Jump to content

Portsmouth Owners Go Into Administration


Saint-Armstrong

Recommended Posts

Was this proposal actually adopted by the FL?

 

The FL League rules are here: http://www.football-league.co.uk/regulations/20110629/section-3-the-league_2293633_2125717 under Section 12.3 Sporting Sanctions. I can't be arsed to look through them properly, but in skimming them I couldn't find any mention of a 2 strikes in three years and your out rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "proposed rule" states "two admins in a three year period" as a company, not "two admins whilst a Football League Club".

 

"The Football League has announced plans to revolutionise the game outside the Premiership."

 

As a company yes, but also whilst under the Football League rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brendan Guilfoyle on SSN - "Well the transfer window is coming up, so we can always cover losses with player sales". (Paraphrasing...)

 

Who's worth anything that they have? Huskelepp? Kitson? Lawrence? With such a small squad, they can't really afford to lose many more players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And the people that ruled Portsmouth just departed Chairman as a "fit and proper" person to own a football club will be suitably admonished?

Ultimately, I'm not entirely sure what the FA/Premier League/Football League are really able to do about that situation, to be honest.

 

It was perfectly legal for Vladimir Antonov, under the name of Convers Sports Initiatives PLC, to purchase Portsmouth FC from the administrators. He wasn't banned from owning a company or from being a director of a company, and the legal system in this country largely works on the basis that you are innocent until proven guilty.

 

Once he has got ownership of the club, there's not a cat in hell's chance the Football League are going to say "sorry, we don't like the look of you, therefore we're revoking Pompey's membership" - it simply wouldn't happen. Just think of the ****storm that would create, a relatively powerless organisation uses a few blog posts and rumours as the basis for kicking a football club with a core support of 11,000 fans into the wilderness.

 

While the idea of the (now-titled) Owners and Directors Test is a noble one, it simply doesn't work in practice as the Football League (or indeed the Premier League, despite their seeming belief that they are above the law) has no legal power to say who can and cannot own a UK company.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brendan Guilfoyle on SSN - "Well the transfer window is coming up, so we can always cover losses with player sales". (Paraphrasing...)

 

Who's worth anything that they have? Huskelepp? Kitson? Lawrence? With such a small squad, they can't really afford to lose many more players.

 

they'll get loan players in, just as they always do.Haven't they just got 2 young loanees from West Brom,probably paying less than half of their wages.Probably got some compensation from Forest for Cotterill as well.They'll get by because they always do,that's what's so firking annoying about them.

Edited by Window Cleaner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guilfoyle on SSN: "It's the parent company, not the Club, in administration. Points deduction would be harsh. The Club will be fine." (words to that effect anyway)

 

Didn't they say that about us, but Mawhinney said the two were intrinically linked?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I can't see it washing. If they allow them to fiddle it then it will set a model that any club can copy.

 

Of course FL will make it up as they go along, as usual. There's no telling what will happen.

 

If there isn't a points deduction we should write to the FL and ask for those 10 points back. As this will be our last year in the FL we'll take them this year, thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ultimately, I'm not entirely sure what the FA/Premier League/Football League are really able to do about that situation, to be honest.

 

It was perfectly legal for Vladimir Antonov, under the name of Convers Sports Initiatives PLC, to purchase Portsmouth FC from the administrators. He wasn't banned from owning a company or from being a director of a company, and the legal system in this country largely works on the basis that you are innocent until proven guilty.

 

Once he has got ownership of the club, there's not a cat in hell's chance the Football League are going to say "sorry, we don't like the look of you, therefore we're revoking Pompey's membership" - it simply wouldn't happen. Just think of the ****storm that would create, a relatively powerless organisation uses a few blog posts and rumours as the basis for kicking a football club with a core support of 11,000 fans into the wilderness.

 

While the idea of the (now-titled) Owners and Directors Test is a noble one, it simply doesn't work in practice as the Football League (or indeed the Premier League, despite their seeming belief that they are above the law) has no legal power to say who can and cannot own a UK company.

 

The only way this could change was if we were to adopt a US franchise system as happens where the NFL decides who can and cannot buy any of the franchises.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I can't see it washing. If they allow them to fiddle it then it will set a model that any club can copy.

 

No, if Pompey can prove the parent company's insolvency was entirely due to non-football related trading and nothing to do with PFC, then the League are unlikely to apply a penalty.

 

SLH went into administration solely due to losses made by the football club, which isn't necessarily the case here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cortese said before when Skates went in to Admin

 

"If they don't get a points deduction we will have our 10 points back" I'm sure he will be ready to sue The FL if they get away with this

 

He didn't really have mush of a case then, as Pompey were in the Premier League and Saints were in the Football League, two different governing bodies. He might this time though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, if Pompey can prove the parent company's insolvency was entirely due to non-football related trading and nothing to do with PFC, then the League are unlikely to apply a penalty.

 

SLH went into administration solely due to losses made by the football club, which isn't necessarily the case here.

 

Where did the money for their large summer spending come from Huseklupp, Norris, Varney etc? If it came from Antonov robbing Lithunian/Latvian bank customers then that source has now ended and they may want the money back from Pompey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, if Pompey can prove the parent company's insolvency was entirely due to non-football related trading and nothing to do with PFC, then the League are unlikely to apply a penalty.

 

SLH went into administration solely due to losses made by the football club, which isn't necessarily the case here.

 

Well who knows? Not me, not you, the FL make things up as they go along.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cortese said before when Skates went in to Admin

 

"If they don't get a points deduction we will have our 10 points back" I'm sure he will be ready to sue The FL if they get away with this

 

What difference would that make?? It would be totally pointless,they won't give us +10 points in a higher League and we wouldn't get any sort of financial compensation either. Our -10,like spilt milk is just not worth crying over any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What difference would that make?? It would be totally pointless,they won't give us +10 points in a higher League and we wouldn't get any sort of financial compensation either. Our -10,like spilt milk is just not worth crying over any more.

 

BUT it would be funny as f/ck if Cortese said it and wound the skates up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BUT it would be funny as f/ck if Cortese said it and wound the skates up.

 

Skates should have been wound up years ago but as has been said they are the Houdinis of football fiscal dramas.

They must have been one of the first clubs ever to have been threatened with being wound up over a 357£ unpaid bill (or whatever amount it was) .They got away with it and they've been at it ever since. They learned on that occasion that no matter what they do they have some sort of importance to their insignificant community and they've been taking the p*ss ever since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, if Pompey can prove the parent company's insolvency was entirely due to non-football related trading and nothing to do with PFC, then the League are unlikely to apply a penalty.

 

SLH went into administration solely due to losses made by the football club, which isn't necessarily the case here.

 

I think the key question is whether Pompey reverts back to Chanrai as a secured lender (the club purchase was in instalments IIRC).If they are, it depends on what Chanrai does. Having tried his arse off to sell the club last time and only turned up with these clowns, will he want to prop the club up again, or will he realise there's no value in doing that so he may as well take the ground and wind them up? Will he be prepared to stick the cash in?

 

As Andronikou is back in as the Administrator, it seems likely to me that it's Chanrai who has pulled the plug.

 

If the club isn't supported by Chanrai, how does it survive? They can argue all they like about the Parent Club going into administration, but surely if Pompey are reliant on CSI to stay afloat, they are inextricably linked to the downfall of CSI and will, by default, go into admin too.

 

So....Chanrai.......what next?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's easy to say that the holding company debts and that of the football club are not linked but surely when they took on the club they took on the terms of the previous CVA? The football club were trading whilst being insolvent before the take over and signed players they couldn't afford, since. This must have had an affect on CSI Miami going bust and without their money the club is back to trading insolvent AFAICS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...