The9

Absolute cobblers, the pitch was basically flat with very few bobbles, it was just sticky in the middle, passing football was perfectly possible with a bit of nous and Wycombe dribbled through the middle despite the mud. We just didn't cope with it.

What would be the point of that? The very point of it is to deter the casual potential buyer so only those prepared to make the effort get a ticket first. This is an appreciation thread...

How about if the Official Saints website says it's sold out ? http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10280~1962156,00.html

If you're under a WUP the only way you can go into Admin is via a creditor. Chainrai is a creditor. Aquila was a Palace creditor. To be fair SaintJay77 has covered most of the rest - as for the additional points deduction, HMRC has voted against ALL CVAs as a matter of policy since they lost preferential creditor status via an Act of Parliament (circa 2005) and as they're the ones who raised the WUP, I seriously doubt they'll agree to ANYTHING the Skates put before them in terms of payoff. So they can look forward to a nice -10 from the FL if they're still in Admin in July(ish), and if the books are as dodgy as they seem to be, they'll probably get -15 for irregularities and/or coming out of admin without a CVA. Even if they manage to find a buyer, they might actually be on -25 in the CCC next season, which would be funny for a team with no Prem players left on their books (by then), plus they wouldn't own the ground or any of the surrounding land.

That's probably true, but they almost certainly won't be 6th if they're on 82 points, they'll be nearer 4th. Leeds were 4th last season on 84, Millwall 5th on 82 and Scvnthorpe 6th on 76. So that's two defeats you haven't factored in already. Having said that, we can't keep doing what we did(n't do) last night and think we're close to the playoffs, we're only 9th even WITH the -10 back (although we're safely better than MKDons in 8th).

Seems to be fair comment based on what I saw last night. Although I'm not quite sure why we weren't able to pass the ball on a reasonably flat - if sticky - pitch. Never ceases to amaze me how thick footballers are. PASS IT TO THE WINGS ON THE GRASS YOU IDIOTS !!!! Can't see why anyone would blame (at a quick glance) Pardew or Wotton, Pardew changed things as much as was possible when the entire time was basically in sleepwalk mode and Lambert in particular was awful, and Wotton was the one player who did the smart thing with the ball in getting it out of the gloop and into the corners behind their defence any chance we had. Sometimes you just have to play for the conditions, and we didn't. Having said that, we could have won by two goals if we'd taken our chances (or lost if they'd taken theirs).

I'm on my way, WOOT !

I get what you mean, but AFAIK there's no link between the Prem and FL points deductions. Technically they resign as members of the PL and "join" the FL and will need to get their "golden share" etc so they may well have to take -10 if still in admin come the start of next season. But we shall see. We already had grounds for appealing our deduction due to the tenous nature of the holding company loophole, but didn't and shouldn't, but there's no obvious similarity to their situation anyway. No holding company and that was the issue with us. You can't just say "they didn't get a deduction, we shouldn't have had one" when the detail is completely different.

We're about to find out. Chainrai did well to become a creditor, get ownership of the ground AND be in a position to affect the outcome in a way Gaydamak and HMRC can't. There's some question about the legality of his purchase, but I *think* (if Palace is a precedent in January, they were due WUP on Jan 27 and "Aquila" put them into Admin on Jan 26) that going into admin gets them out of the High Court winding up order BECAUSE it's been invoked by a creditor (which is the only way to do it at that point). They clearly do not have any buyer or any semblance of a buyer at the moment or they would be presenting that as their solvency. This gives them as long as the administrator gives them.

BBC have caught up with it now : http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8527495.stm PS Glad I didn't take that £10 bet...

That's what's supposed to happen. So far all we've heard is £3 per ticket on the phone and £3 per application online.

I never cease to be amazed at the General Public.

Phone or online?

I think they're in better shape now they've admitted there might be administration, they avoid the WUP immediately - lucky for them Chainrai seems to know what he's doing, lucky for us he's not interested in owning a football club ! I will again mention that Newcastle were in a much better financial situation last season when Ashley tried to sell, and no-one bought them.

Because people can buy 9 each, and they don't care who they sell them to as there's not likely to be a shortage. More demand for ours so there's a staggered sales period. You would hope that our ticket office would have the tickets given that they should be posting them out when they get the orders...

Good use of FACT, but as I've been saying since about October, there's no guarantee that the Football League will enforce the -10 if the Premier League's -9 is implemented as well. I don't think the Prem has a cut off date for Admin (what with this being the first one and all) - but this is early enough that they'll definitely get -9 anyway. With Chainrai's admin winding up will be avoided, but they need to 1) Find a buyer and 2) Do it before the FL gets to look at their situation and deliberate on it (around June/July 1 I'm guessing). I'd just like to LOL at the use of "creditability" on the News website. The OED describes it as "rare" http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50053584?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=creditability&first=1&max_to_show=10 I'm assuming they really mean "credibility", given that they use "credible" in the article, twice.

That'll do for me. Well, that's going to p155 off the creditors at HMRC and Gaydamak then... ...Palace were due a winding up order on Jan 27th and "Aquila" put them into admin on 26th, saving them the High Court date - will be interesting to see what happens in this case, they still need to find a buyer and look how close we were to going - and we actually have assets. Looks like Chainrai will need to judge possible rental income from Fratton against the likelihood of actually managing to sell them.

Link ?

There was a stink last year because Luton sold their half, Scvnthorpe only took 15-20k and because Scunny ignored the directives on selling the tickets in blocks their fans were all over their end, removing the possibility of Luton fans gaining extra blocks over the half way line.

Here's the 31 stage process of getting through a hearing about a restrictive covenant if you think it's nice and straightforward to change or ignore : http://www.landstribunal.gov.uk/Documents/rules_procedures_and_forms/lpflow1.pdf (Warning, it's a PDF).

Cattermole is quoted on the BBC site saying he's not going to rush and it definitely won't be done by Monday. There are supposed to be two other buyers. Saints' due diligence took nigh-on a month, they'll have had at most 3weeks and we all already know what a mess their finances are. Equally, no-one bought Newcastle United last season when they might have stayed up and have decent revenue streams - compare that to the Skate mess. If they're not put into admin by a creditor (likely to be Chainrai if he's able to, and assuming his ground purchase from PCFC Ltd is legal) before Monday there is every chance HMRC will have them liquidated for insolvency. The club owe too much to too many with too little income in addition to the money they owe the HMRC, and HMRC wanted them gone at the last court hearing. If they are liquidated, Chainrai owns the ground, Gaydamak some land around it. They'll both get income from it assuming there nothign legally stopping them developing it. Chainrai has already said he's not in it for the football and needs to recoup £17m. If Chainrai puts them into Admin they're all but relegated immediately, he'll own the ground and will get rental income indefinitely, but they will STILL have to find a buyer for a debt-ridden CCC club with about half a squad of untried players and maybe two assets on the pitch.

Depends which "League" you mean. The Premier League could invoke a wage/turnover ratio if they wanted, they choose not to. The Football League chooses to do so. It's got nothing to do with "teeth" or discriminating against small teams, and everything to do with which league competition they play in. Other than the fact they couldn't afford to pay them, wages have nothing to do with the punishments to Chester, Luton and Bournemouth, who were penalised for going into Admin and not coming out in the manner the Football League requires.

Flattered, but I only know what I've read on various clubs' boards, wiki, seen from legal people on SSN etc. Informed, and occasionally ill-informed !

Just remembered it was the 2006 World Cup bid not 2010 (gentleman's agreement indeed)... Ferguson said here that were there because the FA insisted : http://www.goal.com/en-india/news/2171/premier-league/2009/12/02/1661532/alex-ferguson-regrets-manchester-uniteds-fa-cup-withdrawal Nothing about the FA threatening them with fines or expulsion here either, but stuff about the FA offering them the chance to withdraw rather than devalue the competition : http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football-united-given-chance-to-miss-fa-cup-1102926.html The point remains that there's no precedent for this situation other than in the case of ineligible players, which reinstates the opponent, but that's where rules have been broken, rather than a failure to field a team.

If they have the OS to rely on, it's all on there. I'm sure the ticket Info in the programme would have been the same too. I will admit they were a LITTLE vague on the £3 per ticket v £3 per transaction front, but the complaints from people who actually pitched up at the ticket office, for instance..? I think the club has been very noble in taking the blame on themselves for that one in particular.