Pompey Takeover Saga

Kingsbridge Saint · 28 April, 2010

Are the FA really going to sit on their hands and do nothing about the global event that is the FA Cup Final whilst this sh1t storm erupts across the British national media? Their showcase final includes a basket case of a club that illustrates all that is wrong with professional football in the UK, and they have got to the final using players they should never have had. The Premier League have sanctioned them (slap on the wrists only in my opinion) but the FA have done absolutely nothing. Shame on them.

sidthesquid · 28 April, 2010

...

I have been on here saying that Pompey have not cheated and I stand by that. The team is put together beyond our means as is Hulls, West Hams, Spurs, Chelsea's etc etc. All I have said is they only way Pompey differs is by having been stitched up by the owners in the meantime and it all come crashing down.

Hull maybe. I don't see Chelsea, Spuds or West Ham going broke. Pompey were only stitched to the point that more than 100% of income was going on players and nobody has ever achieved that level of stupidity before.

Granted, there are some clubs in the prem that live with in thier means but they are the minority.

I think you'll find it's the vast majority.

Question for you Nick and all others - If your billionaire owner decides to spend on players beyond what Saints could actually sustain on income will you be protesting?

We would be very concerned. There have already been long debates about our costs versus income. We won't know the truth, like you didn't, but it would sit uncomfortably for many of us if we were clearly overspending. I can only speak personally, but I want us to do it the 'right' way.

Shroppie · 28 April, 2010

HMRC now investigating 'irregularities' at Glasgow Rangers. Here's hoping they don't over-stretch their resources on all these concurrent footballing matters....

Must be the blue shirts .....

dellboypete · 28 April, 2010

Couple of good articles about Platini in the Times this morning - one specifically about our good friends :smt071.

Portsmouth farce should have been prevented, says Michel Platini

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/portsmouth/article7109942.ece

I've been liberal in my copying from the piece, but the following two paras from it sum up what we have all been saying for months

“I’m not an expert of finance, but it was easy to understand that clubs like Portsmouth would be in big danger of going bankrupt and going down. We have to protect them. Why was this club winning [the FA Cup in 2008] with losses of £50 million? .........

....................but it’s what has happened in football: you don’t have the money to buy the players, but you get the players and in the end you cheat and win the competition. That’s not correct.” .

CHEATS

Gingeletiss · 28 April, 2010

Oh dear oh dear.

Have you READ the Creditors list?

If you bother you would note that there is a figure of 500k owed to Spuds for the Loan of O'Hara. In other words you re-signed him and never paid for him. So you lied to the PL that you could cover their costs in order to get the embargo lifted. They should NEVER have been there.

So no, the manager may well deserve support (How good is his record vs Paul Hart?) But the players? No.

The players owe Feck all to you and are only lining their own pockets at the expnse of you suckers.

Who had to come up with the scheme to pay the St John's Bill? The FANS, not the players who SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THERE and yet you still insanely believe you should be supporting.

And none of this comes CLOSE to why you idiots thought you could even START this season with SUltan Bin Trump's Billions....... The Players should have been sold in 2009 during the summer transfer window.

They don't wear "Your Shirt" They watch their wallets. You watch them come the end of the season, they'll disappear faster than you can say "Need some cash"

Phil, Phil, Phil, I think you're being very unfair to the players, They may be greedy gits, they may condone the fleecing of various charities, they may be at Poor smouth through nefarious means they even support their moaning whinging manager. But Phil, they have dug into their pockets, to pay the wages of their kit man. Christ sakes, who else have they got to hang clean towels on their pegs, and pick up their dirty clothes!

krissyboy31 · 28 April, 2010

I thought the Wolves fan on the Saggers/Collymore Talksport programme, last night, made a good point. They (Wolves) were after a certain player in the summer (I didn't catch which one) but were outbid both in terms of transfer fee and salary, by P*rtsm*uth. In normal circumstances, this would be fine (market forces etc) but this player was just another that they couldn't afford. Wolves, living within their budget, missed out on a player to a club blatantly overspending theirs. How then, is that not cheating?

Wes Tender · 28 April, 2010

I have been on here saying that Pompey have not cheated and I stand by that.

Divorce your thoughts from the Skates in particular and let's talk about it in more general terms, so that your bias doesn't cloud your judgement. I'll walk you through the argument step by step to simplify it for you.

In any competitive sporting environment, the success of a team in competition with others, depends to a large extent on the quality of the players they have. Agreed?

As a broad sweeping generalisation, the higher quality the player, the more they cost to buy and the higher paid they are. With me so far?

Therefore, the wealthier owners of a team start with the advantage of being able to afford the better players, both in their ability to purchase them and to pay their higher wages. They do have an unfair advantage over the poorer teams, don't you agree? But that's just the way it is and it's all above board, because the wealthy owners can afford to sustain it.

But a team which attempts to gain an advantage by buying those quality players which it cannot afford, which eventually leads to the club trading while insolvent (illegal) and ends up bankrupting itself, is cheating. It is buying an advantage over other clubs with money it does not possess.

Is that clear? If not, perhaps you would point out which part you either do not understand, or what you disagree with.

Remember though, that there's none so blind as those who will not see.

Question for you Nick and all others - If your billionaire owner decides to spend on players beyond what Saints could actually sustain on income will you be protesting?

And here is where you start to cross your wires. Why would we protest when you lot didn't? Would we be cheating by gaining an unfair advantage, is that what you infer? Might we run the risk of promising donations to local charities and then reneging on our commitments? Could we end up having players here that we couldn't afford?

Well, actually, I very much doubt that we will be spending beyond our income, except perhaps as a short term expedient if required. You see, we are debt free, own our stadium, our training ground, can afford the players we have. If it becomes apparent that we are spending above income, then certainly come back and ask again, but there is no evidence that we are doing that and our owner runs his other businesses without debt, so no reason why he should change his way of doing things with us. Of course, there would only be a real problem if having spent beyond our income, the owner did not write out a cheque to cover the shortfall.

Platini accused you of cheating. But then what does he know, eh?

tony13579 · 28 April, 2010

I listened to the hour on Quay radio. Great stuff. The questions about charity money raised on the pitch and cashed into pompey coffers never paid over and then trapped as the bank accounts were frozen. Very humbled. The question about pompys official guests at the FA cup final carefully avoiding the name Storrie. The season ticket prices "we assessed how much the fans can afford (£300) and how much we can sell them for going forward into the championship £400 and plonked for a reduced price £399. And it will be different in the championship. In the pl we would be up against huge teams we knew we would lose to but in the championship we will win every game"(slight mis quote but that was the message) and -17 points is the worst senario we will construct a cva and the creditor must accept it or nothing (well the might accept it , well possibly, a write down, a bloody big write down, but the probobly will accept it. PLS) and the PL and FA told us not to bother applying for an European place but we are going to apply anyway (failed to mention they have no accounts or an accadamy) did we mention how sorry and ashamed and humbled by the charity fiasco. please support pompey. Goodnight.

Edited 28 April, 2010 by tony13579

OldNick · 28 April, 2010

I have been on here saying that Pompey have not cheated and I stand by that. The team is put together beyond our means as is Hulls, West Hams, Spurs, Chelsea's etc etc. All I have said is they only way Pompey differs is by having been stitched up by the owners in the meantime and it all come crashing down.

So if we had hired 50m worht of players for a cup run when we knew we were trading insolvently, that would not be cheating?

Can you not see that by getting players in on loan that the club knew it couldnt afford is cheating to gain an advantage. Those players were crucial to your progress in the FA cup and so you may understand why people are a tad upset.

I am not surprised that the charities were out of pocket, I voiced my shame when we went into Admin as all those companies were done out of money due and caused hardship.

I dont see you coming on showing anything but 'well we have paid back a couple of charities, but the rest is ok as we kept paying the players instead of the small family businesses that may be hurt forever.'

Stand back and listen to yourself PIR

dubai_phil · 28 April, 2010

So if we had hired 50m worht of players for a cup run when we knew we were trading insolvently, that would not be cheating?
Can you not see that by getting players in on loan that the club knew it couldnt afford is cheating to gain an advantage. Those players were crucial to your progress in the FA cup and so you may understand why people are a tad upset.
I am not surprised that the charities were out of pocket, I voiced my shame when we went into Admin as all those companies were done out of money due and caused hardship.
I dont see you coming on showing anything but 'well we have paid back a couple of charities, but the rest is ok as we kept paying the players instead of the small family businesses that may be hurt forever.'
Stand back and listen to yourself PIR

Not only have they cheated, but they LIED to the Premier League.

They supplied a statement of affairs (pre-Vantis) that resulted in their being able to resign O'Hara on loan at a cost of 500k in loan fees WHICH THEY NEVER HAD THE ABILITY OR INTENTION TO PAY!

Did O'Hara have an effect on their season?

How can any fan not understand this?

But then we get ahead of ourselves, we forget that seeing as they all live in caravans they never have mortgages or loans so that they don't understand the basics of economics

stevegrant · 28 April, 2010

Not only have they cheated, but they LIED to the Premier League.

They also told the Premier League that Daniel Azougy, a convicted fraudster who wouldn't stand a hope in hell of passing the Premier League's "Fit and Proper Persons" test, wasn't appointed to make executive decisions.

The administrator's report published last week states: "Mr Al Faraj appointed Mr Mark Jacobs of Fuglers solicitors and Mr Daniel Azougy to assist with the general running of the club and the making of executive decisions".

tony13579 · 28 April, 2010

Not only have they cheated, but they LIED to the Premier League.

They supplied a statement of affairs (pre-Vantis) that resulted in their being able to resign O'Hara on loan at a cost of 500k in loan fees WHICH THEY NEVER HAD THE ABILITY OR INTENTION TO PAY!

Did O'Hara have an effect on their season?

How can any fan not understand this?

But then we get ahead of ourselves, we forget that seeing as they all live in caravans they never have mortgages or loans so that they don't understand the basics of economics

They understood the economics They just couldnt afford to drop from the prem. They had so many outstanding payments on players they had sold on they had to gamble on buying more and more players they couldnt afford. They continued gambling again and again, However they didnt win on the pitch as they expected, the PL stopped them buying more players and the foundations started to crumble.

maybe the management shouldnt go to gaol, maybe they should join gamblers anon and go into rehab!

Whitey Grandad · 28 April, 2010

They understood the economics They just couldnt afford to drop from the prem. They had so many outstanding payments on players they had sold on they had to gamble on buying more and more players they couldnt afford. They continued gambling again and again, However they didnt win on the pitch as they expected, the PL stopped them buying more players and the foundations started to crumble.

maybe the management shouldnt go to gaol, maybe they should join gamblers anon and go into rehab!

But even if they had stayed in the Premier League, they would not have been able to continue trading. They owe tens of millions for this season and have faced a winding-up order. The extra income from the PL would not arrive until next year.

qwertySFC · 28 April, 2010

I have been on here saying that Pompey have not cheated and I stand by that.

In a scenario for example: SFC started on -10 this season. Markus could have offered massive wages to players such as Beckham , Schols ect to play for us on loan for the season , not likely ever to happen but he could have offered a million a week to get us promoted.

If we did run away with the League 1 title by 20 points and then it was discovered that Markus was un-able to actually pay their wages but we still get promoted , surely we would have been classed as cheated our way of this league. This is what Poortsmouth have done that is why claiming not to have cheated your way to the FA Cup is some what flawed, if you can explain in simple terms how you come to this belief that no cheating has occurred I would love to hear it.

trousers · 28 April, 2010

Mr Sale starting to put the boot in on a slightly more regular basis.....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1269341/Charles-Sale-Your-important-.html

"The catalogue of mismanagement at crisis club Portsmouth even includes the letter sent to creditors after the administrators, UHY Hacker Young, revealed the full details of the astonishing £120million-plus debt.

Those owed money by the relegated Premier League club were informed in a covering note with the 70-page document of the upcoming creditors’ meeting on May 6 and told to ring the accountancy firm’s London office assistant manager, Maria Ensabella, on her direct line if they had any immediate questions.

Farcically, when creditors rang the number, it was not recognised"

rallyboy · 28 April, 2010

perhaps you were right Nick, I may have been a tad premature in my earlier judgement!

I recall when we were on the rocks I did a casual analysis of what I was actually supporting, I attended the last games just to put cash in with no expectation of entertainment nor success - and those games didn't disappoint!

I certainly wasn't supporting the board, the players didn't deserve it, even the ground had changed in recent times so the only continuity I was left with was the badge on the shirt.

That's where the likes of PIR must be getting to.

He also needs to accept that even if people like O'Hara themselves haven't cheated, their presence is clear evidence that the club has cheated, and the illegal cup run can't be blamed on past owners.

When I see O'Hara in that shirt I just see the money that should have been paid to charities and local businesses.

They could have paid off debts, but no, they chose to bring in overpriced loanees.

And the worst thing with the charity theft is that the money wasn't owed to them as a commercial debt, it was raised and then stolen to finance Grant's glorious fairytale - possibly the most disgusting case of bringing the game and a city into disrepute in football history?

Very guilty of cheating, no defence at all - next case.

aintforever · 28 April, 2010

I have been on here saying that Pompey have not cheated and I stand by that.

In a scenario for example: SFC started on -10 this season. Markus could have offered massive wages to players such as Beckham , Schols ect to play for us on loan for the season , not likely ever to happen but he could have offered a million a week to get us promoted.

If we did run away with the League 1 title by 20 points and then it was discovered that Markus was un-able to actually pay their wages but we still get promoted , surely we would have been classed as cheated our way of this league. This is what Poortsmouth have done that is why claiming not to have cheated your way to the FA Cup is some what flawed, if you can explain in simple terms how you come to this belief that no cheating has occurred I would love to hear it.

If we had carried on signing loan players after he left and we knew we were skint, whilst at the same time stealing from local cancer charities - I think we would all think of the club as cheating.

mightysaints · 28 April, 2010

Platini quote in the Times

“When I was younger, I remember seeing people with no money buy Ferraris — and then, because of the Ferrari, they would get the best girls! That’s not correct, but it’s what has happened in football: you don’t have the money to buy the players, but you get the players and in the end you cheat and win the competition. That’s not correct.”

Plain and simple

CHEATS

Fowllyd · 28 April, 2010

They also told the Premier League that Daniel Azougy, a convicted fraudster who wouldn't stand a hope in hell of passing the Premier League's "Fit and Proper Persons" test, wasn't appointed to make executive decisions.

The administrator's report published last week states: "Mr Al Faraj appointed Mr Mark Jacobs of Fuglers solicitors and Mr Daniel Azougy to assist with the general running of the club and the making of executive decisions".

Having listened to some of the Quay Radio programme, I noticed that Andronikou referred to Jacob and Azougy as 'former directors'. Yes, I know it's only a casual mention on a radio show, but I still think it's quite damning - and it just goes to confirm what was suspected all along.

EBS1980 · 28 April, 2010

Don't know if this has been covered in one of the many hundred previous pages but how come Pompey are able to announce season ticket prices and sell them when they are in administration? I thought we couldn't sell any until we were out of administration?

http://www.portsmouthfc.co.uk/LatestNews/latest-news/Season-Ticket-Prices-Slashed-894.aspx

Saint Lindford · 28 April, 2010

Still trying to get into Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/portsmouth/7640580/Portsmouth-to-take-Europa-League-fight-to-the-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport.html

Beggers belief that Android seems to think that their interests have not been looked after. What about the interests of local businesses, schools and charities that have not been looked after by PCFC??

Crab Lungs · 28 April, 2010

Still trying to get into Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/portsmouth/7640580/Portsmouth-to-take-Europa-League-fight-to-the-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport.html

Beggers belief that Android seems to think that their interests have not been looked after. What about the interests of local businesses, schools and charities that have not been looked after by PCFC??

Unbelievable delusion. Absolutely unreal. It's like running someone over then whinging about your car being damaged.

Kingsbridge Saint · 28 April, 2010

Still trying to get into Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/portsmouth/7640580/Portsmouth-to-take-Europa-League-fight-to-the-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport.html

Beggers belief that Android seems to think that their interests have not been looked after. What about the interests of local businesses, schools and charities that have not been looked after by PCFC??

Unbelievable. Words fail me. How can the pillock say they deserve a place in Europe when they have cheated thier way to the FA Cup final, and despite the cheating, were still one of the 3 crappest sides in the Premier League? On what basis do they 'deserve' it? It's nonsense.

dubai_phil · 28 April, 2010

Plucky Poompey.

Going to get away with (TM Nickh)

Think it is now becoming more and more clear that as each day goes by, fresh comments and stories are emerging regarding the horror show up the road. I've said it time and again, it will not be the debts or the admon or the cheating that does for them, it will be the total lack of Corporate Compliance, and Boy oh Boy have we been seeing that in print in the past week or so.

It is funny in many ways, I think the fact that they avoided (cheated) their way out of the Winding Up Order is being seen to be a good thing.

As each day passes, now that the knives are out for them, the tale of debacle grows larger and larger. At this rate, it will not be many weeks before many of the wiser Few start hiding their heads and WISHING they had been Wound Up. At least then they would have been simply Poor Old Pompey.

Now they have passed beyond the "TSW told you so" stage into an all out downright unmitigated laughing stock. The longer it goes on the worse it will get. In many ways having them around like this is far better than having them dead and buried.

While they might (hahahaha) survive as a club, it will take many many years for them to be thought of with anything other than contempt by the rest of the footballing fraternity.

And no, the fans aren't blameless, after all who did they vote for as their Terrace Hero, and who did they demand the Freedom of the City for?

Being rescued from (in the words of the Telegraph) a Stinking Cesspit of a club by it being Wound Up means you have been rescued and can rebuild. Being left to wallow in it for years to come is much funnier

redkeith · 28 April, 2010

One of the conditions that UEFA set is being upto date with your taxes by 31st December. At that time, PFC whre under a winfing up order from HRMC for 17 Miliion.

If it was a racehorse, AA's appeal would fall at the first hurdle.

buctootim · 28 April, 2010

Still trying to get into Europe.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/portsmouth/7640580/Portsmouth-to-take-Europa-League-fight-to-the-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport.html

Beggers belief that Android seems to think that their interests have not been looked after. What about the interests of local businesses, schools and charities that have not been looked after by PCFC??

Great. The more they **** off the PL, FA and other clubs the better imo.

Wes Tender · 28 April, 2010

The latest massively deluded Skate to post following an article in The News:-

pmpycj,
portsmouth 28/04/2010 11:27:30
(Responding to a poster called "there are loads of teams in hampshire")

you're name seems to show a large degree of geographical ignorance. Mind telling me who the other team's' in hampshire are? Stains are the only other league team and they're still going to be in league 1 next year. and Brigton are in east sussex.
I would hardly call brighton a rich team either. And to be honest I don't think the south coasts footballing power base is changing, ask anyone in the country and they will still tell you by far and away pompey are the biggest team south of london.

Typically, he also shows a large degree of geographical ignorance, as he doesn't realise that Aldershot is in Hampshire. But he is totally deluding himself if he doesn't think that the power base in football on the South Coast is changing. Brighton might not be an especially rich team, but they are certainly wealthier than the Skates. I suppose that geographically speaking he is right that the Skates are the biggest team South of London. But that is because more correctly we are to the South West of London.

Ask anybody in the country who is the biggest load of cheating bastards in the South and they'd say the Skates were.

And it is eminently feasible that in a few months time, there will be several football clubs in Hampshire and along the South Coast that will be bigger than them, including Havant & Waterlooville (whose ground they might be sharing) and Eastleigh.

Whitey Grandad · 28 April, 2010

How are they the biggest club? In terms of debts?

100%Red&White · 28 April, 2010

How are they the biggest club? In terms of debts?

And attendances. And stadium. And training facilities. And future.

?

benjii · 28 April, 2010

The power base is not changing. Saints have remained the biggest club despite being two divisions lower.

Not that it matters, if he can't see who has the brighter future then he is either ignorant or stupid.

FloridaMarlin · 28 April, 2010

They also told the Premier League that Daniel Azougy, a convicted fraudster who wouldn't stand a hope in hell of passing the Premier League's "Fit and Proper Persons" test, wasn't appointed to make executive decisions.

The administrator's report published last week states: "Mr Al Faraj appointed Mr Mark Jacobs of Fuglers solicitors and Mr Daniel Azougy to assist with the general running of the club and the making of executive decisions".

Let's not forget the biggest lie of all.

The one told at the very beginning and which is at the root and heart of this vile tale of deceipt and debacle.

From day one when Mandaric first entered into negotiations, P***ey swore black and blue that Alexandre (Sasha) Gaydamak was buying the club, and was acting independently of his father, Arkadi, who had nothing whatsoever to do with the club. No siree, nothing; nada, nowt, nitchevo.

And yet here in the Daily Telegraph on March 19, we had the Storrie teller admitting it was a lie.

"Sacha always said it was him owning Portsmouth and not his father. The reality is that there had to be some backing from him. Sacha's a young guy, where's he got all that money? Maybe he just borrowed it from his father.

"I think one of the reasons why they bought Portsmouth was because the Premier League was so high profile. Because the father had had some bad publicity, they saw this as a way of protecting the son and cleaning the Gaydamak name a little bit.''

Of all the lies told in this sorry saga, this is the biggest and the most important

It was told because without it, the Gaydamak money would not have come into the club as Arkadi would not have passed the Prem's Fit and Proper Person's Test.

Everyone suspected it to be a lie, obviously a few people knew it, but the Premier League accepted it at face value without doing any digging.

Storrie blew this lie out of the water, proving that the first requisite of a good liar is a good memory.

Not only have P***ey cheated by acquiring players with money they did not have, they have cheated by virtue of the fact they should not have been allowed to have this pretend money in the first place.

So have the Prem called Storrie in to ask him to explain why he and P***ey made monkeys out them years ago by lying as to who the true owner really was?

Are the Prem minded to take retrospective action against a club that clearly lied to them, and in doing so broke PL rules?

The catalogue of lies and deceipt in this story is as thick as the New York city telephone driectory.

Yet if this lie had been doubted and some investigation work done at the beginning, none of this would happened.

Actually it might have done. At the time Sasha/Arkadi Gaydamak bought the club from Mandaric, the line of parties interested in buying it didn't exactly stretch around the block.

FloridaMarlin · 28 April, 2010