Lord Duckhunter

A Poll tax is a per head flat tax. The Tory manifesto included a pledge to abolish the rates and replace it with a fairer Community charge. Personally, I thought it was a fairer system. There are many elderly people living in big houses, who have less disposable income than others in smaller cheaper property. To judge someones ability to pay on the value of their house is a very crude way of collecting taxes.

"Bit unfair to pick on you as you're only repeating received wisdom", received from whom? I voted in '83 and took an interest in politics. I saw for myself what happened. They polled 11.5 million in '79 and that was after the Callaghan years, a massive drop in 4 years, they also polled below 30% of the vote in '83. Had the Labour party kept to Foot's ideals of Clause 4, withdrawal from Europe, abandoning the United Kingdom's nuclear deterrent (during the cold war), abolishing the house of lords, and an end to council house sales, they would have never formed a Gov again.His beliefs were rejected by the British people, that's why the Party did a complete about turn on nearly all of them. The reason for the SDP was because the policies of Foot, Benn and other loons drove moderate men like David Owen and Bill Rodgers away from the party. The comparison with Hague and Howard does not stand up, because although a watered down version, DC's manifesto will not differer that much. Foot and Benn were not eccentric, harmless idealists but dangerous men in powerful positions. Men who if they had their way would have changed the UK fundamentally beyond recognition. I find it strange that Mrs Thatcher, who had the same conviction about her beliefs as Foot, but was proved to be right, is hated by the left wing establishment, and yet Foot, who was wrong time and time again, praised for sticking by his ideals long after they were discredited.

Whilst it's always sad when someone passes, I find all these tributes to Foot and his beliefs a bit OTT. He was wrong about most of the issues he stood for, and I dread to think where the Country would be, if we turned to his ideas in the 70's/80's instead of Maggie's. I believe he was a founding member of CND, a dangerous and in my opinion, discredited organisation. The fact of the matter was the 1983 Labour manifesto, reflected Foot's beliefs. I can not recall another election where a manifesto so reflected the leader's core beliefs. To recap the Labour party suffered it's worse drubbing since 1918, as the British people rejected Foot's ideas.The lean towards the left of him and Benn, nearly destroyed the Labour Party, and it was only when they moved as far away from Foots ideals as possible, that they were able to be be elected once more.If they had followed the Foot/Benn path, they would be a tiny party, representing a few Labour heartlands now. Yes, he was an honest politian, who stood by his beliefs and was unwilling to water them down or change them to gain popularity. However, he was wrong time and time again (Just like Tony Benn).The Benn/Foot ideas for Britain would have left us a basket case and thankfully the British people rejected them.

I went with my mate of 30 years whose from Huddersfield originally. He said our performance was the best he's seen for years, and he follows them regulary. In 30 years of friendship, we've managed to get to 2 games together, the first one was a one man thrashing at The Dell, when Matty got all 4 and then again last night.We couldn't make the away game, as his daughter was married that weekend. He is a good luck omen, and I'm trying to persuade him to come to the Leeds game with me.

Exactly.....He was on Sky's "Goals on Sunday" and he said that going into admin, had made his position stronger in terms of receiving what he was owed.

You had 2 choices last week, admin (and the -9 that goes with it), or taking your chances in court today. You choose admin, and now seem to be complaining about the consiquences of that decision. From Grant, down to your supporters, you lot seem to think the rules dont apply to you. The rules were in place when you decided not to pay the taxman.

I thought Johnny Cash was dead, mind you, I thought the same about Poorsmouth.

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5977133,00.html "The rest of it has been a bonus given by (former owner) Sacha Gaydamak every year. That's in recognition of me keeping the club going for him by selling players" In basic English, a cut of any transfer profit. Weeks ago a journo was on Sky saying that HR and Storrie-Teller were getting a cut of each and every transfer. He said it was unheard of for the CEO to get this ( Used to be common for the Manager) and was a conflict of interest. How any Skates still back Storrie is beyond me.

These things are way too complicated for me, but I can't see how this helps them. How does this help them pay off HMRC or pay the wages this month? It's not like the £10mil is a cash injection, they weren't paying off any of the £10mil anyway. Any reduction in the debt, will just be offset by the reductions in the assets. All I can see that's happened is Chaneri has placed the ground out of reach of the liquadator, get's £1mil a year for 15 years if they find a buyer, or can devolop if they dont. Could it be that by doing this they also get the Directors off the "trading whilst insolvent hook?

The minute Barclays failed to honour a cheque, Lowe placed us in admin, he said to do otherwise risked Trading whilst insolvent.

BBC are reporting that FIFA are looking favourable at their request to sell players.

Are all Poorsmouth supporters this simple? If the Club fail to complete the season and their results taken from the records, they will cease to exist. If supporters set up another Club, it will not be the same Club, if it was the FA/FL would let them play in their league. They wont, and this new Club will have to start again at the bottom of the pyramid. The FA run football in this country and they will deem it to be a new Club, no matter what any half witted Skates may say.

The internet is a wonderful thing and you can find out anything about anything , apart from this "Dock strike".

At least we didn't surrender tamely like we did in the 4-1m at Fratton, or last seasons Cup game against Utd. Every single player gave 100% and you cant ask more than that. Jaiadi and Perry came out of our reserves and have no pace. They played as well as they could until their lack of pace got exposed by us pushing on. Had we taken the lead and been able to defend as a unit, we could have been talking about an historic rearguard action for the last 10. With Puncheon, and Fonte, I reckon we'd have beaten them.

The -10, plus the start we had, made the play offs pretty impossible in the first place. Great to have a Wembley visit and a decent FA Cup run. People like Fonte, Lambert and NC/ML themselves would have seen what support and passion we're capable of, and they'll see it at Wembley again.Hopefully these cup runs will have cemented,the players, Pards and NC/ML faith in the Club and make getting in more quality during the summer easier.

Do you really think the Journo writes the article in the exact order that they discuss things in. For all you know, he could have started talking about players BEFORE the mention of having to pay, but the Journo thinking (as I do ) that it's quite a big deal, wrote that first. Most players who worked for him, speak glowingly of him, that's good enough for me.

How do you know what he wanted to "drive home". Interviewers put their own spin on things leave things out, and generaly highlight what THEY think are the main points of interest to the reader. Are you trying to say that Lawrie was all "make sure you put the bit about my freebies in, and drive it home" 99% of supporters up and down the Country would be shocked that he had to pay for his own tickets. Didn't he bring Bally back from Exeter and Nigel Pearson in?

Here we go, a decent article about our greatest living manager and it'll end up in a slanging match with people running the great man down. I will always be grateful for what he achieved for our Club, achievements that seem more and more unbelievable as the years pass by.

Things are starting to look up for them, not only is Tanya Roberts back on board, but they've arranged a Company car for her. http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/4999259._Insolvent__Portsmouth_have_nine_days_to_be_rescued/?ref=mr

The Conference criteria is a lot stricter than the FL/Pl. However, it only applies to existing or promoted sides. Any sides relegated from the FL are not subject to the same criteria. This was a concession agreed by the Conference in return for 2 up 2 down from League 1. So the conference would take them.

HMRC have got themselves into this mess with their lenient treatment of football clubs over the years. Had they treated them as any other business then a couple may have gone belly up, but Poorsmouth would have done everything in their power to settle this. The fact they didn't conduct a completet fire sale and end up with frees and youth players ala Weymouth, shows IMHO that they think they can wriggle out of it. Had the options been liquadation or taking the chance of finding a buyer in the CCC, they would have coughed up. By past actions, the revenue have indicated there is a third option. Settle a small % of the bill, restructure payments and try to get taken over, or by some miracle stay up, with a poor side. The fact that Wolves, Burnley and Hull are awful sides, makes this option pretty attractive. Forget that it's Poorsmouth, but this has to stop. Burnley, and Wolves paid their tax bills. By not paying theirs Poorsmouth, have gained an advantage over them.

Just got through now. They tried to tell me I'd come through to the wrong line and needed to call back. I stood my ground and she booked the tickets. Dont understand, perhaps the Company dealing with it cant get on with their normal ticket dealing business and want people to call the freephone line only. If they tell you you've come through to the wrong line, dont hang up.

I'm not the best fan by a long way, but I'm in the top 20,000. This is a bloody joke. There must be guys who can't afford a S/T but go most weeks , why should they be treated the same as someone whose been to half a dozen games over the past 5 years?

has anyone got through on the phone?

It used to be quite common in the game, the thinking behind it was if a Manager improved a player and therefore made the Club a profit, then he deserves a cut of that profit. There was a time when Managers were very poorly paid compared to the players and this was an extra bit of income. With the advent of Sky and Clubs being run more like multi million pound Companies, this has gone from the game, it will only be the "old school" type Managers, if any, that still have this perk (I doubt if Redknapp has it at Spurs). Whilst this was common practise, my understanding is that Storrie-Teller and Mandric also benefited from a % of any transfer profit.This is unheard of anywhere else and is a clear conflict of interest. Maybe the scout who recommended the player would have got a cut, along with the Manager, but for the owner and CEO to also get one, is highly suspect.