Jump to content

Club covid executives - a statement.


antrin

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, alanb said:

JG says in B and W mag interview that a player caught it from his mother, who works as a carer.
I await with interest the line of defence used in the appeal process and want a victory. However the Robust Defence stance taken in the case so far leaves me less than confident 

Good to see at least we are not going at this alone as Kilmarnock are to appeal also

The SPFL have to respond to our defence in detail. It is in our interest to raise every ambiguity that exists with this pandemic and force the SPFL to provide detailed clarity and justification on every incident.

No one deliberately goes out to catch this. Nor are their any guarantees that by following all of the protocols and guidance that you will not get it.

Look Boris team and Trumps team have all contracted the virus. Scrub that don’t use that as an example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


54 minutes ago, Brilliant Disguise said:

The SPFL have to respond to our defence in detail. It is in our interest to raise every ambiguity that exists with this pandemic and force the SPFL to provide detailed clarity and justification on every incident.

No one deliberately goes out to catch this. Nor are their any guarantees that by following all of the protocols and guidance that you will not get it.

Look Boris team and Trumps team have all contracted the virus. Scrub that don’t use that as an example.

Aye, if you blatantly ignore the rules you greatly INCREASE the chances of getting it and passing it onto some other unsuspecting soul. 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, munoz said:

It’s my feelings entirely - I said this earlier in this thread. Regardless of who pulled the head plug on games, other clubs had games cancelled for players breaching Covid rules. Needs to be an equal punishment. 
 

Another thing on this article I found strange - was not only are hibs pinching our players - but also our kit man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Tommy said:

Bristol Rovers have their next 2 games cancelled after Covid-19 outbreak.

Maybe we should ask the English League to run our league :rolleyes:

I noticed that in the papers, so I wonder what the English authorities are going to do, take a leaf out of the SPFL book, or go about it in the proper manner, investigate fully why it occurred, decide if it could have been avoided by the CLUB, then take appropriate action, be it a fine, some other less draconian penalty such a forfeiture, or exoneration?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I'm not quite understanding is that in every league table I look at, both Motherwell and Hamilton are credited with the points they gained through the SPFL decision, which is technically under appeal, which essentially makes these decisions and outcomes as a temporary position rather that a confirmed decision. Yet no asterisks or bracketed explanation at the bottom of each table!? 

I'm not suggesting that we may have to ultimately accept our fates, but the league currently should not be skewed by the decisions until it is completed properly, right through all appeal procedures. So that should reflect 6 points less for Motherwell and 3 less for Hamilton and also games to be played by all teams involved, i.e. two less for Motherwell & Saints and one less for Killie and Hamilton.

Innocent until proven guilty and all appeal procedures are exhausted comes to mind.:huh:

All I want is consistency, so the transgressions by all are treated the same way. As has been said before, how can relegation or a European position be decided by the inconsistent decisions of a Kangaroo court?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, The Original 59er said:

 

All I want is consistency, so the transgressions by all are treated the same way. As has been said before, how can relegation or a European position be decided by the inconsistent decisions of a Kangaroo court?

The SPFL is a members club to which St Mirren signed up.

it can make decisions on behalf of those clubs (but mostly in favour of the Twin Cheeks). 
Clubs have bought into that structure.  It is illegal to challenge it in Law (unless you are sevco, it seems)

relegation by kangaroo court was done with reference to Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer.  Remember?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, The Original 59er said:

What I'm not quite understanding is that in every league table I look at, both Motherwell and Hamilton are credited with the points they gained through the SPFL decision, which is technically under appeal, which essentially makes these decisions and outcomes as a temporary position rather that a confirmed decision. Yet no asterisks or bracketed explanation at the bottom of each table!? 

I'm not suggesting that we may have to ultimately accept our fates, but the league currently should not be skewed by the decisions until it is completed properly, right through all appeal procedures. So that should reflect 6 points less for Motherwell and 3 less for Hamilton and also games to be played by all teams involved, i.e. two less for Motherwell & Saints and one less for Killie and Hamilton.

Innocent until proven guilty and all appeal procedures are exhausted comes to mind.:huh:

All I want is consistency, so the transgressions by all are treated the same way. As has been said before, how can relegation or a European position be decided by the inconsistent decisions of a Kangaroo court?

I don't know if that is necessary, the appeal is to overturn not validate. We have been found guilt of the charges and have admitted the breach, it's more to challenge the severity which in a fair world, should absolutely be successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, antrin said:

The SPFL is a members club to which St Mirren signed up.

it can make decisions on behalf of those clubs (but mostly in favour of the Twin Cheeks). 
Clubs have bought into that structure.  It is illegal to challenge it in Law (unless you are sevco, it seems)

relegation by kangaroo court was done with reference to Hearts, Thistle and Stranraer.  Remember?

Not really the same situation as all clubs had a vote on that.  Also, there was a "stricter time limit" on that decision.

 

To me, the only other option would have been to postpone the end of last season then complete it when allowed but, of course, that would have resulted in teams having different squads and teams with larger budgets being able to strengthen more than others in a "third window" for that one season.  No matter what was decided, some teams would have won and some would have lost and I bet the teams that were relegated would have voted for it had been others in that position.  There was essentially no win-win situation.

 

I doubt our situation would have been duplicated if it had been the clubs represented on the panel (or whatever you call them) that had been up for breaches.  There were also free midweeks when our postponed games could have been played but we weren't allowed to until the SPFL had made their decision, which makes the whole thing even more of a farce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, delpierro said:

Yeep, the only thing i can see changing is a reduction in the fine.

A reduction?  I also doubt that a reduction CAN happen..

The fine is essentially £0.00, surely?  I was under the impression that it's a suspended fine till sometime next summer, isn't it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, antrin said:

A reduction?  I also doubt that a reduction CAN happen..

The fine is essentially £0.00, surely?  I was under the impression that it's a suspended fine till sometime next summer, isn't it?

They could say that if we don't breach the rules again before the end of the season that they will give us £40,000.  Is that a "reduction"? :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t expect SPFL to take the same stance, despite this and what’s happened down south. 
 
I would be pleasantly surprised if they did.... 

I don’t think any clubs have confidence in the SPFL, but what was interesting is that it was the Italian Olympic committee that overturned the original ruling.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...