bottom tier!!!!

[aweebluesoandso 290]

Why i am not surprised by this, i'll tell you why. Because they are corrupt cheating bigoted bassas.

[foggy dewhurst 0]

to be frank I don't think the creditors will take any kind of cva from hearts and its interesting to note that some of the creditors are firms owned by mad vlad I don't know how it would go if a cva were to be accepted would he/his firms get any money

[the gunslinger 3,366]

mad vlads old firms are secured creditors. what ever happens they will get all the money.

[barca72 440]

My first reaction when I seen the headline was that the SFA would not try to contravene the precedent set by their actions done to Rangers. Then I remembered "sporting integrity".

What did the SFA hit us with? Taking the information from section 2.7.3 of the draft copy of the five way agreement, the Judicial Panel of the SFA decided that we had breached rule 2 - 10,000 pound fine, breached rule 14 - 50,000 pound fine, breached rule 66 - 100,000 pound fine, and we had to pay the SFA's legal costs incurred in Lord Glennie's Judicial Review of the transfer embargo - 31,063.40 pounds. This gave us a grand total of - 191,063.40 pounds.

 

Now I agree with the sentiment that double standards are at play here. However, what would Rangers gain by doing anything more than Mather has done - ask for an explanation of the rules? We would lose any high moral ground that we now hold by being seen to be the party that wishes to stick the boot to the fallen Hearts, and really any gain to us would be meaningless at this point.

 

Let us go back to the copy of the five way agreement, and assume that apart from the parts about stripping titles and EBT's this copy is close to what Green did sign. This then leaves us to contemplate section 2.7.5, which reads -

RFC and Sevco will not raise any proceedings of any nature in the Scottish Courts against the SFA or otherwise seek the protection of the Scottish Courts in relation to any matter or dispute involving the SFA and in fortification of this obligation will deposit 100,000 pounds with the SFA, which sum will be repaid by the SFA to Sevco (without interest) on the 31st August 2015 provided that Sevco has not been, or is not then, in breach of the Undertaking set out in this clause 2.7.5. In the event that any such proceedings are commenced, the SFA shall be entitled to apply such deposited sum to its own reasonable legal costs and outlays.

 

There are other sentences and paragraphs in there that say Sevco can not break this contract etc. You get the feeling that big fat Rod's palm prints are all over it. However, I felt last year and still feel that a good contract lawyer could use the 'signing a contract under duress' laws to have this thing overturned. Maybe Rangers are waiting for the pieces to fall into place. At this point I feel that my subconscious knows something that it is not telling my conscious mind, because I have a great sense that Rangers are just biding their time before they strike - remember Mather's statements at the NARSA convention. For this reason I don't think Rangers want to rock any boats at present. For instance, supposing Rangers were able to force the SFA into some kind of a corner, knowing the way they make up the rules as they go along, they could reverse themselves and fine Hearts the minimal amount and we lose evidence that they are treating us any different to other teams. I am sure there is more to come, but biting the bullet for us fans at least is very frustrating.

[Crimson Dynamo 128]

"@Martin1Williams: #Rangers oldco ACTUAL debt would amount to around £31m - just £3m more than #Hearts coz #Ticketus are chasing their £26m from #CraigWhyte"

 

Interesting from Martin Williams the above excludes Ticketus who subsequently pursued Whyte and the big tax case