SPL lawyer questions need for a second vote

Published on Saturday 12 June 2004 01:07

ROD McKENZIE, the legal adviser to the Bank of Scotland Premierleague, has insisted there was no excuse for any of the 12 member clubs failing to understand the details of their controversial secret ballot which denied Inverness Caledonian Thistle promotion last week.

At a media conference called by the SPL at Hampden yesterday to address the criticism they have received in the wake of Inverness’ failure to achieve the two-thirds majority they required to approve their groundshare proposal with Aberdeen, McKenzie said there was no reason for any ambiguity over the competence of the Highland club’s case.

A second, open vote has been requisitioned by Hearts and Hibs and will be held at a general meeting of the SPL on 22 June.

It has been suggested several clubs were unaware that the 31 March deadline for meeting the current 10,000 all-seater stadia criteria did not apply to groundshare proposals but McKenzie is in no doubt the advice provided to all 12 was clear and unequivocal.

"I don’t know why Hibs and Hearts have done it, you would have to ask them what their reasons are," said McKenzie. "But I do not understand that either (Hearts chief executive) Chris Robinson or (Hibs managing director) Rod Petrie were in any doubt at the time the vote was taken as to what the position was on groundshare.

"It is interesting to note that at the meeting on 1 June, no club challenged the competence of the Inverness resolution before it was put to the vote.

"There was no deadline (for groundsharing proposals). It was a request. The SPL asked for groundshare submissions to be put in before the 31 March for practical purposes, because it was plainly better to have the proposals in early. It did not mean there was a bar on people doing it afterwards."

McKenzie also defended the right of both Aberdeen and Partick Thistle to vote on the proposal despite their respective vested interests in the outcome.

"The 12 clubs are all shareholders of the SPL and entitled to vote," he said. "If you have shares in any company, you have a vested interest in any vote. In any case, if you had excluded any member club from the 1 June vote, the practical consequence of it would have been a ‘no’ vote for Inverness."

Thistle, who will be relegated if the second vote goes in favour of Inverness, are already considering a legal challenge to uphold the outcome of the initial ballot. The SFA are due to hear an appeal by Inverness against the original decision on 23 or 24 June, although that could be negated by the second SPL meeting on the issue.