johnny c Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Why? That's if we don't get a creditor's agreement to come out of administration. We're not there yet. No other club has managed to get one. So why would we?
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 So, can we start selling season tickets for League 1 now and thus keep the club afloat?
tulip Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 what happens now if the football club goes into administration,anyone know
Johnny Bognor Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Our best possible outcome is starting next season! That's about the best possible outcome. On the bright side (if there is one), there is nothing to hold back the 31 interested buyers now that our status is known.
leer Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Lets see them deduct 10 points from West Ham also then whose holding company entered administration the other day!!!!
Stirchleysaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 The [Football League]Board noted that Grant Thornton reported that toward the end of their enquiries co-operation with them was withdrawn. Yep, that sums it up. Good work all involved with the football club. Burn what remaining bridge we had... Idiots.
Beer Engine Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 There is zero percent chance of winning an appeal. What the League have done is right and fair. Even after administration, the "Investors" section on the OS said that SLH was a company whose principal business was the running of a football club. The useless ****wits who thought that they could escape the 10 point deduction on a technicality didn't even think to remove the self-incriminating evidence from their own website. Uselss f***ers. If I were a shareholder in SLH I would seriously contemplate suing old Cherry Face.
slickmick Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 That's about the best possible outcome. On the bright side (if there is one), there is nothing to hold back the 31 interested buyers now that our status is known. They've left the building.
anothersaintinsouthsea Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 administration just after the 31 March deadline...what fecking incompetance. any lowe supporters will to mount a defence?
corsacar saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 That fecking arsehole Lowe could not even get that right.
St Landrew Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Didn't think it would happen [at first] but we deserve it,not us fans but the club. Same here, but tbh, I've been building up myself for this news, and frankly Saints deserve nothing less.
LGTL Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Wonder how much Season Tickets will be next year, that's if we even exist...
up and away Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 It's the correct decision and inevitable ... but an absolute disaster for SFC all the same. The decision to postpone administration until after the end-March deadline must have been the product of extreme stupidity and/or arrogance. As things stand, I think that the 10 point deduction at the start of next season is the least of our problems. I will not argue the point that this decision is fair, but it is not correct. They had ample opportunity to change the regulations since Derby and decided to do nothing about it. The Football League were sounded out prior to the March deadline and confirmed there would be no 10 point deduction? Now I can readily understand it is not in the spirit of the regulations, but they chose not to close that loop hole. What they did do was to punish Luton to the hilt for something that was none of their fault. the spirit of the regulations meaning absolute zilch there. Double standards here and I cannot see any reason why we cannot back date administration to pre March, thus avoiding the 10 point penalty next season. The Football league basically bypassed that option when they confirmed the Football club would not be deducted points.
Window Cleaner Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 My what a surprise, nailed on from the day we went into admin. All the rest was just smoke and mirrors, the 2 are one and the same entity.
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Lets see them deduct 10 points from West Ham also then whose holding company entered administration the other day!!!! Sky Sports News asking for Saints fans to email their reaction. This would be a good question to email them to get it on national TV
liquidsnake Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Expected the penalty, expected relegation. But still, when it happens... absolutely gutted.
thesaint sfc Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I cried when we were relegated. I cried when Rasiak scored in the play off semi. I put my arm through a wall when Best missed his penalty. Now, nothing. I'm too drained.
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Not really a surprise, we deserved it. Hopefully it will hurry up whoever is buying the club...
OldNick Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 wasn't someone to do with Norwich on the committee?
Rational Rich Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/ChampionshipNewsDetail/0,,10794~1636735,00.html I've just read the rationale on the league website and it makes no sense from a legal perspective. SLH (the only bit where an administrator has been appointed) is in no way an asset or an undertaking of SFC, SFC is an asset/undertaking of SLH. The FL have made a perverse decision on the facts. The administrators should and almost certainly will challenge this, as it will materially affect the value of SLH's main asset and, as such, the return to creditors. This is by no means over.
Foxstone Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 For those who thought Administration would be a good thing - Bloody great is'nt it ?? :mad: Thanks to all the various idiots we have had the misfortune to have been saddled with over the past few years - The whole bloody lot of them have contributed to this and NO exceptions !!
saintjay77 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 If only we still had the finance company and radio station I never thought I would actually think that but if that was still around then the holding company would have other forms of revenue and the football club would be more of a seperate entity. I doubt anyone actually thought about that when the hair brained idea was hatched but all the same.... I suppose this will now mean we will lose a few of the interested parties and the ones that stick around will want to get us at even more of a cut down price? In some ways we are actually more likly to get bought now!!! If we apeal and lose does that mean we will get a further point penalty or did Leeds and Luton lose extra for something else? Wonder what league we will finally stop in?
Mole Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 wasn't someone to do with Norwich on the committee? Yep a Norwich director. Anyone want a Forest ticket?
Whitey Grandad Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 So imagine this.... by some miracle we finish out of the bottom three, the 10 points are applied which relegates us, we win the appeal and are re-instated in the Championship, Barnsley or Forest are relegated instead. This one could run and run.
krissyboy31 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Just went on the OS for the official view. Not even on!!
SNSUN Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Well it has been coming. Frankly I'm not suprised, it would've caused no end of grief for the FA had the intended loophole worked. Now the players need to work their arseholes off to win the next two games. I doubt it'll happen, but we need to limit the troubles to this season in order to start with a clean(ish) slate. Yes, we're down no metter what. But we need that points deduction to happen this season, not next. If we DO get it next season? Well, I will be hoping for a fresh new team come the start of next season so we can rapidly climb up the table. Rock Bottom? We've just hit it.
Wade Garrett Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 If we have broken insolvency laws, then I hope the directors responsible for this are brought to account. Will be interesting to see if Rupert goes on another media offensive. I rather think he'll probably go on holiday instead.
notnowcato Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I will not argue the point that this decision is fair, but it is not correct. They had ample opportunity to change the regulations since Derby and decided to do nothing about it. The Football League were sounded out prior to the March deadline and confirmed there would be no 10 point deduction? Now I can readily understand it is not in the spirit of the regulations, but they chose not to close that loop hole. What they did do was to punish Luton to the hilt for something that was none of their fault. the spirit of the regulations meaning absolute zilch there. Double standards here and I cannot see any reason why we cannot back date administration to pre March, thus avoiding the 10 point penalty next season. The Football league basically bypassed that option when they confirmed the Football club would not be deducted points. When you know you are dealing with an outfit like the FL you take the decision away from them. Why did we seek assurance that if we go into admin the following week that we would not be punished 10 points?? This communication with the FL sounds like utter s**t spouted from the Lowe camp.
SaintDonkey Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 (edited) The FA are ****ing ****s. Ready to tear up the rule book when the mood takes them, of course nothing to do with one of the presiding board being Chief Executive at Norwich... ****ers Edited 23 April, 2009 by SaintDonkey [job title error]
mr_bishiuk Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Lets see them deduct 10 points from West Ham also then whose holding company entered administration the other day!!!! Football League rules do not apply to Premier League sides, not sure The Premier League has rules about point deductions for administration
WIGANSAINT Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 one thing follows another. ****ing disgrace the way this club has been run.
saint1977 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Thanks Rupert, you could at least have spared us the -10 for next season. Shows you his true colours.
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 (edited) For those who thought Administration would be a good thing - Bloody great is'nt it ?? :mad: No one thought it would be a good thing per se. Some thought it might be better in the long run than the alternative. Not the same thing. Edited 23 April, 2009 by trousers
Flyer Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 This is by no means over. Its over, the FL can exclude Saints from next season unless they sign something that they accept the decision. Thats exactly what they did to Leeds and Leeds had to take it or cease to exist, just as Saints would if they appealed or sued.
Wade Garrett Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Not really a surprise, we deserved it. Hopefully it will hurry up whoever is buying the club... A long legal battle with the Football League could drag it out even more.
Mole Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Thanks Rupert, you could at least have spared us the -10 for next season. Shows you his true colours. Yeah, i reckon he waited a week out of spite. It's my ball and if i can't play with it i'm taking it home.
corky morris Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Not surprised, but *****ing disapointed. The business genius that is Rupert Lowe deserves having all his assets taken off him & then let him start again.
Runaway Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I hope Rupert Lowe takes his duck hunting rifle and puts in up his own.... *BLAM*
WokingSaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Today is St.George's Day - appropriate don't you think!
Window Cleaner Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Yeah, i reckon he waited a week out of spite. It's my ball and if i can't play with it i'm taking it home. Out of spite ? doubt it, I suspect that the plan was not to get relegated TBH,thus just -10 this season putting us into Lge 1 as planned with time to pay the debts or get them knocked down. F*cking cracking wheeze Rupert, if you wanted it to work we shouldn't have lost to Charlton, that was where the sh*t hit the fan.
loughborough_saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Who is the player in the BBC article photo? Is it even a Saints player?
saint1977 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Yeah, i reckon he waited a week out of spite. It's my ball and if i can't play with it i'm taking it home. I think he's just a poor CEO to be honest. Barclays have shot themselves in the foot a bit though, does this mean they may get a worse deal than if they'd shut Rupert and Wilde down the week before the cut-off?
Beer Engine Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I will not argue the point that this decision is fair, but it is not correct. They had ample opportunity to change the regulations since Derby and decided to do nothing about it. The Football League were sounded out prior to the March deadline and confirmed there would be no 10 point deduction? Now I can readily understand it is not in the spirit of the regulations, but they chose not to close that loop hole. What they did do was to punish Luton to the hilt for something that was none of their fault. the spirit of the regulations meaning absolute zilch there. Double standards here and I cannot see any reason why we cannot back date administration to pre March, thus avoiding the 10 point penalty next season. The Football league basically bypassed that option when they confirmed the Football club would not be deducted points. Don't get me wrong, the Football League are meddling in something that they patently have no feel for - law. And they are generally a bunch of worthless, pompous incompetents. In real law, there are broad equitable principles that are invoked to try and make sure that no-one suffers real injustice on account of the strict application of technical legal rules. Principles like "noone will profit from their own wrongdoing" for example would prevent someone from claiming an insurance payout on the life of someone they murdered (assuming that the policy was silent on the issue). So, the Football League have probably got it right by penalising SFC because Rupes was trying to take the ****** based on a technicality ! Was prepared for this from day 1 of admin but still curiously stunned and shocked ..
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Thanks Rupert, you could at least have spared us the -10 for next season. Shows you his true colours. Barclays called the shots
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