LEX Gold, the executive chairman of the Bank of Scotland Premierleague, last night accused SFA vice-president George Peat of undermining the integrity of Inverness Caledonian Thistle’s appeal against the refusal to grant them promotion.
Peat’s ill-founded and injudicious claims that the SFA could charge the SPL with bringing the game into disrepute as a result of their handling of the Inverness case prompted a withering counter-attack from Gold.
As the SFA made it clear Peat’s b
izarre comments constituted a personal opinion and were not officially endorsed by the game’s ruling body, Gold insisted they had potentially jeopardised the Inverness appeal to them against the outcome of the SPL’s controversial secret ballot on 1 June.
Peat, as he did last year in the similar case which affected Falkirk and Motherwell, is likely to sit on the appeal committee that the SFA is currently in the process of constituting to sit later this month.
"I was interested to see the comments attributed to George Peat about the SPL bringing the game into disrepute," said Gold last night. "I would point out Mr Peat was a member of the SFA appeal committee which considered an appeal against the SPL last year when Falkirk sought to ground-share at Airdrie.
"It will be recalled that the SFA appeal committee found in favour of the SPL decision. The SFA have indicated that 23 and 24 June are possible dates on which the appeal by Inverness Caledonian Thistle against the decision taken by the SPL clubs in general meeting on 1 June might be heard.
"It appears Mr Peat has sought to make a judgement in advance of that appeal, thereby seriously prejudicing his own position and potentially that of the SFA as the appeals body. I also understand that the SFA have distanced themselves from Mr Peat’s comments. Mr Peat may have come to his judgment based upon comments in the press attributed to individuals, rather than the SPL acting as a corporate body. This seems less than prudent."
Peat’s suggestion that a disrepute charge could be laid at the SPL’s door appeared to ignore the fact that to do so would be to charge all of the league’s 12 member clubs. Aside from the 1 June ballot having been a democratic process, the prospect of the seven clubs who voted in favour of the Inverness groundshare proposal being cited for disrepute is ludicrous.
"The situation is becoming weirder and weirder and we don’t think it can go on much longer," Peat had said. "The game is developing into a farce and we are becoming a laughing stock. It’s a very serious charge [disrepute] and it has never been done with a body like a league before. We have authority over everybody in Scottish football. There is no meeting on the horizon at the moment, but how long can this go on?".
Neither David Taylor, the SFA chief executive, or his president John McBeth made any comment on Peat’s remarks but their silence was a deafening enough confirmation that the vice-president had spoken out of turn.
Amid all the hysterical bluster which has cascaded into print since last week’s original meeting, the crux of the issue will be played out later this month. First, a 22 June general meeting of the SPL requisitioned by Hearts and Hibs will decide whether to hold a second, open ballot on whether Inverness should be allowed to play in the top flight at Pittodrie next season. A second request, from Dundee United and Dunfermline, was lodged with the SPL yesterday for a meeting to propose Inverness be allowed a waiver from the 10,000 SPL stadia criteria to play at their own Caledonian Stadium next season with temporary seating taking the capacity up to the 6,000 figure which has been proposed for season 2005-06. That request was not lodged within the 14-day notice period required to be considered at the 22 June meeting, but could still be discussed if all 12 clubs agree to place it on the agenda.
Partick Thistle, who will be relegated if Inverness are granted promotion, remain in talks with their lawyers and maintain their stance that the Highland club failed to meet the deadline of 31 March to lodge their groundshare proposal. Gold, however, insisted again last night that there was no ambiguity over the 31 March deadline which has previously applied to a number of clubs in similar circumstances.
"I confirmed to the general meeting on 1 June that the proposal from Inverness to share at Aberdeen was competent and had been duly notified for consideration. Whether or not to approve the proposal was a decision for the member clubs of the SPL.
The SPL has operated the relevant rule precisely as it is written and as it was agreed and approved."
