Am I right in thinking that the arbitration panel does not represent the SFA but is merely arranged by them? If so, then this whole issue is still in the hands of legal people, not the footballing authorities.
Even if they are presented with all evidence, written or otherwise, on what the SPFL Board decided via its rules and voting procedures and find that nothing untoward occurred, can they still decide that in their view a different outcome would be preferable? If this is the case then I'm even more worried at the prospect of us not getting promoted.
Apparently the SFA panel can still impose all of the options Hearts were looking for. And it's also not subject to appeal
Surely it could still go to the court of arbitration for sport?
https://www.tas-cas.org/
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/53291719
See the last paragraph, hope I've done this correctly
Bar the big four of LaLiga, Bundesliga, EPL and Serie A (and possibly Portugal), pretty well every other league in Europe have called their Leagues as they stood with no Null and Voiding going on. So it’s not like we are an outlier here in all this. And the only reason the big leagues cracked on was that they had the money to organise the testing and management that was necessary to do it. So basically they can argue over the semantics of it, but how Hearts and Thistle can argue over the basic principle of calling the leagues I don’t know. I can’t think of any precedent elsewhere they can use against it. And that now includes France as we’ve seen recently.
My understanding of arbitration, which might be wrong, is to find some middle ground to suit both parties.
In this case compensation to Hearts and Partick who remain relegated.
The QC’s do not represent either of the parties but are there to make a decision based on the facts.
They are all on the SFA list so we can hope they will favour the SPFL but not guaranteed.
Worst case is that they agree with Hearts and we stay in the Championship.
And there is no appeal.