dronskisaint

The FL have never disputed the club are not in admin, only SLH were, but they tied the two together to appease the other FL members and to prevent appeals from those already penalised in the past. They are now demanding that clubs that come out of admin must have a voluntary arrangement with creditors for repayments of debt. SFC cannot do this as it has no creditors, it is not in liquidation. SLH cannot do this as its assets are being sold off and the company liquidated. Therefore: 1. The FL say no CVA or its minus 25! Accept or get lost. Pinnacle say there cannot be a CVA as the club has no creditors to come to an arrangement with or 2. The FL say no CVA? Oh yes, see your point, let's stick with the -10 then. But this breaks their own rules regarding CVA's and presents complications for the past and future. or 3. FL say no CVA, I see your point. True SFC were never in administration so can't enter in to one! Sh1t! That means if your were never in admin we can't doc you any points at all can we? Oh dear, that makes us look very foolish but never mind. or 4. FL say, you are cheating and we don't like it. You are trying to exploit a legal loophole to get by the spirit of the legislation we put in place to prevent this form of manipulation. If you want to play in our league then you have to play fairly. Stop splitting hairs and sign here. Buyers lawyers say, you can't sign with that clause in it, its illegal. So there you have it. The future of Southampton FC versus the future, as we know it, of the Football League. The FL cannot back down, the purchase (by anyone) of SFC cannot go ahead. All that is left now is to wait while the all powerful FL decide on what course of action they will accept as a compromise whereby they do not lose face and Saints get to continue. However, the FL will win - they have to.

This seems an informed analysis relating to the relevant rules. Could I ask if there is a rule or machinery in place to suspend the imposition of the ten points pending an appeal or would that then incur the additional penalty should the courts (as opposed to the FLs' own internal kangaroo court) find against the club? Were the points deduction to be suspended then it would hopefully give Pinnacle the confidence in their own case to proceed & allow the FL the back door exit of backing down in the face of the illegalty of their own rules.

From one of the staff at 5pm saying they had been told nothing - this is someone who would be told along with the players.

'By the way Lowes over here is a massive DIY store' Figures...over here Lowe is a massive w****er

Skates, my fishing mad pal tells me, are defined as 'bottom feeders' - apt on a number of levels I would have thought. I was born mid '50s & can remember scummer being used by us against 'them' at Hamble Primary School...it was a little later that I can remember the term ;skate' coming in to the vocabulary.

'Just a skate Michael Knighton'? He certainly looked very shifty & downright uncomfortable when paraded in front of the South Today (showing my age) camera. True he was trying a seat in a rotting shed but the body language was not of a happy prospective owner. The Lynam letter appears to be the best information we have...my optimism is running with it until we know better or worse

Surman & Gillet should form the basis of our midfield for the next few years if we can keep them - it was a real pity that Brendan Rodgers came in for Jack Cork...the way that he linked with Surman was pure pleasure to watch & probably his departure cost us our place in CCC. Surman is a Southampton boy through & through & can only get better - for my money (if only I had some) he can provide DMG (I hope he stays too) with passes that will be too good for next years' league opposition. I rate Holmes but he has been far too fragile so far & may not have the physique or stomach for what is ahead. I just wish the speculation woul end so we can start planning again!