Jump to content

League deduct 10 Points - Will apply in L1 Next Season


Danny

Recommended Posts

The League rules penalise football clubs which ARE in administration

 

SFC is NOT in administration

 

The League rules say nothing about parent companies. They cannot bend the rules to suit the outcome they are aiming to achieve. It's akin to reversing a penalty decision after a game has ended ......they are wrong and there is every reason to believe a court will say that

 

I wonder if it is relevant that one of the three man members on the review panel is a Director of Norwich? FFS!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like we're appealing! Sounds shocking by the football league...

 

 

Mark Fry has confirmed that they are investigating that possibilty, however, Mawhinney in his statement cleary states that he does not know how football runs its finances. Should that be the case then how can this excuse for human intelligence make a judgement on the issue.

 

 

BIZZARE.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

********

 

I'm shocked, stunned, ****ed off..

 

If you thought Lg 1 was going to be easier, think again. We'll still be a lot of teams' cup final....and on -10.

 

We won't do a Leeds 'cos they had a passionate group of players who kept winning to overcome the penalty. Can anyone honestly see this lot doing that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a Saints Fan I am absolutel gutted this has happened as I like others have paid the Full Season Ticket price for many years now and bben supporting them through thick and thin. The sad thing about it is Football has now become all about Money and not passion, and thats a shame. To take 10 points off our club and announce it today is a disgrace and I cannot understand the reason behind it. I feel so sad that due to the Greed of both board members and players it can bring a club to a standstill and thats wrong. True fans have a loyalty and a love for the club like a family member and to others its wage without the passion or a love for the club. RIP Saints lets hope we can get behind the club and take us forward to new beginnings with a new board with a passion for the club

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The League rules penalise football clubs which ARE in administration

 

SFC is NOT in administration

 

The League rules say nothing about parent companies. They cannot bend the rules to suit the outcome they are aiming to achieve. It's akin to reversing a penalty decision after a game has ended ......they are wrong and there is every reason to believe a court will say that

 

I wonder if it is relevant that one of the three man members on the review panel is a Director of Norwich? FFS!

 

The point of the League's Insolvency Policy is to ensure that no club can gain a competitive advantage by living beyond its means and then walking away from the debt.

 

The obvious scenario would be where a club (SFC for example) gambled huge sums of money it doesn't have in trying to gain promotion to the Premiership. The theory is that clubs would be encouraged to do this if they thought that they could avoid having to pay their debts by going into administration and subsequently selling the good bits to a Phoenix company that would take the League share and other assets free of debt and at a knock-down price.

 

Unfortunately, we gambled £7.5 million that we don't have on a team whose only achievement has been to stay ahead of Charlton.

 

Had we been near the top of the Championship at the time we went into administration, then we might have understood the sanction better on an emotional level.

 

How pathetic is that. We can't even cheat properly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ten points deduction comes as no surprise. The authorities have always hated us and probably saw it as their last opportunity to give Woopert a kick in the balls.

 

It was posted earlier this week but it seems like it a different story for Mr Brooking's team - 2 illegal players fielded + the below makes it look one rule for us and one for the elite.

 

http://www.eufootball.biz/Clubs/6391-parent_administration_west_ham.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ten points deduction comes as no surprise. The authorities have always hated us and probably saw it as their last opportunity to give Woopert a kick in the balls.

 

It was posted earlier this week but it seems like it a different story for Mr Brooking's team - 2 illegal players fielded + the below makes it look one rule for us and one for the elite.

 

http://www.eufootball.biz/Clubs/6391-parent_administration_west_ham.html

half the countries press being West 'Am fans and so it will be put to bed.

Some of the big clubs will be squirming about this for their own future

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Depends how much money he's talking.

 

Perhaps he'll triple the amount he put in before? So that'll be 3 x £0 then. £0.

 

It's like an arsonist who has just burnt your house down and killed your family, turning up to the blaze with a cup of water and saying "can I help?".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dalek2003, that's like saying I'll buy a ticket for last weeks lottery as I now know the winning numbers, no guarantee Hoddle would have stayed long term.

My only supprise with the 10 point deduction is that the FL didn't wait until after the last game of the season and the unlikely event that we stayed up.

Let's all move on and get behind the future of the football team and hope who ever is in charge learns from the last 4 years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well im defo getting a season ticket next year, finally got a job and can afford one, surely if people care as much about saints as they say they do then they will be willing to spend the money and get us back up next season. We should show the FA and football leagues that they cant dampen the sprit of the saints fans and that no matter how hard they try Southampton FC will never die !!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's such a crying shame for every fan of both SFC and football in general. The greed in the game has made it self-implode and there will be many more after us who fall from grace in the same way. It all goes back to the days of that genius Graham Kelly and selling the rights to Sky.

 

It's also a massive poke in the eye for those who supported RL through thick and thin in their tireless support of the Club. His parting gift to us turns out not to be some phenomenal slight of hand of his business acumen to stave of the inevitable points deduction afterall. I'm sure some will insist he was brilliant in the chair however.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well im defo getting a season ticket next year, finally got a job and can afford one, surely if people care as much about saints as they say they do then they will be willing to spend the money and get us back up next season. We should show the FA and football leagues that they cant dampen the sprit of the saints fans and that no matter how hard they try Southampton FC will never die !!!!!

 

congratulations mate:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

thanks, its hard for teenagers in this climate, maybe saints will have some spaces in the first team next year :L:p

 

 

The whole thing makes me even more disillusioned with football in general.

 

As usual the rich directors shareholders and players **** with the poor (the fans) and ruin a perfectly good football club.

 

**** the plc and **** those that just see the fans loyalty as a business opportunity.

Whats the betting tickets prices are even higher next year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe they read the poll on this website:

 

View Poll Results: Would you take administration before the deadline?

Yes 93 - 36.19% No 164 - 63.81%

 

Maybe.

 

But maybe out of those 63% none of realised that the rug was likely to pulled only 5 days later...

 

Maybe Wupert knew a bit more than us and still did nothing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will not cease from mental fight,

Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,

'till we have built Jerusalem,

On Southamptons green and pleasant lands......

 

-10 now or next season...who gives a ****?

 

Bring it on.

 

Let's be havin' ya' as one famous chairperson once said.

 

We'll be back, bigger and better than ever, though I have had 4 pints, 2 glasses of wine, 2 JD & cokes and 4 tequila's so what do I know?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to be out of line here, but I have to say this came as no surprise, nor do I think it is unjust. The idea that the Football Club is solvent is clearly not true and the PLC is no more than a shell for the real entity, the Football Club.

 

Substance over form for me, and using that definition the Football Club is the sole and dominant player. The fact that a 100% owned subsidiary is supposedly still trading yet the Holding Company has no income and yet has gone into administration doesn't stack up.

 

The only positive about today is that hopefully it may mean things can start moving as people know just what they're going to buy (hopefully there are people wanting to buy us!!!!!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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...

 

You get very touchy when people don't simply accept everything you say as gospel don't you.

 

I've not the one spouting off on here demanding that everybody agree with me. What I have said is that I don't think that the argument is as clear cut as your posts imply it to be.

 

You are one of number of posters who are prepared to offer different views to the majority which I think is to your creidit. In my opinion though (I'm sure you won't hesitate to disagree with me) you spoil your valid points by refusing to listen to other opinions and responding with such vitriol rather than with an explanation of your opinions.

 

Oh well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You get very touchy when people don't simply accept everything you say as gospel don't you.

 

I've not the one spouting off on here demanding that everybody agree with me. What I have said is that I don't think that the argument is as clear cut as your posts imply it to be.

 

You are one of number of posters who are prepared to offer different views to the majority which I think is to your creidit. In my opinion though (I'm sure you won't hesitate to disagree with me) you spoil your valid points by refusing to listen to other opinions and responding with such vitriol rather than with an explanation of your opinions.

 

Oh well.

 

I think he has a bee in his bonnet about bankers/lawyers/accountants/anyone cleverer than him.....

 

On a related point, I've just watched the Mark Fry press-conference on the Beeb site. I liked his reference to the FL appeal procedure which he said involves a bunch of QCs sitting around and considering the issue. He welcomed this as it meant that the process was being considered at the "right intellectual level" - almost a Loweism, but a point well made in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You get very touchy when people don't simply accept everything you say as gospel don't you.

 

I've not the one spouting off on here demanding that everybody agree with me. What I have said is that I don't think that the argument is as clear cut as your posts imply it to be.

 

You are one of number of posters who are prepared to offer different views to the majority which I think is to your creidit. In my opinion though (I'm sure you won't hesitate to disagree with me) you spoil your valid points by refusing to listen to other opinions and responding with such vitriol rather than with an explanation of your opinions.

 

Oh well.

 

 

It's a pity really because it's only a few days since GM was getting all touchy feely and saying that we're all in this together.

 

I didn't think it would last somehow.

 

I believe he said his company once went into Administration and now of course he's an expert.

 

If he ever had a lobotomy I don't doubt he'd come out of surgery knowing more about it than a brain surgeon. He's just that kind of guy. :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to be out of line here, but I have to say this came as no surprise, nor do I think it is unjust. The idea that the Football Club is solvent is clearly not true and the PLC is no more than a shell for the real entity, the Football Club.

 

Substance over form for me, and using that definition the Football Club is the sole and dominant player. The fact that a 100% owned subsidiary is supposedly still trading yet the Holding Company has no income and yet has gone into administration doesn't stack up.

 

The only positive about today is that hopefully it may mean things can start moving as people know just what they're going to buy (hopefully there are people wanting to buy us!!!!!).

 

A company is insolvent if it's liabilities exceed its assets or it's unable to py its debts as they fall due.

 

What are SFC Ltd's liabilities? I would imagine they are the staff costs - hence this depserate scrabble for some money before wages are payable. In any case, until such time as it cannot pay its debts it is solvent.

 

I don't think they are the overdraft?

I don't think (in fact I'm 99% sure) they are the mortgage repayments.

 

Clearly the holding company's activities are all football related - there is no doubt. However, that is where the liabilities seem to lie, either directly or through other subsidiaries, not with the football club.

 

It may be morally offensive. It may be a bit sly. But, if their rules are a pile of ****, that's their fault.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listening to Mawhinney on 5Live, this guy and the FL have NOTHING in their 'locker' so to speak. In a court of law, we would destroy them, bring on the appeal.

league regulations:12.3.1 With effect from the 10th May 2004, if any Club shall: -

a have a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of

that Club or any part of its undertaking or assets;

b have an administration order made in respect of that Club;

c have a winding-up order made in respect of that Club;

d pass a resolution for the winding-up of that Club;

e enter into any arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in

respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a company

voluntary arrangement under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of

Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985; or

f have any proceeding or step taken or any court order in any

jurisdiction made which has a substantially similar effect to any of

the foregoing;

that Club shall be deducted 10 points.

 

I would say the legal advice the League got was that point f covers our situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I seem to be out of line here, but I have to say this came as no surprise, nor do I think it is unjust. The idea that the Football Club is solvent is clearly not true and the PLC is no more than a shell for the real entity, the Football Club.

 

Substance over form for me, and using that definition the Football Club is the sole and dominant player. The fact that a 100% owned subsidiary is supposedly still trading yet the Holding Company has no income and yet has gone into administration doesn't stack up.

 

The only positive about today is that hopefully it may mean things can start moving as people know just what they're going to buy (hopefully there are people wanting to buy us!!!!!).

 

Yes - not the result we wanted but I tend to agree. Lowe tried to be too clever by half. Unfortunately Leon just shot us in the foot by suggesting that SLH was only set up to avoid us getting a points penalty (which I'm sure isn't true):

 

Responding to Crouch on Five Live Sport, Football League chairman Lord Mawhinney said: "What he said that was of particular interest of me was when he said this structure was set up to avoid the football club having a penalty if it got into financial trouble.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8014811.stm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's such a crying shame for every fan of both SFC and football in general. The greed in the game has made it self-implode and there will be many more after us who fall from grace in the same way. It all goes back to the days of that genius Graham Kelly and selling the rights to Sky.

 

It's also a massive poke in the eye for those who supported RL through thick and thin in their tireless support of the Club. His parting gift to us turns out not to be some phenomenal slight of hand of his business acumen to stave of the inevitable points deduction afterall. I'm sure some will insist he was brilliant in the chair however.

I understand where you are coming from but it could also be said that his second tenure he took on almost impossible job with having to cut the massive overdraft and still stay afloat. Barclays pulling the rug when they did smells to me.They would have known the implications of doing so only 2-3 days after the deadline.It is not all clearcut IMO and in time a different picture may unfold.If he misjudged the bank it was undefensible, but am I the only person to question the timing of their action?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand where you are coming from but it could also be said that his second tenure he took on almost impossible job with having to cut the massive overdraft and still stay afloat. Barclays pulling the rug when they did smells to me.They would have known the implications of doing so only 2-3 days after the deadline.It is not all clearcut IMO and in time a different picture may unfold.If he misjudged the bank it was undefensible, but am I the only person to question the timing of their action?

 

No you are not, I questioned this before.

 

We are still in the phoney war but somewhere someday facts and stories are going to come spilling out, now is clearly not the time if we are trying to save the club but somewhere I hope IF we get new owners they are wise enough to let all the old skeletons get put to bed when we have a clean start.

 

If we DON'T get new owners then my guess is that the phoney war would go nuclear

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you are not, I questioned this before.

 

We are still in the phoney war but somewhere someday facts and stories are going to come spilling out, now is clearly not the time if we are trying to save the club but somewhere I hope IF we get new owners they are wise enough to let all the old skeletons get put to bed when we have a clean start.

 

If we DON'T get new owners then my guess is that the phoney war would go nuclear

Im glad Im not the only person who wonders DP

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone dig up any details on the derby admin and how the hell they got away with it ??

 

I don't think that the rules included a points deduction at the time for the club's parent company entering administration.

 

That 'loophole' was quickly changed. Expect the same to happen here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

league regulations:12.3.1 With effect from the 10th May 2004, if any Club shall: -

a have a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of

that Club or any part of its undertaking or assets;

b have an administration order made in respect of that Club;

c have a winding-up order made in respect of that Club;

d pass a resolution for the winding-up of that Club;

e enter into any arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in

respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a company

voluntary arrangement under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of

Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985; or

f have any proceeding or step taken or any court order in any

jurisdiction made which has a substantially similar effect to any of

the foregoing;

that Club shall be deducted 10 points.

 

I would say the legal advice the League got was that point f covers our situation.

 

Point f effectively apes standard boilerplate clauses in commercial / financial agreements, the point of which is to act as a sweeper in the case of some other procedure analagous to an English insolvency event taking place - hence the reference to "any jurisdiction". It also anticipates a change in English law ie. "Administration" as it is now, changes into something slightly different but similar etc.

 

It would not be designed to move the goalposts of the preceeding clauses but merely to capture events that are not strictly defined therein.

 

If they are relying on point f to catch us, they are changing the goalposts as there is no other jurisdiction involved and there is no analogous procedure.

 

Basically, they fecked up the drafting or didn't anticipate this scenario. Or didn't care because they are such a clandestine troupe of old-ties that it makes bugger all difference to their sad little boys club in any case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No you are not, I questioned this before.

 

We are still in the phoney war but somewhere someday facts and stories are going to come spilling out, now is clearly not the time if we are trying to save the club but somewhere I hope IF we get new owners they are wise enough to let all the old skeletons get put to bed when we have a clean start.

 

If we DON'T get new owners then my guess is that the phoney war would go nuclear

 

 

Good post.

 

I'll feel a lot more comfortable discussing who is to blame once the short term future is secured.:smt086

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A company is insolvent if it's liabilities exceed its assets or it's unable to py its debts as they fall due.

 

What are SFC Ltd's liabilities? I would imagine they are the staff costs - hence this depserate scrabble for some money before wages are payable. In any case, until such time as it cannot pay its debts it is solvent.

 

I don't think they are the overdraft?

I don't think (in fact I'm 99% sure) they are the mortgage repayments.

 

Clearly the holding company's activities are all football related - there is no doubt. However, that is where the liabilities seem to lie, either directly or through other subsidiaries, not with the football club.

 

It may be morally offensive. It may be a bit sly. But, if their rules are a pile of ****, that's their fault.

 

But IMHO although technically/legally they are seperate companies and it is the PLC that is in administration and not the Club, I don't think the "law" applies as clearly as people think here, as ultimately the League is a "member's arrangement" and they can do pretty much as they see fit (within reasons of course).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure why our relegation status should be linked to the points deduction. What has relegation got to do with administration? Surely they either deduct the points this season, or next, for us going into admin.

 

Why is it reliant on our league final position? What if we were mid table for example?

 

Why this "vendetta" to ensure that Saints are relegated whatever?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone dig up any details on the derby admin and how the hell they got away with it ??

See my post above -The regulations apply from May 2004, Derby went into admin in October 2003 before the present regulations were agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone dig up any details on the derby admin and how the hell they got away with it ??

 

Posted by a Derby fan a few weeks ago:-

 

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/sho...093#post246093

 

Empathy from an unexpected source......... Rams fan in peace.

 

Your situation is indeed very similar to the one we were in a few years back. We were £24M in debt and the Coop bank pulled the plug on the holding company. This is a replica of your current situation. Three men, later to be branded the 3 amigos by Rams fans bought the club for the princely sum of 3 pounds. They secured a £15M mortgage on Pride Park (the ground was all bought and paid for long before that), ostensibly to reduce the debts and to satisfy the Coop Bank. The "mortgage" was from the Panamanian ABC Corporation (who also lent cash to QPR and nearly bankrupted them too). The 3 Amigos ruled the roost for some two and a half years, permanently telling us that the debt was declining and that the club was trading at break even. In that time we were forced to sell Huddlestone and Rasiak for paltry sums in order to pay interest on time and the debt rose from £24M to around £54M. Again we were on the brink of extinction. Seven lifelong Derby fans who are also successful businessmen ploughed some £30M into buying out the 3 A´s and reducing the debt slightly. That consortium took the club back to the PL but couldnt (or wouldnt) finance the buying of the 6 to 8 genuine PL class players we needed to make a fight of it. Consequently we had the disaster that was known as the 2007/2008 season. Just over 18 months ago we got a new Chairman of Football, Adam Pearson, who had been responsible for getting Hull into shape. He came in and negotiated with the GSE group to take the club over. It is a consortium of many American and Canadian businessmen, most with a successful background in American Sports as well as in other business ventures, one of them was one of the founders of Yahoo. They took over and we are doing OK. We now have Nigel Clough at the helm who has got us playing proper football again and what looked like a disaster season looks like being saved and we can build from there. The debt will, in June, be down to £15M, the mortgage on the ground, and that debt is manageable.

 

In my lifetime (and I'm mid 50's) I've seen the Rams on the brink in the early 80's, early 90's and again for the past 5 seasons...... it's not nice having to face the prospect of your club going to the wall. Boards come and go but we Rams, and you Saints, were always there before them and will be there when they have long gone. I know some of what you are feeling, I empathise with you. I hope the club survives to fight another day and would love to see you stay up by by getting all 3 points at the Tree Huggers on the last day of the season to send them down in your stead.

 

As one of you said earlier, we are a precedent but...... after the 3 amigo deal there was Leeds and Boston who went into Admin once they knew they were already down. That caused the Football League to plug that particular loophole and to add the caveat that they held the right to scrutinise anything not covered by the rules and still take action against a club if the League thought it was warranted. What happened at Derby hasn't been "outlawed" by the League but they do now have the legal right to act differently should they so choose.

 

I hope they don't break the precedent. Good luck.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can someone dig up any details on the derby admin and how the hell they got away with it ??

 

When Derbey went in to admin in Oct 2003 the rules on points deductions didn't apply.

 

Although approved in Sept 2003, they didn't come into effect until the following season (August 2004).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...