CB Fry

Do you know what "price Fry is asking for"? Well, that is what is called hindsight, and I for one would not have been happy if the club was broken up and the stadium flogged to the council in the first week. I'd have said there were better deals to be done out there, and I think there still is. So I won't be loosing sleep over it, especially if your dream ticket is Trust + Council. Jesus wept that is the lastest, lastest resort you could think of.

So why hasn't Lynam just come out and said it then? Or Fry for that matter. Funny how the FL get ripped apart for "politico-banal" and "pointless statements" but Pinnacle says nothing apart from "other issues" and you all decide that it definitely definitely means we're going to be deducted eighty points a season for the next ten years. Why do the Pinnacle "banal" and "pointless" statements get given so much more worth in your eyes?

Sorry, not sure what you are reading into the statement here, apart from actively looking for things to keep the conspiracy going. Funny if the issue was lots more points being deducted, why hasn't Lynam and co been shouting it from the rooftops? That's what I'd have been doing because it takes all the blame off me and onto Mawhinney and the League. But not a sausage about it. Funny eh?

Sorry, how can the football league be responsible for us being bankrupt? They've got nothing to "wash their hands of". Christ, get the chip off your shoulder and look a bit closer to home for blame.

Hopefully this might quieten down the -25 point conspiracy theorists. The FL telling Pinnacle to show us the money is a perfectly reasonably request, and even more reasonable now we know they were full of it from the get go, and built their entire business plan on not being -10. They might as well have built their business plan on us being in the group stages of the Champions League.

I do know how renting works. My point is about additional funding generated by the facilities going to the council rather than the football club would hurt the club, especially in L1 where a 32,000 state of the art stadium is a more significant advantage than it is in the Prem or even CCC. Ask Mark Goldberg how not owning Selhurst Park worked for him. And Coventry aren't doing too well either in their council owned stadium. Hull are the one example I can think of where it is working, but lets not get too excited about them yet - their success could still be a passing fad. The point is the council owning the stadium should have been last resort, and it probably still is, so that's about right.

If Fry had sold the ground to the council in the first week, it makes the rest of the club much less of an attractive investment. Especially in the lower leagues it is the ground/facilities that gives you the capacity to increase revenues - the "club" isn't going to do that as well. Bon Jovi could still play an SMS if saints are in L1, but comparatively that is now worth a lot more money than it was when we were in the Prem. Any prospective buyer would have wanted the ground. So easy to say in hindsight but it was the right thing to not sell to the council at the time.

Agree with this. It's also worth pointing out that if the figurehead was AN Other person on earth, they would be getting ripped apart on here for lying, deceit, leading the fans on etc. Just like Mr Lynam in fact. So some gentle appraisal of MLT's limitations is not exactly crime of the century, not least because I am sure he is feeling a little bit of a tit himself at the moment. And before some loon gives it all the "HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!!!" routine with me, I'm quoting my own post from further up this very thread. So there.

Sorry, this theory is 2+2=5. SLH and SFC are inextricably linked, they were before and they will be following. The league are not going to say "SFC can't provide a CVA" if the new company, or the new SFC business has settled all its debts and has a CVA. There is no catch-22 except for paranoid conspiracists on web forums. As I've said a couple of times, if this was the case then Lynam and co would be milking it to death because it gets them off the hook. Correct.

Shut up you plum. That was my Bellemoor favourite.

We might have some further points deductions but not for the reason Adriansfc keeps going on about. He thinks we are going to get deducted because SFC doesn't sumbit a CVA because they "weren't" in admin in the first place therefore they can't. He thinks we'd get deducted on a technicality even if a billionaire bought SLH and paid every single debt in full. That isn't going to happen - the League are treating SLH and SFC as inextricably linked, and as long as that entity in its new form sorts itself out we won't get any more deductions. The league aren't going suddenly go back on their entire argument and then split them out just for the sake of deducting points. If we don't get sorted then additional points deductions are perfectly possible, though.

Sorry, don't buy it. If that was the case then Lynham and Jackson have got the greatest get out of free card in the world. If we were about to be deducted 30 points and Pinnacle and Wacko were told that we'd know about it, South Today would have led on it and it would be all over the Echo website , Sky Sports News and Talksport like sh*t on a pensioner's blanket. Pinnacle clearly built their whole plan by telling their mystery backer "we can get out of the 10 point thing" which was utterly deluded and they dragged it on and on as long as they could, built on ridiculous hope. Wacko Jacko probably got wind of the Pinnacle bail and got out before he was expected to do anything on his fantasy. He is an idiot. And anyway, failing to comply with a CVA is simply "not having enough money to run the business". Its not about points deductions - if they can't comply with a CVA they can't run the bloody club. I'm saying chancers, the pair of them.

If this "catch 22" 25 points thing you keep going on about was anything like a reality then Lynham and co (and Fry) would have mentioned it by now. If not before than definitely today now Lynham is not even involved anymore. After all, Lynham could take all the heat off himself and his fantasy consortium by blabbing about 25 points, couldn't he? That would remove all anger to him and straight to Mahwinney. This 25 points rule is you reading some rules and making 2+2=5. It just isn't going to happen. There is no "catch 22" except in your head. We've got things to worry about, but this isn't one of them.

Pinnacle was a Ted Bates statue of a consortium though. Full of good intention, people giving progress reports about how great it was all looking, massive anticipation, supported by leading figures from the club's past. But when it came to the crunch turned out to be total cowplop. And a national embarrassment. That statue is still hilarious, though.

He's probably guilty of believing too much. He probably feels more gutted, let down and angry than any of us right now. Fans slagging him off really are shameful. Legend last year, legend last week, legend yesterday, legend today. Legend, forever.

Not sure I buy this latest excuse - when has a club ever had its licence revoked "because the time ran out" or "it was only a two year licence"? If Saints are trading normally then I can't see the problem. It's probably part of the league's procedure with clubs coming out of administration/with new owners - some conditions, a few health checks.

If Pinnacle does fall through, MLT is going to look pretty foolish. Which is why I don't think Pinnacle will fall through now, MLT has staked too much on it. He's talking as if he is the chairman and can't see a situation where he won't be. Can you imagine if it turns out Lynam and co are full of it - it won't be MLT the fans turn on, it'll be the Pinnacle boys. Leading the fans along is one thing, but leading on our talisman is quite the other. Pitchforks at the ready.

He's a bit like the James Dean of Saints - "died" before he had the chance to get rubbish (imagine if, say, Glenn ****erill had a career ending injury three years into his Saints career) Was brilliant for us in his time, but don't buy into the "loyalty" thing - if has was 100% fit on the day we were relegated, the likelihood would have been he'd have been gone that summer, or during the Jan window, like Niemi. The tragedy, of course, is that we probably wouldn't have gone down with a fit Svennson. Our team with a fit Killer would have been easily good enough to finish a point above Bryan Robson's lowest-survival-total-ever WBA team*. * until Hull. So all in all, a mini legend, and a tragic career cut short.

Bosko Balaban was famously a John Gregory signing, and Angel (who DOL didn't sign either) was a good player, so not sure what your point is there. David OL was the man that promoted all the players you list into the first team. George Graham wasn't playing them. That's the point. DOL believed in them, and he made those kids, he made that team. You can say "they were good anyway" but using that argument Man U could appoint me as manager tomorrow because "they're good anyway". DOL I don't think even spent that much money at Villa as memory serves. And Risdale was to blame for the spending at Leeds. To be honest, I don't even want DOL, not least because he has been out for a long time and is unproven at our level. But he has a record that stands up against anyone, including Keegan who never did anything much in Europe. But if he did take over at Saints, we'd stroll to the playoffs.

I think you've gone a bit over the top there. Risdale would have negotiated Johnson's salary, not O'Leary. And O'Leary worked to the budget that Risdale gave him, and it was Risdale who cooked up the idea of borrowing to fund players wages against guaranteed CL football. His career at Villa was mixed, but his first season was very good. He is hardly "one of the worst managerial options out there" and his work with young players at Leeds was exceptional. You name any other option for saints and I can bet they've never finished third, fifth and sixth in the Prem, and into the Semis of the Champion's League. And you can say "he bought it" but Mark Hughes spent more and finished nowhere near anything last season. Not that I think DOL would come here in a million years of course.

Would probably get us promoted from L1 at a stroke, but really any one with an "aura" or a reputation could. You could call it "the Paul Ince rule". But we couldn't afford him and I think he'd want to spend too much for us, especially once we'd got into the CCC. So although he was successful at both clubs he's been at, its a no from me.

If it turns out to be a Glazers/Liverpool style leverage deal then I think that will be a massive disappointment to a lot of fans. I think that would have been the kind of "real world" deal we would expect a prospective purchaser to carry out for us a few weeks back, but after a fair few big noises from Pinnacle I think it will be something of a damp squib now. It wouldn't be terrible (not least because the renogiated mortage or lump sum to close the debt completely will make things a lot easier) but it doesn't demonstrate genuine incremental investment, and certainly won't justify the hype attached to it. PS - and yes, Liverpool and Man U do seem to be doing okay out of it broadly, but it is fairyland in the Prem.

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?