Joesaint

Bit more than a tool I think!! Some people say anything to be talked about though.

Looked at some of the comments and thought I would quote this: "BC will be back this week, MA will get his wish list, and the club is in great shape, has a balance of PP payments over soccer debt and CVA, the best financially geared club in league 1 I suspect...you need to call step toe and stop panicking harold........maths surely not your strong point..." Love it!!!

I think he will have a great season with us. We all make mistakes when we are young, and his now attitude has been quality.

Not much we can do but show support for the islanders and (something I have done for a while now) not to buy Argie goods, which is really easy now because country of origin is put on nearly everything.

PS, also though it was illegal esp because some parents who may be pretty stupid might think it is OK and be over the top with it! Not sure if you know about management, but everything seems to be around positive reinforcement. (although if bad behaviour is not sorted, the end result willl be just as bad I guess) Golden rule actually: Teach right from wrong Be consistant!!!!! Important

Do not do it, we use the 'naughty step' the age is how long - 3 years old - 3 mins. It works, you have to put them straight back if they move away, no talking because they are looking for attention, the time starts when behaviour is acceptable. After they have to say sorry and explain what they have done wrong so they understand. Takes a bit of time to start but works. Bad behaviour can from a lack of attention, hence play up more when you try to deal with it. Always praise the good behaviour. Children do like praise, but if good behaviour is not reinforced (child given no attention) they may seek attention in other ways - just look at the yobs who look for a fight and ask yourself "did they get much attention from parents". I was smacked, did me no harm, but I can't say it did me any good, my parents we very good and that was just the way it was! Hope this was usefull

Love living in Southampton, simple. Alot of damage during the war, and the fast growth of the city did not to much good although, there are loads of hidden gems. Around me, peartree green, millers pond, mayfield park (as well as the bit that runs along the brook). Being in walking distance of these as well as town and St Marys! Dislike... wonder what the new woolston development will be like but will be nice to walk by the water there, still waiting for Ocean village to be finished, the peer needs to be done as well as west key 3. I believe that Southampton will improve alot in 10 years BUT must keep its greeen spaces and continue to improve the poor areas like in Thornhill.

Love it

Sent an e-mail to the FL, here is the message and reply. Changes f all though! Joe, Thank you for your comments which have been noted. Thank you for contacting The Football League. Regards, Andrew Pomfret Customer Services Officer The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk http://www.football-league.co.uk The Football League Ltd. Registered Office - Edward VII Quay, Navigation Way, Preston PR2 2YF. Registered No: 80612. Tel: 0844 463 1888. Fax: 0844 826 5188. London Office - 30 Gloucester Place, London, W1U 8FL. Tel: 0844 826 3099 Follow us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/football_league From:joe 25 July 2012 09:10 To: FL Subject: portsmouth hi For Portsmouth to not honor the football creditors rule by threatening the players they will get nothing if they do not agree is cheating, it is also blackmail. The players made a bad decision to join Portsmouth, when they may have been offered a contract elsewhere; I believe it is the responsibility of Portsmouth to (with current rules) pay players in full. I believe the players have a case for the club bringing them into disrepute, as well as blackmail. For a club trying to get away with sticking two fingers up at the football creditors rule, it would be like 1 rule for them and 1 for everyone else. Joe The Football League Ltd. Registered Office - Unit 5B. Edward VII Quay, Navigation Way, Preston PR2 2YF. Registered in England & Wales. Reg No: 80612.

No, will not happen.

Please, please, please. Theo would be a really, really good. He also has an option in the front 3 of switching to striker as NA clearley favours this sort of movement. With theo, I relly believe we have a huge chance to have a great this season, although I do feel we need to sell a few players.

What did Frank De Boar say?

You are 100% right, it's cheating. It is also blackmail, I am tempted to write to the FL as the players have a case for the club bringing them into disrepute, as well as blackmail. This on top of a club trying to get away with sticking two fingers up at the football creadators rule, it would be like 1 rule for them and 1 for everyone else.

We need more votes!!

Love it, and will buy

It just says 'loading'

Bit harsh!

Love it, fingers crossed.

My brother lives out there, its OK. Recommend; Natural history musem, Don't order too much food, Go up the Rockefeller (good view of centeral park) 6 flags new jersey if you get a car. (massive theme park and water park (did not do the water park)) To be honest I actually think many places in europe are better, but its better to see for yourself I suppose.

Got to say, not sure it would do any harm. Hopefully no one gets the sack! maybe a tralking to!

Had a reply from the FL today, I wil just copy the whole thing here taking out my e mail (top message most recent); Joseph, As aforementioned The Football League will comment in due course once the club’s exit is clear. We do not have jurisdiction over any comments the administrator may which to make in the interim. Thank you for contacting The Football League. Regards, Andrew Pomfret Customer Services Officer The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk http://www.football-league.co.uk From: JOSEPH Sent: 06 June 2012 12:09 To: FL Subject: Re: No further points deduction for Portsmouth Why have you said to Portsmouth there will be no further points deduction then? From: FL To: 'JOSEPH Sent: Wednesday, 6 June 2012, 10:58 Subject: RE: No further points deduction for Portsmouth Joseph, We thank you for contacting The Football League on this matter, however until all the circumstances surrounding the club’s exit from administration become clear, The League is unable to make any official comment at this time regarding any points deductions. Updates that we do give will be made available on http://www.football-league.co.uk and you should check there for any further updates in due course. Thank you again for your email. Kind Regards Amanda Amanda Craig Customer Services Administrator The Football League Limited Email - enquiries@football-league.co.uk http://www.football-league.co.uk From: JOSEPH Sent: 30 May 2012 18:13 To: FL Subject: No further points deduction for Portsmouth Hello, Heard this; "BBC Solent Sport ‏@solentsport To clarify statement from PKF - #pompey will start next season without further points deduction even if they are still in admin" I understand that failing to reach a CVA, would mean a points deduction (I believe Leeds were deducted 15 points), surely the Portsmouth 2010 CVA now has to be classed as failed, with the dept having to go to a second CVA. What I do not understand, is failing to exit with a CVA means points deduction, but reaching a CVA but ignoring it, to add onto a second CVA, after another admin does not. Case A Leeds owed about 35 million I think but could not agree a CVA. Case B Portsmouth owed about 120 million but gained a CVA to pay back 20%'. Both Case A and B do not pay back anything, Case A has 15 point penalty. Case B increases their debt still further, build up extra dept by signing extra new players, not paying charities on top of other depts; has a 10 point penalty for second admin, within a couple of years. The fist CVA now part of the second CVA so they will only be able to get a tiny fraction of money owed, not sure this is fair at all. A small local business owed around £10,000 for example, would get £2000 from the first CVA. Now I have no idea of what the next CVA would get creditors but if it would be 20% again they would only get £400. I believe HMRC were owed 17 million, on a second CVA at 20% would mean they may only get £68,000. No wonder they are not happy with the football creditors rule, that I must confess is a joke and not done any favors to football at all, unless you can tell me otherwise. As I believe the football league should be fair, can you please explain how two clubs can fail a CVA but only one has a points penalty for it? Thank you for your time Joe PS, wrote this very quickly and just wanted to make the point, I understand I do not understand all the facts, and may be miss-informed. I love football and want the best for the game.

You should then write to them for some clarity.

Wrote a little letter, put in the main thread.

OK written to the FL using some of the questions here, (hope I have not made a tit of myself) here is what I have e mailed; Hello, Heard this; "BBC Solent Sport ‏@solentsport To clarify statement from PKF - #pompey will start next season without further points deduction even if they are still in admin" I understand that failing to reach a CVA, would mean a points deduction (I believe Leeds were deducted 15 points), surely the Portsmouth 2010 CVA now has to be classed as failed, with the dept having to go to a second CVA. What I do not understand, is failing to exit with a CVA means points deduction, but reaching a CVA but ignoring it, to add onto a second CVA, after another admin does not. Case A Leeds owed about 35 million I think but could not agree a CVA. Case B Portsmouth owed about 120 million but gained a CVA to pay back 20%'. Both Case A and B do not pay back anything, Case A has 15 point penalty. Case B increases their debt still further, build up extra dept by signing extra new players, not paying charities on top of other depts; has a 10 point penalty for second admin, within a couple of years. The first CVA now part of the second CVA so they will only be able to get a tiny fraction of money owed, not sure this is fair at all. A small local business owed around £10,000 for example, would get £2000 from the first CVA. Now I have no idea of what the next CVA would get creditors but if it would be 20% again they would only get £400. I believe HMRC were owed 17 million, on a second CVA at 20% would mean they may only get £68,000. No wonder they are not happy with the football creditors rule, that I must confess is a joke and not done any favors to football at all, unless you can tell me otherwise. As I believe the football league should be fair, can you please explain how two clubs can fail a CVA but only one has a points penalty for it? Thank you for your time Joe PS, wrote this very quickly and just wanted to make the point, I understand I do not understand all the facts, and may be miss-informed. I love football and want the best for the game.

If they are not docked more points for failing to service a previous CVA then what is to stop clubs getting a CVA that they can not afford, not get the docked points and then do a pompy? Does not make any sence.