CB Fry

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.

Pinnacle are still the best bid because they've got further than anyone else, and that idiot Jackson isn't involved in it. If MLT wasn't involved Pinnacle would have been ripped apart by the good people on here (including me) and this forum would be even more of a sh*tstorm than it is now.

Absolutely. Agree with this too. And agree with this - the fact that MLT is on board is the reason to keep believing. Yesterday I had serious doubts - the ten points thing is just dragging on far too long and stinks of red herring - but todays commitment to pay the staff makes me feel much better. I think it probably will happen.

Great post, agree with all of it, except the bit about the FL losing in the high court. They wouldn't lose, the FL would win 100 appeals out of 100. But of course it wouldn't ever get to high court, not within about three years anyway. By which time the 10 points will be a complete irrelevence to the SFC of 2012. Anyway, the rest of your post is fab.

There's only one demented frother on this forum love, and it aint me you swivel eyed div. Read your first post again and tell me where the non subjective bits are

a) We haven't been jerked around by anyone. The previous board jerked around (to say the least) and landed us where we are now, with a perfectly fair 10 point penalty. b) The prospective new owners are making a bit too much of a song and dance about the ten point thing and the right to appeal. We don't need to appeal, the punishment is perfectly fair. c) Not sure what the Premier League owes Setanta - Setanta have been taking £10 a month off 1.2m punters on the strength of broadcasting valuable assets they now can't pay for having had several extensions from the PL and SPL. Sentantas mismanagement could see several Blue Square and SPL clubs go into administration. All a bit of a mixed up rant about nothing there, Alpine.

Why do people still think the FA run the Premier League? Christ, that hasn't been the case for well over a decade - in fact, I don't think they ever ran it - the "FA Premier League" title was just a fig leaf and an ego boost for the FA. They've never run the Prem.

Yeah, fair enough. None of that means we shouldn't be deducted ten points though. It's a difficult one for anyone to put a lid on, and being the FL are being slaughtered on here for issuing and sticking to a perfectly reasonable punishment no-one is ever going to thank them because fans will moan like hell whatever.

Have a look at some of Um Pahars contributions on various threads tonight. Chances are the League have opened their negotiations by starting us off in League 2 instead with the compromise being L1 minus ten, as they did with Leeds.

I think this kind of thing needs to be permanently at the top of the forum. Getting a bit sick of people screaming IT'S ILLEGAL!!!!!!!!!!!! when what is happening is clearly a bit of brinkmanship/negotiation between two parties, ultimately leading to a compromise agreement. About as "illegal" as winding up a business in order to shake off debts you can't afford to pay and then starting again a few weeks later. Maybe we need to start a brand new sub forum on Human Rights and Common Law now we have so much interest in it. I'll get on the phone to Shami Chakrabati to officially open it if the mods will do the honours.

Which puts the tin hat on any talk of "natural justice" on either side firmly in the bin, then. Good, that was the point I was making. The news that Pinnacle are paying the wages on Thursday is excellent.

Actually, I think we are in agreement (call it a compromise ). Even if we sign this piece of paper, we can, in reality, in law appeal if we want to. Course we can. That's why I don't get the hand wringing and "oh its a scandal" stuff we've seen on here all day.

Eh? So just to confirm any club can run up any debts they like, plead poverty and start again. Surely the whole point of the 10 point rule is to stop clubs running up debt they can't manage? But you can't have rules without some sanctions. Come on. Normally sensible people on this forum (yes, you ) have gone quite mad.

Look, I don't give a monkey's about Aviva. But "they decided to do so and so" defence is also applicable to our dopey decision to go into administration and not expect a 10 point deduction. Southampton Football Club haven't been wronged, either. Swallow it.

Not sure I have ever said the league is allowed to do anything illegal. Reasonable conditions of entry is not the same as employees of a casino beating people up. Christ, I'm ****ing in the wind today.

You don't get that we do not have a case. The FL just want us to shut us up so they can get on with running a football competition. The FL would walk through one appeal, two appeals, ten appeals. Take it to the f*cking pope. We would never win, we have no case whatsoever.