ladysaint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 apparently on Monday afternoon as per the Daily Echo website to discuss Saints. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4449041.League_to_hold_emergency_board_meeting_over_Saints_takeover/ http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4448957.Saints_takeover_hits_problems/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 apparently on Monday afternoon as per the Daily Echo website to discuss Saints. I wonder if it'll be a case of.....''If we do let them back in our league, it will have to be with -30....'' I have a horrible feeling we could be facing more points deductions, because they simply ''do not like the way'' our deal is structured. As we know, the FL just completely make it up as they go along – and until one of the big governing body’s actually stand up and confront of the FL...They’ll just continue to kill clubs off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 there is no way on gods green earth that there will be a decision to over turn our -10 points bit of a let down that something that has not been a secret is (by all accounts) causing the problem here... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanfairoak Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 apparently on Monday afternoon as per the Daily Echo website to discuss Saints.wheres that from lovely? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpturner Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 wheres that from lovely?Look at the links in the second post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stanthemanfairoak Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 []Look at the links in the second post.[/Qsorry no more from me back to the pub.UOTE] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fitzhugh Fella Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 apparently on Monday afternoon as per the Daily Echo website to discuss Saints. Jan, if it's an emergency meeting you would think they could convene tomorrow, they must have known this was likely to happen. They are tinkering with people's livlehoods not to mention the fans emotions. Bunch of out of touch, ill-fitting suits out of their depth facing a catch 22 imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladysaint Posted 19 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 19 June, 2009 []Look at the links in the second post.[/Qsorry no more from me back to the pub.UOTE] LOL you are excused mines a B & C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micky Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Jan, if it's an emergency meeting you would think they could convene tomorrow, they must have known this was likely to happen. They are tinkering with people's livlehoods not to mention the fans emotions. Bunch of out of touch, ill-fitting suits out of their depth facing a catch 22 imo. I think that the FL will probably want the weekend in order to work on their own strategy FF. This is not an easy one for them to worm their way out of, and therefore they will probably see the next couple of days as 'breathing space' and a chance to try to come up with something watertight for Monday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teamsaint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 It really is all a bit pathetic(on the part of the FL). If they are so confident, they should allow an appeal, and get their costs. Lots of us invest large parts of our lives in these teams, and they are happy to play power games to boost their egos and bank accounts. Actually i think we should have taken the ten points on the chin, but then its not my £15m !) The peoples game. Ha!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 You only have to look at the way the FL shafted Luton Town to see that they do what the f*ck they like, when they like. A complete bunch of tossers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JibMcdo Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 According to the bloke on SSN, FL want proof in writing that we won't appeal. Everything else is in place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lee_saint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 You only have to look at the way the FL shafted Luton Town to see that they do what the f*ck they like, when they like. A complete bunch of tossers! Exactly, I've had an email from a Luton fan today who said similar things, I would much rather us be in the Conference than to deal with those muppets anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 According to the bloke on SSN, FL want proof in writing that we won't appeal. Everything else is in place. So are we saying the FL are threatening to withhold SFC's registration unless we agree not to appeal their 'let's make it up as we go along' points deduction ? - if so I find that quite scandalous :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JustMike Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 so why didnt they do this meeting today!! FFS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladysaint Posted 19 June, 2009 Author Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Jan, if it's an emergency meeting you would think they could convene tomorrow, they must have known this was likely to happen. They are tinkering with people's livlehoods not to mention the fans emotions. Bunch of out of touch, ill-fitting suits out of their depth facing a catch 22 imo. Totally agree Duncan. I would love nothing more than for that bunch of muppets to be proved wrong, but we just know that its not going to happen, most probably end up with a 20 point penalty instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathan Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 It's just so wrong on so many levels. If the FA think they have legally done the right thing then what do they care if we appeal. Let us appeal, we lose and they get their costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itchen Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 But, to be fair to Mawhinney and co (which goes against the grain), Pinnacle perhaps should have found out the League's take on what they were offering. We don't know for sure that it's the points deduction, it may be some other aspect of the deal. All that surprises me is that the problem seems to have emerged so late in the process. Surely someone must have been looking into this. Is it just a case of who blinks first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Jan, if it's an emergency meeting you would think they could convene tomorrow, Was just about to post the same. Emergency = 3 days time...? Emergency my arse! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Larkin Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 So are we saying the FL are threatening to withhold SFC's registration unless we agree not to appeal their 'let's make it up as we go along' points deduction ? - if so I find that quite scandalous :mad: It's what they do to all clubs that are put into administration. The Football League won't give the club their 'Golden Share' (allowing you to play in the league) unless the club waives their right to appeal. I can't see how this will end any better for us than any of the other clubs who the League have done this too, unless Pinnacle have something very clever up their sleeves they might as well just accept the 10 point penalty now and be done with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 But, to be fair to Mawhinney and co (which goes against the grain), Pinnacle perhaps should have found out the League's take on what they were offering. We don't know for sure that it's the points deduction, it may be some other aspect of the deal. All that surprises me is that the problem seems to have emerged so late in the process. Surely someone must have been looking into this. Is it just a case of who blinks first? emerged late - or being trying to get it sorted for a while? again criticising without facts. not seen anything saying this has suddenly come up just that its still not sorted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manji Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Its seems very vindictive of the Football League. I wonder if Mawhinney sees this as a personal issue ? I cant forget the dreadful interview on Radio 5 with Leon Crouch in which he openly admitted SLH was set up as a dodge. Leons appalling live appearance was followed by an similarly live interview with an outraged Mawhinney. I wonder if the photos of Leon hobnobbing with Keegan and MLT have got the Leagues back up ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itchen Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 emerged late - or being trying to get it sorted for a while? again criticising without facts. not seen anything saying this has suddenly come up just that its still not sorted Not really criticising as it's clear I don't have any facts. But I am surprised that what appears to be a deal breaker has only just been discovered. Hence I asked is this a game of brinkmanship to see who backs down first? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 How fair will the FL look if they let a club go out of business just because they were not willing to let a fair impartial trbunal look at their decision on points? They would look awful and IMHO wouldn't let it happen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exit2 Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Luton fans like him NOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wild-saint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 IMO I think on Monday the FL will all meet up after taking legal advice and back down. There is a set of criteria that needs to be met by any new company taking control of a football club (that much we know with the fit & proper persons test). If we meet that criteria and they are actually as reported only approving the takeover if we sign away our right to appeal then that is a case for pinnacle to sue. If pinnacle decide not to sue and walk away then surely the administrator (on behalf of the creditors) could sue for loss of a sale to the tune of £15 million. Either way the FA are in a lose lose situation. if they were so adamant that they are right then why the need for an emergency meeting on monday? They are running scared and trying to bluff there way through. No doubt they will be frantically seeking legal advice over the weekend. Personally I think it will be resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Serve a writ on them Mon am with an interim injunction stopping them from doing anything until the judgement is made. That is the way to treat their bullying. Call their bluff, contest their rules and let the courts decide. Remember George Eastham and the Belgian guy, they changed things when the football authorities did the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4737_carlin Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Its seems very vindictive of the Football League. I wonder if Mawhinney sees this as a personal issue ? I cant forget the dreadful interview on Radio 5 with Leon Crouch in which he openly admitted SLH was set up as a dodge. Leons appalling live appearance was followed by an similarly live interview with an outraged Mawhinney. I wonder if the photos of Leon hobnobbing with Keegan and MLT have got the Leagues back up ? Yeah its all Leons fault !! LOL yawn z z z z z The actual administrator Mark Fry made the most noise on the FL being totally wrong with their stance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Not really criticising as it's clear I don't have any facts. But I am surprised that what appears to be a deal breaker has only just been discovered. Hence I asked is this a game of brinkmanship to see who backs down first? again, nothing says it has only just been discovered has it? Not seen that said at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHAPEL END CHARLIE Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 It's what they do to all clubs that are put into administration. The Football League won't give the club their 'Golden Share' (allowing you to play in the league) unless the club waives their right to appeal. I can't see how this will end any better for us than any of the other clubs who the League have done this too, unless Pinnacle have something very clever up their sleeves they might as well just accept the 10 point penalty now and be done with it. There's an important point of principle involved here - should the FL as a quasi legal governing body abide by and operate within its own regulations or can it do as it pleases and coerce member clubs into accepting whatever arbitrary decisions it imposes while (in effect) denying recourse to any proper appeal process ? They have us over a barrel of course as we desperately need to get this takeover completed and get on with preparations for next season - but that doesn't make their actions right or even legal . Someone will one day test the FL's rather highhanded administration of the game in a court of law (perhaps even to the level of a Judicial Review) where 'bully boy' tactics and making up the rules as you go along may not prevail quite as easily as they seem to in the world of football . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Serve a writ on them Mon am with an interim injunction stopping them from doing anything until the judgement is made. That is the way to treat their bullying. Call their bluff, contest their rules and let the courts decide. Remember George Eastham and the Belgian guy, they changed things when the football authorities did the same thing. With great respect, this is a total load of ******... Firstly, you have to be in a position to apply for an interim injunction and the only corporate entity that can do that is SLH aka Mark Fry and I can guarantee he won't. Secondly, you then have to hope that the judge will grant the interim injunction and I can tell you that the rule with these is that if the potential damage caused by the alleged breach you are trying to injunct can be remediated by an award of quantifiable damages, you won't get one. As the season doesn't start yet, I am trying to figure out any damage the leagues' position will cause, TBH. This is like me wanting to join Stoneham Golf Club and applying for an injunction to prevent them from cutting my handicap, FFS. Get real, everybody. The 10 point deduction was known when the deal was agreed with the administrator. All the league wants is for the new owner to pay the football related debts and reach a CVA with the non-football creditors and not to force the League to spend a million or two on legal expenses to let us play in their league... ...oh, and what's the betting that the two remaining questions that Tony Lynam has for the Administrator are:Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price, and Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 There's an important point of principle involved here - should the FL as a quasi legal governing body abide by and operate within its own regulations or can it do as it pleases and coerce member clubs into accepting whatever arbitrary decisions it imposes while (in effect) denying recourse to any proper appeal process ? They have us over a barrel of course as we desperately need to get this takeover completed and get on with preparations for next season - but that doesn't make their actions right or even legal . Someone will one day test the FL's rather highhanded administration of the game in a court of law (perhaps even to the level of a Judicial Review) where 'bully boy' tactics and making up the rules as you go along may not prevail quite as easily as they seem to in the world of football . The way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wade Garrett Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 With great respect, this is a total load of ******... Firstly, you have to be in a position to apply for an interim injunction and the only corporate entity that can do that is SLH aka Mark Fry and I can guarantee he won't. Secondly, you then have to hope that the judge will grant the interim injunction and I can tell you that the rule with these is that if the potential damage caused by the alleged breach you are trying to injunct can be remediated by an award of quantifiable damages, you won't get one. As the season doesn't start yet, I am trying to figure out any damage the leagues' position will cause, TBH. This is like me wanting to join Stoneham Golf Club and applying for an injunction to prevent them from cutting my handicap, FFS. Get real, everybody. The 10 point deduction was known when the deal was agreed with the administrator. All the league wants is for the new owner to pay the football related debts and reach a CVA with the non-football creditors and not to force the League to spend a million or two on legal expenses to let us play in their league... ...oh, and what's the betting that the two remaining questions that Tony Lynam has for the Administrator are:Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price, and Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price.... You have a point, and your Money Talks thread looks being bang on the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 With great respect, this is a total load of ******... Firstly, you have to be in a position to apply for an interim injunction and the only corporate entity that can do that is SLH aka Mark Fry and I can guarantee he won't. Secondly, you then have to hope that the judge will grant the interim injunction and I can tell you that the rule with these is that if the potential damage caused by the alleged breach you are trying to injunct can be remediated by an award of quantifiable damages, you won't get one. As the season doesn't start yet, I am trying to figure out any damage the leagues' position will cause, TBH. This is like me wanting to join Stoneham Golf Club and applying for an injunction to prevent them from cutting my handicap, FFS. Get real, everybody. The 10 point deduction was known when the deal was agreed with the administrator. All the league wants is for the new owner to pay the football related debts and reach a CVA with the non-football creditors and not to force the League to spend a million or two on legal expenses to let us play in their league... ...oh, and what's the betting that the two remaining questions that Tony Lynam has for the Administrator are:Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price, and Will you take an IOU for most of the asking price.... It was assuming Pinnacle closed the deal. How then do SFC go about getting a CVA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 If the creditors are paid off by Pinnacle and the slates are truly wiped clean, will we have benefited in any way from going into admin? This, after all, was the rationale for the deduction. Some clubs do benefit from admin -hence its right unfair advantage is punished; some dont, undermining the 'spirit' of the law. Given that the FL never had a strong legal foundation to challenge us (coz of the split of the club and holding company) but relied on the spirit of law, its arguable that the Pinnacle deal is not violating that. The FL have neither a legal case nor a moral one, based on the spirit of the law. That's what happens when you make things up on the fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St_Tel49 Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 there is no way on gods green earth that there will be a decision to over turn our -10 points bit of a let down that something that has not been a secret is (by all accounts) causing the problem here... I think that all we are asking for is the right to APPEAL against it. Are we being granted less rights than a criminal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guided Missile Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 It was assuming Pinnacle closed the deal. How then do SFC go about getting a CVA?They don't. The Administrator of SLH satisfied the creditors when they accepted Pinnacles' offer and provided an exclusive period to close the deal. Fry could not have accepted the offer for SFC unless it did.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strangely Brown Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 As we all know the law is fraught with technicalities that clever lawyers exploit to their clients benefit. When the points deduction was imposed even Fry was at pains to point out that it was the holding company and NOT the footy club that went into adminstration and that it was an incorrect decision by FL to impose the points penalty. If the case was that watertight why are the football league insisting that we should not go to the courts and why indeed do they now need an emergency meeting on Monday? Like many others have already said, if they are that convinced they are right let us have our day in court, lose the case and they can have their costs. Methinks they realise that the way the points penalty was imposed was not within their own rules and therefore a clever lawyer will make mincemeat of their decision. Just hope the deal goes through this last hitch has really ruined my day I was so looking forward to everything being done and dusted today:( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickG Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 this meeting could be good news, we may not need the right to appeal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exit2 Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 I see this act from the FL basically as industrial blackmail! A few months back when SLH went into admin it took a week or so for the FL to come up with a decision. During that time they must have had their legal teams look at all the in and outs of the penalty they handed to us and thought it was concrete. The problem I have now with it is Pinnacle have said they want the right to challenge it and the FL have said no and if you do or want to we will not issue your football license. Which is wrong and like I said blackmail! If they thought their case was solid then give us the license and then lets battle it out in court. So what happens now, the FL have a weekend for the legal team again to look at the ins and outs again. They will either back down or in my opinion do the decent thing, issue the license and then let Pinnacle decide to challenge it iin court. We might lose that appeal but at least we have had the chance! Also GM your are way of the mark. Yes Pinnacle knew about the 10 points, but I can tell you that on Wednesday when the FL accepted the director listing all was fine it was not until last evening and today that when the FL went to issue the license they had the "NOT TO CHALLENGE" clause thrown in. This is nothing to do with money or the 10 points it is the chance to appeal against it. Who knows Pinnacle might have not appealed, but not being given the chance to because of the FL is wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rational Rich Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 It was assuming Pinnacle closed the deal. How then do SFC go about getting a CVA? First you would need to to be insolvent, and at the moment SFC is solvent and can pay its debts as they fall due. So no need for a CVA. This is one of the many points which show how impossible the league's stance is. The fact that SFCL can be sold, leaving SLHL behind, shows that they can't be inextricably linked. There is no easy way out of this for the FL, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidney Fudpucker the 3rd Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 I was at Wembley when Luton Town won the JP trophy. The fans used the oportunity to continue their protest against the FA. It was an amazing turn out and if every clubs fans showed their passion and dedication then I'm sure the Football league would sit up and start to take notice. Sadly, they seem to be very good at upsetting clubs one at a time. Absolute ******s! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulwantsapint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Look it at from other teams point of view whoever's decision it was Saints missed the administration cut off date so the rule says -10 points next season Now I dont want to start the season -10 points but I do want Saints to start the season, get back to the prem & say **** off FL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
somptingsaint Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 I see this act from the FL basically as industrial blackmail! A few months back when SLH went into admin it took a week or so for the FL to come up with a decision. During that time they must have had their legal teams look at all the in and outs of the penalty they handed to us and thought it was concrete. The problem I have now with it is Pinnacle have said they want the right to challenge it and the FL have said no and if you do or want to we will not issue your football license. Which is wrong and like I said blackmail! If they thought their case was solid then give us the license and then lets battle it out in court. So what happens now, the FL have a weekend for the legal team again to look at the ins and outs again. They will either back down or in my opinion do the decent thing, issue the license and then let Pinnacle decide to challenge it iin court. We might lose that appeal but at least we have had the chance! Also GM your are way of the mark. Yes Pinnacle knew about the 10 points, but I can tell you that on Wednesday when the FL accepted the director listing all was fine it was not until last evening and today that when the FL went to issue the license they had the "NOT TO CHALLENGE" clause thrown in. This is nothing to do with money or the 10 points it is the chance to appeal against it. Who knows Pinnacle might have not appealed, but not being given the chance to because of the FL is wrong nice clear post thanks:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 First you would need to to be insolvent, and at the moment SFC is solvent and can pay its debts as they fall due. So no need for a CVA. This is one of the many points which show how impossible the league's stance is. The fact that SFCL can be sold, leaving SLHL behind, shows that they can't be inextricably linked. There is no easy way out of this for the FL, IMHO. I knew that, read my other posts, it was a loaded question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
martel Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Jan, if it's an emergency meeting you would think they could convene tomorrow, they must have known this was likely to happen. They are tinkering with people's livlehoods not to mention the fans emotions. Bunch of out of touch, ill-fitting suits out of their depth facing a catch 22 imo. Spot on Fitzhugh, in fact I have just sent a letter to Mawhinney asking for his immediate resignation, they are all totaly inept and have no concept on the workings of a football club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whitey Grandad Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 I should have thought that a 'not to challenge' clause could amount to an illegal contract. If SFC has, of today, a right to appeal then it cannot sign away that right. SFC will continue to exist as a corporate body in its original form and with the same financial commitments but with new backers. The League under its constitution cannot take away that right of appeal, otherwise the said right of appeal would be conditional on the ruling body's approval. I would expect some decision along the lines of 'having examined in more detail the particulars of the proposed takeover, the board is now satisfied that at no time ... ... no advantage was obtained... etc.' Anything else would surely lay them open to massive legal claims from one side of the deal or the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delmary Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 Spot on Fitzhugh, in fact I have just sent a letter to Mawhinney asking for his immediate resignation, they are all totaly inept and have no concept on the workings of a football club.Anyone got their email address? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rational Rich Posted 19 June, 2009 Share Posted 19 June, 2009 I knew that, read my other posts, it was a loaded question. Derry, I know you knew. I was agreeing with you, just adding my 2p on the mess the FL have got themselves in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now