CanadaSaint

No but every ITK expands the risk of it becoming common knowledge - especially as the FL is essentially our competing clubs. How long is that going to stay secret?

I thought there were (quite logical) rules preventing one party from owning more than one club, which would mean that the FL would HAVE to know the identity.

I'm starting to lean towards Bletch's view. Pinnacle will go ahead if they are guaranteed that it's ten and only ten. The FL likes to receive guarantees but not give them, and might be reluctant to give that commitment. However, the FL needs to remember this: Its biggest legal threat comes not from one of its members but from someone who has spent a p*sspot full of money trying to become one, and failed because of the FL's unfair behaviour. They've both got their arses sticking out the window on this one and they both need to pull them in. At the same time, of course.

It seems to me that there's some brinkmanship going on, with TL trying to enlist the media to add some pressure to the FL. From the Pinnacle perspective he's handling it really well. It's just that A) I'm not sure he can win, and B) the FL has a lot more time than we do. I'm concerned that we're going to get so hung up on the deduction/right of appeal issue that we end up damaging our prospects for the 2009-10 season even more. For me this is about a much longer time frame than just the 09-10 season - it's about a five-year plan towards long term success.

He's playing this damn near perfectly. Right now there is no appeal but he's looking for media support for his right to launch one after the takeover is complete. He makes a killer (and very quotable) point when he says “If I am being asked to waive my rights to an appeal against a decision, how confident are the people who made that decision that it was the correct decision in the first place?” His last paragraph is classy and diplomatic - asking us not to "make accusations against the League" and to remember that "we will need to work with the Board of the League and other members, so they are our colleagues." Very impressive. How heartwarming it is - after the past five years or so - to see this kind of tact, diplomacy and genuine respect for the fan base (even if he's giving us a little nudge away from the emotional reactions).

It doesn't matter because we're not talking about a judicial proceeding based on legal precedent. We're talking about the Football League, which has given itself the power to make the rules up as they go along. That power (and Leon's utterance) enables them to ding us with a 10-point penalty even though our specific circumstances are not covered in their "rules". It also gives them the ability to ding us with a higher penalty if we don't meet other criteria (with the "other criteria" including a formal undertaking not to appeal the 10-point penalty through either the FL or the courts). I'm not siding with the FL, just trying to be realistic. If we emerge from this with a far more manageable cost structure and with committed ownership, we are miles ahead of where we were - even with a ten-point deduction. I don't think we can beat them, because they've made themselves "judge, jury and executioner".

The timing doesn't matter much. Mawhinney was all over the comment because it provided support for the deduction he desperately wanted to levy. Leon appears to be connected in some way to Pinnacle but it doesn't really matter even if he isn't. The damage has been done. I don't know wtf he was on about but, like us, I'm sure he wishes he hadn't said that.

The fundamental flaw in this concept, Faz, is that it is simple common sense. And we've all had plenty of opportunity over recent years to realize that arrogance and common sense are rarely found in the same sentence.

I hear you, but I hadn't heard anything about further deductions until today and I'm wondering where it came from. Perhaps all this results from a dark threat from the Dark Lord - "Take the 10 points or it'll be much worse". That would be true to form.

That may be so but the following - see http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/s/southampton/8014811.stm - effectively destroys any case we have IMO: Crouch: "Southampton Football Club was set up so that if this ever happened, we would not have these points deducted - it's the way they have interpreted the rules." Mawhinney: "What he said that was of particular interest of me was when he said this structure was set up to avoid the football club having a penalty if it got into financial trouble." The FL interprets its rules as it sees fit - regardless of how "fair" its interpretation may seem to be in the eyes of fans with a huge emotional attachment to their clubs. I think we're best to try to stay on the high ground here - take our medicine and put people in place who can make sure that the points deduction didn't really matter anyway. I'd bet Pinnacle blinks before the FL does. They've invested too much (time and money) to quit now.

It's very tempting to see Mawhinney as the FL and make this whole thing personal. Regardless of our feelings about Mawhinney, the FL's rules and the supposed loopholes in those rules, the FL is effectively our fellow clubs until we get back to the Prem. The more we b*tch and complain and appeal, the more we are likely to p*ss off clubs whose support we may well need down the road. There's a price attached to that, and I'm not sure it's worth paying in order to take on what seems to be a "no-win proposition".

Um, do you remember exactly what Leon said about this?

On what basis would the additional 15 points be assessed? We have made orderly progress through administration (although it hasn't always felt like it to us ) and we have - as far as I know - met all football-related obligations. Damn right I'd appeal any additional hit because, in my understanding of the rules, there's no basis for it. The goal of the point-deduction process is not to destroy long-established clubs.

And the rationale behind this structure (to protect against administration) was made very clear with Leon Crouch's shockingly unwise admission some time back. Pinnacle can't even distance themselves from that because Crouch appears to be part of their team. Without Leon on the inside of the bid I think we'd have a chance. We didn't conduct ourselves anything like Leeds, and appeals are supposed to address differences like that. With Leon inside the Pinnacle group I think we should just swear, spit, punch the wall, call the FL bastards - and then take the ten-point hit.

I thought the courts had found a significant and unilateral change in reporting relationship amounted to constructive dismissal.

If it really was MJ, then someone wrote it for him. It's certainly not his 'style', if you know what I mean.

Absolutely. That's the fourth possible explanation. He's got a job to do and it sure as hell isn't working for us, no matter what we'd like to think.

I don't agree. It is far too articulate (that's not meant to be funny) and it reflects a detailed knowledge of Administration law. IMO this could mean that it's one (or more) of the following: A) a fairly accurate reflection of what's going on, B) someone with a grudge trying to screw things up with mischief C) another bidder who'd like to see a re-set on the process Having said that, I'm still of the view that there will be many gyrations (PR and real) before this thing wraps up, so patience is the key. Easier said than done, though.

Or, Ron, demonstrate how they got to be real money men in the first place. This is just like the game itself. We're spectators, with our reactions tightly attached to our hearts. They are businessmen, with their actions tightly attached to their wallets and financial statements. God, and we thought the last few games of relegation near-misses were hard to get through. They've got nothing on this!

Surely they can co-exist. That completely transforms the business model because single usages never seem to work out too well.

I wouldn't overplay this "Norwich Union/Aviva have nothing to bargain with" argument, although I do tend to agree that their hand isn't too strong. While it's dead right that the stadium is useless without a football team, let's not forget that the reverse is also true. And that is probably why we're where we are today. I'll never forget a negotiating lecture I attended many years ago. The lecturer said "You make your pitch, you overcome objections, and then do you know what you do next?" "You shut the f*ck up, because the first guy that talks, loses". Until the respective parties have sussed out their opponents' final positions, we'll continue to be stuck between what we've been and what we hope to be. And I'm sure Mr. Fry is skillful enough to use the media to get a message across, and yet never allow himself to be used by the media. I'm not too worried. Yet.

There's quite a strong leaning towards stakeholder involvement here so I'll offer an alternative thought to Duncan's, even though I tend to agree with it. The stadium can easily be a financial millstone unless City Council approves more "non football" (i.e. music) events. The financial appeal of the club is significantly higher if the prospects are good for developing the surrounding area, which also needs City Council approval. Doesn't it make sense to draw City Council into some kind of more active involvement - so that they succeed if the club succeeds?

Yes, Tim, it's extremely unlikely because they have more than enough money to go for something much larger and better established. On the other side (the slim possibility side), they were interested enough to sniff (by visiting SMS) and they like to bring a development focus (hotel, condominium, restaurant and retail developments) near their sporting investments. There's also another of those "links, sort of" because the GM of Toronto FC is an old WGS acquaintance, Mo Johnston. If we hadn't dropped a division this year I would have given us more than the 10% chance (at best) I think we have now.

I think we might have overdone it. Unless someone turns up and says this was the plan all along. Nick, they own two top flight franchises (the Leafs and the basketball Raptors) and they clearly have a developing affection for football. They also own Toronto FC in the growing Major League Soccer league; MLS seems to have a much more solid base than its previous iterations. Toronto sells out most games and has a very enthusiastic fan base (sometimes a little too enthusiastic). Much to the horror of the old-fashioned purists, football has more youth registrations than hockey in Canada and more than baseball in the States. One of the keys is the relatively recent availability of university scholarships, which has caused parents to push their kids to soccer rather than away from it. It makes sense for MLSE, especially if it fosters a two-way conveyor belt for talent.

You'll change your tune if Balsillie gets his wicked way! Or perhaps you are one of those died-in-the-wool Leaf fans, but I thought you were smarter than that.