Jump to content

FL to hold emergency meeting


ladysaint

Recommended Posts

I just wish somebody would sign on the bloody dotted line and tell us we have our club back alive and well.

 

Then we can start discussing the players we want in instead of this drivel.

 

Could be we are waiting for FL to decide what point deduction we get for them to give us membership. Could be 0, -10, -15, -25........Question maybe what will Pinnacle accept to sign on the dotted line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could be we are waiting for FL to decide what point deduction we get for them to give us membership. Could be 0, -10, -15, -25........Question maybe what will Pinnacle accept to sign on the dotted line.

 

Could we have +10 as one of the options please? Ta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was there this much fuss when Leicester, Leeds and other clubs exploited the lack of FL rules on this kind of issue, irrespective of whether it is morally or ethically correct?

 

The fuss when Leicester did it (to get back to the Prem, and were then relegated the following season) was addressed by the FL introducing the points deduction rules in the first place.

 

The fuss when Leeds put themselves in admin when already relegated, thus avoiding the 10 points having any affect, was addressed by a tweaking of the rules to the situation we not find ourselves in, relegated when supposedly in Admin (according to the FL anyway) and not deducted 10 points until the following season in order for the punishment to be a proper punishment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this meeting could be good news, we may not need the right to appeal

 

I'd considered that, Nick.

It may be a face-saving thing on the part of the FA.

If you don't appeal - then we will look at it again.

 

Which in all fairness they ought to.

The Holding company was set up when we were in the Prem.years ago and

the biggest debt is on the stadium (itself a separate entity) - and not SFC.

 

In the eyes of the law, SFC is a subsidiary of SLH - as is the stadium company and several others too, I think.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The fuss when Leicester did it (to get back to the Prem, and were then relegated the following season) was addressed by the FL introducing the points deduction rules in the first place.

 

The fuss when Leeds put themselves in admin when already relegated, thus avoiding the 10 points having any affect, was addressed by a tweaking of the rules to the situation we not find ourselves in, relegated when supposedly in Admin (according to the FL anyway) and not deducted 10 points until the following season in order for the punishment to be a proper punishment.

 

God forbid if the FL were to be proactive!

 

Apart from amending the rules as a course of action, I cannot remember the FL, other clubs or fans getting into such a frenzy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their own rules provide for them to be able to vary the rules.

 

I think, we need to remember that these rules are made by the members and the applied by the FL, on behalf of its members.

 

The FL has the right to impose a 10 point deduction on any 'club' it deems to be effectively in administration. It avoids the complication of determining the difference between the PLC and the club in it's rules and applies the deduction based on the meeting it held which deemed that SLH was now effectively the 'club', in all but title.

 

It made this ruling on behalf of its members and represents those members views. In order for the new owners of the SFC to become members, they must agree to uphold the previous decisions of the FL and it's members, in order for it to be accepted. One of those previous decisions was to issue a 10 point deduction on the SFC. By agreeing to this, the new owners, in order to become members, must agree that this decision was correct and in doing so, cannot, in retrospect, appeal a ruling that they have already agreed to, in order to gain member status.

 

Pinnacle cannot appeal the ruling prior to becoming owners and then members of the FL, and in order for them to become a member, they must agree to uphold the rulings of the FL.

 

It's a catch 22. And whereas there may be a legal right to appeal, we will have to effectively waiver this right in gaining membership. Also, the FL actually has a get out clause on our stance, in that the SFC were not effectively in administration, because, in it's ruling, and with it's right to rule 'on behalf' of its members, made the decision that the effect of the PLC gonig into administration, meant that the club were heavily effected by this due to they type of debt currently levied against the PLC, primarily be down to running the club, wages, ground, overdraft etc, and that a 10 point penalty should be applied in accordance with their rules, on the next season. And by saying in the rules that they will not get involved in the legal matters of PLC's and that they will be held to account by the laws of this land, means that, they have the right to make the type of ruling that they have made against us.

 

And so, whilst I dislike this current situation, and, wouold like to see a right of appeal, I don;t think it will do us any good anyway and that we will not win this appeal. We need to accept it, and get on with it!

 

I do, however, agree with whitey grandad, on another thread, where he thinks that the rules should be 'changed' or 'loosened' during this time of economic crisis. I think we are in extraordinary times and that old rules that were set up to install 'fair play' may now be the ones that punish those that aren't seeking to gain an advantage but are falling fowl of this credit crunch. Whether or not, Saints fall into that category or not, is probably too late to discuss, but the rules should be reviewed in order to allow teams to survive through this period, and that the financial problem should maybe be the best punishment and the points to crush them, should be left off for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think, we need to remember that these rules are made by the members and the applied by the FL, on behalf of its members.

 

The FL has the right to impose a 10 point deduction on any 'club' it deems to be effectively in administration. It avoids the complication of determining the difference between the PLC and the club in it's rules and applies the deduction based on the meeting it held which deemed that SLH was now effectively the 'club', in all but title.

 

It made this ruling on behalf of its members and represents those members views. In order for the new owners of the SFC to become members, they must agree to uphold the previous decisions of the FL and it's members, in order for it to be accepted. One of those previous decisions was to issue a 10 point deduction on the SFC. By agreeing to this, the new owners, in order to become members, must agree that this decision was correct and in doing so, cannot, in retrospect, appeal a ruling that they have already agreed to, in order to gain member status.

 

Pinnacle cannot appeal the ruling prior to becoming owners and then members of the FL, and in order for them to become a member, they must agree to uphold the rulings of the FL.

 

It's a catch 22. And whereas there may be a legal right to appeal, we will have to effectively waiver this right in gaining membership. Also, the FL actually has a get out clause on our stance, in that the SFC were not effectively in administration, because, in it's ruling, and with it's right to rule 'on behalf' of its members, made the decision that the effect of the PLC gonig into administration, meant that the club were heavily effected by this due to they type of debt currently levied against the PLC, primarily be down to running the club, wages, ground, overdraft etc, and that a 10 point penalty should be applied in accordance with their rules, on the next season. And by saying in the rules that they will not get involved in the legal matters of PLC's and that they will be held to account by the laws of this land, means that, they have the right to make the type of ruling that they have made against us.

 

And so, whilst I dislike this current situation, and, wouold like to see a right of appeal, I don;t think it will do us any good anyway and that we will not win this appeal. We need to accept it, and get on with it!

 

I do, however, agree with whitey grandad, on another thread, where he thinks that the rules should be 'changed' or 'loosened' during this time of economic crisis. I think we are in extraordinary times and that old rules that were set up to install 'fair play' may now be the ones that punish those that aren't seeking to gain an advantage but are falling fowl of this credit crunch. Whether or not, Saints fall into that category or not, is probably too late to discuss, but the rules should be reviewed in order to allow teams to survive through this period, and that the financial problem should maybe be the best punishment and the points to crush them, should be left off for now.

Well put. This is a Kafkaesque situation where a club that enters administration will have an initial 10 point deduction with a right to appeal that decision. Any such club will almost certainly have new owners and the convention is that they must waive that right of appeal. So in practice, no appeal can ever be held.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We should really challenge the FL board anyway... I mean, as someone pointed out, its a massive conflict of interests...

How is it a "massive conflict of interest". It would be total madness if the FL Board did not comprise members who represented members interests, i.e. the Clubs. The member Clubs have voted for the representatives to sit on the Board (including Saints), together with the executive (professional administrative) members. This is absolutely no different to when Wiseman and then Lowe sat on the FA Premier League Board - they were elected there by their peers (quite why in the case of Lowe is beyond me but there we are). Almost every Members Club in the country is organised in a similar way, committees of members elected by the members. Clearly with something of the nature of the FL, some professional administrators are also appointed, plus some figureheads/buffoons such as Mawhinney.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do, however, agree with whitey grandad, on another thread, where he thinks that the rules should be 'changed' or 'loosened' during this time of economic crisis. I think we are in extraordinary times and that old rules that were set up to install 'fair play' may now be the ones that punish those that aren't seeking to gain an advantage but are falling fowl of this credit crunch. Whether or not, Saints fall into that category or not, is probably too late to discuss, but the rules should be reviewed in order to allow teams to survive through this period, and that the financial problem should maybe be the best punishment and the points to crush them, should be left off for now.

 

This was not the financial pinch coming in from a world financial down turn, this was gross financial mismanagement of a stupendous order. We ****ed away around £40M over a couple of years in excess of other clubs revenue streams.

 

The whole concept of the FL administration rules is that clubs cannot get an unfair advantage by shedding all their debts. Even though we have agreed CVA's for SLH, we have manged to bypass £5M (est, maybe far more) of debt. Why, because what we agreed to pay off was nowhere near the full amount owed. If you wanted to make this fair for every other club you would have to give them something in the order of that £5M each. That is not feasible but applying a 10 point deduction is, though in many cases clubs would readily do this swap if they knew for certain they could get £5M for 10 points.

 

If we come out of this debt free and a 10 point deduction, that is a massive leap forward from our previous position and gives us real hope for the future that we could never of imagined. I am pretty sure this will all be sorted very soon with Saints having a 10 point deduction but maybe having the right of appeal by the FL process, that would be the best we could hope for. Even if we fail to avoid the 10 point deduction, no Saints fan can say that is not fair when you consider what we have exchanged for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meeting due between 12-12:30pm apparently, add 30mins for a delay, so about 1pm.

 

Might hear something between 3-5pm.

 

I would be inclined to think the longer the delay the better. If the FL have to back down i'm sure Mawhinney would want to take his time and make us sweat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And come up with a way to save face.

 

If (and it's a big if) the FL did back down, you can bet it will be dressed up in a way that suggests the situation was of our own making.

 

It would probably something along the lines of "being presented with fresh evidence" and "if Southampton FC had not terminated discussions with independent investigation early then this could have been resolved more swiftly" - i.e. we're backing down but it's your own fault that it even came to this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How many working hours have been lost to companies by Saints fans continually refreshing pages on here? Seems to go on a couple of times a week at the moment!

 

I am actually amazed at how little work i have got away with doing, If I knew I could turn up and press f5 all day and people still think I was working I would have done it ages ago!

 

Hopefully from today onwards we can look forward to reading a few good news stories with our daily f5-a-thon's

Link to comment
Share on other sites

News has something in common with you then nick, no running ;)

 

This is all annoying.

your eyesight playing up again MB? I always run to the car to avoid the traffic.

I think the person who I spoke with was quite perturbed that there was nothing coming out.

In some ways it should be quiet as nothing will happen until the league make their decision.Unless a rival consortuium just pays up and signs immediately no questions asked.That is obviously highly unlikely

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If (and it's a big if) the FL did back down, you can bet it will be dressed up in a way that suggests the situation was of our own making.

 

It would probably something along the lines of "being presented with fresh evidence" and "if Southampton FC had not terminated discussions with independent investigation early then this could have been resolved more swiftly" - i.e. we're backing down but it's your own fault that it even came to this.

 

Dream on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...