Psycrow Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 To be honest, what Mawhinney is saying is true. The parent company and the club are both linked. You can't argue with that. What I don't understand is why we'd bother contesting the decision. The Football League would never revoke their decision, and any appeal would put us at risk of being handed a further punishment. The last thing we'd want is to start on -17, or worse -30! In my opinion, we should just accept the decision, continue our search for a potential buyer and look to rebuild our club. To appeal and drag this whole thing out just seems a waste of both time and money. Other clubs haven't been deducted more points for appealing, they've been deducted more points for still being in administration or breaking other rules. If a criminal gets sentenced to life in prison, he doesn't risk the death sentence by appealing.
NorthamSaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Forget penalising the club with points deductions the FA go after the people responsible for the state of the clubs finances. These people should be banned from running a business in the future. The board f**ked it up the board should pay.
bridge too far Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Other clubs haven't been deducted more points for appealing, they've been deducted more points for still being in administration or breaking other rules. If a criminal gets sentenced to life in prison, he doesn't risk the death sentence by appealing. "Well maybe I'm being naive, but if the FL has an appeals process surely they can't increase the penalty because we choose to use it? If I was convicted of a crime I hadn't committed and I appealed I wouldn't expect my sentence to be increased just because I'd used my right of appeal." Posted by me on another thread - SNAP
Clapham Saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Please be objective, Clapham, even if it is difficult. Barclays will not do anything of the sort and you and I know it. The game's up and the sooner we get used to it, the better. 1) I never said that they definately would 2) They frequently do in other cases. The judgement is based upon cost, chances of success and the financial impact of success of failure. Cost (in perspective of the figures in which we are dealing with here) is probably manageable I would guess. Chances of success... Who knows, I would imagine unlikely but then again I haven't either read the rules myself in any detail and so am probably not that qualified to give an opinion. Impact... None of us know this. This will have been discussed at the negotiations that the administrator has been having with interested parties. Again, only a guess but I would have thought it will make a BIG difference. As RR said above, none of us can make a definative statement one way or the other as we simply don't have enough information. I never said that they would one way or the other, I simply corrected your statement that the Administrator definately wouldn't appeal as I don't beleive it to be that clear cut.
martel Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Looks like we're appealing! Sounds shocking by the football league... I think that will be a waste of money frankly, the football league told the lawyers to find a way to dock us ten points that would stand up in court; that you can put money on. I think we would be better off not turning up for the last games just to screw up the final league positions, it will save money as the revenue will equate to the square root of nothing after being relegated already. The football league is run by a bunch of syphaletic c----s who know nothing about football, all they achieve is to create greater hardship for any club that finds its self in this postion. I like the rest of you am gutted by this decision but not surprised either, when it went to the lawyers Mawhinney was determined to find a way by any means; this of course he has now achieved, I will now take time out to consider whether I continue to even follow English football in any form. I am so disgusted by the whole dam thing, in particular the premiership, the SPL with four clubs instead of two, that is all it is, who knows after some calming down and thought I will continue to follow the game; however, as of right now I really do not know. Message to the football league: try a new sport like heading the shot, or catching the javelin; with you lot at the recieving end of course, W-----s.
LestWeForget Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 If I was convicted of a crime I hadn't committed and I appealed I wouldn't expect my sentence to be increased just because I'd used my right of appeal. That CAN and DOES happen...........
Psycrow Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 "Well maybe I'm being naive, but if the FL has an appeals process surely they can't increase the penalty because we choose to use it? If I was convicted of a crime I hadn't committed and I appealed I wouldn't expect my sentence to be increased just because I'd used my right of appeal." Posted by me on another thread - SNAP Great minds and fools etc etc
Doctoroncall Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Assuming the club survives, a 10 point deduction coupled with the team we,ve got then next season will probably mean more struggle and relegation. Not really, it means that who ever is interested will reduce their price accordingly.
Third Division South Days Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Surely the PLC uses the legal route as they are not part of the FL. Simultaneously SFC uses the appeals procedure. If our case is so strong it might give the FL some problems.
Master Bates Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I wonder which fans will be coming to St Mary's next season. I for one will still be renewing my ST.
1976_Child Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I wonder which fans will be coming to St Mary's next season. I for one will still be renewing my ST. I'm in for life mate.... literally
Guided Missile Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I currently work for an administrator and agree completely with RR. So...neither of you are qualified administrators, then? I also assume, Clapham, that as you and Rich are having a mutual grooming session, you also agree with the reply he posted to me, here, over a week ago...? 15-04-2009, 01:16 PM The plc's 2008 consolidated accounts are here. They include the value of the players registrations as intangible assets, so any argument that the plc is a separate entity not entirely associated with football and associated football debts won't wash, IMO. 10 points deducted or my d! cks a bloater... GM, I think you are getting confused. Having looked at the accounts, player registrations are only included as intangible assets of the group on a consolidated basis, I assume that they are within SFCL. When companies form part of a group, the parent is obliged by law to submit consolidated accounts for the group as a whole and invidual accounts for itself. This does not result in them becoming the same thing from a legal perspective. When you look at the individual balance sheet for SLH itself (p39-44), the assets of that company are just property and shares in group companies, which ties in with what the administrator is arguing. Having now looked at the accounts, I am more confident that the adminstrator's argument will stand up to scrutiny. Remind me to ignore you two windbags in future, in addition to Mark Fry's boll oxe. If anyone wants a reason why Fry and his bunch of bloodsuckers want to take a punt at an appeal, with Barclays money, I suggest they contact one of these characters to ask what their hourly rate is: For further information, please contact: Begbies Traynor: Mark Fry / Kirstie Provan 020 7398 3800 Smithfield: John Kiely/Will Swan/Will Henderson/Andrew Wilde 020 7360 4900 Personally, given the advice that the lawyers originally gave SLH, re. the 10 point deduction, I can't see Barclays throwing more money their way, can you? F***ing lawyers and accountants put the club where we are today, when we needed someone who knew about football, FFS...
beatlesaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 So we now have to rely on a bunch of players who frankly didnt look that motivated or interested anyway to try and get us out the bottom 3 so that we start next season on 0 points ! Given that 90% of those players Wotte picks Saturday will not be there next season its pretty safe to say we will start with -10 then. He might as well play the kids who will still be here then from the reserves and academy. Judging by last saturday's pathetic showing they wont be any worse.
krissyboy31 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I'm in for life mate.... literally You could always appeal!
mcjwills Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I bet this announcement would have waited until the end of the season if Norwich hadn't been in the bottom three... Well if Norwich are above us and one place below Forrest and we are already maythematically down by the time we play Forrest just send out the youth team and let forest run riot, that will teach Norwich directors for interfering !!!
saintalan Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Well if Norwich are above us and one place below Forrest and we are already maythematically down by the time we play Forrest just send out the youth team and let forest run riot, that will teach Norwich directors for interfering !!! Like the sentiment but better keep the current players, the youth team might show a bit of passion and upset the apple cart!
Rational Rich Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 So...neither of you are qualified administrators, then? I also assume, Clapham, that as you and Rich are having a mutual grooming session, you also agree with the reply he posted to me, here, over a week ago...? 15-04-2009, 01:16 PM Remind me to ignore you two windbags in future, in addition to Mark Fry's boll oxe. If anyone wants a reason why Fry and his bunch of bloodsuckers want to take a punt at an appeal, with Barclays money, I suggest they contact one of these characters to ask what their hourly rate is: For further information, please contact: Begbies Traynor: Mark Fry / Kirstie Provan 020 7398 3800 Smithfield: John Kiely/Will Swan/Will Henderson/Andrew Wilde 020 7360 4900 Personally, given the advice that the lawyers originally gave SLH, re. the 10 point deduction, I can't see Barclays throwing more money their way, can you? F***ing lawyers and accountants put the club where we are today, when we needed someone who knew about football, FFS... Cheers! By the way, the lawyer acting for the administrators has direct experience of running a football club (I believe he was chief exec at Fulham for a while, according to his online CV) as well as being an insolvency specialist. All I will say is that there is no legislating for the Football League making the wrong decision and that's why I expect an appeal. You can (and I'm sure you will) quote me on that.
Jonnyboy Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I dont see why, if we are due to be deducted 10 points, it isnt fixed to one season: - ie - it should 10 points off THIS season OR 10 points off NEXT season. Its bullying by the league to say "oh we'll wait and see where you finish before we decide when you get the points deducted" Turds.
Martin Orford Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Hardly surprising really - that's what you get for appalling mismanagement and a very poor product. But rather than donating money to try to prop up a club that's rotten to the core and in terminal decline, I honestly think that the best thing would be to let it go under and start a new club like the good people of Aldershot and Accrington did. Sure it would have to start from the non-league, but provided the City Council are prepared to buy the stadium and allow it to still be used for football, the sheer weight of local support and the income that generates should ensure that a new club will soon be rocketing up through the leagues rather than plummeting down them like the old one. So do the decent thing and put SFC out of its misery so that we can all start with a clean sheet and finally have something to look forward to.
cambsaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Its a very messy situation. I personally agree that League's statement that SFC and SLH are inextricably linked. However spare a thought for the other relegation fighters- We still may appeal, which could leave the relegation issue in limbo; and now Notts Forest will face a team that will have nothing at all to play for on the last day of the season, hardly fair on Norwich or Barnsley! A typical mess; but as one of the few people who is as, or even possibly more, unpleasant than Lowest is Mahwhinney what would ypu expect?
mcjwills Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Hardly surprising really - that's what you get for appalling mismanagement and a very poor product. But rather than donating money to try to prop up a club that's rotten to the core and in terminal decline, I honestly think that the best thing would be to let it go under and start a new club like the good people of Aldershot and Accrington did. Sure it would have to start from the non-league, but provided the City Council are prepared to buy the stadium and allow it to still be used for football, the sheer weight of local support and the income that generates should ensure that a new club will soon be rocketing up through the leagues rather than plummeting down them like the old one. So do the decent thing and put SFC out of its misery so that we can all start with a clean sheet and finally have something to look forward to. Get a life, I have supported this club for 40 odd years and will continue to do so, so return back to where ever you came from and never return.
Whitey Grandad Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 That CAN and DOES happen........... The law was only changed recently. Before that an appeal could not lead to an increased sentence.
Martin Orford Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Get a life, I have supported this club for 40 odd years and will continue to do so, so return back to where ever you came from and never return. I supported this club for 40 years too, but I cannot bring myself to support something which has been so badly run and which has brought such ruin on itself. I want to support a Southampton football club but I have totally lost patience with the current one, as I suspect have many others.
thorpie the sinner Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I wonder which fans will be coming to St Mary's next season. I for one will still be renewing my ST. good lad!!
chuz Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I dont see why, if we are due to be deducted 10 points, it isnt fixed to one season: - ie - it should 10 points off THIS season OR 10 points off NEXT season. Its bullying by the league to say "oh we'll wait and see where you finish before we decide when you get the points deducted" Turds. Nope it is the rules that the FL dictate and (I imagine) we sign up to in order to be part of the League. It is aimed to stop clubs who know they are going to be relegated going into administration on the last day of the season and taking the hit when they know they are already going down. I believe it was brought in when a club went into administration at half time on the last game of the season, knowing they would be relegated and preferring to take the hit that season. Because of that, the FL changed their rules. And presumably we (like everyone else) signed up to the new rules in order to remain in the league Its not nice, but we knew that if we went into admin after the third Thursday in March, we would have the deduction taken either this year (if we stay up) or next (if we go down). What amazes me is, knowing this, we went into admin less than 5 working days later...
'dover Saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Well if Norwich are above us and one place below Forrest and we are already maythematically down by the time we play Forrest just send out the youth team and let forest run riot, that will teach Norwich directors for interfering !!! Gerry Forrest! Sorry, humour is the only way i can get through today...
Webby Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Given that 90% of those players Wotte picks Saturday will not be there next season its pretty safe to say we will start with -10 then. Why won't they be there? They're not good enough for the championship. They've proved that!
Window Cleaner Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Why won't they be there? They're not good enough for the championship. They've proved that! but as they're already too expensive for the CCC,they're much too expensive for League 1.
Cabrone Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 For the realists amongst us this was always expected. At least any buyer now knows what division we will be in next season. Frankly I'm more concerned about having a club than what division we are in.
Hopkins Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Anyone got the proof where it says in the football league administration rules that if a club and its parent company are inextricably linked the club will be docked?
'dover Saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Why won't they be there? They're not good enough for the championship. They've proved that! Thats because, just like Lowe, Poortvliet etc they think thay are better than they are....or prehaps they are good but there is something rotten in the core of the club that it brings out the worst in people...
saintsfanwill101 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 well iv heard that our dear friend Rupert has expressed interest in rebuying us he can **** off
Window Cleaner Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 well iv heard that our dear friend Rupert has expressed interest in rebuying us he can **** off Depends how much money he's talking.
Whitey Grandad Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Depends how much money he's talking. If he bought the club do you think anybody would want to watch the team after all that he's been responsible for?
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 If he bought the club do you think anybody would want to watch the team after all that he's been responsible for? Poll? (seriously)
adysaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 The dude is on Talk Sport talking about us exploiting another loophole. You'd expect Ian Wright to be on our side due to BWP but he seems entirley not bothered (the dude is joking at him to stay awake).
Toadhall Saint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I wonder which fans will be coming to St Mary's next season. I for one will still be renewing my ST. Same as that MB
Hopkins Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 If he bought the club do you think anybody would want to watch the team after all that he's been responsible for? Anyone who would rather we'd go bankrupt than he take over if he is the only option is a helmet. Don't even get me started on the mugs that would choose not watch there football team play because he was around.
trousers Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Don't even get me started on the mugs that would choose not watch there football team play because he was around. Ok, we won't
Topcat Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Lowe "We are not going to do a Leeds". What go into administration, have the ground sold, be relegated to L1 and start down there with a points deduction? Guess what, that numpty Lowe was wrong again.
martel Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Mawhinney is an arrogant gimp. Talking about the news with a huge smile on his face. I have to agree with that, however, the larger issue is that his IQ is lower than his shoe size.
monosaint Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I think that the other clubs will have been lobbying the FL in the background..
Red Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 Surely now is the time for some legal whiz kid Saints fan to offer his services for free to mount the appeal???? Isn't Anthony Schultz (SP?) a top legal guy who was interested in heading up a consortium to buy us? What better way for him or or a number of other legal firms in Southampton / Hampshire to help the club and the community. Come on you know it makes sense !!! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rational Rich Full Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 103 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: Originally Posted by Guided Missile Rich, you obviously have no clue how administrators work. There is NO way that he will incur legal costs, on the chance that the Club will somehow avoid a 10 point deduction and somehow increase the asset value of SLH. The main reason for this is that an administrator does not have the protection in law that a company does, ie he is PERSONALLY liable for any losses to the creditors, that occur as a result of his actions. A new owner will probably throw a few quid at a law suit, if they think it is worth the effort, but the cost of doing this has already been/will be knocked off the value of SLH... Mate, the game is up... GM, I used to work for an administrator. I have a clue. Provided the legal costs don't outweigh the difference to the value of the asset and there is a decent liklihood of success, he will have to challenge it, especially if the case is as strong as it appears. It will come down to the costs of challenging against what stands to be lost by not challenging. Can't imagine the fees would be that massive. Anyway, that's his call, he has the facts and figures to make the commercial decision, I don't.
Rational Rich Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I think that both the club and the administrators have good lawyers already. The guy from DLA Piper acting for begbies is very well regarded and also used to be chief exec at fulham. Surely now is the time for some legal whiz kid Saints fan to offer his services for free to mount the appeal???? Isn't Anthony Schultz (SP?) a top legal guy who was interested in heading up a consortium to buy us? What better way for him or or a number of other legal firms in Southampton / Hampshire to help the club and the community. Come on you know it makes sense !!! ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rational Rich Full Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Posts: 103 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Quote: Originally Posted by Guided Missile Rich, you obviously have no clue how administrators work. There is NO way that he will incur legal costs, on the chance that the Club will somehow avoid a 10 point deduction and somehow increase the asset value of SLH. The main reason for this is that an administrator does not have the protection in law that a company does, ie he is PERSONALLY liable for any losses to the creditors, that occur as a result of his actions. A new owner will probably throw a few quid at a law suit, if they think it is worth the effort, but the cost of doing this has already been/will be knocked off the value of SLH... Mate, the game is up... GM, I used to work for an administrator. I have a clue. Provided the legal costs don't outweigh the difference to the value of the asset and there is a decent liklihood of success, he will have to challenge it, especially if the case is as strong as it appears. It will come down to the costs of challenging against what stands to be lost by not challenging. Can't imagine the fees would be that massive. Anyway, that's his call, he has the facts and figures to make the commercial decision, I don't.
Saint Fan CaM Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 I find the decision to be disgraceful in the extreme. If they documented the rules and we've not broken the rules then there was no reason to deduct points. I am so glad Fry has decided to appeal - it's a terrible decision by the league and the timing is worse. The club will survive though - the support is too significant for it not to.
Saint Fan CaM Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 ....and Lowe and Wilde should never allow their shadows to darken Southampton again...I would fear for their safety. Absolute incompetence of the highest order and Lowe particularly doesn't deserve to work again.
Dalek2003 Posted 23 April, 2009 Posted 23 April, 2009 There is not much we can do about relegation but it IS worth finishing above the bottom three to make a fresh start. Oh, to be able to go back to the Spring of 2004 and to appoint Hoddle !
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