Noticed that Hamilton have been deducted 6 points for breaching SPFL rules re loan players etc.

That is nice ( for us) It does not come as a surprise considering the way they have been run!

Seems a low penalty for what they’ve done:

https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-statement-hamilton-academical-50858

Got off lightly if you ask me.

• Making payments to players who are Registered as Amateur Players for the Club and/or who the Club have attempted to Register as Amateur Players.

• Making payments to players who have appeared as Trialists for the Club.

• Breach of the Club’s duty to behave with the utmost good faith towards the SPFL and other Clubs regarding its paying of Trialists and Amateur Players.

• Abuse of the Registration system by attempting to Register Professional Players as Amateur Players.

• Failing to keep records and documentation required under SPFL Rules.

Darn, now I have to go figure out (again) how to deduct points from our league table database !

How did this not happen to Gardiner???

WOW!!! That's the way to do it...

Latest from the Scotsman

SPFL club rocked as owner and director deemed unfit by Scottish FA and ordered to stand down

Club plunged deeper into crisis after governing body ruling

Hamilton have been told by the Scottish Football Association that owner Seref Zengin and director of football Gerry Strain are not deemed “fit and proper to hold a position within association football”.

The governing body has ordered the crisis-hit Accies to ensure that, with immediate effect, the pair no longer carry out any role, be involved in the management or administration, or exert any power whatsoever over management or administration of the League One club.

“The Scottish FA has written to Hamilton Academical to notify that, following investigation, neither Seref Zengin nor Gerry Strain are fit and proper to hold a position within association football, in accordance with Scottish FA Article 10.3,” read an SFA statement on Tuesday.

This could drag on for a while. Zengin has accepted the charge but Strain has appealled according to a club statement yesterday:

Hamilton Academical FC acknowledges the decision issued by the Scottish FA on 11 November 2025 concerning Mr Seref Zengin and Mr Gerard Strain.

The Club notes that Mr Zengin will not be appealing the decision. An appeal has been lodged on behalf of Mr Strain, and that process will now run its course through the appropriate channels. He remains a director pending the outcome of the appeal.

Hamilton Academical FC remains committed to full cooperation with the Scottish FA throughout this process, as it has done from the outset. The Club continues to operate responsibly and diligently to ensure stability and safeguard the long-term interests of Hamilton Academical FC.

As the matter is now subject to formal appeal proceedings, the Club will make no further comment at this time.

Separately, we are aware of press reports suggesting that there is a Police Scotland fraud investigation related to the Club. We consider it important to note that this investigation does not involve any current director or employee of the club, and that the investigation arose due to Mr Strain reporting certain circumstances to Police Scotland upon them coming to his attention.

As there is an ongoing investigation by Police Scotland we do not consider it appropriate to make any further comment.

Now on the brink of administration it seems:

Daily Record

Hamilton Accies set for administration as club fights for...

The embattled League One club has contacted administrators

They have just allowed, or facilitated, The Funding Globe Limited. to create a floating charge over the Company's assets. Presumably that is a small but quick liquidity fix.

I cannot access Herald Sport but on the Accies Forum they quote:

'Hamilton Academical director of football Gerry Strain has learned the outcome of his appeal against a ruling by the Scottish FA.

The governing body last month judged that both Strain and Accies owner Seref Zengin were not 'fit and proper' people to be involved with the running of the club.

Hamilton then outlined that Strain would lodge an appeal against the status, although it has now been rejected, Herald Sport understands.'

Hamilton's new 26 year old director - https://hamiltonacciesfc.co.uk/hamilton-academical-fc-is-delighted-to-announce-the-appointment-of-jonny-towers-as-a-statutory-director-of-the-club/

It is interesting to note that there was an issue about playing wages on Friday of last week!!

They are limping along, I hope at least till the end of the season.

A 9 point deduction has been imposed today due to them not having a bronze licence:

https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-statement-hamilton-academical-50972

On 12/15/2025 at 11:48 PM, IBM said:

They are limping along, I hope at least till the end of the season.

It is very difficult to see how much longer they can survive. The Funding Globe Limited placed a standard security over their assets before putting in emergency funding and agreeing in effect to running Hamilton FC with Towers as the sole director. In terms of assets one can assume a net liability position unless any loans are written off. Presumably their only chance of acquiring assets is if Lewis Ferguson is sold in January and they gain a significant sell on windfall. Beyond that, and given lots of unknowns, there are still 5 months for someone to provide funding to prevent a further points deduction.

20 hours ago, Robert said:

A 9 point deduction has been imposed today due to them not having a bronze licence:

https://spfl.co.uk/news/spfl-statement-hamilton-academical-50972

I get it that they have messed stuff up, but this just seems like kicking them when they are down or some form of retribution. 6 points earlier and now 9 points today for a combined total of -15 ... do they get another -15 points if they file for admin?

The worst part is that this implementation of the rule was only enacted in 2024 for this season and beyond and was roundly criticised by clubs at both ends of the pyramid. It was felt that it was designed to keep non-league teams out of the SPFL and also prevent some teams from moving up within the SPFL. An article at the time quoted one of the non-league clubs saying they estimated it would cost them £20K to attain bronze from Entry level and other teams may be more as they had a modern stadium and some might not. If Hamilton have no money to pay wages, and someone is attempting to do an Alan Savage somehow and rescue them, then £20K to pay for a bronze license they might never need, or that might tip them further into insolvency seems like something you should be empathetic about, not punish the new folk in charge.

I felt similar when we were going through this, as the -5 this season seems like a sting in the tail that's not required (for anyone) in the season where you are rebuilding with new ownership after an insolvency event. Luckily for us, SK and the team made that a moot point, but I do sympathise for the good folk at Hamilton and their supporters. Like us, they had no control over the day to day (alleged) shenanigans of the former custodians of their club!

1 hour ago, Scotty said:

I felt similar when we were going through this, as the -5 this season seems like a sting in the tail that's not required (for anyone) in the season where you are rebuilding with new ownership after an insolvency event.

I felt that way too, but I know someone who would disagree with that!

I was seeing my wife's folks last week. They are all Stenny supporters. I was talking to her cousin about League One - and, BTW, he'll be pleased if Stenny finish the season in the top 4 - when he became quite animated and angry about Caley Thistle.

"They've got an advantage that no one else has!", he spat.

"What's that?".

"They don't owe anyone any money!".

Well, I suppose he's right. I did point out what they went through to get to that state, but he wasn't having any of that.

So I suspect that he would regard starting on -5 as letting us off lightly.

Let's have another 0-9 on Saturday, please, lads.

3 minutes ago, snorbens_caleyman said:

"They've got an advantage that no one else has!", he spat.

"What's that?".

"They don't owe anyone any money!".

Well, I suppose he's right. I did point out what they went through to get to that state, but he wasn't having any of that.

So I suspect that he would regard starting on -5 as letting us off lightly.

Let's have another 0-9 on Saturday, please, lads.

I (and you no doubt) would counter that we went through the worst of it with a -15 point penalty at the time, not to mention the s***show that went on to get there, and somehow, SK and the team, without any money, or with a shoestring budget at best, managed to keep us up.

The -5 this season serves no real purpose as far as I can see, and I would say that regardless of which team had that penalty applied, it's just an additional punishment on whoever is around to pick up the pieces and try to turn the club (any club) around.

As for Hamilton, i think you have to have some empathy here and maybe my viewpoint is shaped by our own experience. A few people are trying to keep the club afloat after a nightmare period. We can all relate to that. If they have an on-field infraction, fair enough, deal with it (as they did) but what they don't need is pen pushers telling them they don't have enough urinals or that they don't have the correct lux level on their floodlights. Give them the warning, give them to next season to rectify it, and if they make it that far then hopefully someone will be able to incorporate the cost of gaining a bronze license into whatever budget they formulate to keep them afloat. If they fold, then the lightbulbs are somewhat irrelevant! unless the administrators can sell them for £££££

I hope your Stenny supporting friend never has to experience what we and other clubs have had to more recently.

With all due respect I disagree with the above views somwhat. I feel sorry for the Hamilton fanbase but this mess is even more complicated than our situation was.

The rules are very clear re what level clubs are. We are entry level for 3 years following our admin. Hamilton have been penalised for unaudited accounts. The SPFL statement clearly states they have been given umteen chances to try and fix the issues (s). I think the SPFL has clearly run out of patience.

Hamilton are now in the awful position that their owner has walked away following the decision he wasnt a fit and proper person? Their CEO was also found to be unfit. There appears to have been politics at play over the move out of Hamilton to Cumbernauld which has been financially disasterous. It looks like they continued to stick 2 fingers up at the rules such as being found guilty of paying amateur players despite a transfer ban in place. It looks like Nov wages paid at the last gasp thanks to esentually a payday type loan. This gentleman now has taken over the reigns at the club I imagine to protect that secure loan? According to the forums there is no money to pay for administration and even if there was no company will take them on. I dont know what happens next but there must be a suggestion that they are allegedly trading whilst insolvent?

As for us well our story could have had a dfferent ending. Personally think we are only 'debt free' due to having an owner with deep pockets. We served our punishment ie the deductions are clear rules and now we move on. I personally dont think Hamilton will have such a happy ending sadly

I don't know enough about the Hamilton situation to say if they are being hard done by. I guess whichever way you look at it the fans certainly are, but is that purely as a result of the way the club has been run or are the SPFL exacerbating the situation? It does seem as if the SPFL are kicking the club to punish the two individuals who have let the situation arise. The whole thing does look bleak for them.

As for the -5 points issue that @Scotty brought up, I can see the logic in this being applied. Lets say you're close to needing to go into administration and also looking like relegation is likely. You'd press the button towards the end of that season knowing that the -15 penalty effectively means nothing. The extra -5 the following year is a deterrent against that scenario. I understand that this sounds like a flippant and trivial view of the process which is clearly very serious, but there are people around who would try to use of the rules to serve themselves.

2 hours ago, The Hammer said:

I don't know enough about the Hamilton situation to say if they are being hard done by. I guess whichever way you look at it the fans certainly are, but is that purely as a result of the way the club has been run or are the SPFL exacerbating the situation? It does seem as if the SPFL are kicking the club to punish the two individuals who have let the situation arise. The whole thing does look bleak for them.

I guess this is kind of my point. The fans are the ones who get hard done by, and the people who caused the situation simply walk away. The punishment has no effect on them and those who want to try and save the club end up with added challenges because of it.

2 hours ago, The Hammer said:

As for the -5 points issue that @Scotty brought up, I can see the logic in this being applied. Lets say you're close to needing to go into administration and also looking like relegation is likely. You'd press the button towards the end of that season knowing that the -15 penalty effectively means nothing. The extra -5 the following year is a deterrent against that scenario. I understand that this sounds like a flippant and trivial view of the process which is clearly very serious, but there are people around who would try to use of the rules to serve themselves.

I see your point, and yes, someone could definitely game the situation in that manner. Some would argue it has already been done, but that's another discussion. This is why I tend to dislike blanket "one size fits all" decisions or rules. They do have their place, where things are simple and you need uniformity, but when it comes to situations (even simple ones) that may have additional factors or complications, they can be detrimental. I deal with these nuances every day at work, and its (part of) my job to assess if the rule fits and should be applied or we need to make a decision based on individual circumstance.

We were so lucky to have Alan Savage come in. At various points in the process where the debt numbers started climbing exponentially or additional layers of alleged incompetence or malfeasance were discovered he could surely have walked away and said "that's enough" but to his credit, and our relief, he did not. I fear that Hamilton do not and will not have anyone like that, and these penalties will make someone who might be tempted to try and save the club just walk away. I have no special place in my heart for Hamilton, feel quite ambivalent to them on any given day to be honest, but still think the powers that be should be doing everything they can to help clubs get back on track when they have had bad owners and a new set of folks are trying to save the - in this case 151 year old - club!

I tend to agree.

In the non-football world it's perhaps easier to review potential rule breaches on a case by case basis. Football fans, however, are very emotive and would raise merry hell if they thought their club had been treated harsher than another club in the same circumstances. In that instance I can see why sticking hard and fast to rules may be valid.

As I said before I don't know enough about the Hamilton situation but presumably the SPFL deemed the owners "fit and proper" at one point but now no longer do and are punishing (what's left behind at) the club for the now former directors change in "status". I think you're right the SPFL have made them pretty undersirable as a going concern (from both a football and financial perspective).

Hamilton in the news again, with them telling the SPFL they are unlikely to be able to play the players’ salaries for December until the New Tear, and the players may refuse to play Saturday’s game as a result.

Edited December 30, 2025Dec 30 by Robert

Absolute hell for players and supporters. The new owners have a standard security over any assets which appear to be liabilities. Difficult to see them saving the club.

Time for the handful of Hamilton fans that cling on to the hope of some messiah to appear and save their club to face the inevitable, that their club should have there drip feed life support switched off.

When Hamilton top business people and die hard (successful smart football) guys like Jock Brown cut the ropes, it’s time to face reality. Any outside offers of cash is simply in the interest of those individuals with an eye on any assets and not in the interest of the club.

Flick off the switch on the life support and let the fans look forward to some form of new club in 2026 like Third Lanark in the Amateur leagues.

bc

Edited December 31, 2025Dec 31 by big cherly

There will be a piece on Reporting Scotland about Hamilton at 1830 tonight. Presumably this has something to do with it (and this is all that is on Hamilton’s website just now):

https://hamiltonacciesfc.co.uk/

Edited January 16Jan 16 by Robert

sad state of affairs. This is why we appreciated and continue to appreciate AS.

https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c62v6pv88jko

https://hamiltonacciesfc.co.uk/