andy123 Posted December 6, 2020 Report Share Posted December 6, 2020 On 12/4/2020 at 4:18 PM, Dazza said: Ignore the hun, only appears when trouble is brewing and always takes anyone's side but ours. The Rangers The Rangers The Rangers ?? -13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccarton Bluebell Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 Has some sort of precedent been set here? Apparently as we could not fulfil a fixture we were guilty and as such forfeited the game 3-0. At the moment it’s because of Covid but what in the future is to stop the SPFL from making teams forfeit a game due to their pitch being unplayable? As the pitch was unplayable that fixture could not be fulfilled. As much as clubs can’t stop the weather, they are supposed to have procedures in place to protect their pitches. Same as clubs can’t stop the virus but are supposed to have procedures in place. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 1 hour ago, Riccarton Bluebell said: Has some sort of precedent been set here? Apparently as we could not fulfil a fixture we were guilty and as such forfeited the game 3-0. At the moment it’s because of Covid but what in the future is to stop the SPFL from making teams forfeit a game due to their pitch being unplayable? As the pitch was unplayable that fixture could not be fulfilled. As much as clubs can’t stop the weather, they are supposed to have procedures in place to protect their pitches. Same as clubs can’t stop the virus but are supposed to have procedures in place. Wank face Doncaster has already been at pains to say no precedent has been set. That is to give him the right to reach a different decision if ‘more important’ clubs transgress. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beaker71 Posted December 7, 2020 Report Share Posted December 7, 2020 42 minutes ago, KenVaagen1984 said: Wank face Doncaster has already been at pains to say no precedent has been set. That is to give him the right to reach a different decision if ‘more important’ clubs transgress. And when he does thats when the club needs to grow a pair and go after this f**king charlatan and the charade that masquerades as the SPFL. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangodog Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 3 hours ago, Riccarton Bluebell said: Has some sort of precedent been set here? Apparently as we could not fulfil a fixture we were guilty and as such forfeited the game 3-0. At the moment it’s because of Covid but what in the future is to stop the SPFL from making teams forfeit a game due to their pitch being unplayable? As the pitch was unplayable that fixture could not be fulfilled. As much as clubs can’t stop the weather, they are supposed to have procedures in place to protect their pitches. Same as clubs can’t stop the virus but are supposed to have procedures in place. If that happens we are in a good position. A few grass pitches are going to be in a mess this season with no winter break and fixtures building up in December and January. Killie will have played twelve games from the start of December until the end of January, other clubs playing on grass will face the same schedule. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skygod Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 9 hours ago, Riccarton Bluebell said: .... but what in the future is to stop the SPFL from making teams forfeit a game due to their pitch being unplayable? As the pitch was unplayable that fixture could not be fulfilled. G5 Each Club shall comply with and play in the relevant fixtures comprised in the fixture schedule determined by the Board and any rescheduled date, time and/or venue determined from time to time by the Board for Official Matches in which the Club is a participant. Non-fulfilment of Fixture Obligations G53 No Club shall, unless the circumstances of the failure are outside the control of the Club concerned and could not have been reasonably foreseen and reasonably anticipated and remedied prior to the match, fail to fulfil its fixture obligations in respect of any League Match or Play-Off Match on and at the appointed or, as the case may be, rescheduled date, time and venue. G54 For the purposes of Rules G5 and G53 a representation by a Club that it will not or intends not to fulfil a fixture obligation or that it will do so only subject to a condition or conditions which are or are found to be unacceptable to the Board shall be deemed to be in breach of Rule G5 notwithstanding that the Board has or may have rescheduled or later reschedules the match concerned. G55 Without prejudice to any other sanctions, which may be imposed for a breach of Rules, a Club failing to fulfil a fixture obligation in terms of Rules G5 and/or G53 shall be liable to pay compensation for any expenses necessarily incurred by the opposing Club as a direct result of the failure. The amount of such compensation will be at the discretion of the Board which will consider every such case on its merits 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post GCM Posted December 8, 2020 Popular Post Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 Celtic's Boli Bolingoli gets three-game ban Aberdeen eight receive three-match suspended ban Rangers pair banned for seven games Dundee United's Mark Connolly suspended two-match ban All these bans were done outwith the club premises. Celtic and Dundeed United's club photos were done with full knowledge of the club, breached the protocols, condemned by the Scottish Government and in Utd's case certain individuals had Covid at the time. Almost immediately after our game against Motherwell was "postponed" the SPFL announced we were to be investigated, still not seen anywhere that the SPFL are investigating Celtic or Dundee United. 12 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skygod Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 45 minutes ago, GCM said: ....still not seen anywhere that the SPFL are investigating Celtic or Dundee United. It's splitting hairs but it's a matter for the SFA as no league fixtures have been affected. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piffer Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 There’s a photo of our players who weren’t involved sitting clustered at Accies on Saturday. Not what we need with a fine hanging over us 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
historyman Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 3 hours ago, skygod said: G5 Each Club shall comply with and play in the relevant fixtures comprised in the fixture schedule determined by the Board and any rescheduled date, time and/or venue determined from time to time by the Board for Official Matches in which the Club is a participant. Non-fulfilment of Fixture Obligations G53 No Club shall, unless the circumstances of the failure are outside the control of the Club concerned and could not have been reasonably foreseen and reasonably anticipated and remedied prior to the match, fail to fulfil its fixture obligations in respect of any League Match or Play-Off Match on and at the appointed or, as the case may be, rescheduled date, time and venue. G54 For the purposes of Rules G5 and G53 a representation by a Club that it will not or intends not to fulfil a fixture obligation or that it will do so only subject to a condition or conditions which are or are found to be unacceptable to the Board shall be deemed to be in breach of Rule G5 notwithstanding that the Board has or may have rescheduled or later reschedules the match concerned. G55 Without prejudice to any other sanctions, which may be imposed for a breach of Rules, a Club failing to fulfil a fixture obligation in terms of Rules G5 and/or G53 shall be liable to pay compensation for any expenses necessarily incurred by the opposing Club as a direct result of the failure. The amount of such compensation will be at the discretion of the Board which will consider every such case on its merits If a global pandemic doesn’t qualify as being ‘outside the control of the club’ then God knows what does. If there is a War of the Worlds style alien invasion and we miss a game we would no doubt be made to forfeit that as well. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouser2 Posted December 8, 2020 Report Share Posted December 8, 2020 41 minutes ago, skygod said: It's splitting hairs but it's a matter for the SFA as no league fixtures have been affected. And that is what clubs if any will do thier utmost now to make sure or more like cover up..so it doesn’t happen ....even if it means playing reserve or youth players 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kfcinlancashire Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 SFA fined 2500 euros for Covid protocol breach in relation to the under 21s. That seems like a more proportionate action in the face of a global pandemic than we have seen from the SPFL. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prahakillie Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 On 12/8/2020 at 10:13 AM, skygod said: It's splitting hairs but it's a matter for the SFA as no league fixtures have been affected. but perhaps they should have been. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prahakillie Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 On 12/8/2020 at 10:45 AM, piffer said: There’s a photo of our players who weren’t involved sitting clustered at Accies on Saturday. Not what we need with a fine hanging over us Was that the photo Dicker posted? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TTF Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 St Mirren have appealed the decision. Hopefully we do the same. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kfc_superteam Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wrangodog Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 Don't see why we shouldn't appeal, we're not taking them to court just appealing against the game being awarded to Motherwell. There were dates available and there will be dates available for this game to be played. The complication is that Motherwell are involved in both cases which could impact on a date being available. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bellman2010 Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scouser2 Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 Looks like both clubs been in contact to go over possible grounds of appeal.......with way SPFL dragged this out so far suppose we will hear results of any appeal sometime in 2022 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GCM Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 According to BBC The appeal will be heard by the Scottish FA's Judicial Panel Appellate Tribunal, with Kilmarnock understood to be contesting the severity of their punishment. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrTumnus Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 7 minutes ago, GCM said: According to BBC The appeal will be heard by the Scottish FA's Judicial Panel Appellate Tribunal. No SPFL (direct) involvement so we're in with a slightly better chance. However the press so far have seemed to have backed, or at least accepted, the decision so a lot less pressure to overturn it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theboyjohnston Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 I'd be challenging the spurious assertion that the game couldn't have been rescheduled. There are dates that have already passed where it could have been accommodated, onus on SPFL to mitigate outcome, and there are precedents where fixture congestion has required multiple games to be played in a short period. The endangerment line is also spurious rhetoric as to play a rescheduled game would be of no lesser or greater risk than the original fixture. Fixture dates are routinely moved for TV and trips to Dubai, so what is the difference? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 Not sure what I think about this. Wouldn't be surprised if we now get hit with an SPFL "bringing the game into disrepute" charge which is what they normally do if their authority is challenged by a diddy team. Fairly sure I remember twat-face saying their was no right of appeal to SPFL, which presumably is why this appeal is to SFA and not SPFL?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
C4mmy31 Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 17 minutes ago, KenVaagen1984 said: Not sure what I think about this. Wouldn't be surprised if we now get hit with an SPFL "bringing the game into disrepute" charge which is what they normally do if their authority is challenged by a diddy team. Fairly sure I remember twat-face saying their was no right of appeal to SPFL, which presumably is why this appeal is to SFA and not SPFL?? And if no luck here we should look to be taking it to CAS.... 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DG5 Posted December 9, 2020 Report Share Posted December 9, 2020 SFA are the governing body. Would imagine that's the procedure to take for a appeal. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.