SaintBobby

Ok, a few questions for those who have been more immersed in this thread than I have (although I have read most of it): 1. What and who can stop Portsmouth entering administration? 2. Is it in anyone's interests to stop them going into admin - and if so, through what mechanism? 3. If, for whatever reason, they do go into admin, does this permanently suspend the WUP? 4. Isn't it completely obvious that the club are insolvent? Their income simply doesn't match their expenditure - let alone start to clear their debts. What are the legal ramifications for being in admin while insolvent? 5. If they are prevented from going into admin, does the WUP order go ahead? And, if so, what could possibly prevent it succeeding? 6. If the WUP order succeeds (now or later) do Portsmouth go out of business immediately?

Even if we're the worst squad in the division, we have a high enough points tally to date to finish in the top 16! I calculated (and posted on another thread) that the chances of us losing all our remaining games is about 1 in 5 billion. Even if you think we are so sh1te that we go into each game with a 90% chance of losing, there is still only an 18.5% chance that we'll lose all our remaining games.

If you assume that for each remaining match that there's a 33% chance of a win, 33% chance of a draw and 33% of a defeat (which is rather pessimistic analysis...), then: The chance of us losing the next eight games is a tiny 0.014%. The chance of us losing all the remaining 16 games is 0.00000002 % (a one in five billion chance...that's 357 times as unlikely as hitting the national lottery jackpot) Even if you are a "wrist-slashing" depressive and you think that for each upcoming game, Saints are a 90% shot to lose - it is only an 18.5% chance that we will lose all 16 remaining league games. In short, the chances of Saints finishing 17th or worse are so vanishingly small as to be nearly impossible to measure.

The odds of us finishing in the top 16 are now something like 1/1,000,000 Only remotely feasible we will finish outside of the top 10-12 if we get some weird points deduction. Which looks rather more likely to happen to a different Hampshire-based team...

I said at kick off that I thought the starting 11 was probably the best Saints side to take to the pitch in about 7 or 8 years. They did not disappoint. Real quality performance through out the team, with Rickie Lambert turning in a near flawless performance. His touch, passing and strength were phenomenonal. I suspect he is going to get a shedload of assists with Sharp playing alongside him. A very good and enormously professional performance. Burnley, a good team on paper, were made to look somewhere between poor and awful. Happy days.

if you're on twitter, you might like to ask if you can encourage any of our present squad to back Steve's efforts: These are the @s that I'm aware of: @billysharp10 @jasonpunch @adlallana1 @RChap04 @stief87 (de Ridder) @Danny_Fox3 @joshooiveld20 @jackcork1 @RadhijaidiOff

Agree, can we make this a sticky please? Steve Moran was my childhood hero - and that winner versus the skates is worth every Saints fan bunging in a few quid, surely?

The official stats don't bear that out.

I'm delighted a new thread has been set up for this. Clearly doesn't belong in "post match reaction", given we haven't managed a shot on target all season. Sigh. Mods - please lock.

But probably by a team that finishes in the top 16?

I basically agree with this article http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2093995/How-vilification-Stephen-Hester-cost-billions.html

Agree 100%. If we;d only got Hooper, we'd be pretty certain of a top 16 finish. Having only secured Billy Sharp, I'm much less sure.

Almost always, yes. They'd try to sign a contract "subject to medical" in most cases - but given the rush, that may not ahve happened today. However, I'd be surprsied if the medical is taking place if there isn't already some sort of agreement on contractual terms.

Taking bets on that?

Let's not.

Fox at centre back? Is Hoovield injured - having been subbed at the Leicester game?

I'd think the fair thing would be for all Pompey's unplayed fixtures to be forfeited 2-0, but existing results to stand (I'm not sure why I say 2-0...I seem to have some dim distant recollection that this is the standard "default" score). But the rulebook couldn't be clearer, as I understand it, and ALL results would be expunged. I can see why the league would want to keep them afloat. It would look odd to suddenly switch to a 44 game season when you're more than halfway through. And, of course, there are revenue implications (Saints would stand to lose c. £1m if the game at St Mary's is cancelled). Offsetting that, the club's struggling against relegation are surely going to be utterly insistent that there is a mammoth points penalty.

A lot of folk can be like that (disproportionately those at around about the age of puberty, as another poster suggested). There's nothing wrong with that per se - but people behaving in such a fashion can't reasonably expect to be listened to very much or taken at all seriously.

Query: does Chainrai have an incentive to keep them afloat? Sorry if this has been covered elsewhere...but if the club owes him £17m isn't he best advised to spend several £m on keeping alive the possibility that he gets some of that back? E.g. if he could get them over this hurdle by spending £2m and they restructured so as to pay him back £500K a year for 34 years, isn't this a good deal for him? Or are the sums needed so vast that he probably needs to take a £17m loss on the chin?

This is great. In terms of all those saying "they'll make it"..."we've seen this before" etc... Well, yes...you maybe right. BUT..most madly run companies take several years to go bust. Desperate and absurd measures are taken to keep the business afloat. Months - if not years - of agonising and increasingly farcical moves are attempted to keep the show on the road. But eventually, death happens. It's not like Woolworths suddenly went "pop"...it dies agongisingly over a few years. The skates are probably in same position.

Paul Jones (didn't we have Maik Taylor beforehand?) Similarly, Niemi when there was no apparent need to replace Jones. Claus Lundekvam (such an underwhelming signing, no one noticed) Agree on Beattie being a shock success (wasn't he the makeweight in Kevin Davies going the other way?) Also, what about Brett Ormerod?

They are both mad at a guess...or more likely enjoy a perverse wind-up. The "we're not out of the woods yet" is a particular gem. Let's spend £10m on new players to make sure we end up 17th...:-) My own impression was that we utterly walked the game (I watched it on the stream, but wasn't actually there in person). Yes, some things went our way...and you could just about re-imagine the game as a massively flukey 1-0 win to Forest.....but you'd need an imagination that dwarves Tolkein, Asimov and Arthur C Clarke combined. In modern, professional, English football, you will very rarely bear witness to a more comprehensive and deserved away win as we saw on Saturday. If you're not ecstatic with the performance and result - or at least completely and unquestionably satisfied - you probably need a level of therapy and support that this website is incapable of providing....

Carlos Tevez

Thanks for the precis of the NA interview. Is the implication that we want Lee, Hooper AND another striker. That's a LOT of firepower...

He always seem to be totally behind Saints...often using "we"/"us" etc. I actually think his criticisms have been reasonable too - even if i don't always agree with them.