benjii

Wotton confirmed on the bench. All rather strange!

"We are, how you say de underdogsh?" "And it ish Arshenal, I thinksh". Now there's a ****.

Yeah, that's right. It was the day Wimbledon got relegated.

That team is good enough to win matches (Molyneux aside, no idea if he's any good), provided it does the simple things well and retains some semblance of shape. EDIT: Just notice I am apparently "Apple Hunt Champion" - news to me!

They are perfectly justified. The same cannot be said for his little beard.

Indians are not allowed in Barnsley. HTH.

Perhaps, but quite indubitably either is better than a ****ing train from Doncaster.

Brilliant stuff guys!

Obviously not. Why do people persist in moulding their oponent's position out of the ashes of their own burnt ideas?

He gave Surman a "9" for pace I think Generally though, I agree, there doesn't seem to be any bitter-skate bias about him.

The FA has no jurisdiction to override the legal charge that Aviva will have over the ground. If we went into admin we would be in default of our loan. Aviva would be able to exercise a power of sale or would work with the administrator to achieve a sale if they didn't want to do that.

Nah, they're really not.

Yes, but not if the ground is subject to a legal charge (which it will be).

I think this is a misconception arising from a "securitisation" structure that was used in the original debt. "Securitisation" and "security" are two different things. I won't go into detail but in effect securitisation is a way of realising a capital sum up front from an income producing asset (ie season ticket sales). The security on the debt, however, will, unless its been drafted terribly, provide legal charges over just about every fixed asset of the group capable of being subject to a legal charge and will also include floating charges over everything else. That is what a debenture does and Aviva will most certainly have a debenture. The question is who is party to the debenture, but again it would be extremely odd if all group companies were not part of the security structure.

"Lowe - Narcissistic personality disorder" banner anyone?

:rolleyes: Yeah, I'm sure he was really talking about a financial challenge. Honestly, what a dullard.

Documentary on now. Might be a sensitive and illuminating portrayal of a troubled genius and his battle with the booze. Hope not, hope it's funny.

Yeah, read the first post again. Ta.

Spot on, mate. Absolutely spot on.

I think it is a different scenario really. The role of a captain in cricket is much more far reaching than the role of a captain in football. Interesting comparison though... I think however you look at it Lowe messed up big-time. Either he was right to sack Sturrock, in which case it was an awful appointment or he was wrong to sack Sturrock in which case he compunded this error by making an awful managerial appointment in his replacement. I wonder if he'll ever do that again..... whoops.

Why?

The other end were in a better position as they were facing the side of McGoldrick that the ball hit. Kelvin was on the other side.