A lot of people seem think they have a very high chance of losing starting on -15 or -25 (i couldnt work it out) points if the new owners or whatever can't get a CVA (??) from the Treasury.
Goodness knows what that means but an increase would seem very harsh.
[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]Can i just make a point here please
I dont like the scummy elemant of the Southampton faithful and any club that goes into Admin deserves the deduction,
But i couldnt give 2 fuks if they get it this year or next if we are going to win the league next year (I dont think we will) then i would rather we done it on merit than another team being deducted points from this year.
I want to win the thing because we are the best team in the league
good luck to them as i reckon a lot of their players will be off now
I came here to say just that, but NLA has done it already I think we're better than hoping that we could win the league "in court".
teams that go into administration lose points because they will have a financial advantage by not necessarily having to re-pay all of what they owe and getting to start again. The rule is intended to even things up for the other teams and prevent teams taking administration and getting a fresh start without dealing with the consequences of their actions. We will be living with the consequences of our financial mistakes next year and now they will have to deal with their own.
[cite]Posted By: FatterThanAndyReid[/cite]on a side issue, southapmton are obviously being penalised for their holding company going into administration.
wasn't it West Ham's holding company (Hansa) that went into administration earlier this season but they got away with it.
correct me if I'm wrong please, it's fair to say I don't fully understand the ins & outs of this financial stuff.. but this seems to be like a classic case of inconsistent punishments. & someone (trevor brooking) smiling down on west ham again.
There is a big difference between Southampton & West Ham though. West Ham's holding company was a proper holding company that owned lots of other businesses. Southampton's holding company ONLY owns the football club & all of it's income is derived from the football club & the ground. Legally, the accountants have said that all the Southampton companies should be viewed as just one business. You can't apply the same logic to the West Ham situation.
West Ham are in the Prem where the rules are different. It may also be that the holding co that owned West Ham was a "real" holding co. in the sense that it owned a number of different businesses, The FL investigate the Soton holding Co. and found that it was, in effect, the same entity. I can't explain the legal niceties but it seems justice was done with Soton at least.
[cite]Posted By: FatterThanAndyReid[/cite]on a side issue, southapmton are obviously being penalised for their holding company going into administration.
wasn't it West Ham's holding company (Hansa) that went into administration earlier this season but they got away with it.
correct me if I'm wrong please, it's fair to say I don't fully understand the ins & outs of this financial stuff.. but this seems to be like a classic case of inconsistent punishments. & someone (trevor brooking) smiling down on west ham again.
Well according to the Telegraph...
"West Ham United plc are regarded as the member organisation by the Premier League, meaning that the possibility of a sporting sanction against the team, such as the deduction of points, could not be considered in respect of any financial issues relating to the holding company."
But alos I think it's a case of Hansa being more than just a wrapper for West Ham, but having many different holdings and investments, where the southampton situation is different in that the league themselves have said they can't find any difference between saints and the holding company, the are for all intents and purposes the same entity.
[cite]Posted By: nth london addick[/cite]Can i just make a point here please
I dont like the scummy elemant of the Southampton faithful and any club that goes into Admin deserves the deduction,
But i couldnt give 2 fuks if they get it this year or next if we are going to win the league next year (I dont think we will) then i would rather we done it on merit than another team being deducted points from this year.
I want to win the thing because we are the best team in the league
good luck to them as i reckon a lot of their players will be off now
I came here to say just that, but NLA has done it already I think we're better than hoping that we could win the league "in court".
teams that go into administration lose points because they will have a financial advantage by not necessarily having to re-pay all of what they owe and getting to start again. The rule is intended to even things up for the other teams and prevent teams taking administration and getting a fresh start without dealing with the consequences of their actions. We will be living with the consequences of our financial mistakes next year and now they will have to deal with their own.
I have no issue with what is said here
my point being i dont think we should be so condescending about it, i certainly dont like them havent since the days of the dell, ipersonally hoped that they would be punished and i am happy that they have had points docked, i just dont care if it is this season or next
[cite]Posted By: Red_Pete[/cite]
There is a big difference between Southampton & West Ham though. West Ham's holding company was a proper holding company that owned lots of other businesses. Southampton's holding company ONLY owns the football club & all of it's income is derived from the football club & the ground. Legally, the accountants have said that all the Southampton companies should be viewed as just one business. You can't apply the same logic to the West Ham situation.
I make you right on this but just in case you aren't right, the Premier League will do everything possible, bend every rule, strain every sinew to ensure that the great West Ham - team that won the World Cup, will never, ever, ever be relegated!
At last the games administrators seem to have grown a pair BUT they've very likely planned for this to happen so I'd expect an appeal from Saint's very soon.
Knew they'd appeal it too. Always thought there was an air of 'we're too good to go down' about them and so confident they'd beat us the other week. I bet Le Tiss is crying into his beer tonight....now all they've got to play for is to save getting a 10 point penalty next season....
Perhaps a little caution should be added to some of the responses on here to Soton's impending demise......I don't particularly like them, but they are without doubt not alone at being in a financial mess.
Most of the championship clubs have balance sheets that don't stand up to a litte scrutiny. And as well as Palace, I'm pretty sure Charlton's finances are a little flimsy.
I heard Ryan the Chairman of Doncaster asked a few weeks ago what relegation mean financially to Doncaster, he said about 5 Million pounds.
As much as I don't like certain elements of Southampton fanbase, I do feel for the decent fans. A club that has produced a conveyor belt of decent talent will now watch as they are sold off even more cheaply than before............very dark day's ahead on the south coast, and they wont be the last to feel this draft.
Surprised by this and never thought the League would have the guts, as their claim that there is no distinction between Southampton FC and Southampton Leisure Holdings may not hold water legally and could be subject to a challenge in the courts.
Can't agree with anyone who takes pleasure in what has happened to them. A sad day for anyone who loves football.
I agree Nigel, I shared your view on this. I've not read the actual "admin" rule which applies in forensic detail. Maybe there is a catch all phrase which can skewer them?
I'll be seriously peeved off if they stay up, lose the ten points and so finish bottom. We deserve to finish bottom and it isn't fair for them to cheat us out of that honour. Plus, our Board would see that as Parky achieving something and give him the job for next season. However, I can't see them beating Burnley and I fully expect them relegated this weekend.
Having now listened to Sir Brian Mawhinney speaking today, it seems clear that they are interpreting the "club" as not just the legal entity known as Southampton FC Ltd but as incorporating the holding company which he says is "inextricably" linked to the football club and thus the "club" is in administration.
So again without having the actual rules word for word, I imagine there is the fault line for lawyers between the "club" as a legal entity and the club as a body corporate comprising holding company and its subsidiary.
I remember the old days when football issues were settled by what happened on a field of grass, where 22 blokes kicked a leather sphere around and tried to get it between some wooden posts. How things have changed.
Imagine a check list for laying the kit out now for the team
Outfield Shirts x 14
Outfield Socks x 14 pairs
Outfield Shorts x 14
Goalkeeper Shirts x 2
Goalkeeper Socks x 2 pairs
Goalkeeper Shorts x 2
Boots x 16 pairs
Gloves x 2 pairs
Towel x 2
Practice Balls x 30
Bibs x 14
Isotonic Drinks x 32
Lawyer x 1
i thought there was a deadline on this points deduction and it had passed and would have to be applied to next season - so the FA have moved the goal posts again.
Didn't derby get off with the same thing few season back as well. ie holding companyy going into Admin
[cite]Posted By: Ledge[/cite]i thought there was a deadline on this points deduction and it had passed and would have to be applied to next season - so the FA have moved the goal posts again.
Before the deadline the penalty applies this season, after the deadline the FA decide when it applies I think, so in this case it will apply this season only if they do not finish in the bottom three, otherwise it will apply next season.
I think we should remember that some people can get hurt in administration. There will be people out there who have provided goods and services to Southampton who wont get paid. It may be thats its the banks who are owed but they will probably have first claim on any monies and in any event pass on losses to the rest of us mugs. Lawyers will of course benefit.
I personally would rather English football finances were far more stable than they are and the whole Sky/Prem thing has made it a joke. Our Board were I thought one of the more sane groups but look at the trouble we are now in. Its madness.
I personally would rather English football finances were far more stable than they are and the whole Sky/Prem thing has made it a joke. Our Board were I thought one of the more sane groups but look at the trouble we are now in. Its madness.
But has been mentioned already on this thread, it's many clubs in the Championship walking the financial tightrope.
If we followed suit how many of those welcoming Saints demise, would start wailing about the gross unfairness of it all? come on, honestly...
The rule has to be there though because teams like Leicester and Luton have played the administration game in order to get rid of debts that they'd merrily racked up. It's sad that the fans suffer from poor management, but then again they do anyway. We've had 4 cack managers and countless useless players foisted on us, which is kind of the same thing.
[cite]Posted By: Ledge[/cite]i thought there was a deadline on this points deduction and it had passed and would have to be applied to next season - so the FA have moved the goal posts again.
Didn't derby get off with the same thing few season back as well. ie holding companyy going into Admin
Goalposts aint moved at all.
After the deadline the FL can choose which season to deduct points, this season or next, if the deduction this year moved them into the bottom 3 it will be done, if they are already down, it will count for next season. It simply means that clubs can't wait till they are relegated to go into Admin, nor can they wait for the deadline to pass and take the hit next season whilst avoding relegation this season.
As for Derby it's not really at all relevent, as it was prior to the new rules being drawn up.
Comments
Goodness knows what that means but an increase would seem very harsh.
teams that go into administration lose points because they will have a financial advantage by not necessarily having to re-pay all of what they owe and getting to start again. The rule is intended to even things up for the other teams and prevent teams taking administration and getting a fresh start without dealing with the consequences of their actions. We will be living with the consequences of our financial mistakes next year and now they will have to deal with their own.
West Ham are in the Prem where the rules are different. It may also be that the holding co that owned West Ham was a "real" holding co. in the sense that it owned a number of different businesses, The FL investigate the Soton holding Co. and found that it was, in effect, the same entity. I can't explain the legal niceties but it seems justice was done with Soton at least.
West Ham got away with murder FACT
Well according to the Telegraph...
"West Ham United plc are regarded as the member organisation by the Premier League, meaning that the possibility of a sporting sanction against the team, such as the deduction of points, could not be considered in respect of any financial issues relating to the holding company."
But alos I think it's a case of Hansa being more than just a wrapper for West Ham, but having many different holdings and investments, where the southampton situation is different in that the league themselves have said they can't find any difference between saints and the holding company, the are for all intents and purposes the same entity.
I have no issue with what is said here
my point being i dont think we should be so condescending about it, i certainly dont like them havent since the days of the dell, ipersonally hoped that they would be punished and i am happy that they have had points docked, i just dont care if it is this season or next
I make you right on this but just in case you aren't right, the Premier League will do everything possible, bend every rule, strain every sinew to ensure that the great West Ham - team that won the World Cup, will never, ever, ever be relegated!
Money has ruined this game.
Most of the championship clubs have balance sheets that don't stand up to a litte scrutiny. And as well as Palace, I'm pretty sure Charlton's finances are a little flimsy.
I heard Ryan the Chairman of Doncaster asked a few weeks ago what relegation mean financially to Doncaster, he said about 5 Million pounds.
As much as I don't like certain elements of Southampton fanbase, I do feel for the decent fans. A club that has produced a conveyor belt of decent talent will now watch as they are sold off even more cheaply than before............very dark day's ahead on the south coast, and they wont be the last to feel this draft.
Well what a good judge he was.
I would be very suprised if there is, and certainly not at the prices SJ was originally floating.
Can't agree with anyone who takes pleasure in what has happened to them. A sad day for anyone who loves football.
So again without having the actual rules word for word, I imagine there is the fault line for lawyers between the "club" as a legal entity and the club as a body corporate comprising holding company and its subsidiary.
I remember the old days when football issues were settled by what happened on a field of grass, where 22 blokes kicked a leather sphere around and tried to get it between some wooden posts. How things have changed.
Imagine a check list for laying the kit out now for the team
Outfield Shirts x 14
Outfield Socks x 14 pairs
Outfield Shorts x 14
Goalkeeper Shirts x 2
Goalkeeper Socks x 2 pairs
Goalkeeper Shorts x 2
Boots x 16 pairs
Gloves x 2 pairs
Towel x 2
Practice Balls x 30
Bibs x 14
Isotonic Drinks x 32
Lawyer x 1
Didn't derby get off with the same thing few season back as well. ie holding companyy going into Admin
Pompey got that right
I personally would rather English football finances were far more stable than they are and the whole Sky/Prem thing has made it a joke. Our Board were I thought one of the more sane groups but look at the trouble we are now in. Its madness.
But has been mentioned already on this thread, it's many clubs in the Championship walking the financial tightrope.
We wobbled, but Southampton fell off.
The rule has to be there though because teams like Leicester and Luton have played the administration game in order to get rid of debts that they'd merrily racked up. It's sad that the fans suffer from poor management, but then again they do anyway. We've had 4 cack managers and countless useless players foisted on us, which is kind of the same thing.
Goalposts aint moved at all.
After the deadline the FL can choose which season to deduct points, this season or next, if the deduction this year moved them into the bottom 3 it will be done, if they are already down, it will count for next season. It simply means that clubs can't wait till they are relegated to go into Admin, nor can they wait for the deadline to pass and take the hit next season whilst avoding relegation this season.
As for Derby it's not really at all relevent, as it was prior to the new rules being drawn up.