Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
I would like to express my shock and horror at the events of today.

 

How one EARTH can our first post on our first 500th page be........

 

That thought warms the ****les of your heart

 

Dear Lord, does this mean we're doomed, will the 20,000th be yet another disappointment.

 

Still as it was posted by the losing m anager I suppose it does have a small footnote in history.

 

Onwards and upwards

I might even get Scudamore to put this event in my honours in the programme. You can add your chance meetings with Tiger and the Bullfrogs but my honour has far more substance, I was the first post on page 500, and you know what I hadn't realised! Lol
Link to comment
Share on other sites
CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted (edited)
You have not thought your argument through. Without this inane football creditors rule clubs WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CHEAT.

 

Why?

 

The agents would not let their players sign contracts the club could not hope to honour. It is no good for the player, and no good for the agent. Given the choice of signing for 80k per week at Poopey that has a 25% chance of being paid or 50k a week at a club with better finances the players would opt for the 50k a week.

 

Now they can sign contracts with impunity and know they will be made good, even if the club goes bankrupt.

 

If this protection was removed and they knew they would have to stand in line with the other creditors you would find them being a lot more choosey about how solvent their employers are

 

Think CB Fry think, think before you troll.

 

Sorry, how is what I posted before trolling? Especially as I am right.

 

You go on about the agents being circumspect, but surely in the current climate, where clubs know they have to pay every single penny of every single contract the clubs would be far more circumspect wouldn't they?

 

But they're not, just like agents wouldn't be in your reverse situation.

 

Since when are the football agents the ultra cautious ones?

 

Footballers and football agents don't enter contract negotiations thinking about the club going under, just like Peter Storrie and his ilk entered his negotiations not thinking about the club going under.

 

You could easily apply your logic to imposing the current "pay 100% back" with exactly the same rationale:

 

the clubs would be more circumspect, they wouldn't be so risky commiting to contracts they can't possibly get out of etc etc etc.

 

Your theory that a normal creditors rule would solve football's problems is just that. A theory.

 

In practice, it would make the clubs even more risk-happy because they know they can waltz out of it.

 

Punting left right and centre knowing the worst that can happen is paying back a fraction of it.

 

And are you seriously suggesting agents will tell their clients - "nahhh, don't take £60k a week, not sure they can afford it two years in. Take £30k a week instead".

 

"Don't sign for that club offering £50k a week. Sign for that club for half the amount".

 

"I'm very circumspect about that club, I think they might be run by unsavoury characters. Under no circumstances accept their offer of £80k a week plus image rights".

 

This is FOOTBALL AGENTS you are talking about. FOOTBALL AGENTS.

 

Clubs don't go under two minutes after these contracts are signed, they go under two years later.

 

I'd take £60k a week for two years and risk 25% for the last year rather than £30k a week for three years. Not least because you can get yourself transferred in the third year anyway.

 

You're in a fantasy, fantasy, fantasy land of "circumspect" football agents. There's more vegetarian butchers around.

 

 

Don't come up with theories as fact and then accuse me of trolling.

 

I'm not trolling, I just think that Portsmouth should not get off scott free, paying 25% of what they owe and back in the game next season thank you very much.

 

Think, think, think about the implications of your theories before you accuse me of trolling.

 

 

Quote CB Fry:

 

Thank you Red and White Army for expressing this point far better than I did.

 

I had in mind a comparison with companies in the ordinary line of business, who get to hear whether another business is reliable and credit worthy and therefore they are more circumspect in their dealings with those who fall short in that regard. Naturally, if there was a guarantee in place that they would be paid 100p in the pound of the money owed to them as creditors, they would be perfectly happy to deal with that rogue company, safe in the knowledge that they ran no risk of getting their fingers burned. However, if that rogue company had a history of poor financial management and it was rumoured that they were spending beyond their means, then it would only be sensible that any business having dealings with them would want money up front, or would not allow their debt to increase beyond a certain level.

 

As it stands, the current rules could reasonably be deemed to be an encouragement to overspend on players that a club cannot afford, rather than a brake. When local businesses who supply the club suffer, as well as charities, while wealthy agents and players benefit, then it is plainly wrong, ethically and morally. But ethics and morals are not qualities naturally associated with the Skates and the crooks that have associated themselves with them.

 

Says the person who wants Pompey off scott free quicker than anyone else but cutting their obligations down by 75%, and encourages every other football club to massively increase their short term risk but bringing in a safety net where they can write off their major debts by 75% at a stroke two years down the line.

 

But who cares, that club have cheated another out of the Prem, or to the cup final in that time.

 

But who cares, we'll be back next season to do it all again because we only had to find 25%.

 

Welcome to the new age of cheating.

Edited by CB Fry
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Saint

Weston Saint

Posted
Posted

Simple answer to Administration. End of season relegation by two divisions based on where the team would be at the end of that season.

 

For Portsmouth who relegated irrespective of the points deduction - Championship but 2 down so Division 2.

 

Saints would have been starting this season in Conference.

 

Make teams think twice about overspending.

 

Take away the special football creditor status as well

 

It will also make teams fight to avoid relegation (rather than give up that season) to avoid too drastic a fall.

 

Also before any team can be considered for a season they have to produce a certificate from HMRC that taxes are paid and up to date as at 4th April each year and filed with PL or FL by 1st June that same year.

 

Radical I know but too many clubs are living beyond their means and treating Administration as a savour to avoid their full responsibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
Simple answer to Administration. End of season relegation by two divisions based on where the team would be at the end of that season.

 

For Portsmouth who relegated irrespective of the points deduction - Championship but 2 down so Division 2.

 

Saints would have been starting this season in Conference.

 

Make teams think twice about overspending.

 

Take away the special football creditor status as well

 

It will also make teams fight to avoid relegation (rather than give up that season) to avoid too drastic a fall.

 

Also before any team can be considered for a season they have to produce a certificate from HMRC that taxes are paid and up to date as at 4th April each year and filed with PL or FL by 1st June that same year.

 

Radical I know but too many clubs are living beyond their means and treating Administration as a savour to avoid their full responsibilities.

 

How is your proposal a deterrent?

 

Those responsible have left and the punishment in many cases has no influence on their actions before they leave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Weston Saint

Weston Saint

Posted
Posted
How is your proposal a deterrent?

 

Those responsible have left and the punishment in many cases has no influence on their actions before they leave.

They acted for the club, the club is responsible. Too easy to blame a previous regime.

 

And try telling that to the creditors!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted

Looks like the Football League are going to be bullied into accepting the new larger parachute payments...

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/8652535.stm

 

Greedy Premier League ****s, the game is being ruined enough as it is, these parachutes will just move the ceiling down and kill all hope for smaller League 1 & 2 sides. Kiss goodbye to fair competition for good.

 

Good news for the skates' creditors, I don't know if the hostility between the PL and FL is too good for the Blue Few though, you can see the FL throwing the book at them just to prove a point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Matthew Le God

Matthew Le God

Posted
Posted
They acted for the club, the club is responsible. Too easy to blame a previous regime.

 

And try telling that to the creditors!

 

I'm not saying the club shouldn't be punished with things like points deduction/relegations. Just that there needs to be a deterrent as well. Former owners aren't affected by points deductions given after administration so why would they see it as a reason not to continue unless they actually care for the clubs future (which isn't always the case)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smirking_Saint

Smirking_Saint

Posted
Posted
How is your proposal a deterrent?

 

Those responsible have left and the punishment in many cases has no influence on their actions before they leave.

 

They need to impose some sort of legal framework, i don't really know how it works currently but in business if you take a company into admin you are no longer allowed to be a director right ??

 

They need to come up with something, perhaps a fine to the individual of a fixed amount or % of yearly earnings ??

 

As well as Westons proposals

 

Simple answer to Administration. End of season relegation by two divisions based on where the team would be at the end of that season.

 

For Portsmouth who relegated irrespective of the points deduction - Championship but 2 down so Division 2.

 

Saints would have been starting this season in Conference.

 

Make teams think twice about overspending.

 

Take away the special football creditor status as well

 

It will also make teams fight to avoid relegation (rather than give up that season) to avoid too drastic a fall.

 

Also before any team can be considered for a season they have to produce a certificate from HMRC that taxes are paid and up to date as at 4th April each year and filed with PL or FL by 1st June that same year.

 

Radical I know but too many clubs are living beyond their means and treating Administration as a savour to avoid their full responsibilities.

 

This is far too sensible to be accepted though, and the PL are only out for one thing, the PL.

 

The FA need to be harder on them. End of. If the PL try to push their weight around and say that they make splinter from FA etc then Fifa need to reiterate that it would not be under licence.

 

The FA are letting PL run away with everything, make their own rules and generally dictate the rule of football.

 

Back to my previous question, i have been away with no internet for a week, whats the latest ??

 

Why is Stu saying Bye bye skates ?? Are they dead ?? Please tell me they are dead ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted

I know it wouldn't necessarily deter the likes of the Poopey spivs, but saying that any director/senior financial officer of a club that goes into admin is barred from working in football from Conference level up might just focus the minds of serial club-wreckers like Ridsdale or Bates.

And the club has to take the punishment because in law most of these guys have done nothing wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_John

Saint_John

Posted
Posted

They have just said on BBC South Local News that they are producing a TV program about the demise of the Cheating Skates to be aired on Sunday 9th May at 3:15 (just before the start of their last match in the PL).

 

I hope this is the start of the media telling the truth instead of the usual rubbish we hear.

 

Hints to producers of the program, please mention :-

- Who the real owner of the club was from 2006 ? Daddy.

- How they repeatly Lied to the PL about who was the owner, and have not been charged by the football authorities, why ?

- That it was NOT the financial markets that stopped the money flowing into the club but the fact that Daddy had his Bank Accounts frozen in Israel after he was charged with money laundering (trial due to start in May).

- How this thread was started in July 2009 (from a leak from the Skates Finance Dept) to say NO MONEY WAS COMING from the Fake_Dr. Yet they somehow managed to get the PL to remove the first transfer embargo in August last year and sign 6 or 7 players in the final few days of that Summer Transfer Window on the understanding that the Fake_Dr was bringing in new money, but WE all knew on here there was no money.

- How they had a "shadow director" for a number of weeks against PL rules but have still not been charged by the football authorities, why ?

- How 3 people connected with the club are currently before the courts charged with Tax Fraud, but still the club has not been charged, why ?

- They can also show this memo/email that the BBC have got which shows who was making the decisions at the time the Invisible_Owner was in charge.

- They can also mention the Andriods previous dealings with the High Court.

- They can also mention how they used players in the 2nd half of the season that they were never going to pay for and SHOULD NOT have been allowed to sign. Most people now view this as CHEATING, but they still have NOT been thrown out of the FA Cup and the 9 league points has made NO difference to their league position.

- They can ....

(please add)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

I apologise for editing the original (Gordon Brown) version

 

PCFC's players & The Groaning One were visiting a local primary school and the class was in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.

 

The teacher asked them if they would like to lead the discussion on the word 'Tragedy'.

So our Avram asked the class for an example of a 'Tragedy'.

 

A little boy (who was Scottich) stood up and offered, "If ma best freen, wha' lives on a ferm, is playin' in the field and a tractor rins ower him and kills him, that wid be a tragedy."

 

"Incorrect", said the David James, in his best trying-not-to-sound-too-Scottish-accent, "That would be an accident."

 

A little girl raised her hand, "If a school bus carrying fifty children drove over a cliff, killing evryone inside, would that be a tragedy"

 

'I'm afraid not', explained Avram, "that's what we would refer to as a great loss''.

 

The room went silent. No other children volunteered. Avram searched the room.

"Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?"

 

Finally, at the back of the room, a wee lad raised his hand and, in a quiet voice, said: "If a plane carrying you and the players to an away game was struck by a 'friendly fire' missile & blown tae smithereens, that would be a tragedy."

 

"Fantastic, of course!" exclaimed Avram, "and can you tell me why that would be a tragedy?"

 

"Well", says the lad, "it has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn't be a great loss, and it probably wouldn't be a f*cking accident either!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Right sider

Right sider

Posted
Posted

 

Back to my previous question, i have been away with no internet for a week, whats the latest ??

 

Why is Stu saying Bye bye skates ?? Are they dead ?? Please tell me they are dead ?

 

Stu was just trying to make a statement for the anniversary post. I presume! Not alot has happened since the creditors report came out, apart from not going into Europa league. Not even a sniff of a takeover and Friday has nearly gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dubai_phil

dubai_phil

Posted
Posted

I apologise for editing the original (Gordon Brown) version

 

PCFC's players & The Groaning One were visiting a local primary school and the class was in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.

 

The teacher asked them if they would like to lead the discussion on the word 'Tragedy'.

So our Avram asked the class for an example of a 'Tragedy'.

 

A little boy (who was Scottich) stood up and offered, "If ma best freen, wha' lives on a ferm, is playin' in the field and a tractor rins ower him and kills him, that wid be a tragedy."

 

"Incorrect", said the David James, in his best trying-not-to-sound-too-Scottish-accent, "That would be an accident."

 

A little girl raised her hand, "If a school bus carrying fifty children drove over a cliff, killing evryone inside, would that be a tragedy"

 

'I'm afraid not', explained Avram, "that's what we would refer to as a great loss''.

 

The room went silent. No other children volunteered. Avram searched the room.

"Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?"

 

Finally, at the back of the room, a wee lad raised his hand and, in a quiet voice, said: "If a plane carrying you and the players to an away game was struck by a 'friendly fire' missile & blown tae smithereens, that would be a tragedy."

 

"Fantastic, of course!" exclaimed Avram, "and can you tell me why that would be a tragedy?"

 

"Well", says the lad, "it has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn't be a great loss, and it probably wouldn't be a f*cking accident either!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
positivepete

positivepete

Posted
Posted (edited)

From the Grauniad. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/apr/29/premier-league-football-league-parachute-payments

 

 

"The carefully calibrated offer has the dual effect of satisfying clubs such as Bolton Wanderers, who have long wanted added insurance against going down, and the Championship clubs struggling with the investment required to reach the top flight. If accepted, it would apply to relegated clubs from this season and would also mean that payments to Middlesbrough – relegated in 2009 and not promoted this time – would be adjusted on a pro-rata basis. In addition any payments unclaimed because a club have been promoted back to the Premier League will be added to the solidarity pot."

 

Confirming that the payments would not only apply to clubs relegated this season, but also to clubs relegated last season!

Edited by positivepete
add link
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...