Bryan O’Donnell: Legal headaches for Scottish football

Bryan O'Donnell

Arrigo Sacchi once proclaimed: “Football is the most important of the least important things in life”. He has clearly never visited Scotland. Inch upon inch of column space, and hour upon hour of radio and television airtime have been devoted to opinion on the effect of the current lockdown on the nation’s favourite sport.

Scottish football is in a unique position across European football, as shown by UEFA in their latest Club Licensing Benchmark report. Scottish Premiership clubs earn a greater percentage (43 per cent) of their income from ticket sales than any other top league in Europe. That figure is almost three times the European average of 15 per cent and places the SPFL in a uniquely precarious position in light of football being suspended.

Coverage has focussed around the resolution on the end of the season. The ultimately successful resolution to end the season in the Championship, League 1 and League 2, declaring the current standings as final on an average points basis and allowing for distribution of prize money of almost £2 million has been mired in controversy. The vote effectively relegated two clubs, and promoted a further three. Although the vote was not primarily determinant of the Premiership, the SPFL board have been granted the power to follow the same course of action in the top division.

One SPFL Premiership team, Rangers, submitted an alternative proposal for distribution of prize money. Rangers’ proposal, aimed at aiding clubs struggling to meet their financial commitments, called for the SPFL to distribute prize money immediately, but to declare that the leagues be not could be ‘completed’ until all scheduled 38 games were played. This resolution was rejected and described as “not competent” by the SPFL board. This preliminary decision was made due to the fact that the payments to clubs would be by the vehicle of interest-free loans equivalent to the prize money which would ordinarily be distributed. The SPFL ruled that their articles of association do not allow for prize money to be paid out until final league positions have been determined. The SPFL stated; “The clear and unequivocal legal advice received by the SPFL is that the resolution received from Rangers is ineffective in terms of company law. As a result, the Board determined this morning that it cannot be circulated to members.”

In the two weeks since the approved resolution, calls for an independent enquiry have been met by the SPFL board, and on 24 April 2020, it was announced that a major professional services network had undertaken an independent investigation into the vote on the resolution on the end of the season. The investigation determined that the vote was carried out properly, and that there was no evidence of improper behaviour by SPFL staff.

Going forward, there are important decisions to be made by the various stakeholders in the Scottish game. The Scottish and UK governments, as the legislative decision makers, have the power to enact laws which could render the Scottish football season complete. As unprecedented decisions are being made around the world on a daily basis, precedent has begun to form. In the Netherlands and France, events including professional sports and music festivals have been banned until at least 1 September 2020 to prevent a resurgence of coronavirus infections. For this reason, the national Dutch football association, the KNVB, has cancelled their league seasons but announced that the current standings will be used for determining entry to European competition. They now face legal action from a number of clubs who have been adversely affected by this decision, having spent significant sums of money on a championship campaign which has now been effectively ruled null and void. Questions have also been raised about the legal rights of third parties, such as sponsors and TV broadcasters, who have now effectively paid for something which is null and void. France, on the other hand, has crowned Paris Saint Germain as champions after the season was forced to end early. A similar decision by the UK government to ban sporting events could have the same controversial effect and force difficult decisions to be made which will almost certainly be met with legal challenges.

Read the full article on the SLN website