Dark Munster

Don't underestimate the sleaze that that cesspit of a club is capable of. For example, after administration hiring David Lampitt as their CEO, the former Football Association's head of football integrity. WTF was that all about? And AA meekly accepting HMRC's debt going up from about 18 million to 35 million? That means their share effectively goes up from 20% to 40% (of the original tax debt). And then we hear HMRC may well accept a CVA, as long as PFC is liquidated 9 months from now. 9 months, WTF?? The stench coming from AA and the rest of the corrupt club is worse than that of a rotten maggot-filled corpse of a skate left in the sun. Who knows what's going on behind closed doors? Spot on. Disgusting indeed. Maybe AA is desperately trying to sign up a squad, damned the cost, before the FL hits them with an embargo? CHEATING BASTARDS

Not if he uses this.

Has he signed yet?

You're right if the CVA isn't sorted out in time. But from what we hear it appears that it may well be. The timing of when all the other dirt comes out is also critical, methinks. If it comes out after they have started life in the CCC on zero points, the FL may indeed try to hit them belatedly with penalties, but the cheats (having established a foothold in the CCC) could take it to court, claiming that the FL don't have the right to punish them for crimes committed in the PL. They may or may not win. On the other hand, if all the crimes (that we here on SWF are aware of) become officially established before they get the golden share, then indeed the FL could deny them entry into the CCC unless they take a points penalty without appeal (similar to what happened to us). Blackmail I suspect. The creditors will be given the choice of 20p in the pound and accept the £10m salary budget per annum, or liquidation, no parachute monies, and 1 or 2p in the pound. CHEATING BASTARDS

But there's a difference. AA and the cheating bastards could argue that the FL cannot punish them for their actions, since they occurred in the PL.

But not all Hampshire fans come from Southampton. How about the poor skates? They've had a miserable season, so Hants (and possibly Chelsea) will only add to that misery. You have to feel sorry for them Not.

Don't let us down, lads.

I don't. They've had 7 or so years in the top flight, an FA Cup success, and possibly another one, all built on money that's either based on maiming people or outright stealing (borrowing with no intention of paying back). I feel sorry for the fans of Burnley, Norwich etc. which are clubs that live within their means and as a result could not compete in the PL. But there's a difference, unfortunately: Luton's crimes occurred while they were in the FL. P****y's occurred during their time in the PL. So the big question is, does the FL have jurisdiction over crimes committed in the PL? Too nice. I'd prefer this chant (repeated for 90 minutes): "CHEATING BASTARDS! CHEATING BASTARDS! CHEATING BASTARDS! CHEATING BASTARDS! CHEATING BASTARDS! CHEATING BASTARDS" Haven't you read any of my previous posts? :cool:

That would be excellent of course. But I'm a bit concerned Chelski may have shot their wad today. We all know what happened in 1974. TBH I would settle for Chelski scraping a lucky 1-0, or even a poor 0-0 a.e.t. with Chelski winning on penalties.

Without NC (and hence ML) Saints would certainly not have hired AP in the first place, and if by some miracle we were not in the Blue Square at this time, would very probably end this season relegated and heading into L2 next season. So whilst I think sacking AP would be a bad move, at the end of the day NC has every right to make that decision, even if it turns out to be a big mistake.

Maybe we should also sign their 1st and 2nd players of the season.

True. But it's unlikely going into administration 5 days earlier would have stopped Markus buying Saints. And possibly in an automatic promotion place: it could be argued that without the -10 around their necks, Saints would've picked up an additional 3 or more points over the season (especially the first 10 matches).

Well, it's now official. Lowe's parting gift to saints fans has cost us a playoff place.

It appears they are already in a position to block the CVA, but appear not to be willing to lose 20% of 34 million. I hope you're right. But if they have a CVA agreed upon in time, can the FL punish them for crimes committed in the PL? Hopefully it'll be case of the FL telling the skates: you take the X point punishment, or we won't accept you into our club. It's called blackmail. AA could tell them that yes, we can flog everything of value, but if we do that we will liquidate and won't get the parachute money, and so instead of 20p in the £1 we are offering now you'll get 1p. It's one thing to sacrifice a few hundred thousand to send a message, which they've done in the past, and another to sacrifice 20% of 34 million. I think the alleged demand of liquidation of PCFC next year is their means of "sending a message", while still recovering about 40% of the original 18 million or so owed. Note that this liquidation could occur in the middle of next season, making it more difficult for the Fl to kick them out. The worst case for us haters of the cheats, is that they will start next season on 0 points, and only suffer a name change. CHEATING BASTARDS.

But if they get away with it, then wouldn't that would make him a very successful CEO? I hope you're right. But maybe HMRC are now willing to settle for 20% of 35m (in effect, about 40% of the original 18m), rather than getting S.F.A. There's no way they're going to get anything close to 100% of the original 18m. See above. CHEATING BASTARDS.

Could well be. That would explain his thumbs up to Mad Milan after the Krap Nottarf capitulation. :mad:

Indeed. And if the unthinkable happens, and the cheating bastards somehow manage to win, the winnings will make it slightly more palatable.

If we add back the lost 10 points, then Saints are above Huddersfield (on g.d.). But Swindon would still be above us, and they did the double over us to boot. So, to answer your question, ummm, yes and no?

Nice one. One quibble though: The football authorities, notably the Premier League, bent over backwards to help Portsmouth — indeed were far too lenient with successive owners — and for Grant to imply that “they” were in any way to blame for the supporters’ travails was an insult to his audience’s intelligence. Doesn't he realise that it's impossible to insult the intelligence of the skate audience found in Krap Nottarf? :cool:

It would appear that Baloo will buy them, paying unsecured creditors pennies on the pound, to avoid liquidation, so that he can get his grubby hands on the parachute money. After that he'll toss away the rotten corpse. I've added the missing word. :cool: They've previously refused much smaller amounts. It's one thing to set an example when a club only owes a million or two, but it's another matter when the club owes 18 million (or more). HRMC can afford to set an example by refusing 23% of a million or two, but can they afford to give up 23% of 18+ million out of principle? CHEATING BASTARDS.

Originally Posted by Frank's cousin See Grant is still bleating on about how 'unfair' it all is - http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/foot...th/8642368.stm does he not have an ounce of self awareness? Cant believe he has the cheek, considering the players he is using should not be on the park... No, but he thinks everyone else is. (TBF that is partly understandable given that he is in close contact with skate fans).

We deserved a points penalty last season. The spiteful rosy-cheeked one made sure it carried over to this season, which we did not deserve.

Yes, and no. It's easy because most of the other teams are crap. It's hard because most of the refs are crap (and seem to have it in for Saints). :cool:

But the Lowe luvvies were telling us that this was an easy league to get out of, when Nigel Pearson's Leicester walked the league last season. :smt017