Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to Kerrydale Street. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use.

If you decide to register, please be aware that we don't accept email addresses from free web accounts like gmail, Hotmail, live.co.uk etc. Sorry, but almost all of the abuse and spam that we get is from free web accounts. The software on the forum will automatically block any requests using a free email account.

Upon Registration, you will be given access to all our varied Forums, and you will be expected to comply with our fairly stringent Rules and Regulations. Meantime, enjoy your visit

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
The Board - general discussion (including Res 12); notes from the AGM
Topic Started: 15 Jul 2014, 12:03 AM (1,414,494 Views)
Milton
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
This all day. And fair play to the board.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
searcher52
Member Avatar
You can observe a lot by just watching
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Roland
8 Sep 2017, 09:24 AM
aldo
8 Sep 2017, 08:57 AM
Questions on what Celtic/complaining clubs can do:

- who or what determines if a Judicial Review can take place?
- is JR the 'best' method of ensuring a fair and thorough investigation, or are there other options?
- would a JR or other independent investigation determine actions/punishments, and are they enforceable?
- would a JR compel all parties to take part, or could SFA/anyone opt out?

The gist of what I'm asking is: can the SFA get away with carrying on ignoring this, and just brass-neck it out it out?
A JR takes place in court (Court of Session in this case). There are rules about standing (who can bring a JR) and scope (what can be JR'd): Scots law has much broader rules of standing than it used to (and Celtic would be fine either way, as would - on the best understanding of the law - a fans group, I think). Scots law also has funny rules about the scope of JR (so in England you can't JR a private body but you can in Scotland). This is presumably within scope.

More problematic is that there are now quite strict time limits in Scotland for bringing a JR - depending on exactly what was being JR'd, I suspect Celtic may be out of time (unless the JR is of the decision communicated yesterday, and is brought in the next few weeks). Going back in time to 2012 or whenever will be more or less impossible.

A JR would (at best) say that, by the rules governing their decision-making a party had acted unlawfully - either as a matter of not following those rules, or adopting an illegal procedure, or (in extreme cases) because the decision or act in question was irrational. JR doesn't see a judge substitute his own decision though - he gets the original decision-maker to remake the decision, this time lawfully. What that would mean in practice would depend on the reason that the decision was held to be unlawful, whether it was procedural or substantive.

If you are JRing the SFA, they have no option to not take part.

JR will not determine punishments directly.
Been years since I went anywhere near constitutional law but from my vague memory are there not cases where the Court of Session (instead of ruling that the body complained about needs to go through the decision making process again) can actually substitute a decision itself? If I recall it would only be in extreme cases, but nonetheless possible?

Maybe the law in this context has changed since the early 1970s - I've noticed it has moved on in other areas!!

:lol: :lol:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Roland
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
searcher52
8 Sep 2017, 10:28 AM
Roland
8 Sep 2017, 09:24 AM
aldo
8 Sep 2017, 08:57 AM
Questions on what Celtic/complaining clubs can do:

- who or what determines if a Judicial Review can take place?
- is JR the 'best' method of ensuring a fair and thorough investigation, or are there other options?
- would a JR or other independent investigation determine actions/punishments, and are they enforceable?
- would a JR compel all parties to take part, or could SFA/anyone opt out?

The gist of what I'm asking is: can the SFA get away with carrying on ignoring this, and just brass-neck it out it out?
A JR takes place in court (Court of Session in this case). There are rules about standing (who can bring a JR) and scope (what can be JR'd): Scots law has much broader rules of standing than it used to (and Celtic would be fine either way, as would - on the best understanding of the law - a fans group, I think). Scots law also has funny rules about the scope of JR (so in England you can't JR a private body but you can in Scotland). This is presumably within scope.

More problematic is that there are now quite strict time limits in Scotland for bringing a JR - depending on exactly what was being JR'd, I suspect Celtic may be out of time (unless the JR is of the decision communicated yesterday, and is brought in the next few weeks). Going back in time to 2012 or whenever will be more or less impossible.

A JR would (at best) say that, by the rules governing their decision-making a party had acted unlawfully - either as a matter of not following those rules, or adopting an illegal procedure, or (in extreme cases) because the decision or act in question was irrational. JR doesn't see a judge substitute his own decision though - he gets the original decision-maker to remake the decision, this time lawfully. What that would mean in practice would depend on the reason that the decision was held to be unlawful, whether it was procedural or substantive.

If you are JRing the SFA, they have no option to not take part.

JR will not determine punishments directly.
Been years since I went anywhere near constitutional law but from my vague memory are there not cases where the Court of Session (instead of ruling that the body complained about needs to go through the decision making process again) can actually substitute a decision itself? If I recall it would only be in extreme cases, but nonetheless possible?

Maybe the law in this context has changed since the early 1970s - I've noticed it has moved on in other areas!!

:lol: :lol:
Not that I'm aware of - also, reading this back, I've effed up the standing point. The old (narrow) standing rules still apply to private JRs, and so while Celtic would be fine, a fans group probably wouldnt.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
A day to remember The Bunnet:

http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football-celtic-win-farry-fight-1077916.html

The similarities here with the Farry case are stark imo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
MILLIGANS ISLAND
Member Avatar
....give us a glimmer......
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
puroresu_boy
8 Sep 2017, 09:59 AM
qualitystreetkid
8 Sep 2017, 08:17 AM
In my inbox this morning - a new blog by Rangers Tax Case - probably better here than in the actual hun thread

Long but very informative

FTT Transcript for Andrew Dickson
There was enough in there for game, set, match.

The reasons he tried to give for not lodging details with the SFA are laughable.
All you need to take from that document is Dickson is admitting side letters were removed from files before they were given to HMRC.

In short TAX EVASION.

This man sits on the rangers board,and is employed by the SFA.
Edited by MILLIGANS ISLAND, 8 Sep 2017, 10:46 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
tinytim81
Member Avatar
42
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
:thumbsup:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bricor
First-team starter
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
tinytim81
8 Sep 2017, 10:39 AM
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
:thumbsup:
:thumbsup:
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wanyerma
Member Avatar
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Milton
8 Sep 2017, 10:22 AM
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
This all day. And fair play to the board.
Indeed. A calm heid in the face of ranters like me. :thumbsup:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Tiny Tim
Member Avatar
"a Premier League player in all but status"
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Roland
8 Sep 2017, 09:24 AM
aldo
8 Sep 2017, 08:57 AM
Questions on what Celtic/complaining clubs can do:

- who or what determines if a Judicial Review can take place?
- is JR the 'best' method of ensuring a fair and thorough investigation, or are there other options?
- would a JR or other independent investigation determine actions/punishments, and are they enforceable?
- would a JR compel all parties to take part, or could SFA/anyone opt out?

The gist of what I'm asking is: can the SFA get away with carrying on ignoring this, and just brass-neck it out it out?
A JR takes place in court (Court of Session in this case). There are rules about standing (who can bring a JR) and scope (what can be JR'd): Scots law has much broader rules of standing than it used to (and Celtic would be fine either way, as would - on the best understanding of the law - a fans group, I think). Scots law also has funny rules about the scope of JR (so in England you can't JR a private body but you can in Scotland). This is presumably within scope.

More problematic is that there are now quite strict time limits in Scotland for bringing a JR - depending on exactly what was being JR'd, I suspect Celtic may be out of time (unless the JR is of the decision communicated yesterday, and is brought in the next few weeks). Going back in time to 2012 or whenever will be more or less impossible.

A JR would (at best) say that, by the rules governing their decision-making a party had acted unlawfully - either as a matter of not following those rules, or adopting an illegal procedure, or (in extreme cases) because the decision or act in question was irrational. JR doesn't see a judge substitute his own decision though - he gets the original decision-maker to remake the decision, this time lawfully. What that would mean in practice would depend on the reason that the decision was held to be unlawful, whether it was procedural or substantive.

If you are JRing the SFA, they have no option to not take part.

JR will not determine punishments directly.
Maybe being overly cynical, but if events in 2012 are time-barred from a JR, why is Celtic's letter only coming to light now?
When would the time bar have kicked in?
Online Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nisi Dominus Frustra
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wee Ed KTF
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:27 AM
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Broadfoot would have leaked the letter to a Hun hack at a Sevco cheer-leading tabloid that would have presented the article in a Sevco-sympathetic way

Not Ewing Grahame at The Times

John James is, as usual, talking bollocks

Edit to add: Broadfoot has undoubtedly been sent out to fire-fight on behalf of the SFA
Edited by Wee Ed KTF, 8 Sep 2017, 11:33 AM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wee Ed KTF
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
:thumbsup:

:worthy: to Auldyin
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
ronny_is_not_da_man
Member Avatar
Off treasure hunting in Holland
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Glad things are seemingly going forward but I won't be happy until titles are removed and asterisks placed in their place.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nisi Dominus Frustra
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:32 AM
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:27 AM
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Broadfoot would have leaked the letter to a Hun hack at a Sevco cheer-leading tabloid that would have presented the article in a Sevco-sympathetic way

Not Ewing Grahame at The Times

John James is, as usual, talking bollocks

Edit to add: Broadfoot has undoubtedly been sent out to fire-fight on behalf of the SFA
Yeah, Broadfoot was almost certainly out on fire-fighting patrol. :thumbsup: I'm sure Kenny Mac is the go-to guy to hold the hose. :suspect:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wee Ed KTF
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:40 AM
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:32 AM
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:27 AM
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Broadfoot would have leaked the letter to a Hun hack at a Sevco cheer-leading tabloid that would have presented the article in a Sevco-sympathetic way

Not Ewing Grahame at The Times

John James is, as usual, talking bollocks

Edit to add: Broadfoot has undoubtedly been sent out to fire-fight on behalf of the SFA
Yeah, Broadfoot was almost certainly out on fire-fighting patrol. :thumbsup: I'm sure Kenny Mac is the go-to guy to hold the hose. :suspect:
Thought it was Michelle McManus who held Darryl's hose

:rubeyes:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Nisi Dominus Frustra
Member Avatar
Club Captain
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:48 AM
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:40 AM
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:32 AM

Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Yeah, Broadfoot was almost certainly out on fire-fighting patrol. :thumbsup: I'm sure Kenny Mac is the go-to guy to hold the hose. :suspect:
Thought it was Michelle McManus who held Darryl's hose

:rubeyes:
:dadumchhh:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
OBK
Member Avatar
Everyone's Fantasy Football first pick
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:36 AM
murphio
8 Sep 2017, 10:03 AM
Kudos to Auldyin. He has been like a dog with a bone on the UEFA license and here is the SFA forced into admitting it was a complete stitchup. Respect.
:thumbsup:

:worthy: to Auldyin
I second this, thank you Auldyin, you've relentlessly pushed and prodded and now hopefully we are starting to reap the rewards of your hardwork
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
He Cometh
First name on the team-sheet
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Wee Ed KTF
8 Sep 2017, 11:32 AM
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:27 AM
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Broadfoot would have leaked the letter to a Hun hack at a Sevco cheer-leading tabloid that would have presented the article in a Sevco-sympathetic way

Not Ewing Grahame at The Times

John James is, as usual, talking bollocks

Edit to add: Broadfoot has undoubtedly been sent out to fire-fight on behalf of the SFA
Or Broadfoot didn't leak it to one of Level5's puppet papers because that would then be far too obvious that it didn't come from Lawwell and would point all fingers towards the SFA.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Smiley
Member Avatar
Off treasure hunting in Holland
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Nisi Dominus Frustra
8 Sep 2017, 11:27 AM
I see johnjames has ventured that it was Darryl Broadhoof that leaked the letter. :notmissingthis:

Probably just a co-incidence that he was in the Sportsound studio on the Wednesday.
Does this johnjames guy get anything right?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wee Ed KTF
Considering retirement
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Interesting -

http://www.celticquicknews.co.uk/sfa-cover-up-lies-unfit-members-of-uefa-or-fifa/

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Celtic Football Club Discussion Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply