CB Fry

Correct. While some were going all goey over Pinnacle for "standing up against the evil league ()" and other such rot, the unfortunate admin/office/commercial/grounds staff had to defer their wages for at least a week while they ponced about over a course of action they could never, ever win. But there are losers, and that's the staff forced to ring their mortgage companies last week because they didn't get their wages. Way to go, Pinnacle legal masterminds. So there is a tarnish there they need to work very hard to remove, very quickly.

Indeed. And all because they decided to ponce and posture over the ten point rule and some nebulous "human right to appeal" (Jesus wept), which did nothing except waste a week to ten days of time they could have spent owning the club and driving it forward. It was plain to anyone with a brain that Pinnacle would never get to appeal, would never get the points back and would never ever win, and what the league were doing was not illegal in the slightest. Funny I did say that several times on this forum over the last week or so and got dog's abuse. So Pinnacle from being the do-no-wrong golden boys now have some serious ground to make up to regain faith. And all because they decided to listen to their greedy lawyers with eyes on a prize and with zero understanding of how sport actually works. That said, with MLT in tow, I think they can regain the faith, but they probably need to start acting on appointing a coach and sorting players futures PDQ.

Finally moved out of your parents house have we?

But I thought we were being told it wasn't a "group", it was one single money man? It does seem to be unravelling somewhat, but sure it will be fine come Tuesday.

Course it will son. You keep knocking one out over Pinnacle's super dooper professional legal team.

You've changed your tune. Pinnacle's sh*t-hot legal team have decided on a course and you're saying they shouldn't bother? And what's your view on the fact that Pinnacle and co now look like doing precisely what I said they should do, just more than a week later than I said it. But what do I know, eh? If they'd listened to this gob****e we'd have been under new ownership for a full week by now and all the staff would have been paid. But hey, I'm just a gob****e.

Again, any consortium with half a brain would have planned for this eventuality. Or have the legal mega brains helping out Lynam and co not bothered to study the cases of Rotherham, Luton or Leeds? Coming out and wailing "well, we can't believe the cheek of it" after months of planning just makes them look ridiculous.

Hilarious. So it's all our fault. We should have welcomed them all in, just like all the Man United fans welcomed the Glazers with wide open arms and unquestioning adoration a couple of years back.

No they haven't you f*cking plank. It's looking more and more like Pinnacle have been posturing over the ten points because they don't actually have the funds to complete the deal. Before it all kicked off there was a general consensus that we didn't like it but we were lumbered with the ten points, and any consortium with their eyes open knew they were buying a club ten points down. They've had more than eighty days to get used to that fact.

This is my favourite post ever on this website.

Of course we gain an advantage - in our case, primarily post admin. And anyway, the league can't just ignore clubs going into admin, there has to be a sanction otherwise all clubs would be p*ssing money up the wall forever. Anyway it isn't me you need to rant at. Plenty of people on this forum were screaming for us to go into administration NOW NOW NOW throughout last season because "we'd be stronger for it". Those people have now changed their tune. Whether you think we've gained an advantage or not (I get what you're saying) we spent money we didn't have which is cheating. We could talk all day about the ins and outs of it, but that is the fundemental rule we've been done by. Don't bother mentioning Liverpools, Pompeys and Man Us debt. I know.

....but as you have just admitted, a renegotiation of the loan in our favour is 100% guaranteed to happen. Even if we had to pay the whole lot back in the Prem we'd still be at a massive sporting advantage against lots of other teams in L1 and the CCC, not least Brighton who have a £90m stadium to pay for, and lots of clubs who would love a stadium like ours. I'd like a mortgage holiday until the day I win £100,000 or above on the Premium Bonds. That would put me in a much stronger position than I am now. So a renegotiated stadium debt in our favour is a fact. Cheers.

Evidence, eh? Let me see now.... Christ. We've gone into administration and the adminstrators and potential purchasers of the business have been renogiating with creditors. What do you think has been going on for the last three odd months? Do you honestly think Pinnacle have negotiated with Aviva to pick up the mortgage precisely where SLH left it and just carry on paying the same amount against the same mortgage? Do you think Lynam, Fry and co are absolute idiots? So sorry, I have no "evidence". Actually, I think there was something from Le Tissier or Lynam, I think, very early on, about us being debt free. Can't remember. Doesn't matter though. Take it as read the stadium mortgage will be massively renegotiated, and firmly expect it to be settled via an early lump sum or two.

Because no one gives a flying f*ck about L1. And its the summer.

It reads precisely as I have been telling people and getting shouted down for the last couple of days. They are in negotiation, its a bit of a stand off, the League are probably being extreme in threatening non entry to the league, and Pinnacle are probably being extreme in threatening to drag the league through the courts and hold up an entire season of football. I personally think the League have a far stronger case than we do, but it takes time to settle a negotiation as any union negotiator or high level sales trader will tell you. I am keeping the faith that this will happen and don't doubt the commitment. But it is MLT that makes me believe these people.

Has any party got the golden share? I'm not sure anyone has. All my points still stand because in the trade off, refusing entry to Pinnacle and anyone else that refuses to accept the terms will drive us into liquidation anyway.

Don't you think SLH made a humoungous mistake when they seriously thought they could dump SLH into admin and not get points deducted. The league haven't made a bloody mistake, and don't you think the FL "checked their decision" again on Monday and didn't they "check their decision" when they sent their accountants in after the first week or so. Stop going on about dictators, for christ's sake. Don't any of you work in the real world?

They are in a trading position. This is a negotiation about membership of the league and is being carried out in a similar fashion to a trading negotiation or a union dispute etc. Lots of legalese but a fundemental argument. At the moment SFC is not in the league. The FL extreme position is to refuse us entry. SFC's extreme position would be to then sue the league for restraint of trade. Neither of those are likely to happen, but the bits in between might be, as with Leeds (look up Um Pahar's posts on it). The bits in between hover around: Entry granted to L2 to Entry granted to L1 with -10 and including Yes, you can appeal, but find another league to play in in the meantime. and entry granted on condition that the points will not be contested, the books are clean, football debts covered, fit and proper person test etc. So it is something to trade if we want to be in the League next season. Not illegal whatsoever, just a negotiation. Entry granted to L1 with -10 is our best bet and we should bite their hand off.

I'm with him above. The right of appeal if you like is part of a negotiated settlement to grant us entry to the league. I likened it to a "compromise agreement" where you pay someone off and they agree not to contest the decision to challenge it. I signed one when I got made redundant. I "waived my rights to appeal". It is pretty common practice which is what the "it's unfair!!! it's illegal!!" brigade don't seem to get. But if I wanted to go to court and appeal, of course I still could - how could my previous company stop me? I'd probably lose though. And that's what Saints could do. They'd probably lose, but then they'd probably lose even if the League wrote them a letter saying "please, please please appeal". And one more thing - the "waiver" preventing appealing is not there because "the league know they are in the wrong :rolleyes:" its so the league can get on with running a football competition with the clubs involved having some idea of how many points the teams have. The league would win 100 appeals out of 100.

Excellent, excellent post. The whiners and whingers making out how hard done by we are and how unfair it all is are conveniently forgetting the club will be a hell of a lot stronger post admin than pre and will have a significant advantage over their competitors - namely they've got a stadium at a ridiculous knock down price. I'm sure Yeovil, Gillingham and Brighton would love a £30m stadium for a third of the price. Brighton have just comitted £90m to their new one. That's why there is a ten point penalty to offset our considerable advantage against our competitors*. But you people just won't listen. Just keep whinging about fairness because Southampton are the most hard done by football club in the world. *oh, one more thing - the fact that would be stronger post admin was the reason king divs like Alpine and SaintRichmond were screaming for us to go into admin NOW NOW NOW last season. They seem to have forgotten that argument now.

After seven days, wasn't it?

Excellent post, which will be ignored by the lunatics screaming about "human rights" and "the FL are breaking the law!!!!!!" and other such garbage that is being churned out day in day out on here. And anyone saying the non appeal ruling is a "last minute spanner in the works" is utterly deluded. It was plain as day to anyone eighty days ago when this all started.

Says who? As several dull people have said to me in recent days - are you a qualified lawyer with access to the full details of the blah blah etc etc etc

Jimmy Tarbuck would play himself.

I was Saints lawyer I wouldn't make any money by dragging everything out over every single sentence, but that doesn't make me wrong. We won't get the 10 points recinded and if we ever do "appeal" to the FL, the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the high court, Watchdog, the European Union, Norwich Union, the Pope or Lynne Foulds Wood we will never, ever, win. All of you can come and poo on my head if I'm wrong.