FL to hold emergency meeting

[aintforever]

SFC should have appealed earlier, there has to be a cut off point so to expect an appeal to achieve anything now is a bit dumb.

 

We are not going to get the 10 points back so it is worrying that this Pinnacle thing is being held up over this, looks to me now like an excuse.

[St Chalet]

That may be so but the following - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8014811.stm - effectively destroys any case we have IMO:

 

Crouch: "Southampton Football Club was set up so that if this ever happened, we would not have these points deducted - it's the way they have interpreted the rules."

 

Mawhinney: "What he said that was of particular interest of me was when he said this structure was set up to avoid the football club having a penalty if it got into financial trouble."

 

The FL interprets its rules as it sees fit - regardless of how "fair" its interpretation may seem to be in the eyes of fans with a huge emotional attachment to their clubs.

 

I think we're best to try to stay on the high ground here - take our medicine and put people in place who can make sure that the points deduction didn't really matter anyway.

 

I'd bet Pinnacle blinks before the FL does. They've invested too much (time and money) to quit now.

 

The company structure was setup long before the FL rules came into effect. Leon Crouch (who post-dates the company structure) currently has no official capacity at the club, and nor did he at the time of formation so wtf is he on about?

[CanadaSaint]

The company structure was setup long before the FL rules came into effect. Leon Crouch (who post-dates the company structure) currently has no official capacity at the club, and nor did he at the time of formation so wtf is he on about?

 

The timing doesn't matter much. Mawhinney was all over the comment because it provided support for the deduction he desperately wanted to levy. Leon appears to be connected in some way to Pinnacle but it doesn't really matter even if he isn't. The damage has been done.

 

I don't know wtf he was on about but, like us, I'm sure he wishes he hadn't said that.

[Amesbury Saint]

why is everyone describing it as an emergency meeting?

 

My take is that the FL knew there was a period of 21 days and at the end there (hopefully) would be a successful bidder who needed FL approval. So 20 odd days ago Mondays meeting was pencilled into the diary.

 

But an emergency meeting sounds far more exciting!

[bridge too far]

The timing doesn't matter much. Mawhinney was all over the comment because it provided support for the deduction he desperately wanted to levy. Leon appears to be connected in some way to Pinnacle but it doesn't really matter even if he isn't. The damage has been done.

 

I don't know wtf he was on about but, like us, I'm sure he wishes he hadn't said that.

 

And I bet Mawhinney wished he hadn't said we had every right to appeal the 10 point deduction too.

[Matthew Le God]

The timing doesn't matter much. Mawhinney was all over the comment because it provided support for the deduction he desperately wanted to levy. Leon appears to be connected in some way to Pinnacle but it doesn't really matter even if he isn't. The damage has been done.

 

I don't know wtf he was on about but, like us, I'm sure he wishes he hadn't said that.

 

The timing matters alot! You can't be trying to find a loophole in something that won't exist for 8 years in the future. Leon was just wrong and no truth in what he said so it makes no difference.

[SaintDonkey]

Any idea where this meeting is taking place? If it's in London I've half a mind to deck chair myself in the red and white on their doorstep tomorrow.

[Matthew Le God]

Either

 

Football League Operations Centre

Edward VII Quay

Navigation Way

Preston PR2 2YF

 

or

 

Football League Commercial Office

The Football League

30 Gloucester Place

London

W1U 8FL

 

I reckon

[CanadaSaint]

The timing matters alot! You can't be trying to find a loophole in something that won't exist for 8 years in the future. Leon was just wrong and no truth in what he said so it makes no difference.

 

It doesn't matter because we're not talking about a judicial proceeding based on legal precedent. We're talking about the Football League, which has given itself the power to make the rules up as they go along.

 

That power (and Leon's utterance) enables them to ding us with a 10-point penalty even though our specific circumstances are not covered in their "rules". It also gives them the ability to ding us with a higher penalty if we don't meet other criteria (with the "other criteria" including a formal undertaking not to appeal the 10-point penalty through either the FL or the courts).

 

I'm not siding with the FL, just trying to be realistic.

 

If we emerge from this with a far more manageable cost structure and with committed ownership, we are miles ahead of where we were - even with a ten-point deduction.

 

I don't think we can beat them, because they've made themselves "judge, jury and executioner".

[sotonist]

Leon's utterance

 

Has no basis in fact and will not hold water under any examination.

[Matthew Le God]

It doesn't matter because we're not talking about a judicial proceeding based on legal precedent. We're talking about the Football League, which has given itself the power to make the rules up as they go along.

 

That power (and Leon's utterance) enables them to ding us with a 10-point penalty even though our specific circumstances are not covered in their "rules". It also gives them the ability to ding us with a higher penalty if we don't meet other criteria (with the "other criteria" including a formal undertaking not to appeal the 10-point penalty through either the FL or the courts).

 

I'm not siding with the FL, just trying to be realistic.

 

If we emerge from this with a far more manageable cost structure and with committed ownership, we are miles ahead of where we were - even with a ten-point deduction.

 

I don't think we can beat them, because they've made themselves "judge, jury and executioner".

 

1) Leon at the time he made those comments was not connected to Saints.

2) Factually those comments are incorrect and thus irrelevant.

 

For those two reasons the FL can't do anything with them

[SaintDonkey]

Either

 

Football League Operations Centre

Edward VII Quay

Navigation Way

Preston PR2 2YF

 

or

 

Football League Commercial Office

The Football League

30 Gloucester Place

London

W1U 8FL

 

I reckon

 

Figured that much out for myself ta

 

Looking on Google Street Map it looks like the Gloucester Place address is quite small (Georgian Terrace, several names next to the door) so maybe either the Preston Office or some rented office space in London. Just wondered if anyone knew for sure where it was.

[Horley CTFC Saint]

Either

 

Football League Operations Centre

Edward VII Quay

Navigation Way

Preston PR2 2YF

 

or

 

Football League Commercial Office

The Football League

30 Gloucester Place

London

W1U 8FL

 

I reckon

 

Or Sixfields Stadium, Northampton maybe?

[Crispypie]

I think I may have missed something, but I thought all the "official" talk about FL problems have been about next seasons registration, when have the deducted points been mentioned?

[up and away]

1) Leon at the time he made those comments was not connected to Saints.

2) Factually those comments are incorrect and thus irrelevant.

 

For those two reasons the FL can't do anything with them

 

I am not sure Saints will actually be represented at this meeting! But if they were to go through the proposed board members and find Crouch's name there, you could excuse them for taking this as kosher and proceed accordingly. Even if someone says it is incorrect they may well feel it applicable for saying something so dumb!

 

 

That was Leeds claim when they went to Arbitration - and they lost.

Leeds went through the FL appeals procedure, they never contested it in open court!

 

http://www.ciderspace.co.uk/ASP/news/news.asp?NewsItemId=9539 This piece actually sounds if they know what they are on about, but time will tell. If this is the case it is just a minor point that should be all sorted by Tuesday.

[It's There]

I am not sure Saints will actually be represented at this meeting! But if they were to go through the proposed board members and find Crouch's name there, you could excuse them for taking this as kosher and proceed accordingly. Even if someone says it is incorrect they may well feel it applicable for saying something so dumb!

 

 

 

Leeds went through the FL appeals procedure, they never contested it in open court!

 

http://www.ciderspace.co.uk/ASP/news/news.asp?NewsItemId=9539 This piece actually sounds if they know what they are on about, but time will tell. If this is the case it is just a minor point that should be all sorted by Tuesday.

 

Ciderspace article seems to sum it up pretty much. I guess we'll know more tomorrow evening

[Hopkins]

Anybody else think this is nothing to do with the points?

 

I have a feeling that Pinnacle have accepted they are not going to appeal, but would like to know, because they are setting up a new company, what division we will be starting in next season.

 

Am I right in thinking that a new company has to start in League 2? Therefore this emergency meeting has been set up to work out whether were allowed to play in League 1 with our 10 point penalty or League 2? Hence the footballing license problem that needs to be solved and will be.

[Saints foreva]

I think I may have missed something, but I thought all the "official" talk about FL problems have been about next seasons registration, when have the deducted points been mentioned?

 

Sky Sports understood that we wanted to appeal and this stopped the FL from signing their agreement on the takeover.

 

They wanted it in a written letter that Southampton F.C will not appeal towards a point deduction.

 

Pinnacle refused and tried to talk the FL out of it.. They FL call an 'emergency' meeting tomorrow to discuss their private chat with Pinnacle.

 

And IMHO we will either get a further point deduction tomorrow, or still be on -10.

 

We never seem to get much luck, so it could well be another 15 points.

 

It sucks being a Saints fan.

[supaimpy_returns]

Its more likely to be as Ciderspace puts it, new company can't appeal penalty against old company, however in this case SFC remains the same just new owners.

 

I still feel that if the FL accept the deal as Pinancle buying the assets of SLH the problem they have is accepting that without a CVA. If they accept then the SLH penalty is difficult to defend,

 

They always want all the debt paid or a CVA accepted by the creditors, but again there won't be one on SFC, only SLH requires one.

 

This is where Football Clubs differ to the real world, where companies get broken up and assets sold with no problems, how many of us know of companies closed on Friday yet open like a Phoenix on Monday?

 

All Pinancle are trying to do is do a Phoenix on SLH and the FL probably havn't had this problem before.

 

I have two questions,

 

1 who did they give the Golden Share to when Saints entered the FL, did they pass it to the SLH or SFC

2 why don't the current board of SFC just issue notice of appeal now?

[SaintRichmond]

Leeds -25 .... Saints - 10

 

Speculation is rife that Saints may incur another 15 deduction ?????

 

Question .... What are/were the differences in circumstances between the two situations ????

 

I thought Leeds were in severe breach of certain Rules ...... I did not think Saints were in the same boat ?????

[aintforever]

Leeds -25 .... Saints - 10

 

Speculation is rife that Saints may incur another 15 deduction ?????

 

Question .... What are/were the differences in circumstances between the two situations ????

 

I thought Leeds were in severe breach of certain Rules ...... I did not think Saints were in the same boat ?????

 

The extra -15 is for not agreeing a CVA, if the Pinnacle deal goes through I think it means that the creditors are satisfied so the -15 shouldn't effect us. I think.

[Mole]

The extra -15 is for not agreeing a CVA, if the Pinnacle deal goes through I think it means that the creditors are satisfied so the -15 shouldn't effect us. I think.

 

In the Leeds case Bates was the largest creditor hence he was able to aquire the club for peanuts. I'm assuming the other creditors were well ****ed off and therefore blocked a CVA. I assume based on this that a certain %age of creditors need to be in agreement of a said deal for a CVA to be issued? In Saints case Barclays and Aviva i'd imagine hold the key and if they were to oppose a CVA it'd mean that the money an investor was prepared to pay would be greatly reduced. On that basis i can't see them kicking up a stink and a further points deduction will therefore not be applicable.

[benjii]

Its more likely to be as Ciderspace puts it, new company can't appeal penalty against old company, however in this case SFC remains the same just new owners.

 

I still feel that if the FL accept the deal as Pinancle buying the assets of SLH the problem they have is accepting that without a CVA. If they accept then the SLH penalty is difficult to defend,

 

They always want all the debt paid or a CVA accepted by the creditors, but again there won't be one on SFC, only SLH requires one.

 

This is where Football Clubs differ to the real world, where companies get broken up and assets sold with no problems, how many of us know of companies closed on Friday yet open like a Phoenix on Monday?

 

All Pinancle are trying to do is do a Phoenix on SLH and the FL probably havn't had this problem before.

 

I have two questions,

 

1 who did they give the Golden Share to when Saints entered the FL, did they pass it to the SLH or SFC

2 why don't the current board of SFC just issue notice of appeal now?

 

This is precisely the point that I've been making on here for a while.

 

When those idiots announced that "the rest of the FL insolvency provisions would apply" they just showed their inability to understand the situation. The provisions can't apply because they don't apply! There's a massive hole in the drafting that doesn't work in this situation. That was obvious from the start and they've just backed themselves into a bugger's-muddle of a position with no logic or reason that supports it.

 

They should have admitted they had messed up the drafting of the rules or had forgotten that some clubs had parent companies and got on with it.

 

Dimwits.

[CB Fry]

SFC should have appealed earlier, there has to be a cut off point so to expect an appeal to achieve anything now is a bit dumb.

 

We are not going to get the 10 points back so it is worrying that this Pinnacle thing is being held up over this, looks to me now like an excuse.

 

 

 

I'm surprised there aren't more people on this forum saying this.

 

It will be an absolute scandal if this takeover is being held up by the ten point thing because the 10 point deduction was part of the deal 21 days ago, it was part of the deal 80 frigging days ago.

 

You buy SFC, you buy a club on -10 next season. Whining about it now is a co*king joke.

 

If Pinnacle genuinely thought the League would ever recind the 10 point deduction then maybe they aren't the switched on saviours we thought they were and are just as dopey as some of our previous "saviours".

 

The ten points is the ten points is the ten points. It isn't going away.

 

Swallow it Pinnacle and stop being such a buch of arses [if, of course that is the issue. If it isn't, just sort it out anyway, you've had three weeks and admitted that due diligence was already complete before the 21 days started]

[Mole]

The ten points is the ten points is the ten points. It isn't going away.

 

Swallow it Pinnacle and stop being such a buch of arses.

 

Are you a lawyer and therefore qualified to state the 10 points penalty cannot be quashed?

[Smirking_Saint]

Are you a lawyer and therefore qualified to state the 10 points penalty cannot be quashed?

 

The way the FL have hold off our desperate little ballbag i am not entirely sure that really matters.

[CB Fry]

Are you a lawyer and therefore qualified to state the 10 points penalty cannot be quashed?

 

 

What are you talking about. Do you think a court in the land is going to waste time with our shi**y little winge about being done by the same rule that has been served on about twelve other clubs before us in the last five years?

 

 

Football League to Saints - if you don't like it, find another league to play in. P*ss off. If I was the FL that's precisely what I'd be saying.

 

Southampton Football Club have no "legal right" to play in the Football League, you know.

[teamsaint]

I'm surprised there aren't more people on this forum saying this.

 

It will be an absolute scandal if this takeover is being held up by the ten point thing because the 10 point deduction was part of the deal 21 days ago, it was part of the deal 80 frigging days ago.

 

You buy SFC, you buy a club on -10 next season. Whining about it now is a co*king joke.

 

If Pinnacle genuinely thought the League would ever recind the 10 point deduction then maybe they aren't the switched on saviours we thought they were and are just as dopey as some of our previous "saviours".

 

The ten points is the ten points is the ten points. It isn't going away.

 

Swallow it Pinnacle and stop being such a buch of arses [if, of course that is the issue. If it isn't, just sort it out anyway, you've had three weeks and admitted that due diligence was already complete before the 21 days started]

 

And on the points issue, even in the unlikely event of the -10 getting

quashed, theres nothing certain about promotion next season.

Anybody with half a brain knows we are looking at the very real possibility of 2 years at least in L1, whatever the points deduction.

[Mole]

What are you talking about. Do you think a court in the land is going to waste time with our shi**y little winge about being done by the same rule that has been served on about twelve other clubs before us in the last five years?

 

 

Football League to Saints - if you don't like it, find another league to play in. P*ss off. If I was the FL that's precisely what I'd be saying.

 

Southampton Football Club have no "legal right" to play in the Football League, you know.

 

So in answer to my question you are not a lawyer and as such you don't really know what you are talking about.

 

Colin Montgommery gets off speeding fines by employing top lawyers so why is it so difficult for you to get your head round Saints overturning a points penalty through a loophole?

[CB Fry]

So in answer to my question you are not a lawyer and as such you don't really know what you are talking about.

 

Colin Montgommery gets off speeding fines by employing top lawyers so why is it so difficult for you to get your head round Saints overturning a points penalty through a loophole?

 

 

I don't need lessons in "knowing what I am talking about" from the likes of you.

 

Last time I looked speeding fines weren't quite the same as a private members club setting and agreeing rules between themselves.

 

The ten points is never ever going to be recinded. Get your head round that.

[Mole]

I don't need lessons in "knowing what I am talking about" from the likes of you.

 

Last time I looked speeding fines weren't quite the same as a private members club setting and agreeing rules between themselves.

 

The ten points is never ever going to be recinded. Get your head round that.

 

So you'd advise Pinnacle to take the word of someone who clearly doesn't have a clue, over the advice of experienced Lawyers?

[CB Fry]

So you'd advise Pinnacle to take the word of someone who clearly doesn't have a clue, over the advice of experienced Lawyers?

 

Looks that way, don't it.

 

Maybe we should join up with Ferrari and Brawn and start up our own competition and make our own little rules up.

[John Boy Saint]

This gets more and more like that Terry Gilliam Film Brazil everyday!!!

[Mole]

Looks that way, don't it.

 

I understand you are frustrated, but you really need to be patient and allow those with knowledge and experience to do what they deem is in SFC's best interests. You may think you know best, but clearly you don't because your views contradict the views of the professionals.

[RedAndWhite91]

Sorry if it's already been said, but does anyone know roughly what time the meeting will be held?

[Smirking_Saint]

Time to let our wrinkly old friends at the FL mull over the decision with tea and prawn sarnies before agreeing that;

 

A/ there is no way they will back down.

B/ They will probably dock us -100 just for trying.

C/ Posting us a bill for the tea and sandwiches.

[CB Fry]

I understand you are frustrated, but you really need to be patient and allow those with knowledge and experience to do what they deem is in SFC's best interests. You may think you know best, but clearly you don't because your views contradict the views of the professionals.

 

 

 

Well, I bet they don't contradict the views of the "professionals" running the football league.

 

People seem to be mixing up weeny little legal details with what the league can do because its their league and their rules.

 

Football league - "well done you, you've exposed a loophole. Have a banana. Good luck on finding a new league to play in, because you aint part of ours anymore".

 

We have no "legal right" to be in the football league so they can kick us out and then the lawyers can w*nk one off about going to court, by which time it will be February 2011 and we'll have no club to speak of.

[Scummer]

Are the Football League the top power in this?

 

Doesn't the international Court of Arbitration for Sport sit above them?

[Greedyfly]

Any idea what time the meeting is today?

[ottery st mary]

Looks that way, don't it.

 

Maybe we should join up with Ferrari and Brawn and start up our own competition and make our own little rules up.

 

When we start our own competition and make our own little rules up....Can we invite junior teams in with our own refs in order we can win at least sum games.

[fromthedell]

anyone know what time the fl meeting is

[The9]

That may be so but the following - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8014811.stm - effectively destroys any case we have IMO:

 

Crouch: "Southampton Football Club was set up so that if this ever happened, we would not have these points deducted - it's the way they have interpreted the rules."

 

Mawhinney: "What he said that was of particular interest of me was when he said this structure was set up to avoid the football club having a penalty if it got into financial trouble."

 

The FL interprets its rules as it sees fit - regardless of how "fair" its interpretation may seem to be in the eyes of fans with a huge emotional attachment to their clubs.

 

I think we're best to try to stay on the high ground here - take our medicine and put people in place who can make sure that the points deduction didn't really matter anyway.

 

I'd bet Pinnacle blinks before the FL does. They've invested too much (time and money) to quit now.

 

I think everyone is aware of the utter cobblers Crouch can spout when his brain disengages. There isn't an ounce of truth in Crouch's statement, and who knows why he felt the need to spout something not only untrue but which also served as easy propaganda for the case against as well. Instead of dealing with the issue in hand (SFC not being in Admin), a phony media war aimed at turning support against Saints would focus on that quote and that's all they'd need.

 

IIRC the reason Leeds were "the bad guy" was a combination of going into admin without an effective points deduction by being already relegated (the rules were subsequently changed and we've been punished by a liberal interpretation of them), and Ken Bates' CVA shenanigans which breached well established CVA rules -allowing him to seize control of the club back.

 

That reflects poorly on Leeds (and Bates), compared to the League issuing a dubious edict contrary to the legal reality (SFC not in Admin) and then trying to stifle an appeal they have already said the club is free to make at the possible expense of anyone taking over the club, which of course reflects poorly on the FL.

[Torres]

I think everyone is aware of the utter cobblers Crouch can spout when his brain disengages.

 

Every Saints fan, yes. Sadly not fans of other clubs who, having heard this, think that we deliberately set out to cheat our way out of the points in deduction.

 

Way to go, Leon.

[Window Cleaner]

I think everyone is aware of the utter cobblers Crouch can spout when his brain disengages. There isn't an ounce of truth in Crouch's statement, and who knows why he felt the need to spout something not only untrue but which also served as easy propaganda for the case against as well.

 

And yet he's still poking his nose in seemingly and no-one in the new prospective set-up sees fit to tell him to get lost.I mean if new guy has a couple of hundred milion at his disposal why is he allowing Crouch to intefere all the time like some WI do-gooder.It just makes no sense, as for him paying part of the deposit;well I just hope there's no truth in that whatsoever.

[once_bitterne]

So in answer to my question you are not a lawyer and as such you don't really know what you are talking about.

 

Colin Montgommery gets off speeding fines by employing top lawyers so why is it so difficult for you to get your head round Saints overturning a points penalty through a loophole?

 

The big difference you seem to missing is that Monty's speeding court cases are held in a court of law. Our appeal will be decided over by........... the Football League. Meaning there is 0% chance of the deduction being overturned.

[trousers]

Why does it matter whether we deliberately set out to exploit this loophole or just stumbled into it? Surely it doesn't affect the legal position (as opposed to the moral position) one iota?

[ladysaint]

Why dont they just deduct the 10 points from our last season total then everyone will be happy and the whole matter closed.

[itchen]

I think that's partly the problem. Leeds effectively used administration to avoid paying debts to third parties while Bates effectively stayed in control of the club.

 

Our situation is that administration clearly didn't provide us any advantage last season (we were relegated). It may give us an advantage in future seasons if we go forward with no debt but I'm not sure whether that is covered by the League's rules. But the people running the club in future are unconnected with the previous plc. Our situation is not the smae as Leeds although we may end up being treated as though it is.

[Torres]

The big difference you seem to missing is that Monty's speeding court cases are held in a court of law. Our appeal will be decided over by........... the Football League. Meaning there is 0% chance of the deduction being overturned.

 

Personally I think that threatened with a strong case and a determination for this to taken to court the FL might just back down, rescind the deducation and tighten the rules.

 

However, we sure as hell wouldn't get any favours from them in the next 6 millennia...

[Matthew Le God]

Why dont they just deduct the 10 points from our last season total then everyone will be happy and the whole matter closed.

 

Because that would be changing the FL rules. What we want is the FL to properly apply the current rules.