FIGHTING FUND
Clubs lend a helping hand to support the ‘SPFL 3’
SPFL clubs from ‘across all four divisions’ have contributed to a fighting fund to protect the promoted status of Dundee United, Raith Rovers and Cove Rangers.
And Sportsmail understands the three clubs are determined to make Hearts and Partick Thistle pay for dragging them through the courts by demanding they cover all legal costs as the price of potential defeat.
The prospect of Hearts and Thistle being hit with yet another hefty bill further raises the stakes heading into the final round of their running battle with the SPFL.
Both are seeking to either overturn their respective relegations from the Premiership and Championship or be awarded a combined £10million in compensation.
Their decision to name the teams crowned champions of the second, third and fourth tiers in their petition forced United, Raith and Cove into hiring a QC to represent their interests at the Court of Session last week.
The ‘SPFL Three’ have since announced plans to launch a crowdfunded page, so fans can contribute to the costs involved, and have asked rival clubs to pitch in.
Raith chairman Bill Clark (right), who describes the case as ‘50-50’, told Sportsmail yesterday that the trio are pressing ahead with a full defence of their promoted status.
‘We’re getting good support, both financially and otherwise, from across all four divisions,’ he said. ‘We’re not getting everybody helping out, obviously. But there are clubs from all four leagues willing to make a financial contribution to our costs because everybody is involved in this. And we should now have the funds to go ahead. ‘We’re confident that, with the combination of the crowdfunding and the support from other clubs, we can go ahead. ‘We’ve already accrued legal costs of over £50,000 and that’s been paid out by the three clubs.’ The SFA’s independent arbitration tribunal is expected to begin hearing evidence from QCs appointed by the rival parties next week, with a final verdict due possibly by next Friday.
Hearts and Thistle remain adamant that their relegations on a points-per-game basis were unlawful as the 2019-20 season was not played to a finish.
Although the Court of Session decided not to rule on the case last week, they have ordered the SPFL to release documents surrounding the controversial vote that brought the bottom three tiers to a premature close — and handed a decision on the top flight back to the league board.
Hearts and Thistle can ask for the attendance of potentially relevant witnesses such as SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster and Dundee managing director John Nelms, whose club did a U-turn over their vote.
But they can’t compel anyone to attend or force anyone to give evidence, meaning all the details of Dundee’s famous yes-no vote on the crucial resolution might not be aired.
If the tribunal finds against the SPFL, the leagues will have to be hastily redrawn — or all clubs will have to shoulder the cost of paying £8m to Hearts and £2m to Thistle.
Clark, explaining that a final verdict will be reached on judgments of company law rather than sporting fairness, said: ‘We have been dragged into this. It was not our intention to be dragged into a legal dispute but, because Hearts and Partick served us with the petition, we felt we had to respond to it.’
The Rovers chairman added: ‘I think it’s 50/50 to be honest. It’s not being determined on football, it’s being determined on company law — whether the SPFL have broken any law and whether the clubs have voted for Hearts and Partick to be relegated in a manner which was prejudiced against them.
‘It’s all in company law, not really anything about the rights and wrongs football-wise, it’s a question of did we, as SPFL shareholders, vote in a prejudiced way.
‘Hearts and Partick’s QC has asked for a lot of documentary evidence about decisions that were made going right back to the first resolution when 81 per cent of clubs agreed the league should finish.
‘The main thing they will get at is the SPFL and the Dundee vote and whether that was legal or not, which could affect our position.’