alpine_saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Will we be feeling like their fans in a couple of weeks' time ? I understand the philosophy behind the points deduction rules, but its too much. Mawhinney and the Football League basically killed LTFC that 30-point deudction. Will they be signing our death-warrant ? I personally find it a disgrace that they bottled acting on their own clearly-defined rules last week, to enable us to get on with finding a buyer to enable the club to survive.
Deppo Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 30-point deduction was a disgrace, IMO. I was hoping they stayed up.
Gorgiesaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Talk about a rollercoaster - 8 days ago they take 40,000 to Wembley & win the Johnstones Paint Trophy, and now they know they are no longer a football league club. Football should be decided on the pitch, not by polititians.
Papa Shango Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 That's 3 relegations in a row now, I do feel sorry for their fans. Hopefully they'll be back, I really like Kenilworth Road for some reason.
BotleySaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Without knowing the details of Luton's crimes I can't say whether 30 points was right. But they'll bounce back I expect.
kelkel31 Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 they didnt bottle it at all, they are fully aware that we have not breached there clearly defined rules on administration, this causing significant embarrassment to themselves. they are desperate to punish us, hence the 'independent' investigation into our financial affairs, as if the reports by the clubs auditors arent independent, im sure they are allowed to make fraudulent statements in the company reports! they are looking for us to have failed to pay the cleaning lady for one extra hour of work that they failed to report correctly so that they can allege financial impropriety's, and if they cant find that they will try to change the rules and apply the retro-actively
chocco boxo Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Possibly the same league as Eastleigh!!! Never liked them, remember them knocking us out of League Cup QF I think on the plastic pitch? But that 30 point deduction was mad as a hatter.
andysstuff Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Yeh, hats off to them (pardon the pun) Had a decent enough awayday a couple of years ago, even if the Ground was poor. Hope they bounce straight back, wouldn't want the same thing happening to us!
so22saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 They missed out by one season on being founder members of the Premier League (along with Notts County who's YTS player, Rob Matthews, sent Luton down with a 2nd half hat-trick - the only reason I know is that my Luton supporting mate Ian, and Rob, were good mates at Uni until that point). Anyway, the point really is that all the old "we'll walk this league" crap should now be in sharp focus for us. We could go the way of Luton, or we could do a Man City who I can remember the Skates relegating to the old Div 3 not that long ago. I do think the League are going to take more than 10 points though if they can. 1) Rupert made plenty of enemies there I'm sure (like he does everywhere, even his supporters say he's divisive) and 2) they've been made to look stupid.
Wade Garrett Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 What does Mawhinney offer to football? It seems to me one of his Tory mates got him the job, and he has made a dogs breakfast of it from the day he started. Would be great if he gets sacked because he can't punish us.
martel Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Will we be feeling like their fans in a couple of weeks' time ? I understand the philosophy behind the points deduction rules, but its too much. Mawhinney and the Football League basically killed LTFC that 30-point deudction. Will they be signing our death-warrant ? I personally find it a disgrace that they bottled acting on their own clearly-defined rules last week, to enable us to get on with finding a buyer to enable the club to survive. Have to agree with this, I cannot stand the sight of Mawhinney, after all what does he really bring to the party; basically the square root of nothing! He went to the lawyers and I bet their instruction was, find a way for the football league to give Southampton football club a ten point penalty, he will ensure that no leaf is left unturned in achieving his goal.
OldNick Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Have to agree with this, I cannot stand the sight of Mawhinney, after all what does he really bring to the party; basically the square root of nothing! He went to the lawyers and I bet their instruction was, find a way for the football league to give Southampton football club a ten point penalty, he will ensure that no leaf is left unturned in achieving his goal.to be fair whatever he does he upsets someone. Luton were punished to an extreme leve l an cant work out why hurt a club that is on its knees.
Saint Fen Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Feel bad for them, unfortunetly they never had a chance with a 30 point deduction. Just far too much. I'm sure next season they will bounce straight back up and certainly hope they do.
teamsaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 we had some great contests with Luton when they had a really good side, with Saints often coming off worst. The true Luton fans will stick with it, and they will be back before too long.Its truly nonsensical to condemn a town of Lutons size to not having a league team. Will always have fond memories of Kenilworth road, if only for the win there in 78. Good luck to them in the conf.
Bailey Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 The 30-point deduction imposed on Luton was a joke. The Football League pretty much killed the club and never gave them a chance of staying up. I was very much hoping they'd pull off a mini-miracle by beating the drop, but it wasn't to be. Here's hoping they make a swift return to the Football League!
TopGun Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 to be fair whatever he does he upsets someone. Luton were punished to an extreme leve l an cant work out why hurt a club that is on its knees. Simply as a deterrent to stop other directors of football clubs playing fast and loose with money. That much is obvious. Luton got deducted 30 points for both admin and irregularities. That is the right thing to do. On the face of it we should get 10 points deducted courtesy of fools like Lowe, no matter how we hope some lawyer will prevent it.
Ludwig Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I don't like Luton. But then I don't like what's happened to them.
VectisSaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Simply as a deterrent to stop other directors of football clubs playing fast and loose with money. That much is obvious. Luton got deducted 30 points for both admin and irregularities. That is the right thing to do. On the face of it we should get 10 points deducted courtesy of fools like Lowe, no matter how we hope some lawyer will prevent it. But thats the problem the punishment does not act as a deterrent (sp?), the directors who caused the problem have not paid any price at all. It is the players and supporters who have been punished, just as it will be when the FL impose a penalty on us, Lowe & Wilde will get away with it scot-free.
TopGun Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 (edited) But thats the problem the punishment does not act as a deterrent (sp?), the directors who caused the problem have not paid any price at all. It is the players and supporters who have been punished, just as it will be when the FL impose a penalty on us, Lowe & Wilde will get away with it scot-free. I assume they will lose the one-time value of their shareholdings as there will be nothing left after the creditors have had their payments. Lowe may have paid nothing because of the original reverse-buy out but Wilde will lose his cash purchase value of the shares. And even Lowe had to gear his nursing homes against the buyout in 1996. Though I expect he clawed that back pretty quickly and obviously he will have made plenty in salary as chairman over the years since. Edited 13 April, 2009 by TopGun
um pahars Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 But thats the problem the punishment does not act as a deterrent (sp?), the directors who caused the problem have not paid any price at all. It is the players and supporters who have been punished, just as it will be when the FL impose a penalty on us, Lowe & Wilde will get away with it scot-free. I think the Chairman and Directors at the time were fined and a football ban slapped on them, but it certainly wasn't as draconian at the -10 for dodgy agent payments and a futher -20 from failing to agree a CVA.
Lowestoft-Saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Will we be feeling like their fans in a couple of weeks' time ? I understand the philosophy behind the points deduction rules, but its too much. Mawhinney and the Football League basically killed LTFC that 30-point deudction. Will they be signing our death-warrant ? I personally find it a disgrace that they bottled acting on their own clearly-defined rules last week, to enable us to get on with finding a buyer to enable the club to survive. If they hit us with similar pentalties as luton have been hit with......... Will YOU still feel PROUD of YOURSELF for calling FOR ADMINISTRATION for so long.....? Or are you now going to say you did not keep saying bring on administration .....
Amesbury Saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 The 30-point deduction imposed on Luton was a joke. The Football League pretty much killed the club and never gave them a chance of staying up. I was very much hoping they'd pull off a mini-miracle by beating the drop, but it wasn't to be. Here's hoping they make a swift return to the Football League! Agreed.
hoozonside10 Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 It was interesting to see that Luton's new owners had to take a 20 point deduction to allow them to carry on participating in the league. Let's hope that doesn't set a precedent.
CLOTH EARS Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I used to hate Luton when they had that plastic pitch and they used that old ID card system. BUT they have decent fans who have to suffer thrugh n fault of their own. I believe that a 30 point deduction was OTT and I really hope that they come back at the 1st attempt. Next season they may end up playing Oxford Utd in the conference, this game was a TOP FLIGHT FIXTURE back in the 1980's!!! I remember Luton beating Oxford 7-5 in the old 1st division! ALSO in 1991 Luton were in the old Division 1 and Eastleigh were ELEVEN divisions below in the Wessex League. Next season they may well meet in a league fixture!!!
cambsaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I sat next to Mahwhinney at a dinner once. I have never met a ruder, surlier or more unpleasant man in supposedly polite society. I was extremely pleased when as soon as he had finished eating our food and wine he stood up and said "I'm going , I've got business in the House." All he brings to football is a knowledge of the trough (HoC) and contacts. He is really a rugby man, was VP of one of my rugby clubs. (I played as a forward-was too big for football-my first love)
alpine_saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Author Posted 13 April, 2009 If they hit us with similar pentalties as luton have been hit with......... Will YOU still feel PROUD of YOURSELF for calling FOR ADMINISTRATION for so long.....? Or are you now going to say you did not keep saying bring on administration ..... Nope, I called for it and am not ashamed of the fact. But I called for it to happen BEFORE the cut-off date, so that the club would have time to get its house in order once completely Lowe-less, BEFORE next season
benjii Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Nope, I called for it and am not ashamed of the fact. But I called for it to happen BEFORE the cut-off date, so that the club would have time to get its house in order once completely Lowe-less, BEFORE next season You did start a thread saying that anyone who had disagreed with you should apologise and hail administration though, once it had happened.
saint lard Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Could'nt give a monkeys left tit what happens to Luton.
Denzil Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Well I'm absolutely delighted. No mark nothing club, I hope they never come back.
alpine_saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Author Posted 13 April, 2009 You did start a thread saying that anyone who had disagreed with you should apologise and hail administration though, once it had happened. Yes, because those with the agenda who were trying to scare everybody about the prospect of administration were going on about asset-stripping, no-one interested in the club as a going concern and the end of the club, and were highly abusive to those that disagreed. At this time NONE of those things have happened, and there is apparently plenty of interest in the club.
alpine_saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Author Posted 13 April, 2009 Could'nt give a monkeys left tit what happens to Luton. I hope you and Denzil dont expect sympathy from fans of other teams then, should the worst case happen to us.....
aintforever Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I find it offensive what the Football League have done to Luton. There obviously needs to be punishments for teams that break the rules but removing them from the league is just a complete disgrace.
um pahars Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I believe that a 30 point deduction was OTT Isn't there a chance we could end up with -30 next season if it all goes against us????? -10 for going into administration after the cut off -20 for not agreeing a CVA (although I think Luton got more than others because they had been here before) Or would we only be up for one of these????
The Godfather Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Isn't there a chance we could end up with -30 next season if it all goes against us????? -10 for going into administration after the cut off -20 for not agreeing a CVA (although I think Luton got more than others because they had been here before) Or would we only be up for one of these???? Also somewhere in their points deduction was where they got caught paying agents illegally and tried to cover it up.
aintforever Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Isn't there a chance we could end up with -30 next season if it all goes against us????? -10 for going into administration after the cut off -20 for not agreeing a CVA (although I think Luton got more than others because they had been here before) Or would we only be up for one of these???? I think we will be in line for -25, -10 for admin, -15 for the CVA. I know Bournemouth got -17 for the CVA but that was because they have been in admin before. I think 15 is what Leeds got.
um pahars Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Also somewhere in their points deduction was where they got caught paying agents illegally and tried to cover it up. They got -10 for financial irregularities (re agents etc) and a further -20 for not agreeing a CVA. They had their -10 for administration last season!!!!!
aintforever Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 If Lowe had filed for admin just a few days earlier it would be a simple case of agree a CVA and we would be starting next season on a clean slate. Cheers Rupes, you ****.
saint lard Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I hope you and Denzil dont expect sympathy from fans of other teams then, should the worst case happen to us..... We,as a club,made our bed,therefore we should l liedown in it. We will not,and i do not expect,to get sympathy from any supporter of another football club.
lordswoodsaints Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 luton always used to be a regular on my awaydays in the 80's, had some good and bad experiences there but i will be sad to see them go,they were treated a bit harshly imo,the fans deserve better,they have been shafted by the knobheads in charge. as a fan of football i dont like to see football fans treated unfairly and luton fans have every right to feel p1ssed off,especially if we dodge the 10 point deduction,i will feel for them but if there is a loophole and we get away with it then so be it.
Block 5 Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Can't believe how fast they have sunk. I was at Kenilworth (what a dump!) 2 seasons ago, and now they are a non league side. Almost surreal.
Cabrone Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 2nd game I ever saw at the Dell was against Luton, we won 2-0 if I remember. Mark Wight and Dave Armstrong?? getting the goals. Used to be a decent little club. They have been treated very badly IMO.
derry Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 they didnt bottle it at all, they are fully aware that we have not breached there clearly defined rules on administration, this causing significant embarrassment to themselves. they are desperate to punish us, hence the 'independent' investigation into our financial affairs, as if the reports by the clubs auditors arent independent, im sure they are allowed to make fraudulent statements in the company reports! they are looking for us to have failed to pay the cleaning lady for one extra hour of work that they failed to report correctly so that they can allege financial impropriety's, and if they cant find that they will try to change the rules and apply the retro-actively They did bottle but not the way you are intimating. The league's lawyers have been through the rules with a fine tooth comb, as have the club's lawyers and the Administrator's lawyers. The rules do not allow for the penalising of a wholly owned independent solvent subsidiary of a public company in administration. The league's problem is that their rules stipulate the football club has to be a completely separate entity from it's public owner. To allow it to be a member of the football/premier league clubs have to undertake to abide by the grievance procedures/tribunals laid down in the rules and give up the right to sue the football authorities. The really neat thing is public companies can't comply with that rule under public company rules. The problem the league have is that if they act despite their rules the public company can sue the pants off them for the losses they would suffer, by action taken against an asset they own, in contravention of the league's rules as the member club is not in administration. The league's lawyers will have already thoroughly advised them of their position. If the rule could be applied then the league would have issued a clear statement that Southampton would be dealt with in accordance with the rules after the final game of the season. The fact they didn't and called a 'forensic' independent legal enquiry shows that they have a problem legally. They already know the position as their lawyers will have advised them of their position. This is a 'Mawhinny' political answer to a too difficult to deal with problem. Get somebody else to make the decision. If the independent enquiry says they are independent and not in administration, the league can hold their hands up in mock horror and promise to try and close the loophole. Apart from banning public companies from owning football clubs there is little they can do. That stance then takes the heat off them from the clubs who have been already docked points. Only Derby I believe was a public company with a subsidiary not in administration. All the others the whole structure was in administration as far as I can make out. The rules had been changed bringing in the points penalty prior to the Derby affair in 2003, they suffered no points penalty. In any event those clubs that are threatening to sue the league are talking crap, and both they and the league know it is just posturing because under the rules they can't sue the league, only use the grievance procedures and that's where we came in.
um pahars Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 They did bottle but not the way you are intimating. The league's lawyers have been through the rules with a fine tooth comb, as have the club's lawyers and the Administrator's lawyers. The rules do not allow for the penalising of a wholly owned independent solvent subsidiary of a public company in administration. The league's problem is that their rules stipulate the football club has to be a completely separate entity from it's public owner. To allow it to be a member of the football/premier league clubs have to undertake to abide by the grievance procedures/tribunals laid down in the rules and give up the right to sue the football authorities. The really neat thing is public companies can't comply with that rule under public company rules. The problem the league have is that if they act despite their rules the public company can sue the pants off them for the losses they would suffer, by action taken against an asset they own, in contravention of the league's rules as the member club is not in administration. The league's lawyers will have already thoroughly advised them of their position. If the rule could be applied then the league would have issued a clear statement that Southampton would be dealt with in accordance with the rules after the final game of the season. The fact they didn't and called a 'forensic' independent legal enquiry shows that they have a problem legally. They already know the position as their lawyers will have advised them of their position. This is a 'Mawhinny' political answer to a too difficult to deal with problem. Get somebody else to make the decision. If the independent enquiry says they are independent and not in administration, the league can hold their hands up in mock horror and promise to try and close the loophole. Apart from banning public companies from owning football clubs there is little they can do. That stance then takes the heat off them from the clubs who have been already docked points. Only Derby I believe was a public company with a subsidiary not in administration. All the others the whole structure was in administration as far as I can make out. The rules had been changed bringing in the points penalty prior to the Derby affair in 2003, they suffered no points penalty. In any event those clubs that are threatening to sue the league are talking crap, and both they and the league know it is just posturing because under the rules they can't sue the league, only use the grievance procedures and that's where we came in. Very interesting read and fingers crossed you're right. However, with regards Derby the rules regarding points deductions for going into administration were introduced the following season (although they were announced just prior to Derby going in to Admin they did not apply at that ttime).
Guest Dark Sotonic Mills Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I hated Luton, the town, the supporters (animals to a man (sic)) and the bomb-site of a ground with its restricted view terraces. However, what has been done to them is nothing short of criminal. I remember when Swindon were denied a place in the old first division for a financial 'crime' yet Tottenham were let off for a similar charge. Hmmmm.
SarniaSaint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 They did bottle but not the way you are intimating. The league's lawyers have been through the rules with a fine tooth comb, as have the club's lawyers and the Administrator's lawyers. The rules do not allow for the penalising of a wholly owned independent solvent subsidiary of a public company in administration. The league's problem is that their rules stipulate the football club has to be a completely separate entity from it's public owner. To allow it to be a member of the football/premier league clubs have to undertake to abide by the grievance procedures/tribunals laid down in the rules and give up the right to sue the football authorities. The really neat thing is public companies can't comply with that rule under public company rules. The problem the league have is that if they act despite their rules the public company can sue the pants off them for the losses they would suffer, by action taken against an asset they own, in contravention of the league's rules as the member club is not in administration. The league's lawyers will have already thoroughly advised them of their position. If the rule could be applied then the league would have issued a clear statement that Southampton would be dealt with in accordance with the rules after the final game of the season. The fact they didn't and called a 'forensic' independent legal enquiry shows that they have a problem legally. They already know the position as their lawyers will have advised them of their position. This is a 'Mawhinny' political answer to a too difficult to deal with problem. Get somebody else to make the decision. If the independent enquiry says they are independent and not in administration, the league can hold their hands up in mock horror and promise to try and close the loophole. Apart from banning public companies from owning football clubs there is little they can do. That stance then takes the heat off them from the clubs who have been already docked points. Only Derby I believe was a public company with a subsidiary not in administration. All the others the whole structure was in administration as far as I can make out. The rules had been changed bringing in the points penalty prior to the Derby affair in 2003, they suffered no points penalty. In any event those clubs that are threatening to sue the league are talking crap, and both they and the league know it is just posturing because under the rules they can't sue the league, only use the grievance procedures and that's where we came in. Well done again. Good summary of the situation.
corsacar saint Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I have a soft spot for Luton, having seen Saints 5 times there over the years, and I hope they come straight back up as champions. As for Malwhinney, what a tory arsehole.
eelpie Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 Luton have suffered from a corrupted inequitable system that endows the rich and condemns the poor. The very smug Football League have no-one to blame but themselves. It is their ineptitude that has created a ridiculous penal system that has destroyed Luton Town. Nobody is safe. My heart goes out to Luton FC and their fans.
eelpie Posted 13 April, 2009 Posted 13 April, 2009 I have a soft spot for Luton, having seen Saints 5 times there over the years, and I hope they come straight back up as champions. As for Malwhinney, what a tory arsehole. In a nutshell.
dubai_phil Posted 14 April, 2009 Posted 14 April, 2009 Luton have suffered from a corrupted inequitable system that endows the rich and condemns the poor. The very smug Football League have no-one to blame but themselves. It is their ineptitude that has created a ridiculous penal system that has destroyed Luton Town. Nobody is safe. My heart goes out to Luton FC and their fans. Ditto. It is a very poor "leader" who becomes responsible for the destruction of the (in this case) clubs who he his supposed to be "looking after". (Read our lot as well as Mawhinney) It isn't ever the people who cause the "discretions/mistakes" who get punished it is always the poor bl**dy fans. (Although an evil part of me does also say - serves them right for that plastic pitch nonsense)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now