pedg

excluding the obvious problem of finding people who were suitably unbiased and uncorruptible maybe there should be expert judges. Say doing scores like in boxing by rating each team under a number of criteria for 15 minute sections of the match? Lots of other sports use judges to determine who wins.

Probably take the simon cowell route and have the winner decided by number of calls to the sepp blatter dinner expenses premium rate phone numbers.

If HMRC had not take them to court when they did they would not be where they are now. The football creditors rule is something of a sideshow.

Not sure about number of shots on goal. Teams would just shoot all the time even when little chance of scoring to get their count up.

They appear to prefer to call it the "The Football League's rules and insolvency policy"

Think that has definitely reduced pompeys chance of survival. Ben Haim and others can now continue to collect knowing that there is nothing can be done to get rid of them.

​http://www.accountancyage.com/aa/news/2179734/breaking-hmrc-loses-football-creditor-rule-court-battle The High Court has dismissed the taxman's challenge against a controversial football insolvency rule .

Possibly the main reason Birch encouraged the trust bid is that if they say offered 4p to creditors it would encourage chainrai to match it to get other creditors to vote with him as he can block with his share but needs others to vote with him to get the vote passed.

nothing in the media about this which is odd. Definitely the right case as same judge mentioned here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15969818

Considering where they are heading Judge Davy Jones would have been more appropriate.

Does make you wonder if the Judge was advised in some way as to when to make the announcement of the decision? If someone wanted to make sure Pompey at least stayed in league 1 then they could not have timed it better. If the judge outlaws the FCR then pompey will have to offer the same deal to all creditors. This may well save chinny some money if he sticks at say 2p but as you say a new rule may well be in place by the time it is accepted.

Question about how retroactive that can be. If, as soon as the judgement is made, pompey propose a CVA paying football creditors 2p how quickly could the league react? i.e. is there a window in which they could get away with paying 2p to football creditors but not get a points penalty for it?

Slow spiral into the abyss continues.

Then they get to the next place a bit late.

I think you have to look at the stories behind the people (excluding the few famous ones) who are running with the torch to see that most are what you would describe as unsung hero's and if giving them a chance to run/walk/hop/roll with the torch is, in a small way, society paying them back from what they have put in then I am more than happy.

"Genuinely, I'm so emotional. I think I shall never again see the like of such amazing paypackets"

Picture taken before they started to mark out where the foundations for the new tesco will go I assume.

So he can at least pledge on one share to the trust.

They obviously have to appear to be in a 'business as normal' mode come the league meeting. Selling off everyone they can and not looking to get anyone in would give the league the impression that they don't intend to compete next season.

Would you trust someone who had this on their linkedin profile?

Their trust did not appear to be overly bothered about this deadline either. Maybe they hope that someone standing up and saying "Talks are ongoing and we hope to fulfill our fixtures" will be enough?

Agreed I think its a completely made up story. After all it claims that Chainrai would actually make a payment of 2p in the pound! Completely farcical.

Exiting administration without a CVA has a 'football' punishment of a points deduction but in terms of business law does it not mean that creditors can then apply to have them wound up again?

Unless they have changed their default position not much point them having dialog with HMRC. "1%?" "No", "2%?" "No, "3%?"..... "99%?" "No", "100%?" "Probably"

So if Chainrai proposes a CVA of 2p in the pound and BT/OldCo vote against what happens then?