solentstars Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 If Birch really wants to challenge Chinny debenture, bring it on. That'll have him tied up in more knots than Frank Bough. Look him up, kids. Has pompey got the money to fight it in court and maybe a Long legal fight if chanria disagrees. Sent from my HTC Desire using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 I'm wise, Stevie, not old. Any case hearing the validity of Chinny charge will examine the entire sordid history of his involvement in the club, something that will make this thread seem like a toddler's bedtime story, and will take flippin' ages. Chinny has the money to pay for that (he'll lose £17m if he doesn't) but do Pimpey? Their only saviour may be that Chinny won't want everything laid bare in a court of law (and he likely won't) so may cut a deal. But, if he plays hardball and says he'll fight it all the way, can Birch really get involved in litigation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevvy Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Just a question to the clever people on here, If and its a big if TB finds that Chainrai debenture is fiction can the HMRC come back and say first CVA was void or enen fraundulent, as this makes AA numbers pure fiction, min Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Just a question to the clever people on here, If and its a big if TB finds that Chainrai debenture is fiction can the HMRC come back and say first CVA was void or enen fraundulent, as this makes AA numbers pure fiction, min That's a whole brand new can of worms that might get opened, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wurzel Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 But no supermarket will get planning. The Council say it has to be used for leisure purposes so any value will reflect that. Tesco's will not purchase it to run it as a football stadium! Shopping has become a leisure activity in its own right in the UK and Mintel's research reveals that 84% of the UK's adult population enjoy shopping/browsing for goods in person http://oxygen.mintel.com/sinatra/oxygen/display/id=68209 Just saying Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 If I was Birch I'd probably conclude that I simply couldn't be arsed trying to sort it all out and liquidate them tomorrow. It would also provide me with great lulz. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angelman Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 But it will be based present value in the open market without planning blessing. IF (maybe a big IF) there is documentation that Tesco would be prepared to pay £20m, then that would back up the validity of £17m. I would imagine that there is something there to confirm said value of the charge. If there is no documentation anywhere, then I don't think Chin has a leg to stand on. I am not sure that he is a fool, so I would imagine that he is fairly confident. There is an exception to every rule, but a fool and his money are soon parted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Good to see our Rickie and Adam in the top 3 shortlist for Championship Player of the Year. However, look to League 2's shortlist, and the fallacy of 'quality over quantity' becomes perfectly clear to the blue phew... npower League 2 Player of the Year (voted for by Football League club managers) Marlon Pack - Cheltenham Town Tyrone Barnett - Crawley Town (now on loan at Peterborough United) Matt Ritchie - Swindon Town Alas, deemed not good enough by Cotterill and Lampitt, they seem to be doing quite well. And they may have done well for Poopey too this season. Reap what ye sow, fish fiddlers. Have got Swindon connections so have seen quite a bit of Ritchie, easily good enough to be a regular in a mid to lower Championship first team squad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Faz Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Of course, if TB gets arsey, Chinny could claim a default event has occurred and take possession of FP. That would jigger them. TB does not hold all the cads I this one. Sit tight and enjoy the ride. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Sounds to me like there are three questions? 1) Was it worth £17 million when the debenture was initially applied? 2) Is it worth £17 million now? 3) Is there any problem with the debenture that might make it invalid? I think we can be fairly safe to say that the answer to 2 is no. For 1 the answer may well be no but its possible that at the time tesco might have been looking to add to their landbank but they have changes strategy since then. For 3 only someone with access to all the documents will be able to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 (edited) This Tesco figure was only a figment of Barbie-Roesie's imagination anyway so largely irrelevant to the discussion. I would imagine that as the owner of the ground BC would have been charging a commercial rent on it...it's not like the phew were buying from him as a mortgagee. I also have little doubt that they will have defaulted on those payments giving him a right to reposess assuming it's a standard commercial contract. As the landlord of a reposessed property that they need he, surely, has them by the brazils as to whether they can even carry on...without finding another venue..Moneyfields? This won't, of course, comply with FL regs re H & S, separation of fans and a host of others I'm sure. It doesn't do to f*ck with your landlord...let alone any other controls or charges he may have over their existence. 2000 pages? At least I'd say Edited 22 February, 2012 by dronskisaint typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toomer Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Sounds to me like there are three questions? 1) Was it worth £17 million when the debenture was initially applied? 2) Is it worth £17 million now? 3) Is there any problem with the debenture that might make it invalid? I think we can be fairly safe to say that the answer to 2 is no. For 1 the answer may well be no but its possible that at the time tesco might have been looking to add to their landbank but they have changes strategy since then. For 3 only someone with access to all the documents will be able to say. I would guess the answers to 1 & 2 no and 3 yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy_D Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The £17M is a bit of a red herring anyway. Even without that, current debt isn't the biggest problem. The biggest problem is that they're losing over a million a month with no assets except the squad, which is itself now relegation threatened with no prospect of being strengthened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17124978 A leading insolvency expert believes Balram Chainrai may never get back the £17m that he is owed by Portsmouth FC. The Hong-Kong businessman's hold over the club has proved to be a major obstacle for potential new owners. That security could be devalued by the courts if administrator Trevor Birch asks for a ruling on it's true worth. "The administrator can force a sale against Mr Chainrai's wishes if he can prove to the court what the assets are worth," Carl Foulds told BBC South.[url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17124978][/url] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 5 hours to catch up FFS The annoying thing is that there are so many valid posts in the past 4 days that deem a reply or comment but by the time you get to read them they were 10 pages (and two days) ago. Anyways. Well done to the Northam on Saturday - absolutely classic Shalalalala la la la made the hair stand up at times. Thought Appleton on Solent on the way home was a disgrace. No humility whatsoever just give us more players. So we now have two potential legal issues rearing their heads. What great news that is. Nobody clean and with a commercial brain would have brought poopey these past years because of the tangled mess. Their only chance is clean and secure title on everything. With possible legal challenges in the air, nobody will be moving forwards with any bids, simply could not risk buying something to find the court over turning you or changing the debt/charges etc. The longer that stays open the bigger the damage to the limited cash that Birch has to spend. Also IF AA is successful & Birch has spent money then that could also open a can of worms. Oh and there is another REALLY positive upside to this now. Had a Business Meeting yesterday in UK, one of the guys I met with was a poopey fan. You know what? Having one of us "Offer our Sympathy" "Shame your Directors never did their own Due Dilligence (as they are empowered to do by Law) with any of your recent owners" Wow that hurts them FAR more than anything else we could do to abuse them. A lovely ROFL moment that was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 But no supermarket will get planning. The Council say it has to be used for leisure purposes so any value will reflect that. Tesco's will not purchase it to run it as a football stadium! Not necessarily true. That's how it is currently designated in the Portsmouth Council Local Development Plan but that could be varied if it became obvious that there was nobody prepared to pay to play football at Fratton Park and that it was likely to become a derelict piece of land instead. Local people would call for other leisure facilities like a swimming pool instead because they always do, but that needs to pay its way also so wouldn't happen. That leaves new housing or retail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Ooh, post 55,555... well done TopGun. (Sorry.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TopGun Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Yay! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Not necessarily true. That's how it is currently designated in the Portsmouth Council Local Development Plan but that could be varied if it became obvious that there was nobody prepared to pay to play football at Fratton Park and that it was likely to become a derelict piece of land instead. Local people would call for other leisure facilities like a swimming pool instead because they always do, but that needs to pay its way also so wouldn't happen. That leaves new housing or retail. Yes, as said before, all a developer need do is make a token gesture of giving a scrap of land elsewhere in the city for 'leisure' and all will go quiet. Companies like Tesco's fight these sorts of planning restrictons every day--and they usually win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The BBC article says: That security could be devalued by the courts if administrator Trevor Birch asks for a ruling on it's true worth. any of our legal eagles have any idea how long that would take in terms of both preparing for going to court and getting a suitable date? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
standy Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Dear Sir, I note that football is trying to 'clean up its act' and that efforts are being made to keep the game fair and competative but ensuring that football clubs spend only what they can afford. With this in mind I find it incredulous that Portsmouth FC are docked only 10 points for entering their third administration and their second in as many years. They have not paid a penny back of the debt that they racked up last time, living beyond their means effectively buying them selves the FA cup in the process. Local charities and schools are still unpaid, and yet Portsmouth FC carry on with a spend, spend policy, buying players and offering them so high wages that other clubs in the Championship are unable to get a look in. Do you condone that the tax man (ie you and I) should be subsedising them? Do you not agree that this is tantamount to cheating? And yet you only penalise them with a 10 point deduction. What sort of message does this send out. Does FAIR PLAY consist of just sewing the relvant badge on your football shirt or do you actually want the game to be played fairly? I await your reply with interest The League replied - Thank you for your email. As you may have noted, Portsmouth Football Club has been deducted ten points in accordance with Football League rules and regulations. For the latest official statement from The Football League please visit our website here http://www.football-league.co.uk/footballleaguenews/20120217/pompey-given-10-point-deduction_2293334_2614922. The club is now in administration following an application by the directors to the High Court. The High Court has determined the appointment of Trevor Birch at PKF as administrator, having being nominated by other creditors including HMRC. The League will now work with the administrators as they seek to find a purchaser for the club. Any football club that is in administration will be subject to a transfer registrations embargo. The principle being that where clubs are not able to afford their current playing squad they are not permitted to sign anyone else. In view of any embargo The Football League cannot allow a club to sign any new players, unless they are unable to field a team, i.e. name fourteen fit players for any match (11 starters plus 3 ‘usable outfield substitutes’ – which is usual Football League policy). However, we only take account of players with any first team experience and young professionals who haven’t played at first team level are therefore discounted. At present The League cannot currently comment any further in relation to Portsmouth and any further statement will appear on our website in due course. Thank you for contacting The Football League. Regards, Andrew Pomfret Customer Services Officer The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk http://www.football-league.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Just a question to the clever people on here, If and its a big if TB finds that Chainrai debenture is fiction the HMRC come back and say first CVA was void or enen fraundulent, as this makes AA numbers pure fiction, min I'm bumping this because this very thought occurred to me last night? Does anyone know the answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Dear Sir, I note that football is trying to 'clean up its act' and that efforts are being made to keep the game fair and competative but ensuring that football clubs spend only what they can afford. With this in mind I find it incredulous that Portsmouth FC are docked only 10 points for entering their third administration and their second in as many years. They have not paid a penny back of the debt that they racked up last time, living beyond their means effectively buying them selves the FA cup in the process. Local charities and schools are still unpaid, and yet Portsmouth FC carry on with a spend, spend policy, buying players and offering them so high wages that other clubs in the Championship are unable to get a look in. Do you condone that the tax man (ie you and I) should be subsedising them? Do you not agree that this is tantamount to cheating? And yet you only penalise them with a 10 point deduction. What sort of message does this send out. Does FAIR PLAY consist of just sewing the relvant badge on your football shirt or do you actually want the game to be played fairly? I await your reply with interest The League replied - Thank you for your email. As you may have noted, Portsmouth Football Club has been deducted ten points in accordance with Football League rules and regulations. For the latest official statement from The Football League please visit our website here http://www.football-league.co.uk/footballleaguenews/20120217/pompey-given-10-point-deduction_2293334_2614922. The club is now in administration following an application by the directors to the High Court. The High Court has determined the appointment of Trevor Birch at PKF as administrator, having being nominated by other creditors including HMRC. The League will now work with the administrators as they seek to find a purchaser for the club. Any football club that is in administration will be subject to a transfer registrations embargo. The principle being that where clubs are not able to afford their current playing squad they are not permitted to sign anyone else. In view of any embargo The Football League cannot allow a club to sign any new players, unless they are unable to field a team, i.e. name fourteen fit players for any match (11 starters plus 3 ‘usable outfield substitutes’ – which is usual Football League policy). However, we only take account of players with any first team experience and young professionals who haven’t played at first team level are therefore discounted. At present The League cannot currently comment any further in relation to Portsmouth and any further statement will appear on our website in due course. Thank you for contacting The Football League. Regards, Andrew Pomfret Customer Services Officer The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk http://www.football-league.co.uk How do the gain experience if they never get played....chicken and egg senario surely and the Cheats angle to get more in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 John Westwood @JohnPFCWestwood I need some friends! Am i the only crazy #pompey fan? haha i didnt even bother following him. didnt want to infect my phone TBH. lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 This Tesco figure was only a figment of Barbie-Roesie's imagination anyway so largely irrelevant to the discussion. In other words. Toy Story. (that coat's here somewhere) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 As the league are good at making up rules on the fly someone should suggest one where teams in admin can get in emergency loans in but that there will be a 3 point deduction for each. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Oh look, another News webchat from 1pm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 As the league are good at making up rules on the fly someone should suggest one where teams in admin can get in emergency loans in but that there will be a 3 point deduction for each. And they cannot come from a team in a higher division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 All that football league reply does is encourage club who overspend with a small squad to go into admin and then ignore their youth team and get in a load of premiership loans if they can persuade the other team to pay their wages. Seems grossly unfair still to those who actually live within their means. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Oh look, another News webchat from 1pm Let the hilarity commence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The Football League:- Any football club that is in administration will be subject to a transfer registrations embargo. The principle being that where clubs are not able to afford their current playing squad they are not permitted to sign anyone else. In view of any embargo The Football League cannot allow a club to sign any new players, unless they are unable to field a team, i.e. name fourteen fit players for any match (11 starters plus 3 ‘usable outfield substitutes’ – which is usual Football League policy). However, we only take account of players with any first team experience and young professionals who haven’t played at first team level are therefore discounted. Do I understand this correctly? If the Skates cannot field fourteen fit players for a match, they are allowed to sign new players? And any player that has not played at first team level cannot counted towards this minimum team level? So if that is true, they cannot play the academy players for example? They have just loaned out one such academy player to Frome. He isn't a kid, he's 19, older than Bale, Chamberlain and Walcott when they played for us. So on a tecnicality that the lad hadn't played for the first team, he can't play now, when they are short of players? Ludicrous! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Let the hilarity commence I am trying... Posted not yet showing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dubai_phil Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The Football League:- Do I understand this correctly? If the Skates cannot field fourteen fit players for a match, they are allowed to sign new players? And any player that has not played at first team level cannot counted towards this minimum team level? So if that is true, they cannot play the academy players for example? They have just loaned out one such academy player to Frome. He isn't a kid, he's 19, older than Bale, Chamberlain and Walcott when they played for us. So on a tecnicality that the lad hadn't played for the first team, he can't play now, when they are short of players? Ludicrous! Madness is more appropriate Baggy Trousers Naughty boys in nasty schools Headmasters breaking all the rules Having fun and playing fools..... All I learnt in school was how to bend not break the rules Yep all fits Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 [TABLE] [TR] [TD]Comment From Nicola C Were the club let down when the "Pack the Park" scheme only attracted 14 thousand fans in this time of dire need? Own up. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Tone Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The Football League:- Do I understand this correctly? If the Skates cannot field fourteen fit players for a match, they are allowed to sign new players? And any player that has not played at first team level cannot counted towards this minimum team level? So if that is true, they cannot play the academy players for example? They have just loaned out one such academy player to Frome. He isn't a kid, he's 19, older than Bale, Chamberlain and Walcott when they played for us. So on a tecnicality that the lad hadn't played for the first team, he can't play now, when they are short of players? Ludicrous! It means he CAN play ,but if he did the FL would count him as a first team player , giving the lie to PFC's "smallest squad in the league " nonsense, and stopping any hope of them getting in more loan players Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Appy Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 [TABLE] [TR] [TD]Comment From Nicola C Were the club let down when the "Pack the Park" scheme only attracted 14 thousand fans in this time of dire need? Own up. [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Guilty! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Good work 'Appy! Nicola C : ] Were the club let down when the "Pack the Park" scheme only attracted 14 thousand fans in this time of dire need? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chez Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 900 seats for SMS went to general sale. http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/LatestNews/news/Southampton-Tickets-On-General-Sale-3127.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudders Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 13:19 Neil: Being a simple sports reporter it is out of my remit. However, it is an incredibly complex issue, nobody's even sure if Chainrai's £17m debenture is legitimate and he's had that for two years! We also have plenty of knowledge, however, legally the vast majority cannot be printed at present. Interesting!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 13:19 Neil: Being a simple sports reporter it is out of my remit. However, it is an incredibly complex issue, nobody's even sure if Chainrai's £17m debenture is legitimate and he's had that for two years! We also have plenty of knowledge, however, legally the vast majority cannot be printed at present. Interesting!! Do we have any undercover Skate journo's using this thread I wonder? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
COMEONYOUREDS Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 ROTFPMSL. And you talk about me missing the point of the thread. Jeeeeeeeesus Nick Nack talk about "still not getting it". Did you not read the Judge's comments in court on Friday? Then you start posting stuff like this. "If it wasn't for Chainrai's money we'd be gone forever". You really, really, realy, really, really don't get what's been going on at Fratton at all do you? Investigative geniuses, all of you. Hopefully us, especially if the Judge's comments about Chainrai's debenture being suspect is proven and we lose £17m of the "debt" that I've been saying to you all along shouldn't have been debt at all. You're a bit of a pest Johnnykins but leaving the pest aside, I shouldn't gloat too much. Things can change awfully quickly in football and whilst things look good for you at the moment they might not be that way forever. Come back on POL posing as a Pompey fan again and give us all a laugh Even if Chainrai's £17m gets written off, whadya gonna do? Who the f*** is laughing now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colinjb Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Is Jay-zee one of ours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dronskisaint Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 The Football League:- Do I understand this correctly? If the Skates cannot field fourteen fit players for a match, they are allowed to sign new players? And any player that has not played at first team level cannot counted towards this minimum team level? So if that is true, they cannot play the academy players for example? They have just loaned out one such academy player to Frome. He isn't a kid, he's 19, older than Bale, Chamberlain and Walcott when they played for us. So on a tecnicality that the lad hadn't played for the first team, he can't play now, when they are short of players? Ludicrous! If he plays for Frome 1st team surely the criteria would be satisfied and they should recall him? It's a fun thought...and they'd probably have to fork out a minimum wage payment from the bulging coffers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pedg Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 (edited) [TABLE=width: 0] [TR] [TD=class: chatmsgtext viewer_text][TABLE=width: 0] [TR] [TD]Comment From Nick P Hi Neil. Why is Appleton not filling the bench with youth team players at the moment?[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [TABLE=width: 0] [TR] [TD=class: chatmsgtime, bgcolor: #F6F6F6]13:02[/TD] [TD=class: chatmsgtext altcaster_text][TABLE=width: 0] [TR] [TD][/TD] [TD]Neil: To put it bluntly, he doesn't believe they are anywhere near ready for the first team environment yet. Let's not forget, a lot of these are 17-year-old kids.[/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] [/TD] [/TR] [/TABLE] Have asked a question along the lines of that he may not believe they are ready but the same could be said of just about every other club in admin and they use their youth players. Strangely did not get through. edit oh, it has but not reply. Edited 22 February, 2012 by pedg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 i am having some fun on the news sport page page http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompey/pompey-past/doubts_are_raised_about_chainrai_s_17m_hold_over_pompey_1_3545992?commentssort=0 Amesbury blu Getting some good bites... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wes Tender Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 All that football league reply does is encourage club who overspend with a small squad to go into admin and then ignore their youth team and get in a load of premiership loans if they can persuade the other team to pay their wages. Seems grossly unfair still to those who actually live within their means. I have now emailed Mr Pomfret at the FL, quoting this seeming policy of theirs that youngsters would be excluded from an available squad if they had not played for the first team and asking for clarification. I have pointed out that they have loaned out an academy player to Frome and suggested that as he is two years older than Bale, Chamberlain and Walcott when they played for us, why couldn't he play for them? I also asked for clarification on whether it was technically possible for a team that had deliberately pursued a policy of having a small, but expensive squad, to obtain a further advantage as a result of not having enough players available, of then signing Premiership players to boost their numbers. I eagerly await his reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 just asked on web chat if Neil thought Ben Haim was worth £30000k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint si Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Any football club that is in administration will be subject to a transfer registrations embargo. The principle being that where clubs are not able to afford their current playing squad they are not permitted to sign anyone else. In view of any embargo The Football League cannot allow a club to sign any new players, unless they are unable to field a team, i.e. name fourteen fit players for any match (11 starters plus 3 ‘usable outfield substitutes’ – which is usual Football League policy). However, we only take account of players with any first team experience and young professionals who haven’t played at first team level are therefore discounted. Be interesting to see where in the FL rules it says anything about 14 fit players, and who counts towards the number and who doesn't. As it hints in the response, this appears to be a "policy" rather than application of any specific rules (though worth checking). If so, that's code for "we can do what we want". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spudders Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 Comment From blue balou : ] I still see Chainrai as the saviour of the club. Do you agree? :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hockey_saint Posted 22 February, 2012 Share Posted 22 February, 2012 HEHEHE I got my question in that web chat! "Comment From Darren H What IF chanrai's debenture is proved to be a myth? does that mean that the previous Admin was invalid and that HMRC had and STILL have a perfectly adequate case for winding the club up?" To which he replied "it could be a real house of cards" too bleedin right it could be!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts