Wes Tender

I think that initially they might dazzle us, but by the second half, our fitness levels and Lambert's ariel power might turn the tide and we can surf on the crest of a wave and win some more games on the bounce.

It was late and I was tired. But I agree, they'll mop up / clean up / sparkle / come shining through / take us to the cleaners, etc

Not necessarily. That rather depends on whether they play their strongest team, or just use it as an exercise in blooding a few fringe players, or trying different formations. When we played the pre-season round robin tournament against Werder Bremen and Athletico Bilbao we beat the Germans and gave a good enough account of ourselves against the Spaniards as a 2nd division team. Anything can happen in these friendlies.

This will be "Hillingdon Ace", Paris Cowan-Hall, yes?

Did I just dream it, or was it a condition of the Skate's administration that a forensic examination of Oldco was to be carried out by Baker Tilley? If so, then what would any further forensic examination turn up, that doesn't seem to have surfaced this far? Is that examination still ongoing, or did it draw a blank? Or did I dream about it?

Sports Direct's website says:- Well, you've got the right man for the job there; Lampitt really is the ultimate poacher turned gamekeeper. He knows all about poor financial management, the need to run clubs responsibly and in a financially sustainable way. I understand also that he knows a bit about ethical behaviour too. His last job, where there was a new owner each year these past few years also highlights his understanding of the risks of short-term vested interests. His knowledge in these areas is unsurpassed. It is an inspired choice.

Morally all creditors should be paid at the same rate. And although the football authorities exist to protect the interests of their members, the judiciary should not give their members and employees an advantage over creditors outside of their cosy little club. I'm not advocating that every penny of debt being paid back to creditors, let alone the footballing ones. It would be acceptable that in the event of a club going into administration, the creditors were treated in exactly the same way as those of any business in administration, each creditor being able to vote on the administrator's proposal for a percentage return from the CVA. It should then be up to the football authorities to ensure that swingeing penalties were applied as a deterrent against clubs who went into administration, even more stringent for successive failures. Current penalties are not harsh enough. As to whether clubs going out of existence was a good thing, at the very least I would say that Pompey being liquidated would be a very good thing, as it would send out a very clear message to the other clubs as to what the likely result would be if anybody chose to model themselves on the way that they went about their business. But here again, the FL should have been totally toothless against them, sending out entirely the wrong message to others.

Well, we agree about the first part and certainly there ought to be legislation to prevent a company forming a holding company, transferring the assets into that shell-company and then going under, wiping off the debts, only to emerge as Fred Bloggs (2012) Ltd, with the same directors. Regarding the wish of the FL/PL trying to protect its other companies and employees, it isn't that the clubs are owned by them, merely part of their cosy little club. If they go bust, then why should their treatment be any different to any other business? The players are like employees anywhere and should have similar employment rights to everybody else. When their rights transcend those of the Taxman, charities and local businesses who are down the list of creditors as a result, then it is morally reprehensible. Or don't you see it like that?

It isn't me who is confused. You must be confused if you think that. I already said that if the law allows the judiciary to adjudicate in favour of the FCR, then the law needs to be amended by act of Parliament. You obviously think it right that fabulously wealthy footballers will be paid before the taxman, charities and local businesses. Bully for you.

It isn't a case of can't answer. It is just that I choose not to answer. Do you see the difference? Why don't you ask HMRC why they bothered to take the FL to court to challenge the FCR? I'm sure that they will provide you with good reason for making the challenge.

Excellent trolling.

Quite. If the Courts continuously return the judgement that the Football Leagues have acted within the principles of existing insolvency law, then it is long overdue that the law was changed. Pressure must be growing for Parliament to pass such a change to the current legislation, as the current position is that the law is an ass. And what exactly do they mean by this? Continued trading whilst insolvent is a criminal offence, so clubs in those circumstances could potentially find themselves being liquidated anyway. So what is their point? And what of those clubs like Pompey who found themselves having a massive advantage through their reckless spending on players they could not afford? What about clubs' unwillingness to play against those clubs who had gained this advantage when the FL was toothless in disallowing it to happen? As you say, Steve, what he means is that it would have devastating circumstances for the stinking rich footballers, agents and managers. Most sensible supporters would wish their team to live within their means rather than go under. As for the "local community" I presume that they do not understand that that includes businesses and charities too and that if the debt from a football club forced a local business to go under, then there are wider implications for local employment. But on the simple matter that wealthy footballers should get their money in full whereas local charities get practically nothing as result, I do hope that the people who run the footballing authorities and the lawyers can sleep at night.

You earn loads and yet you buy burgers? Are they made from Kobe beef with a topping of Imperial Beluga caviar? If you're talking the burgers bought from the concourse, I'm going to be hugely unimpressed that you would buy a spare seat to accommodate that junk, even as a display of gratuitous wealth

Delete as have only just read that figures for ST prices released on OS following campaign of moaning minnies on Saints fan forum.

And by so doing, you make yourself look a right tit, as nothing you wrote had anything to do with the subject of the OP. Whether you choose to read them or not, at least Frank raises some valid points and makes an attempt to indulge in some adult debate. You? A pathetic, childish attempt to follow the Turkish/CB Fry style of debate. A collection of snide, sarcastic jibes more fitting to the primary school playground.

Exactly. Like you, I'm perfectly happy to have the money in my bank account for a bit longer. I don't see that anybody who wishes to buy a ST will not do so because they are brought out later than anybody elses, that is just absurd. Sensible people will have budgeted for the cost, or will make arrangements to finance it one way or another. If it was payment for a holiday, which would they prefer? Payment eight weeks before they flew, or one week before? This thread must be the ultimate nit-picking, a real mountain out of a molehill.

I would assume that if we were desperate for the money, that we would have launched the season ticket sales some time ago. You draw your own conclusions as to why we have not done it, although I doubt that you have any more idea as to the reasoning than anybody else. Frankly, I couldn't give a damn whether we are supposedly out of step with other clubs. Would you go as far as to say that the club was badly run, because we did things differently to the others? As to your insinuation that I don't understand the distinction between our owners' wealth and the football club's wealth, I understand readily enough that we are not run on the basis of others, who have massive amounts of leveraged debt and that were our owners to pull out, we would not be in the same parlous state of some of those clubs with wealthy owners. I suggest that the amount of money raised by the early sale of STs is miniscule in the scale of things and doesn't appear to bother our Chairman and his backers. So from that point of view, it reflects that having wealthy owners does impact on the club's financial position. Likewise, we do not have to sell players if we don't want to like we had to previously, unless it is for a silly price. Conversely we are able to think in terms of stadium expansion and investment in the academy and training facilities beyond anything before in our history. If you think that this situation has little to do with the wealth of our owners, then fine, carry on believing it.

You can't conclude that those other clubs are desperate for the cash necessarily, but it is at least indicative that we are not in desperate need of it. And yes, our owners are wealthier than some of those at clubs you mentioned. Personally, as a ST holder of many years, I'm quite happy that I'll be able to keep the money in my bank account for a bit longer. I really don't know why some are getting their knickers in a twist about it.

Really? Are there many of these clubs? We seem to be the only Premiership club that hasn't been in a mad tearing hurry to get the money in. Does that suggest to you that we are a club with less resources than many others? I would have thought that logically it was suggestive of the opposite position.

Well, you just know that the Lowe attitude would have been that he would have earned far less in his own country, so he ought to be grateful to come to us. Lowe would take him out clay pigeon shooting to build up team spirit. How many clubs were offering that?

A freudian slip by a Skate in the News. Or was it? :-

Quote: Colin Farmery; Pompey-Fans.com - (another deluded Skate) If indeed Pompey is a globally recognised brand, which I doubt, it is probably more because they are a laughing stock than for reasons of their glorious past history, such as it is. They must be proud to be the first Premiership club to go into administration, the prime example of how to spend money you don't have, resulting in your club imploding financially and potentially going out of existence. But as comical as his assertion is that the Skates are a globally recognised brand, his continued idiocy in bracketing them with us when it comes to the financing of both clubs, really does take the biscuit. Yes, it is plain to all that their ownership by a succession of crooks and clowns is exactly the same as our ownership by a Swiss Billionaire and his family. And that their reckless expenditure on players they couldn't afford, is the equivalent of our financial prudence in living well within our means, with a policy of bringing as many as possible of our future players into the first team via our academy. So sorry, Mr Farmery, but we have little to fear from the UEFA Fair Play Rules and the implementaion of them by the English football authorities. You on the other hand, can only wish that those rules had been in place several years ago; but although you wouldn't have been in this parlous state that you find your club in now, neither would you have won the FA Cup and had those players which form the basis of your assertion that you are a global brand.

No they're not. They're up the creek without a paddle.

Poor old Corpse. When he reads this, he'll throw his toys out of the pram.