benjii

Is this thread really a good idea?!

Basically they're clinging to the myopic News reporting. Ashtead Saint's report seems to indicate a good comprehension of what happened.

That's one selective quote. Don't worry... In any case, this appeal might be nothing to do with the alleged procedural irregularities - those could be another hearing?

If he turned off his PM it's nothing to do with me! I just find the public announcement of that fact laughably portentous.

Maybe we are negotiating with Brentford? Do they have cash flow difficulties? I think it should be a safe bet that he will play 40 or 50 games for Saints so maybe we're offering them, for example, £175k up front instead? Just a thought.

Did you, by crikey!? Lawks a lordy, that's a hell of a pickle and no mistakin'

A bit like FF's "I'll never post a rumour again" thread. EDIT - actually, I don't think he said that exactly; I think he said he'd never post again.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? People are entitled to post rumours and readers are entitled to point out that they don't believe them and they sound like ******** or, on the other hand say thanks, if they like. This dummy spitting is bizarre. You can't expect to post things that don't make any sense, backing them up with allusions to some crusty old hasbeen "upstairs" and not expect people to question it.

Nah, still sounds like ******** to me.

Complete nonsense The football creditors rule has no legal status. They have no "right" to 100% to give up. The obligation to pay 100% is a burden imposed on member clubs by the FL, it's not a right to receive 100% enjoyed by football creditors. Legally they are not secured creditors at all. NB - there are some complex legal arguments around "liens" etc but generally, the point stands - the FCR is a FL rule not a legal one and they would not accept that a club "gave up" its ability to be paid 100%. I think, in any case, if they were invited to vote and voted they could not be penalised if it turns out they shouldn't have been invited to vote in the first place... that would be the fault of whoever invited them to vote who is the expert at these things. And if any club's plan was to sham the football creditors, assuming it was possible, the FL wouldn't let them back in - simples as that! The FCR is a funny thing. I'm sure HMRC will "win" at some point. It just needs the right case. One with a truly hopeless club at the centre of it; one with no prospects and meagre resources; one that can't find a willing buyer... hmm...

That is weird! Maybe a red herring for Plymouth?

It's compensation for the effort put into his development. The idea of including add-on clauses in that is completely illogical IMO. I sincerely hope there are no add-on clauses.

Why are you banging on about Hoddle on a thread about the forum? This is why people think you are, er, "eccentric".

RedStripe was bloody awful. The other two were much better. Edit - actually I might be thinking of something else. I definitely preferred UI and OTM to one other one that was knocking around for a while.

Not quite...

Yes, I agree.

"Working for Lowe is awful, he's a pompous buffoon who thinks he's above everyone"... "Working for Hone is awful, he's a ruthless mercenary".. "Working for Cortese is awful... blah, blah, blah."

This is a question, lacking the "?" right? Not a statement with "will" and "you" the wrong way round?

Agreed. Membership runs out in two days... might let it lapse. May rejoin once season starts and all the weirdos have something better to talk about.

Wrong thread. The stuff about Unions is on The Lounge!

Agreed. "Informant" - FFS.

I reckon it's got as much chance as any marriage of going the distance. They are financially secure for life and have been together about 9 years already.

I enjoyed the wedding I attended yesterday. Lots of free drink. Almost too much but not quite.

So basically, at some point Pardew will stop being our manager? Wow, what a scoop. Oh, and we might be signing Waigo. Sounds good to me.