aintforever

Who was on the SaintsWeb table?

Bet we don't make a penny from this, the nationals wont give a **** if they have a picture of a Saints player in or not. Local papers will not buy any out of principle. This is probably just all about Princess Nicola's tiff with the Echo, he probably expects their photographer to get banned from away games. I expect it annoys him that there is nothing he can do to spite the Echo at away games. I agree with the Plymouth article, it's an insult to football fans.

I think you will find fans taking pics is a bit different to press.

Until we go play in Plymouth and the roles are reversed.

Dunno, hopefully if Storrie gets done for tax evasion that will give them an excuse. The other clubs will be after blood and they can change the rules whenever they want like they did with Leeds.

I still think the Football League will give them a points penalty this season.

cheating ****s

I'm glad the other premier league club's attitude is now out in the open: "The other clubs wanted "to boot Pompey out there and then", Sheldon said. He added: "The clubs wanted Portsmouth to go to the wall and divide all the TV money among themselves."" Rest assured that's exactly how the other Football League clubs will be thinking, even if they escape this court case they will still be penalised IMO.

Has to be Beattie's first in the Carling Cup game, the atmosphere was electric.

I don't think they will liquidate if the CVA fails, it's just Chanrai's scare tactics.

Surely it just needs one person to subscribe, then they can just upload it, post link on here - sorted.

If the Echo has been banned it's just ****ing retarded. Not only does it show that the club doesn't give a toss about fans who rely on the Echo, it also achieves nothing but cut off a source of free promotion and just makes the paper more likely to print speculation and negative stories.

When is the Fans Forum?

Do you know anyone who works at SFC?

Bit melodramatic - where do you keep reading "this club is rotten to the core"? I havn't read that since Lowe was here. There is nothing wrong with posting a rumour you hear - good or bad. There is nothing wrong with criticising decisions made by Cortese. It doesn't mean you are anti-Cortese, or that you are making a big issue out of anything. It just means you have a different point of view.

Exactly, I can't believe the new Tory government hasn't introduced steps to make this the case, especially in today's climate of cuts. All prisoners should receive a bill for their imprisonment on release. If they own a house or other assets these should be taken as payment. Only if they have no assets should the bill be written off. That way any compo claims by prisoners would just be swallowed up in their bill anyway.

HRMC appealed the CVA but because the court date was after the start of the season and Leeds couldn't afford to stay in admin they had to exit admin without a CVA - hence the -17. Bates paid the creditors "x" pence in the pound and blew off their debt. I don't see why Chainrai couldn't do the same. The -17 will make little difference to their income which is mainly parachutes and player sales.

Which one of those did Bates do at Leeds? Leeds were not liquidated, they didn't exit admin through a CVA and from what I understand, the creditors actually received less than what they were offered in the CVA that was rejected by HRMC.

Can't Chanai just buy them out of administration without a CVA and blow off their debts like Bates did with Leeds?

I think everyone agrees on that. I don't see why prisoners should get compensation should the Prisons fail to do their job though. They shouldn't have the same rights as real humans.

So if (as most likely) HRMC win on Tuesday, what's the most likely thing to happen next? I'm guessing they will exit administration without a CVA like Leeds did. That means -17, but what does that mean to the debt?

I'm sorry but that is nonsense. There is always rumours surrounding every football club. If Cortese is 100% behind Pardew they won't make the slightest difference.

If there is no truth in the rumours, it will make no difference to anyone if they are posted on an internet message board.

It's not really a big issue but I don't see how the Saints Trust having the clubs logo on their site is bad for the club. A brand is not a logo, it's about how the company is perceived. When Richard Branson does something for charity the Virgin brand gains value. When the SFC chairman threatens a bunch of old Saints fans with court action it devalues it IMO, especially when the business's entire market is Saints fans. Instead of having Nike's "just do it" we might as well adopt "just **** off" as SFC's strapline.

I think stopping them using the logo is pointless, petty and does nothing but have a negative effect on the Southampton FC brand. SFC is not Coca-Cola, the brand has zero value outside our part of hampshire and that wont change one bit unless we get to the Prem and invest Chelsea style.