Stirchleysaint Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Embarrassing performance by Leon. The wheels fell off at the simple question: what apart from the poor financial performance of the football club caused the holding company to go into administration? It would also help if Mark Fry wasn't holding press conferences at SMS with SFC signage behind him talking about Football League decisions which affect the football club. You're really emphasising that separation between SLH and SFC there Mark... I really hope that Burnley put us out of our misery tomorrow and send us down. Having this played out in the media makes the club even more of a laughing stock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 The problem I think these guys have is that they look to anything that might give them credibility or popularity with fans when they come in - afterall everyone knows haow suspicious fans can be and also how vitriolic if things go badly. Crouch used brininging LM and MC bvack into the fold as useful PR exercise to win favour with thjsoe that felt these Saints folk had been in the wilderness and snubbed by Lowe... The problem is he brought in two very vocal anti previous regimers, and whilst taht was likely to go down well with fans of a similar mindset, these old long lasting antagonistic relationships became the overriding issue, tat-for-tat childish arguments and PR stunts meant the real issues were not the focus of everyones attention - nor was it possible to try and least find constructive solutions to teh problems - that would never go away whilst a large shareholding was controlled by those not represented on the baord. That is where I think crouch was most naive - cosying up to LM and MC when he should have been determined to find some common ground and a strategy forward - It was no good falling out with Wilde when the investors promised failed to show up, he should have put his foot down and said no to the spending until it did! Kicking Wilde out was another blunder as wilde was way to self interested not to want a part of teh action or control and tehre was only one way back in if not with Crouch. I am sure CRouch is a decent honorable bloke, has achieved a fair bit in business and does love teh club, but this latest gaff is just another in his history that shows he is way to naive anbout running a football club - its more than just about perception and popularity with fans. We may not like the idea of our club as a business, but we are governed by business rules multiplied by the media spotlight. Crouch just aint suited to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 What Crouch should have said: 'You have to remember SLH was set up as a parent company for a number of businesses in 1997 following a reverse takeover of teh clubs asssets. The buiness interests of SLH have been diverse for the obvious ownership of teh football club its self, to media activy such as a commercail radio station, Insurances servicves and various other interests. The Football club was only ever one of a diverse number of businesses. During the last coupel of years, interest from others has led to the PLC divesting from some of these, leaving for teh present SFC Ltd as the main company with SMS ltd as the otehr priomary asset of the group. This is bad timing for sure as it could be misinterpreted by some taht SLH has only footballing realted assets but as you cans see from teh plans already in place and put together by Mr Wilde they are also committed to property developmnet as well as other non footballing relating business opportunities - thes plans would already be under way had it not been for teh credit crunch of last year and the impact on development projects of all types - Should SFC really be penalised for the impact of the gloabl financial crisis on teh other parts of the groups holdings?' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Foxstone Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 What Crouch should have said: 'You have to remember SLH was set up as a parent company for a number of businesses in 1997 following a reverse takeover of teh clubs asssets. The buiness interests of SLH have been diverse for the obvious ownership of teh football club its self, to media activy such as a commercail radio station, Insurances servicves and various other interests. The Football club was only ever one of a diverse number of businesses. During the last coupel of years, interest from others has led to the PLC divesting from some of these, leaving for teh present SFC Ltd as the main company with SMS ltd as the otehr priomary asset of the group. This is bad timing for sure as it could be misinterpreted by some taht SLH has only footballing realted assets but as you cans see from teh plans already in place and put together by Mr Wilde they are also committed to property developmnet as well as other non footballing relating business opportunities - thes plans would already be under way had it not been for teh credit crunch of last year and the impact on development projects of all types - Should SFC really be penalised for the impact of the gloabl financial crisis on teh other parts of the groups holdings?' As long as you were'nt writing "teh" Autocue Frank ! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 (edited) Or.... BUT thats how you could look at it if cynical - I and most intelligent folk will recognise that teh debt as it stand s in made up of two main creditors the largest of which is the Stadium Loan - a loan taken out duringa period of sustatined Premiership revenue well within the budget and well managed and affordable. This is not debt accumulated in some idiotic fantasy football attemppt at glory, but a solid attempt to develop the facilities and infrastructure for our fans and comunity that will benefit football as a whole and help promote teh game to a greater audience. IN other countries clubs can rely on local taxes to fund such projects, we could not. How anyone connected with football can see this as anything but a genuine attempt to improve the experience for fans and teh community is beyond me. Why even England played their when wembley was built showing this investmnet to be supportive of teh entire football family - I think Mr Mawhinneys actions and commenst fail to recognise the importance and necessity of such investment - made at a time remember when it was well within the affordabilty of the PLC. This was as should be obvious from results never about gambling the clubs future on quick glory, The FL is sadly misguided in this matter. Edited 24 April, 2009 by Frank's cousin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 As long as you were'nt writing "teh" Autocue Frank ! ;-) LOL ;-) need to get some typing lessons for sure Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I don't know why he thinks we love him and that he is indispensable to Saints FC. He's just an ordinary local bloke who happens to have made a bit of money. So am I but I wouldn't presume to foist myself on fans as their spokesman after all the sh*t that he has helped d create in the last couple of years. Don't give me all that crap about 'loyalty to Saints' and so on. All these blokes are part of a failed self-serving regime and if any of them had a modicum of decency they'd b***er off and leave our club in untarnished hands. the sooner a new owner rids us of Crouch, Mcmenemy and any other hanger on who doesn't have the wit to know when their particular party is over the better we'll be for it. Sod off! Absolutely spot on... It'll be lovely to have no-more smug businessmen or withery old stoats angling to put their snout in the club trough. Please......... all fu.c.k off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Absolutely spot on... It'll be lovely to have no-more smug businessmen or withery old stoats angling to put their snout in the club trough. Please......... all fu.c.k off. HAve to say I agree with that. Crouch is at least a fan who cares but I am looking forward to a new owner calling the shots with an untarnished reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 HAve to say I agree with that. Crouch is at least a fan who cares but I am looking forward to a new owner calling the shots with an untarnished reputation. We're agreeing again. Let's go for a drink :shock: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Frank, you've been typing "for sure" a lot today, have you developed a twitch too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Frank, you've been typing "for sure" a lot today, have you developed a twitch too? Apparently when he took over, they only had 2 points from 8 games. Triffic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Frank, you've been typing "for sure" a lot today, have you developed a twitch too? Well I could tell ya boy bit it would cost ya about 50 twenties in a brown envelope ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Pro Rupert Lowe fan starts anti Crouch thread zzzzz Put a six figure sum into the kitty i suggest Frank or shut up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Well I could tell ya boy bit it would cost ya about 50 twenties in a brown envelope ;-) I'll leave the cash with Sandra/Ron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torres Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Pro Rupert Lowe fan starts anti Crouch thread zzzzz Put a six figure sum into the kitty i suggest Frank or shut up. Have you even listened to that interview? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaintRobbie Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 We're agreeing again. Let's go for a drink :shock: Fan unity after Lowe. Knew it would happen! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Pro Rupert Lowe fan starts anti Crouch thread zzzzz Put a six figure sum into the kitty i suggest Frank or shut up. Pro CRouch fan cant stand any criticism of his master...oh and if you listen, tell me you are happy with that performance...and by the way, I am just as happy Lowe has gone as I am saddened by the whole mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I cannot believe people slagging leon off. People who do this just do not know the real facts. I cannot tell you how many little things he has done for the club recently, i.e paying off all sorts of bills. He spent a lot of money buying the shares. He then backed wilde when anyone would have voted lowe out. He was lied to by wilde about wilde putting money in and not knowing that the execs who wilde brought in were running the club. Leon tried to implement cost cutting and was turned down by the execs who were horrible people. When we finally gor rid of the execs maybe he shouldnt have given gorman and dodd a chance but he made up for this by appointing pearson and we stayed up. During this time leon was at st mary's working pretty much 5 days a week and not taking any wages. He also stepped in and paid for the ted bates statue. Recently although not working for the club and with his business taking a hit, he has stepped in again to try and help by putting in 50k and a lot more for other things that havent been mentioned. So I am sorry for not jumping on the anti-leon banner, but equally when people say "fans dont like lowe cos he is posh" I am starting to think people dont like leon because he doesnt speak posh and is one of us, except he has done very well for himself and is richer than lowe. Not everyone is a good public speaker but at least he tries because he loves saints. I for one applaud him and urge other people on this site to think before they type. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I cannot believe people slagging leon off. People who do this just do not know the real facts. I cannot tell you how many little things he has done for the club recently, i.e paying off all sorts of bills. He spent a lot of money buying the shares. He then backed wilde when anyone would have voted lowe out. He was lied to by wilde about wilde putting money in and not knowing that the execs who wilde brought in were running the club. Leon tried to implement cost cutting and was turned down by the execs who were horrible people. When we finally gor rid of the execs maybe he shouldnt have given gorman and dodd a chance but he made up for this by appointing pearson and we stayed up. During this time leon was at st mary's working pretty much 5 days a week and not taking any wages. He also stepped in and paid for the ted bates statue. Recently although not working for the club and with his business taking a hit, he has stepped in again to try and help by putting in 50k and a lot more for other things that havent been mentioned. So I am sorry for not jumping on the anti-leon banner, but equally when people say "fans dont like lowe cos he is posh" I am starting to think people dont like leon because he doesnt speak posh and is one of us, except he has done very well for himself and is richer than lowe. Not everyone is a good public speaker but at least he tries because he loves saints. I for one applaud him and urge other people on this site to think before they type. I think you need to reread the posts here, unlike those anti Lowe threads, there has not been the usual vitriolic rubbish here, Most acknowledge and respect what Leon has done and applaud hism for those positives he has brought to the club, but just because of the good things does not make him somehow immune to criticism of those errors he has made, the same goes for anyone. Last nights interview was unnecessary, he could/sould have declined rather than making these mistakes. If he enjoys and wants to e in the media spotlight as part of his association with the club, he needs some media coaching or he should remain tight lipped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Thought this from Benjii last night was a pretty good summation, in that I also agree that Crouch didn't explain himself very well in that interview (as others have pointed out, what he said was incorrect as the holding company relationship was established in 1996!!!). p.s I don't think Crouch meant to suggest that the corporate structure was put in place to avoid a penalty in these situations. I just don't think he expressed himself very well. The reasons for this belief are: 1) The corporate structure predates the league's insolvency rules 2) The structure was put in place becasue the original stadium finance was provided on a limited recourse basis 3) We needed to back into a listed company If Mawhinney thinks Crouch's comments are in any way useful evidence he is an idiot because: 1) Crouch had nothing to do with the establishment of the corporate structure so how would he knw anyway; and 2) the reasons above. I have to take my hat off to Crouch if he really is funding the Club to the tune that some people are intimating, but that also doesn't mean he is above criticism. I don't think that interview was very good, nor was it necessary. If he wants to get involved in saving the Club then fair play, but I feel he should just leave these issues to the Administrators and their legal team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Thought this from Benjii last night was a pretty good summation, in that I also agree that Crouch didn't explain himself very well in that interview (as others have pointed out, what he said was incorrect as the holding company relationship was established in 1996!!!). I have to take my hat off to Crouch if he really is funding the Club to the tune that some people are intimating, but that also doesn't mean he is above criticism. I don't think that interview was very good, nor was it necessary. If he wants to get involved in saving the Club then fair play, but I feel he should just leave these issues to the Administrators and their legal team. totally agree. It is not two faced to separate the two issues (donating fan and his loving of being in media) he can be commended for one and criticised for the other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank's cousin Posted 24 April, 2009 Author Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Indeed and if he stops doing one, he wont get criticised. (From me anyway ;-)) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_ed Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Mate of mine called to say someone on the radio did us no favours... I assumed it was Mark Fry... I do wish Crouch would just shut the **** up as the self appointed voice of Southampton FC... He knows what he has to do if he wants to become the mouthpiece for Saints...and it involves putting up and shutting up... Totally agree. Crouch should learn when to shut up. Yes I appreciate the money he has put into the club, but he has NO involvement in the club anymore and I would far rather hear comments from Fry than Crouch who I hold partly accountable for our current situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I was sick to death of Lowe doing the media rounds and I'm sick to death of Crouch doing the same (although at least he didn't whine "it's not my fault) I thought Lawrie came accros pretty well and seemed very upset and passionate about the situation. Obviously media outlets are going to ask Lawrie, as like it or not, the media view him as some sort of Mr Southampton. I also thought Mawhinney came accros well on Talksport this morning, although Brazil went pretty easy on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpine_saint Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I cannot believe people slagging leon off. People who do this just do not know the real facts. I cannot tell you how many little things he has done for the club recently, i.e paying off all sorts of bills. He spent a lot of money buying the shares. He then backed wilde when anyone would have voted lowe out. He was lied to by wilde about wilde putting money in and not knowing that the execs who wilde brought in were running the club. Leon tried to implement cost cutting and was turned down by the execs who were horrible people. When we finally gor rid of the execs maybe he shouldnt have given gorman and dodd a chance but he made up for this by appointing pearson and we stayed up. During this time leon was at st mary's working pretty much 5 days a week and not taking any wages. He also stepped in and paid for the ted bates statue. Recently although not working for the club and with his business taking a hit, he has stepped in again to try and help by putting in 50k and a lot more for other things that havent been mentioned. So I am sorry for not jumping on the anti-leon banner, but equally when people say "fans dont like lowe cos he is posh" I am starting to think people dont like leon because he doesnt speak posh and is one of us, except he has done very well for himself and is richer than lowe. Not everyone is a good public speaker but at least he tries because he loves saints. I for one applaud him and urge other people on this site to think before they type. +1. So bloody what if he aint the greatest public speaker ? Lowe was a good public speaker and a bloody usless chairman. Crouch has done loads for the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 +1. So bloody what if he aint the greatest public speaker ? -he doesn't need to speak publically Lowe was a good public speaker and a bloody usless chairman.gone and irrelevant to arguement, no-one is asking Lowe to speak either Crouch has done loads for the club.maybe - but as many have said, even if true doesn't mean he can't be criticised for other negative things a/a Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 a/a +1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 For the sake of accuracy this is what was said: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8014811.stm Not at all clever and I imagine Mark Fry has told him so. On the other hand Leon seems to be single-handedly keeping the company afloat at present by paying electricity bills etc so let's not be too harsh on him. He also said elsewhere that the players have already been paid in full this month. The players' role in this really p1sses me off. They are the ones that underperformed on the pitch. They are also the people attached to the club with the most money. If they collectively paid back half of their monthly pay packet I'm sure the club would easily survive until a sale goes through. I've got no time for any of them that haven't helped the club in this way. Mawhinny is talking rubbish. A good lawyer will make mincemeat of him. The structure was formed in 1997, the league brought in the points rule for the 2004/5 season. Whatever Mawhinny says about interesting is absolute hogwash, if he doesn't know his history he certainly doesn't know his rules. 'Club in administration' is legally not 'a club intrinsically/inextricably linked to a holding company in administration' It is a breach of insolvency rules by the club that is being cited. However Grant Thornton were given a different brief by the league to the one supplied to the club by the league. The club refused to let Grant Thornton work to anything but the brief supplied to them. GT walked out and reported back to the league who then acted without consulting the club. Now that Southampton are appealing the league are squealing that it has no chance of success. Strange, I thought 'no comment, it's now sub judice until the appeal is heard' would be the league's response. That sounds like it's the their nightmare situation, got it wrong, premature, legal teams now involved. It remains to be seen whether they balls it out, using bully boy tactics, or get turned over at appeal or better still SLH go to law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I cannot believe people slagging leon off. People who do this just do not know the real facts. I cannot tell you how many little things he has done for the club recently, i.e paying off all sorts of bills. He spent a lot of money buying the shares. He then backed wilde when anyone would have voted lowe out. He was lied to by wilde about wilde putting money in and not knowing that the execs who wilde brought in were running the club. Leon tried to implement cost cutting and was turned down by the execs who were horrible people. When we finally gor rid of the execs maybe he shouldnt have given gorman and dodd a chance but he made up for this by appointing pearson and we stayed up. During this time leon was at st mary's working pretty much 5 days a week and not taking any wages. He also stepped in and paid for the ted bates statue. Recently although not working for the club and with his business taking a hit, he has stepped in again to try and help by putting in 50k and a lot more for other things that havent been mentioned. So I am sorry for not jumping on the anti-leon banner, but equally when people say "fans dont like lowe cos he is posh" I am starting to think people dont like leon because he doesnt speak posh and is one of us, except he has done very well for himself and is richer than lowe. Not everyone is a good public speaker but at least he tries because he loves saints. I for one applaud him and urge other people on this site to think before they type. Roger spot on, without Crouch we would not have a game to go to tomorrow fact !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Roger spot on, without Crouch we would not have a game to go to tomorrow fact !! What a load of rubbish. If we were that skint it just would have hurried along an eleventh hour takeover that will happen soon enough anyway. If the likes of Notts County and Mansfield Town and all the rest can get teams out to play football matches, pretty sure we can. Don't believe the hype. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TNT Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 What a load of rubbish. If we were that skint it just would have hurried along an eleventh hour takeover that will happen soon enough anyway. If the likes of Notts County and Mansfield Town and all the rest can get teams out to play football matches, pretty sure we can. Don't believe the hype. Well i have a mate working at SMS and its common knowledge that Crouch paid the bills to stop the electricity being cut off. How do you have a game with no power ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Well i have a mate working at SMS and its common knowledge that Crouch paid the bills to stop the electricity being cut off. How do you have a game with no power ? As I said, if we were that skint then our takeover would just happen quicker. We are not Weymouth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 What a load of rubbish. If we were that skint it just would have hurried along an eleventh hour takeover that will happen soon enough anyway. If the likes of Notts County and Mansfield Town and all the rest can get teams out to play football matches, pretty sure we can. Don't believe the hype. CB you believe what ever you want, but I can assure you that as you put it " it is not a load of rubbish " you will find alot of people who use this Forum can confirm !! How do you think bills and wages etc are being paid with a frozen bank account !! perhaps we are picking it off the trees !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 CB you believe what ever you want, but I can assure you that as you put it " it is not a load of rubbish " you will find alot of people who use this Forum can confirm !! How do you think bills and wages etc are being paid with a frozen bank account !! perhaps we are picking it off the trees !!! Since when has our bank account been frozen? I was under the impression it was Barclays who put the current administrators in control, I'm sure they will give them more leeway than Lowe with regards to the overdraft. What exactly would Barclays have to gain through having the club die? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Since when has our bank account been frozen? I was under the impression it was Barclays who put the current administrators in control, I'm sure they will give them more leeway than Lowe with regards to the overdraft. What exactly would Barclays have to gain through having the club die? That is why your find that people are keeping the club going out of their own pocket !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 It doesn't matter who says what. Or even if we are fully exempt from league sanctions. Mawhinney has reacted like a little petulant schoolboy as a lot of people expected him to. The League reaction, akin to me taking my ball back because you are winning does not surprise anybody over much. What that redfaced monkey does not seem to realise is the damage he has done by the manner he has run this show. If he had simply said you are morally bound together so therefore you will receive a 10 points deduction, nobody would have said a word. Well, we might have moaned but we would have accepted the punishment. Instead what that person has done is morally indefensible. He has usurped his power and made the league a laughing stock by his lack of moral fibre. ALL IN MY OWN OPINION OF COURSE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
up and away Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I cannot believe people slagging leon off. People who do this just do not know the real facts. I cannot tell you how many little things he has done for the club recently, i.e paying off all sorts of bills. He spent a lot of money buying the shares. He then backed wilde when anyone would have voted lowe out. He was lied to by wilde about wilde putting money in and not knowing that the execs who wilde brought in were running the club. Leon tried to implement cost cutting and was turned down by the execs who were horrible people. When we finally gor rid of the execs maybe he shouldnt have given gorman and dodd a chance but he made up for this by appointing pearson and we stayed up. During this time leon was at st mary's working pretty much 5 days a week and not taking any wages. He also stepped in and paid for the ted bates statue. Recently although not working for the club and with his business taking a hit, he has stepped in again to try and help by putting in 50k and a lot more for other things that havent been mentioned. So I am sorry for not jumping on the anti-leon banner, but equally when people say "fans dont like lowe cos he is posh" I am starting to think people dont like leon because he doesnt speak posh and is one of us, except he has done very well for himself and is richer than lowe. Not everyone is a good public speaker but at least he tries because he loves saints. I for one applaud him and urge other people on this site to think before they type. You can point at the little good that Crouch did, but the negative aspect completely dwarfs that down to infinitesimal. Since Leon stuck his oar, he was part of the responsibility of wasting close on to £40M of the clubs money and one of the prime reasons we are in administration. So when you look at what Crouch divvied up, just have a look on the other end of the scales for a comparison. It was all the execs fault. So how do you explain these comments from Crouch when he was removed from the football board? This pikey was up to his neck in it from the beginning. "I am gutted it has come to this. I have spent the last nine months working tirelessly for this club representing the fans, but I have been a thorn in their (the executive board members) side. "I opposed the mass exodus of staff at the club, we are losing too many good people. I knew it would be a real battle and it has been. I am devastated. I have spent the last 18 months battling these people." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 People always seem to fall for the cheap emotional tug, don't they? I bet the same people who believe that Skacel gives a sh1t about us because he waves his arms about and think that Leon is anything other than an embarrassment AND a major part of the demise of our club also think Diana was the greatest living Englishwoman, closely followed by Jade Goody. He is a well-meaning buffoon who should slip off into the football wilderness with Lowe & Wilde & all the rest. Being a good fan is no qualification for anything. He had his chance, he blew it - now in the name of all things Saintly - go away (And before anyones asks - I've never rated him) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 CB you believe what ever you want, but I can assure you that as you put it " it is not a load of rubbish " you will find alot of people who use this Forum can confirm !! How do you think bills and wages etc are being paid with a frozen bank account !! perhaps we are picking it off the trees !!! Bank accounts aren't frozen when the administrators come in - just that they and not the board sign the cheques. It's administration, not liquidation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 That is why your find that people are keeping the club going out of their own pocket !!! Thought administrators ran seperate accounts under the company name 'in administration' when in control ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Thought administrators ran seperate accounts under the company name 'in administration' when in control ? Only if money is left to pay the bills, think your find we had no money left in the coffers, hence bounced cheque to one of the clubs sub contactors !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Bank accounts aren't frozen when the administrators come in - just that they and not the board sign the cheques. It's administration, not liquidation They can only sign chques if money is available to them, in our case i think you will find the bank would not play ball !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Only if money is left to pay the bills, think your find we had no money left in the coffers, hence bounced cheque to one of the clubs sub contactors !! Fos, where/who does the gate money go to ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fos1 Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Fos, where/who does the gate money go to ? That I am not 100% sure, but I think this would go towards paying off debts that the club owe, and I believe that this would be distributed by the adminitrators in some form of order. But I must say that I am not 100% clear on this, but I do know that bills are being paid by individuals and not out of club funds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 (edited) Thanks for your answer, its just that if SLH (in administration) keep the gate money and associated cash generated on match day then surely the administrator should be distributing that money to utility companies and anyone else essential to the companies ability to operate during the admin process, the scope of that who knows ? if SFC keep it then with an expected crowd of c.21k tomorrow theres the magical 250k Edited 24 April, 2009 by INFLUENCED.COM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
madsent Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 As long as you were'nt writing "teh" Autocue Frank ! ;-) I'm sure that's an ironic statement given that you've transposed two characters in exactly the same way as Frank's Cousin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Mawhinney better save his silver tongue for the Court Room. I would love to see him squirm, and resign, if we made him look like the idiot he is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blanco Saint Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 I heard the interview and at best it was embarrassing. Must be available on listen again or Iplayer if your desperate to experience the pain? It aired at around 7.15pm last night (thursday). It left me feeling that we have one of two hopes at avoiding this penalty, one of them is Bob and the other.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 24 April, 2009 Share Posted 24 April, 2009 Mawhinney better save his silver tongue for the Court Room. I would love to see him squirm, and resign, if we made him look like the idiot he is. We're not going to court. We're in the wrong, we've cheated the system. There isn't any judge in the land who is going to look at us and say that SLH is a completely different entitity to SFC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sidthesquid Posted 25 April, 2009 Share Posted 25 April, 2009 They can only sign chques if money is available to them, in our case i think you will find the bank would not play ball !! Then you are in liquidation & cease trading. The bank appoints administrators so must let them have access to some funds - how else does it work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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