|
Post by ThePrayer on Apr 12, 2009 12:38:00 GMT 1
Well, i think the enquiry's still ongoing in this. But imo they should be docked points...
If the FA back out of this, what must the likes of Luton be thinking?
|
|
|
Post by Shanks5974 on Apr 12, 2009 12:44:14 GMT 1
As I understand, they may get off because they've not actually gone in to administration, the company who own them have? if that's the case it's absolute joke and makes a mockery of the system. Every club may as well set up a holding company and place their debt on to that, put it in to administration to clear the debt and bypass any penalty, completely unfair on all the other clubs battling relegation.
|
|
|
Post by ThePrayer on Apr 12, 2009 12:45:40 GMT 1
Yeah it's the company who owns them or something. There are far too many loopholes being exploited by teams, and the FA seems to have no answers! Joke!
|
|
|
Post by Shanks5974 on Apr 12, 2009 12:54:21 GMT 1
I really don't see them getting away with it though, I really hope the FA see sense and dock them points just like every other team would receive.
|
|
|
Post by BafanaBafana on Apr 12, 2009 18:22:00 GMT 1
They may not have reached the same heights, but Soton or looking more and more like Leeds every day. How the mighty fall.
|
|
|
Post by LightDrizzle on Apr 13, 2009 21:56:16 GMT 1
i dont agree with the docking points anyway, they should punish the companies not the fans but the way i see it they should face the same punishment as anyone in that situation but i can see southamptons point of view also cos it isnt necessarily anything that they've done, for me it depends how involved they were with the company
|
|
Spence
First Team Bench Warmer
[M0:13]CCFC.
Posts: 894
|
Post by Spence on Apr 16, 2009 16:30:34 GMT 1
Don't bring issues like this into football, sort it out off the field. It's ruining our game, and peoples beloved clubs.
|
|
|
Post by ThePrayer on Apr 23, 2009 15:10:00 GMT 1
Southampton will be relegated from the Championship after being docked 10 points by the Football League. The penalty comes after the club's parent company went into administration at the start of April. Southampton are currently four points off safety with two games to go and, even if they beat the drop, they will be deducted 10 points. If they do not avoid finishing in the bottom three then the points penalty will take effect next season. The south coast outfit had hoped to avoid the punishment as they argued that its parent company Southampton Leisure Holdings plc had gone into administration. But a League investigation by "independent forensic accountants" found that the club and the holding company were "inextricably linked as one economic entity" and applied their mandatory penalty. More to follow. BBC Game over for the Saints Tbh, sad day for their fans, but it was the right decision...
|
|
|
Post by LightDrizzle on Apr 23, 2009 19:00:43 GMT 1
dont really think its fair to say it was the right decision when you dont know the ins and outs. its not their fault the parent company went into admin
|
|
|
Post by Shanks5974 on Apr 23, 2009 20:23:56 GMT 1
Of course it was the right decision, "the club and the holding company were inextricably linked as one economic entity"
It IS their fault the parent company went in to administration, this Southampton Leisure Holdings plc had no income or direct expenditure of it's own so was therefore completely solvent in it's own right. It wasn't operational for any other reason other than for Southampton football club and the the stadium company what ever they are called to operate under. The debt which has subsequently forced the parent company in to administration was presumably placed against it by the football club from operational losses and the stadium company from building St Mary's. IF they were to have got away with this, every football club could simply create a holding company and transfer ownership to that and consequently bypass this whole rule of docking points for going in to administration.
As I see it anyway, not read much on this yet so might have missed something.
|
|
|
Post by ThePrayer on Apr 23, 2009 20:28:35 GMT 1
IF they would've got away with it, what about Luton, Rotherham and Bournemouth? Has to be the right decision, but then again it's the FA who are doing the decision making here
|
|
|
Post by BafanaBafana on Apr 23, 2009 20:31:49 GMT 1
Can somebody explain why it is that poor business by the club is punished through point docking? Not saying it is the right or wronf thing to do, I just dont know what the thinking behind it is.
|
|
|
Post by Shanks5974 on Apr 23, 2009 20:49:56 GMT 1
Can somebody explain why it is that poor business by the club is punished through point docking? Not saying it is the right or wronf thing to do, I just dont know what the thinking behind it is. If a club goes in to administration and consequently wipes the debt held against them, it gives them a huge advantage on the pitch as they can strengthen the team until they reach a manageable level of debt. Look at Norwich for example, I think 8 players of the current squad are on loan because they simply can't afford to pay transfer fees. The only way to balance it is to dock points, the FA have to give clubs a severe punishment for going in to administration so they don't all use it as an easy way out.
|
|
|
Post by ThePrayer on Apr 23, 2009 20:52:09 GMT 1
But there's enough loopholes in the system for some teams to exploit it. Only Leeds have done that in my memory, but there's bound to be more flaws to the system.
|
|
|
Post by BafanaBafana on Apr 23, 2009 20:56:35 GMT 1
well it is an understandable punishment i guess, as it will produce the most visible results. However, im not so sure that it is a great way to deal with the situation, but i understand it might be the only way. Oh well, sports and business are just not meant to mix
|
|
|
Post by mrleeds on Apr 24, 2009 1:18:21 GMT 1
Feel sorry for them, but at the end of the day rules are rules
|
|
Larry
Championship Player
[M0:21]
Posts: 5,876
|
Post by Larry on Apr 24, 2009 9:36:25 GMT 1
the football League had no choice in this matter because of what happened with Sheff Utd, any club who thinks they have been unfairly relegated because in their view the League failed to impose the correct punishment on another team are now going to take legal action. The Football League know this and they vertainly wouldn't want to get involved in a simler case.
|
|
|
Post by Shanks5974 on Apr 25, 2009 14:38:26 GMT 1
Neil Doncaster's position on the Football League Board has come under the spotlight due to an alleged conflict of interest involving Southampton's 10-point penalty.
Apparently, there is a lot of upset on the South Coast that the eight-strong Football League board included Doncaster, the chief executive of Norwich, who are one of the clubs still fighting to avoid relegation from the Championship with two games left and so directly affected by the Southampton verdict.
The Football League took the precaution of receiving legal advice over Doncaster taking part in the board's debate on Southampton's fate.
And the Norwich supremo registered his particular conflict before the start of the Southampton discussion and did not participate in the vote.
But official Norwich websites had predicted Doncaster would 'speak forcibly on the subject' at board level and was hardly likely, in the circumstances, to be advocating that the Saints escaped a points deduction this season.
Doncaster said: 'It is my fiduciary duty during board meetings to discuss issues from a Football League perspective, which is always the case.'
ffs, I really hope Southampton go down without the points deduction to shut them up or this could go on for a while.
|
|