A question about our -10 points appeal...

[Barry the Badger]

That's funny, because when we come out of admin we'll be debt free and the club will be sitting on a £30m stadium they've paid about £10m for..

 

This is a good point. We were clearly not at an advantage due to overspending last season, but the playoff season we probably were and next season we will potentially be. Not having to make mortgage payments anymore will be a massive advantage in both L1 and the Championship.

[Burger]

Why would they give us a bigger deduction when the discussion between the Football League has been with a group of people who don't own the football club as of yet. I could see you point if the deal had already been concluded, but it isn't.

 

If you were going to buy the football club wouldn't you want the FL to advise on the total deduction before you did the deal?

[Torres]

They're stumping up £30m to pay the original mortgage now, are they?

 

I very much doubt it.

[Torbay Saint]

If you were going to buy the football club wouldn't you want the FL to advise on the total deduction before you did the deal?

 

Exactly. Surely it will be a scenario where by if you pursue the takeover in this way then we could deduct further points? Rather than it actually happening today?

[Flyer]

So if it turns out that Pinnacle have paid all the debts in full the Football League will rescind our points deduction?

 

No but it will stop them taking off a -15 if anything was owed to the taxman.

[Chez]

This is a good point. We were clearly not at an advantage due to overspending last season, but the playoff season we probably were and next season we will potentially be. Not having to make mortgage payments anymore will be a massive advantage in both L1 and the Championship.

 

so the £14m rumoured fee clears all debts AND pays the mortage off as well. Is that conformed anywhere? Blimey that would be fantastic.

[OldNick]

so the £14m rumoured fee clears all debts AND pays the mortage off as well. Is that conformed anywhere? Blimey that would be fantastic.

that is why the club is a bargain investment and so i cant see why there is not more interest. If we got pormoted the investment will get better. Pinacle are hoping for the golden goose and a big crop of eggs in its first batch IMO

We should make the play offs even with a minus 10, if the squad is strengthened in the right areas.

[Evo]

The whole damn system is wrong...

 

To get from CCC to PL, you basically have to bet the family silver. If it does work, you get a big wad of TV cash and a hearty slap on the back. Not many know just how close to the wind you were sailing or how totally ****ed you'd be if it had gone wrong. If it doesn't work you end up Bankrupt and, if you can somehow keep the club going, you get a boot up the ass and slapped with a points penalty. Everybody else calls you a bunch of cheats.

 

How on earth does football become a sustainable business with things the way they are at the moment? It's all a load of ******** I reckon.

[Frank's cousin]

The whole damn system is wrong...

 

To get from CCC to PL, you basically have to bet the family silver. If it does work, you get a big wad of TV cash and a hearty slap on the back. Not many know just how close to the wind you were sailing or how totally ****ed you'd be if it had gone wrong. If it doesn't work you end up Bankrupt and, if you can somehow keep the club going, you get a boot up the ass and slapped with a points penalty. Everybody else calls you a bunch of cheats.

 

How on earth does football become a sustainable business with things the way they are at the moment? It's all a load of ******** I reckon.

 

The best examples are probably Chelski huges debts only sustained by either a billionnaire sugar daddy - not living within their means and buying success which makes our 7 mil punt in the CCC look like peanuts - The rules are there to feck you over some more when you have already been fecked over - in effect you dont get punished for actually succeeding in having a competitive edge by borrowing, only if you fail eg no competitive edge - where the feck is the logic in that.

 

I can fully understand the league determined to see clubs work within their means, but these rules dont seem to do that or provide a suitable punsihment for clubs actually 'cheating' and getting away with it.... year on year... the mind boggles.

[Gordon Mockles]

Just telling the FL we intend to do so may be enough for them to back down. I'm sure the FL know we'd be likely to get a ruling in our favour from the Court of Arbitration. Blackmail works both ways

 

Well said. Fight fire with fire and I'm please Pinnacle have the common sense and professional attitude to NOT be steam rolled by the FL (with their very chequered history) who "make it up as they go". Also, accepting the non-appeal clause could leave us on very dodgey ground and with further deductions, judging by the actions of the FL towards many smaller clubs.

[up and away]

The evidence seems to point to the view that the legal advice received by Pinnacle, MLT, Fry et al, points to us having a very strong - possibly watertight - case against the ten point penalty.

 

If this is so, then I'd be loathe to see us surrender on the -10 points too easily. I really think it could well end up being the difference between promotion and non-promotion, so a good few million quid ride on it.

 

This is absolute ******. For this to be the case, they must have acted against their rules and constitution, but everything they have done is within that framework. Just because the FL have deviated from one rule / guideline in their constitution is not a justifiable case, they have done many such things in the past in the pursuit of equity and fairness. This is just the way the FL is constructed. You would then be arguing the case that what the FL did was not fair and you are now in Douglas Bader territory.

 

If this case was presented to court I doubt it would go ahead with the whole thing getting referred to the Sports arbitration panel (which is exactly where you end up with the FL), something that was specifically designed because of such problems and the difference for sporting and company bodies. You would need a clear case of corruption or one of the human rights rules to get this to court, something that is clearly absent.

 

The reason why the FL are desperate to have this sorted as soon as possible is because of the effect the 10 points can have on league positions. They cannot afford this dragging on such that you are going into a relegation / promotion position where you do not know what the outcome will be due to these 10 points, that would be terrible for all parties.

 

Any lawyer would look at the case and more than likely tell the client they have a very good case. Ask any one of them to take this up on a no win - no fee basis and you will still be waiting for them to get back to you. In the eyes of any lawyer this looks a nailed on case, go back through the case histories for similar such events and the results show completely the opposite. Sheffield Utd are the only club I can think of in recent years that have managed to over turn such an action and that never got to court but arbitration. Sheffield Utd had the benefit of being morally right, we do not even have that luxury.

[LestWeForget]

Actually - it is that simple - the FL's staement is (for once) bang on the money.

 

Here's the clinching argument:-

 

1. Rule 12.3.1 of the Regulations of the Football League Limited states that .. "if any Club shall ... have an administration order made in respect of that Club ... the Club shall be deducted 10 points etc .."

 

2. The word "Club" is defined in Rule 1.1 to mean .. "any Association Football club which is from time to time, a member of The League ..."

 

3. There is nothing in the FL Rules that runs contrary to the FL's finding that Southampton Football Club comprised SFC Limited, SLH plc and the company that owns the stadium.

 

4. One of the "Force Majeure" events that would allow an appeal against 10 points deduction for clubs in administration (Rule 12.3) is "Default by another Club:... where [going into administration] is caused by the default of another football club" - so, if Saints had gone bust solely due to the fact that the holding company for say Derby County owed us £3 million in unpaid fees for a player we had sold them, then according to the argument put forward by Pinnacle and their lawyers, we would not be able to overturn our 10 points deduction on the narrow, technical ground that Derby's holding company did not comprise all or part of Derby County football Club ...

 

That is why narrow, technical arguments designed solely to thwart substantive justice always fail in the end ....

 

That argument clinches NOTHING!

 

THIS is what clinches the fact that the FL decision would NOT be overturned on appeal :

 

12.3.1 With effect from the 10th May 2004, if any Club shall: -

a have a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of

that Club or any part of its undertaking or assets;

b have an administration order made in respect of that Club;

c have a winding-up order made in respect of that Club;

d pass a resolution for the winding-up of that Club;

e enter into any arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in

respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a company

voluntary arrangement under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of

Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985; or

f have any proceeding or step taken or any court order in any

jurisdiction made which has a substantially similar effect to any of

the foregoing;

 

that Club shall be deducted 10 points.

[CB Fry]

This is absolute ******. For this to be the case, they must have acted against their rules and constitution, but everything they have done is within that framework. Just because the FL have deviated from one rule / guideline in their constitution is not a justifiable case, they have done many such things in the past in the pursuit of equity and fairness. This is just the way the FL is constructed. You would then be arguing the case that what the FL did was not fair and you are now in Douglas Bader territory.

 

If this case was presented to court I doubt it would go ahead with the whole thing getting referred to the Sports arbitration panel (which is exactly where you end up with the FL), something that was specifically designed because of such problems and the difference for sporting and company bodies. You would need a clear case of corruption or one of the human rights rules to get this to court, something that is clearly absent.

 

The reason why the FL are desperate to have this sorted as soon as possible is because of the effect the 10 points can have on league positions. They cannot afford this dragging on such that you are going into a relegation / promotion position where you do not know what the outcome will be due to these 10 points, that would be terrible for all parties.

 

Any lawyer would look at the case and more than likely tell the client they have a very good case. Ask any one of them to take this up on a no win - no fee basis and you will still be waiting for them to get back to you. In the eyes of any lawyer this looks a nailed on case, go back through the case histories for similar such events and the results show completely the opposite. Sheffield Utd are the only club I can think of in recent years that have managed to over turn such an action and that never got to court but arbitration. Sheffield Utd had the benefit of being morally right, we do not even have that luxury.

 

 

Amen to that, great post.

 

I can't stop laughing at the delusionals who think the League are "running scared" or "looking for a way to back down" or "know they're in the wrong".

 

They don't want us to appeal not because they think they'll lose - they won't ever, ever, ever lose - but because it would just waste month after month and could end up buggering up things like next seasons play off semis with Saints whinging they should be in it and the other four clubs threatening legal action in return etc etc.

 

And how do you coach a team when you don't know how many points you have, or you become fixated that "don't worry, we'll get those ten back". Us fighting it will do us as a football club no good once the season starts.

 

 

 

The league are not scared of losing, they are just rolling their eyes skyward as Pinnacle posture and flounce about.

 

Think of the chav kids in the paper who rant on about their "human rights" when they get sent home from school for having a nose ring and a mohican. The FL is the school and Pinnacle is chav mum.

 

We shouldn't be appealing it because the punishment is fair and Pinnacle are being ridiculous.

[Beer Engine]

Dear Lest we Forget

 

WTF are you on about? That stuff you've highlighted in bold is irrelevant - I think you've missed the point of what is a fairly standard "insolvency" clause more often tied to a right of termination in a commercial agreement ...

 

Moreover, I am actually agreeing with you about the final outcome - we have no chance of having the points deduction overturned.

[Gingeletiss]

Amen to that, great post.

 

I can't stop laughing at the delusionals who think the League are "running scared" or "looking for a way to back down" or "know they're in the wrong".

 

They don't want us to appeal not because they think they'll lose - they won't ever, ever, ever lose - but because it would just waste month after month and could end up buggering up things like next seasons play off semis with Saints whinging they should be in it and the other four clubs threatening legal action in return etc etc.

 

And how do you coach a team when you don't know how many points you have, or you become fixated that "don't worry, we'll get those ten back". Us fighting it will do us as a football club no good once the season starts.

 

 

 

The league are not scared of losing, they are just rolling their eyes skyward as Pinnacle posture and flounce about.

 

Think of the chav kids in the paper who rant on about their "human rights" when they get sent home from school for having a nose ring and a mohican. The FL is the school and Pinnacle is chav mum.

 

We shouldn't be appealing it because the punishment is fair and Pinnacle are being ridiculous.

 

You forgot the 'IMO'.......because there are many who support Saints, who will disagree with the way you have expressed YOUR views.

 

IMO of course

[OldNick]

Amen to that, great post.

 

I can't stop laughing at the delusionals who think the League are "running scared" or "looking for a way to back down" or "know they're in the wrong".

 

They don't want us to appeal not because they think they'll lose - they won't ever, ever, ever lose - but because it would just waste month after month and could end up buggering up things like next seasons play off semis with Saints whinging they should be in it and the other four clubs threatening legal action in return etc etc.

 

And how do you coach a team when you don't know how many points you have, or you become fixated that "don't worry, we'll get those ten back". Us fighting it will do us as a football club no good once the season starts.

 

 

 

The league are not scared of losing, they are just rolling their eyes skyward as Pinnacle posture and flounce about.

 

Think of the chav kids in the paper who rant on about their "human rights" when they get sent home from school for having a nose ring and a mohican. The FL is the school and Pinnacle is chav mum.

 

We shouldn't be appealing it because the punishment is fair and Pinnacle are being ridiculous.

in principle you may be right, to punish us last season and it to move to this season if it didnt relagate us is downright wrong.It is unjust.They should have given us the penalty last season and be done with it.To hold it over if we were relegated (something that basically cost us as with the best will in the world the squad were down) is what I feel is wrong

[CB Fry]

You forgot the 'IMO'.......because there are many who support Saints, who will disagree with the way you have expressed YOUR views.

 

IMO of course

 

 

Yawn. I never put IMO on anything - this is a fans forum for opinions and everything anyone says on this forum is an opinion. Get used to it.

[Mole]

Yawn. I never put IMO on anything - this is a fans forum for opinions and everything anyone says on this forum is an opinion. Get used to it.

 

Ooooh get her.

[Frank's cousin]

UHm - sometimes though its necessary to use IMHO - because of the numpties who seem to treat opinion as fact if it supports their own opinion if you get what I mean ;-)

[LestWeForget]

Not in this case it doesn't. "Go and find another league to play in then".

 

When do you think the court of arbitration will look at this "case"? Next week? Tomorrow? How about 2011.

 

There's a dopey misconception that the FL are stopping us appealing because they think they will "lose" and that they are "wrong".

 

Wrong.

 

They are stopping us appealing for our own good, because us appealing this perfectly fair ruling would waste everyone's time and make Southampton Football Club look a bunch of divs.

 

And I still think we'd lose at the court of arbitration anyway, because our case is wafer, wafer thin.

 

The football league aren't scared of us and our team of hot shot Perry Masons. They are trying to save us from ourselves.

 

 

"Legally" Sheffield United "won" against the PL and WHU and now look at them rightfully restored to the Premie... oh, right.

 

 

At last! Someone who sees the light!

Any appeal would have to first appeal against the Appeals rule....

Then when THAT fails, take THAT to court... and fail.... could drag on for months or even years ... Oh I say chaps, let's put League one on hold until this is sorted, shall we???

[VectisSaint]

Amen to that, great post.

 

I can't stop laughing at the delusionals who think the League are "running scared" or "looking for a way to back down" or "know they're in the wrong".

 

They don't want us to appeal not because they think they'll lose - they won't ever, ever, ever lose - but because it would just waste month after month and could end up buggering up things like next seasons play off semis with Saints whinging they should be in it and the other four clubs threatening legal action in return etc etc.

 

And how do you coach a team when you don't know how many points you have, or you become fixated that "don't worry, we'll get those ten back". Us fighting it will do us as a football club no good once the season starts.

 

 

 

The league are not scared of losing, they are just rolling their eyes skyward as Pinnacle posture and flounce about.

 

Think of the chav kids in the paper who rant on about their "human rights" when they get sent home from school for having a nose ring and a mohican. The FL is the school and Pinnacle is chav mum.

 

We shouldn't be appealing it because the punishment is fair and Pinnacle are being ridiculous.

You are absolutely right. The FL are not scared, we will lose any appeal, whether we have a case or not. And to all those who keep spouting that the FL are breaking the law or whatever, they are not, they are running a Members Club in accordance with the rules of that Club. No-one is being forced to act illegally in any way, shape or form.

 

BUT, it does seem that what Pinnacle are looking to confirm is at least the right to appeal, and that is an altogether different matter. Mawhinney did state that we had the right to appeal, and it seems now thats what Pinnacle are trying to confirm. I doubt very much that they would actually appeal, because they are not that dumb (I hope) because the result of the appeal is a foregone conclusion. But to sign away the right of appeal sets a dangerous precendent for SFC and all other member clubs in the future and leaves us open to further punishments.

 

All IMHO of course.

[Thedelldays]

lol at those who think the football league are a bunch of nasty wasters...

 

lol at this place and the hype it generates and believes

[ottery st mary]

lol at those who think the football league are a bunch of nasty wasters...

 

lol at this place and the hype it generates and believes

 

IMO or in yer IMHO....would help:smt071

[The9]

Sheffield Utd are the only club I can think of in recent years that have managed to over turn such an action and that never got to court but arbitration. Sheffield Utd had the benefit of being morally right, we do not even have that luxury.

 

Newport AFC (now Newport County AFC) successfully regained the right to play English non-league pyramid football in (ahem) Wales following a victory in the High Court on the grounds of restraint of trade in the mid 90s, after the FAW refused to let them play matches in Gwent affiliated to the FAW and they'd spent two seasons playing home games under the auspices of the Gloucestershire FA at Gloucester City's ground.

 

That went all the way to the High Court, with no arbitration process, but that was because it was a ruling on restrictive practices within EU employment law in the early post-Maastricht days. Vague "membership" parallels but not much more.

[The9]

At last! Someone who sees the light!

Any appeal would have to first appeal against the Appeals rule....

Then when THAT fails, take THAT to court... and fail.... could drag on for months or even years ... Oh I say chaps, let's put League one on hold until this is sorted, shall we???

 

Leeds' appeal had to go through the "duress" issue and yet was dealt with the same season - albeit late enough in that season that the FL undermined their League One table in the run-up to the end of the season in 2007/8. It is in the FL's interest to get it all out of the way before the season starts, which is one of the reasons they're asking for the "non-appeal".

[Beer Engine]

Leeds FA Arbitration was dismissed solely on the ground that the agreement betwen New Leeds and the FL contained a waiver of the right to appeal trhe 15 point deduction.

 

QUOTEWe are satisfied that the Claimants case begins and ends with the Compromise Agreement which clearly embodied the intention of both parties. Taking the Agreement as a whole and in particular Clause 4 Leeds NewCo agreed to the imposition of the 15 points and to release the League from the claims which have now been advanced and to waive any rights to do so. Leeds NewCo specifically covenanted not to bring the claims it has now sought to assert and there is no basis to allow it not to honour that covenant.

 

The Tribunal dismisses the Claim on this ground alone.

[Flyer]

Newport AFC (now Newport County AFC) successfully regained the right to play English non-league pyramid football in (ahem) Wales following a victory in the High Court on the grounds of restraint of trade in the mid 90s, after the FAW refused to let them play matches in Gwent affiliated to the FAW and they'd spent two seasons playing home games under the auspices of the Gloucestershire FA at Gloucester City's ground.

 

That went all the way to the High Court, with no arbitration process, but that was because it was a ruling on restrictive practices within EU employment law in the early post-Maastricht days. Vague "membership" parallels but not much more.

In Saints case, winning is still worse than accepting the -10 or even -25 if it means 2 seasons not playing in the FL.