Jump to content

Motherwell Match Forfeit - Appeal Successful


Allan

Recommended Posts

In my experience a disciplinary committee doesn’t necessarily mean punishment will be handed out . It can look at the evidence from an investigation and if handled in the correct manner , lessons can be learned on both sides of the table . These should be used to further refine the existing protocols , which if were honest here and looking at the SPFL’s track record , will have been less than diligent . 

Again in my experience dishing out punishment in a heavy handed manner is counter productive, pointing out errors and agreeing to change actions and attitudes is far more productive . Punishment can lead to acrimony and resentment which if you’re trying to facilitate change is the wrong path . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zorro said:

No, what’s nonsense is apologists pretending this wasn’t a new club. How else would you describe a business that had “died”? Reanimated? Resurrected? Is there precedent for dead clubs being offered an available league place (because a previous club had “died”) over existing clubs?

Look at the Airdrie situation.... went bust.... took over Clydebank..... and had to rename theselves as Airdrie Utd... as a NEW club. Sevco/Newco definately got preferential treatment when compared with Airdrie

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dillinger said:

Agree with your answers to both. 

Are there plenty examples of them getting punished as they should be? Yes. Including when Rangers were deducted points and booted out. So, as I said, folk just ignore this stuff when it suits their argument. And discussing what would happen to the OF is pointless... its us in bother here, not them 

They weren’t booted out. They ceased to exist. They were liquidated. The business stopped trading. It’s a new club. It was in all the newspapers at the time, I’m surprised you don’t pick up on it. While we’re discussing them (again) they weren’t relegated to the bottom league. They were admitted into the league’s. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Dillinger said:

I've never understood the "oh this wouldnt happen to the OF" chat. 

 

The bigger the club, the more influence you have. While the powers at be would never admit it publicly their action show this to be the case. Let's look at Scotland's biggest 4.

1  Ceptic - Player openly disregards the rules,  slap on the wrist. Paltry fine based on their income with most of it suspended.

2 *anger* - Manager blatantly implies bias of a referee. Their media machine said he had no case to answer so he got off with it.

3. Aberdeen - A minibus load of players break the rules. Matches postponed and a slap on the wrist. Matches rescheduled when all players were available again. Hamilton severely disadvantaged with this as they ended up with key players missing.

4. Hearts - SPFL try their damnest to increase the league size for one season to allow them to stay up. A few years back they fielded a ineligible player in the League Cup - a 2pt fine instead of a forfeit, that meant they could still qualify if they won the last match, which they did.

I've never understood why folk think that all clubs are dealt with equally!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you look back at acrimony over how the 2019/20 season ended, it's a bit of a surprise that our clubs even managed to get the new campaign underway without refusing to play each other.

There was a real divide in the SPFL after the league was called early and the curious case of the missing Dundee email didn't help matters.

The SPFL want to avoid a repeat of that nightmare if Covid-19 causes another campaign to end early this time around.

They've written to all 42 member clubs to gather their thoughts in a bid to create a contingency plan that allows them to call the season without any hassle.

And here are the seven questions that the SPFL have asked all 42 clubs.

 

1. Clubs recently rejected a resolution that would have given the SPFL Board broad powers to manage Covid-19 related disruption to the League programme this season. Would you now support such a resolution if it were brought back to clubs?

2. Would you support the SPFL Board being given a specific power to impose a 3-0 defeat on any club that is unwilling or unable to fulfil a League fixture, so as to expedite the completion of the League programme of fixtures.

3. With all the uncertainty about the progress of the virus and the impact of further disruption on the Season, do you think it is too early to take binding decisions now about the various issues that could arise at the end of a curtailed Season? If not now, when do you think the time would be right to make such decisions?

4a. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? 9This would include promotion through playoffs)

4b. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? (This would cancel all playoffs)

5. Would you support a resolution giving the SPFL Board the express power to curtail the season for your Division, in the event that the Board consider that Season 2020/21 cannot be completed by 31 May 2021, and in the event that the relevant number of games (at answer 4.a or 4.b, above) have been completed by 31 May 2021?

6. In the event that an insufficient number of games have been played for a ‘valid’ season to be completed by 31 May 2021 (i.e. neither the relevant numbers of matches at 4.a nor 4.b had been completed), would you support a resolution now, which would give the SPFL Board the express power to ‘void’ the season in your Division?

7. Please make any other points you would like the SPFL Board to take account of.

Chief executive Neil Doncaster explained why he has taken the step of sending out the questionnaire as he attempts to avoid a repeat of last season's bitter rancour between member clubs.

He said: “When the SPFL rules were drawn up many years ago, no- one could have foreseen the impact which Covid-19 would have on our game.

The fact that our rules did not expressly cover the situation where a season must be curtailed with a number of matches remaining to be played, caused a great deal of uncertainty and delay in reaching a resolution last season. No-one wants to see that repeated.

“Many of our clubs support the principle of drawing up a set of protocols long before we get to the situation where league positions understandably influence the individual approach of clubs to these difficult situations. However, the proposal to allow the board a clearly specified and limited degree of authority to take action if we are unable to complete the season did not have sufficient support in the summer.

“Given the ongoing challenges caused to sport worldwide by Covid-19, several clubs have now indicated they have changed their position.

The board wishes to establish if a sufficient number of clubs now wish to revisit this issue, so we can significantly reduce the uncertainty and division that arose towards the end of last season.

“Those circumstances were caused by the need to curtail the season, make promotions and relegations and cancel the play-offs, all in a written resolution. As we know, this effectively meant asking members to vote for the relegation of their club and other clubs in circumstances where the season could not be completed, with all the issues this prompted. If there is sufficient support to secure an amendment to the SPFL Rules, then all clubs will know well in advance of any need to curtail the season what the outcome will be – so far as it concerns league positions, promotion, relegation, play-offs, fees and qualification for UEFA competitions.

“The questionnaire is designed to assist the Board in recommending a resolution to member clubs as a means of giving the SPFL Board the express power to deal with any further Covid-19 related disruption to Season 2020/21.”

 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/7-questions-spfl-clubs-must-22894041

Doncaster looking to get power to impose 3-0 loses to clubs unable to fulfill fixture 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, MrTumnus said:

The bigger the club, the more influence you have. While the powers at be would never admit it publicly their action show this to be the case. Let's look at Scotland's biggest 4.

1  Ceptic - Player openly disregards the rules,  slap on the wrist. Paltry fine based on their income with most of it suspended.

2 *anger* - Manager blatantly implies bias of a referee. Their media machine said he had no case to answer so he got off with it.

3. Aberdeen - A minibus load of players break the rules. Matches postponed and a slap on the wrist. Matches rescheduled when all players were available again. Hamilton severely disadvantaged with this as they ended up with key players missing.

4. Hearts - SPFL try their damnest to increase the league size for one season to allow them to stay up. A few years back they fielded a ineligible player in the League Cup - a 2pt fine instead of a forfeit, that meant they could still qualify if they won the last match, which they did.

I've never understood why folk think that all clubs are dealt with equally!

As in all walks of life. All clubs are equal but some are more equal than others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Killiepies said:

1. Clubs recently rejected a resolution that would have given the SPFL Board broad powers to manage Covid-19 related disruption to the League programme this season. Would you now support such a resolution if it were brought back to clubs?

2. Would you support the SPFL Board being given a specific power to impose a 3-0 defeat on any club that is unwilling or unable to fulfil a League fixture, so as to expedite the completion of the League programme of fixtures.

3. With all the uncertainty about the progress of the virus and the impact of further disruption on the Season, do you think it is too early to take binding decisions now about the various issues that could arise at the end of a curtailed Season? If not now, when do you think the time would be right to make such decisions?

4a. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? 9This would include promotion through playoffs)

4b. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? (This would cancel all playoffs)

5. Would you support a resolution giving the SPFL Board the express power to curtail the season for your Division, in the event that the Board consider that Season 2020/21 cannot be completed by 31 May 2021, and in the event that the relevant number of games (at answer 4.a or 4.b, above) have been completed by 31 May 2021?

6. In the event that an insufficient number of games have been played for a ‘valid’ season to be completed by 31 May 2021 (i.e. neither the relevant numbers of matches at 4.a nor 4.b had been completed), would you support a resolution now, which would give the SPFL Board the express power to ‘void’ the season in your Division?

7. Please make any other points you would like the SPFL Board to take account of.

 

1. No.

2. No.

3. Who am I? King Soloman? 

4a. 2/3rds

4b. Did you no hear me? 2/3rds

5. No. There are 365 days a year, 24 hours in a day. 'My' league can be finished in the summer.

6. No. See answer 5.

7. Neil Doncaster blows goats. I have proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrTumnus said:

The bigger the club, the more influence you have. While the powers at be would never admit it publicly their action show this to be the case. Let's look at Scotland's biggest 4.

1  Ceptic - Player openly disregards the rules,  slap on the wrist. Paltry fine based on their income with most of it suspended.

2 *anger* - Manager blatantly implies bias of a referee. Their media machine said he had no case to answer so he got off with it.

3. Aberdeen - A minibus load of players break the rules. Matches postponed and a slap on the wrist. Matches rescheduled when all players were available again. Hamilton severely disadvantaged with this as they ended up with key players missing.

4. Hearts - SPFL try their damnest to increase the league size for one season to allow them to stay up. A few years back they fielded a ineligible player in the League Cup - a 2pt fine instead of a forfeit, that meant they could still qualify if they won the last match, which they did.

I've never understood why folk think that all clubs are dealt with equally!

Apart from point 4 none of these were the clubs fault, so no bearing on us as a club potentially breaking rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2020 at 1:16 PM, Killiepies said:

When you look back at acrimony over how the 2019/20 season ended, it's a bit of a surprise that our clubs even managed to get the new campaign underway without refusing to play each other.

There was a real divide in the SPFL after the league was called early and the curious case of the missing Dundee email didn't help matters.

The SPFL want to avoid a repeat of that nightmare if Covid-19 causes another campaign to end early this time around.

They've written to all 42 member clubs to gather their thoughts in a bid to create a contingency plan that allows them to call the season without any hassle.

And here are the seven questions that the SPFL have asked all 42 clubs.

 

1. Clubs recently rejected a resolution that would have given the SPFL Board broad powers to manage Covid-19 related disruption to the League programme this season. Would you now support such a resolution if it were brought back to clubs?

2. Would you support the SPFL Board being given a specific power to impose a 3-0 defeat on any club that is unwilling or unable to fulfil a League fixture, so as to expedite the completion of the League programme of fixtures.

3. With all the uncertainty about the progress of the virus and the impact of further disruption on the Season, do you think it is too early to take binding decisions now about the various issues that could arise at the end of a curtailed Season? If not now, when do you think the time would be right to make such decisions?

4a. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? 9This would include promotion through playoffs)

4b. How many league fixtures do you believe need to have been completed for a Season in a Division to be considered as ‘valid’ in the event of curtailment? (This would cancel all playoffs)

5. Would you support a resolution giving the SPFL Board the express power to curtail the season for your Division, in the event that the Board consider that Season 2020/21 cannot be completed by 31 May 2021, and in the event that the relevant number of games (at answer 4.a or 4.b, above) have been completed by 31 May 2021?

6. In the event that an insufficient number of games have been played for a ‘valid’ season to be completed by 31 May 2021 (i.e. neither the relevant numbers of matches at 4.a nor 4.b had been completed), would you support a resolution now, which would give the SPFL Board the express power to ‘void’ the season in your Division?

7. Please make any other points you would like the SPFL Board to take account of.

Chief executive Neil Doncaster explained why he has taken the step of sending out the questionnaire as he attempts to avoid a repeat of last season's bitter rancour between member clubs.

He said: “When the SPFL rules were drawn up many years ago, no- one could have foreseen the impact which Covid-19 would have on our game.

The fact that our rules did not expressly cover the situation where a season must be curtailed with a number of matches remaining to be played, caused a great deal of uncertainty and delay in reaching a resolution last season. No-one wants to see that repeated.

“Many of our clubs support the principle of drawing up a set of protocols long before we get to the situation where league positions understandably influence the individual approach of clubs to these difficult situations. However, the proposal to allow the board a clearly specified and limited degree of authority to take action if we are unable to complete the season did not have sufficient support in the summer.

“Given the ongoing challenges caused to sport worldwide by Covid-19, several clubs have now indicated they have changed their position.

The board wishes to establish if a sufficient number of clubs now wish to revisit this issue, so we can significantly reduce the uncertainty and division that arose towards the end of last season.

“Those circumstances were caused by the need to curtail the season, make promotions and relegations and cancel the play-offs, all in a written resolution. As we know, this effectively meant asking members to vote for the relegation of their club and other clubs in circumstances where the season could not be completed, with all the issues this prompted. If there is sufficient support to secure an amendment to the SPFL Rules, then all clubs will know well in advance of any need to curtail the season what the outcome will be – so far as it concerns league positions, promotion, relegation, play-offs, fees and qualification for UEFA competitions.

“The questionnaire is designed to assist the Board in recommending a resolution to member clubs as a means of giving the SPFL Board the express power to deal with any further Covid-19 related disruption to Season 2020/21.”

 

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/7-questions-spfl-clubs-must-22894041

Doncaster looking to get power to impose 3-0 loses to clubs unable to fulfill fixture 

Do not give that inept clown Doncaster any more powers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/24/2020 at 1:16 PM, Killiepies said:

“Many of our clubs support the principle of drawing up a set of protocols long before we get to the situation where league positions understandably influence the individual approach of clubs to these difficult situations. However, the proposal to allow the board a clearly specified and limited degree of authority to take action if we are unable to complete the season did not have sufficient support in the summer.

“Given the ongoing challenges caused to sport worldwide by Covid-19, several clubs have now indicated they have changed their position.

Many clubs being three, Celtic, Rangers and Aberdeen

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Find it strange that no hearing date was announced when they charged our club , so unlikely say to be happening this week , given it’s now over 3 weeks since the game was postponed will probably be at least well over a month passed before get to hold this hearing ......in meantime been other games called off since and likelihood more in next few weeks...with other clubs facing same delayed course of action ....costly investigations etc 

Using common sense ...and say a joint statement been issued by club and SPFL saying an agreement on extra audit steps etc ...and that Motherwell game could then been easily been played by now , .....and a lot of money on lawyers , costs etc saved 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, chubbs said:

See Sc**thorpe have had their next 3 games postponed after having 8 positive tests and a further 10 close contacts in isolation.

The EFL are investigating.... and say the games will be rearranged as soon as possible.

 

THAT is how it should be handled Doncaster ya prick!

It's called leadership, something Doncaster and co are completely lacking in. 

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.   Restore formatting

  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.

×
×
  • Create New...