um pahars

I would agree that on the face of it, it would appear that SFC Ltd is not going under and a NewCo being formed, instead it's just a "transfer of ownership", but once again given past precendents I believe the League would have no problem in stating substance over form, and using their discretion and authority to rule in a similar manner.

I wouldn't rule that out as what was clear from the Leeds affair was that Leeds could well have had to start in League 2 (Division 4) if the League not used their discretion and compromised. I reckon the League are saying you're in League 2 unless you want to meet us halfway!!!!

The League are probably doing exactly the same as they did with Leeds and offering us two options: 1. Withdraw from the League, or 2. Take up our position in Division 4 as per Regulation 11 And then the League's compromise is allowing us to stay in Division 3 as opposed to starting in Division 4, as long as we compromise and accept the points deduction and forego our right of appeal. The League will be happy to compromise, as long as we meet them halfway and a line can be drawn under this sorry saga. The Arbitration Panel highlighted the League's compromise: A consortium of businessmen (including Mr Ken Bates) wanted to acquire the assets of the Club and made an offer to the Administrators which was accepted. Regulation 11 requires a new Member (‘Leeds NewCo’) to start the following season in a lower league (L2). Leeds NewCo wanted to stay in L1. The League’s Board was receptive to the idea but on condition of a deduction of 15 points in the following season. Leeds NewCo agreed to this condition. (paras 4-21) The Arbitration Panel were also clear that the League had the discretion and authority to act (and our position not materially different from the Leeds episode): “by virtue of Article 41, Article 4 and Article 6 the Board had all the requisite authority to exercise its powers and discretion to impose a Condition of a 15 point deduction.” The Panel therefore held that:- “the assertion that the Board lacked the power to impose the Condition is unsustainable.” The Panel also rejected as “unsustainable” Leeds’ allegation that the decision was unfair and/or unreasonable. It held that Leeds United: - “would have failed to establish that the Board’s decision (or the League’s) to include the points Condition was a decision that no rational decision maker in their position could make.” “As to the amount of points deducted it carefully carried out a balancing exercise between 0 to 20 and arrived at a decision that, in all the circumstances of this particular case (which we do not need to recite) was well within the range of decision reasonably open to it to make.” And hopefully for the last time, the only redress we have is via arbitration, due to the FA's Rule K. Additionally, the Arbitration Panel have already set a precedent by clearly stating that the waiver Leeds signed was enforceable.

The League are probably doing exactly the same as they did with Leeds and offering us two options: 1. Withdraw from the League, or 2. Take up our position in Division 4 as per Regulation 11 And then the League's compromise is allowing us to stay in Division 3 as opposed to starting in Division 4, as long as we compromise and accept the points deduction and forego our right of appeal. The League will be happy to compromise, as long as we meet them halfway and a line can be drawn under this sorry saga. The Arbitration Panel highlighted the League's compromise: A consortium of businessmen (including Mr Ken Bates) wanted to acquire the assets of the Club and made an offer to the Administrators which was accepted. Regulation 11 requires a new Member (‘Leeds NewCo’) to start the following season in a lower league (L2). Leeds NewCo wanted to stay in L1. The League’s Board was receptive to the idea but on condition of a deduction of 15 points in the following season. Leeds NewCo agreed to this condition. (paras 4-21)

They did exactly the same with Leeds and the Independent Arbitration Panel found in favour of the League.

We cannot take the League to court!!!!!! We are bound by the pre existing arrangement with the FA (Rule K Arbitration) that disputes must be settled by arbitration. Additionally we can't just sign up and then say we changed our minds: As the Panel said, “to ensure Leeds stayed in League 1, [Leeds] was prepared to pay a price to achieve this”. As the Arbitration Panel stressed, ‘[t]his was a commercial bargain, at arms length between a powerful and rich Consortium of businessmen and a responsible professional Sports Governing Body’. The Panel overwhelmingly concluded that Leeds United should be required to abide by the bargain that it struck with the League’s Board, including its waiver of any claims beyond the appeal to member clubs, and the arbitration claims were rejected on this basis. As the Panel said: - “We are satisfied that the Claimants’ case begins and ends with the Compromise Agreement which clearly embodied the intention of both parties. Taking the Agreement as a whole and in particular Clause 4 Leeds New Co agreed to the imposition of the 15 points and to release the League from the claims which have now been advanced and to waive any rights to do so. Leeds New Co specifically covenanted not to bring the claims it has now sought to assert and there is no basis to allow it not to honour that covenant.”

I was also surprised when I read that the League had that option and that it was one of the options they put to Leeds (along with withdrawing from the League and also accepting the points deduction and staying in Div 3). However, I think the League sought to compromise and keep the clubs in their respective divisions as long as they accept the points deductions. This came from the League when they explained the Arbitration Panel's decision which backed the League's stance: In particular, the League not only accepted Leeds United New Co into membership, but allowed it to take its predecessor’s place in League 1, subject to a 15 point deduction to reflect the lack of a CVA. It has been suggested that this 3rd August Agreement was signed under duress, that Leeds United had no option but to do so or face losing the Club forever. In fact, as the judgment reflects, the Agreement as signed represented the culmination of a series of discussions and a meeting between representatives of Leeds United and The Football League, in which various options had been discussed to address the failure to secure a CVA of the creditors of Leeds Old Co, including: - • Cessation of membership; • Commencing the following Season in League 2 under Regulation 11; and • The 15 point deduction to apply in League 1. It was Leeds United who chose the option of a points deduction in League 1 rather than commencing the following season in League 2. As the Panel said, “to ensure Leeds stayed in League 1, [Leeds] was prepared to pay a price to achieve this”.

I don't think anyone came out wth anything as concrete as saying the Club had been assured and even if they did, then quite frankly I think it was the last desperate acts of a desperate regime!!!

think you'll find he manager he was alluding to in The Pink was Peter Reid!!!!

I think the problem might be that Pinnacle want to know exactly what our start position will be i.e. -10 or up to -30, as this would certainly impact on the price you would pay.

The problem is that we are subject to a valid pre-existing agreement to submit any disputes between clubs and the League to arbitration as per FA Rule K arbitration. Leeds attempted to go to the High Court, but quickly backtracked and withdrew.

LOL:D Pearson's certainly not my hero (Keegan would get my legs all wobbly though), just find Moanji's continued ramblings rather amusing, particularly when put up against his support of the god awful Poortvliet. I too hope it can all be sorted out in a couple of days and as much as I would welcome Pearson back, I just don't think it would happen as he's on a bit of a roll at Leicester.

There is, as this is the ruling they have enacted to deduct us 10 points. The League have a massive amount of discretion and authority (as supported by the Arbitration Panel's ruling with regards Leeds) to ensure the integrity of their competition is upheld. We would have to prove that their decision was one that no rational decision maker in their position would make, which is simply not the case. Which is exactly what Leeds did and this was promptly rejected by the Arbitration Panel.

Probably better than your hero Poortvliet though;) Bed-wetter.

Where did you read this???

The Football League Board aren't out to screw nasty Southampton, instead they are trying to treat us as fairly as possible with reference to how they have treated other clubs in the past. I personally think the whole insolvency policy needs some serious attention, but as we stand here today the League are just trying to be fair and consistent with us and with the other teams under their watch. They have the discretion and authority in regard to their overriding responsibility to protect the integrity of the League and its competitions, in the interests of all member clubs. The Football League will doing their part to ensure we survive and honour our fixtures next season, it is not in their interests not to, but that does not mean they will have to be consistent and tough with us where it is appropriate.

Everyone knew the two companies were inextricably linked, even thicko's like me pointed out we only had one business and it was the football team that was the root cause of our financial problems. He just sent the forensic accountants in to prove what we were trying to say was poppy**** and to justify and safeguard the League's position. Indeed there is an appeal mechanism and as I have said above, then if we don't want to compromise then the League does not have to compromise either and can start us in Division 4. That said, I think an apeeal would have little if no chance anyway.

I'm sure the League will do exactly what they did with Leeds. 1. Give us the right to cease our membership of the League. 2. Offer us the chance to start in Division 4 as per their rules and we will have the right to appeal the points deduction. 3. Offer us the chance to start in Division 3, but accept the point deduction and forego any appeal. As with Leeds, the League will compromise and allow us to stay in Division 3, but only if we compromise and drop our right of appeal.

Evn with their rules and laws the League still have a huge amount of leeway and discretion on all matters pertaining to their own League. The Arbitration Panel in the Leeds case backed this up and one snippet gives an indication that the League has every right to use its discretion: 64. Given the absolute discretion afforded to the Board in this respect by the Memorandum, Articles of Association and the Insolvency Policy and having regard to the margin of appreciation afforded to a sport’s governing body, the Claimant would have failed to establish that the Board’s decision (or the League’s) to include the points Condition was a decision that no rational decision maker in their position could make. The last part here (along with other bits throughout the ruling by the Arbitration Panel) makes it clear that the League can use its discretion to make decisions that they see are in the best interests of the League and the concept of fair play etc etc etc. With precedents like this, the support of the Board and the support of the member clubs, then it would be a pretty big task to prove that the League has not made a rational decision by considering substance over form in our case. It's not just a black and white legal case, there is a huge grey area within which the League has quite a bit of power, support and discretion to make rulings that are in the wider interests of the game.

The League have a huge amount of leeway and discretion on all matters pertaining to their own League. The Arbitration Panel in the Leeds case backed this up and one snippet gives an indication that the League has every right to use its discretion: 64. Given the absolute discretion afforded to the Board in this respect by the Memorandum, Articles of Association and the Insolvency Policy and having regard to the margin of appreciation afforded to a sport’s governing body, the Claimant would have failed to establish that the Board’s decision (or the League’s) to include the points Condition was a decision that no rational decision maker in their position could make.

Read these (particularly the full Arbitration Panel's Findings) and you will see that they support the League's position in that the League has quite a bit of discretion when dealing with matters such as these. http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/4b/ec/0,,10794~126027,00.pdf http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/4c/ec/0,,10794~126028,00.pdf http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/78/3/0,,10794~888,00.pdf http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/dc/ed/0,,10794~126428,00.pdf

I think the compromise will be exactly what the League did with Leeds. The League could well have made Leeds start in League 2 (Div 4), but compromised by allowin them to stay in League 1 (Div 3) on the proviso that they accepted the -15 and signed to a compromise agreement effectivley asking them to accept it and forego any future action against the League. It may well be that the clause that Pinnacle are being asked to sign is something along the same lines. I also think that our starting position hasn't been fully clarified as there is still the potential of further points deductions. I think Pinnacle will want to have a definite agreed start point with the League before they hand over the cash as any subsequent points deductions could well affect the prospects of the Club and therefore materially affect the value of the Club.

I would probably agree and IMHO I think the sticking point is that the League have not made it clear what the final outcome will be. As I said elsewhere I think Pinnacle would want to know exactly where the Club will be starting next season before they hand over the cash i.e. what division and with what points deduction.

The rationale behind this structure (put in place in 1996 and way before the League's Insolvency Procedure was even dreamt of) was to circumvent the FA's Rule 34 (regarding financially exploiting football clubs).

Indeed they are, but when you get to a case of administration, then the p's in the £'s are much smaller. I'm sorry but suggesting there is no material difference to the creditors between going in & coming out of administration and a renegotiated position on debt is somewhat stretching things. To get the vast majority of your debt wiped off will normally only occur in drastic circumstances.