WE WON’T BEND THE RULES TO SAVE HEARTS
SPFL hit out over relegation row
SPFL bosses won’t bend their rules to save Hearts from relegation despite a legal threat to wreck the season.
Former Tynecastle chairman Leslie Deans cranked up the pressure by
insisting his old club could use a legal interdict to prevent the top flight starting as planned on August 1 unless they are spared from the drop by league reconstruction.
His open letter to Hampden’s sixth floor comes ahead of this morning’s 10am deadline for indicative votes on a 14-10-10-10 revamp.
Any proposal would require the support of 11 of the 12 top-flight clubs as well as 75 per cent of all of Scotland’s 42 senior clubs.
Deans has called for league chief Neil Doncaster to use executive powers to force change through if more than 50 per cent are in favour.
However, his demand has been dismissed as a non-starter with one source saying: “The board does have executive powers which can be used in extreme circumstances.
“Those powers could have come into play back in March had 80 per cent of the clubs not backed the SPFL proposal to bring the season to an end because of the pandemic.
“That was a crisis situation and something completely out of the ordinary. Hearts not liking the result of a democratic vote is not such an event. It’s a non-starter.”
Deans is adamant reconstruction should be railroaded through from the top even if the proposal falls short of the 75 per cent threshold.
In his open letter he wrote: “We’ve now reached D-Day. Will clubs elect for reconstruction to 14-10-10-10 where no club suffers major harm or do they reject the opportunity before them?
“If more than 21 of our 42 clubs give the proposal a positive response, will the board use the executive powers it possesses to impose reconstruction?
“Neil Doncaster said on Sky TV as recently as last Friday that the board could not go against the will of the majority of the clubs. Imposed reconstruction would prove he spoke with honesty and integrity. Partick Thistle’s excellent statement on June 13 calls for clubs to come together and cause no lasting harm.
“The alternative is the litigation which Hearts, and perhaps others, will have to pursue.
“I believe the already strong case is strengthened by the restraint of trade principle and decisions in France and Belgium.
“The SPFL board should consider the damage this litigation could cause.
“Firstly, as someone who’s been in the legal profession for 45 years, I can assure them it could be months or years before any case is finally settled.
“Secondly, Hearts could seek interdict to prevent the league starting.
“If they did, would the Sky TV deal be affected?
“How would clubs entering European competitions be affected? Would UEFA suspend the participation of Scottish clubs until the proceedings were completed?
“If Hearts ask the court to ring fence £8million to cover potential damages and costs, how would a club who voted yes feel when their payment from SPFL was reduced?
“How would they react to a board who had the power to avoid all this yet refused to exercise it?
“And what might James Anderson think of Scottish football putting self interest and vindictive insularity before the greater good, when even the SPFL rules oblige clubs to act ‘in the utmost good faith’ to each other?
“If enough clubs refuse to do the right and honourable thing then the board must do so.”