Matthew Le God

Over the last eighteen months only Man City have spent more than Spurs so would be asking alot! Spurs have spent more than Man Utd, Chelsea, Liverpool and Arsenal.

We have won Leagues, come 2nd and 3rd in the past. I'm sure it has been bettered at some point in the last 124 years.

You are either joking or stupid. For your sake I hope it is the former even if it isn't funny.

Rupert Lowe was not the one that put the club into administration, it was out of his hands. The creditors called in the debt.

Maths not a strong point for some on here not realizing that a draw is 2 points dropped

Don't be stupid! Why on earth would Lowe have deliberately put us into administration? He lost all his shares and one hell of alot of money! It was the creditors that forced us into admin at the time it happened, although it was mainly down to poor management at board level for many years from all regimes(Lowe, Crouch, Wilde etc) that it came to it.

We have won a few leagues and come 2nd and 3rd a number of times in the past so it is quite likely in has been better in the past.

Why? Basically we are already in the playoffs(form wise over the season so far) if you add the 10 points back and that was with a very slow start to the League. 9 points over 26 games to catch some lets be honest poor sides above us is very possible.

For the 1st time this season if the 10 points added back we'd be in the top 6. 9 points from the playoffs and 26 games left. Very possible now. Wasn't it you Arizona that said you'd be happy with 5th bottom? Surely we should all be unhappy if we don't make the play offs now?

For the 1st time this season if the 10 points added back we'd be in the top 6. 9 points from the playoffs and 26 games left. Very possible now.

For the 1st time this season if the 10 points added back we'd be in the top 6. 9 points from the playoffs and 26 games left. Very possible now.

I doubt Antonio if signed would cost anywhere near that. 150k to 200k I reckon, perhaps less.

Micky, If anything ooooterryhurlock post made the thread worse! Southampton council couldn't bid at the time as the club was in administration and its very future was in the balance. No council it its right mind would back a bid in that situation and risk spending money on a campaign which potentially had no future.

We were in administration at the time and in no position for the council to bid and waste the cities money when potentially there could have been no club.

Why would the other 19 Premeirship teams want their money used to help Portsmouth? They'd be uproar amongst the 19 teams if the PL kept them afloat and gave them a chance of staying up. It doesn't tarnish the league if a club goes into admin. It shows the inept management of the club not the Premier League. How would it affect the league?

Yes it is true. The Football Association looks after football as a whole in England (from the English national team to womans football to grass roots football for kids). The Football League is concerned with the Championship, League One, League Two and them ONLY. Lord Malwhinney is on the board of the Football League not the FA.

If the banks and creditors call the debt in, it doesn't matter how much leeway the Premier League give the club. Administration will happen in that case.

Well you don't! As you think it was the FA that imposed the -10 points on Saints As shown here... It wasn't the FA it was the Football League - both are different organizations.

I think his point is that Lord Malwhinney is on the board of the England 2018 bid and he is the one on the board responsible of the host city selection and also the Football League Chairman that imposed the -10 on Saints.

It is shocking how many people don't know the difference between the Football Association, Football League and the Premier League. All three are different organizations.

Why does that concern you? That £1m was from Watford chairman Jimmy Russo.

No chance. They'd be uproar from the other Premiership sides.

Thats rubbish. The Premier League can't stop a team going into administration. If it is going to happen it will happen because creditors and banks have had enough.

But it is completely unfair and there is no way you could make it fair. For example... Some teams may have played Leeds, Charlton, Norwich at home before January with a better chance of winning than a team that has only played Leeds, Charlton, Norwich away in the 1st half of a season. Some teams will have easier fixtures lists than others. Promotion can only be given when everyone has had exactly the same fixtures.

You are kidding surely? Quite possibly the worst football related idea I've ever heard. The team at the top of the Championship has had a different set of fixtures compared to every other club. How have they deserved promotion halfway through the season? A team top of the Championship in December is likely to be even worse than the team at the bottom of the Premeirship as they haven't had the millions that the teams in the Prem get to spend in the summer. If this was a real suggestion and not a wind up you, need help!