Jump to content

Pompey Takeover Saga

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in Golden Posts

 Share

Recommended Posts

Doctoroncall

Doctoroncall

Posted
Posted (edited)
'I could of gone to Tottenham this afternoon instead of meeting with you lot

 

 

Lol... even in Jest that's the mother of all PR gaffes...

 

I guess not a direct quote, otherwise that would make it worst as, everyone knows it should be 'could have'.

Edited by Doctoroncall
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
lol

 

how many did we have turn up for our ''Lowe, Wotte-Notta-Gotta-Clue'' march?

on that site I quoted..they were laughing at our protests this week saying "they will show the country what a protest really is"...

 

granted the game was called off..but surely, more than 80 people on the island republic actually care..?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Essruu

Essruu

Posted
Posted
I guess not a direct quote, otherwise that would make it worst as, everyone knows it should be 'could have'.

 

 

I don't think that you should attempt to pick someone up on their spelling or grammar: not with your poor comma use, nor with you not knowing when to use 'worse' or 'worst'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint lard

saint lard

Posted
Posted
Was it not only yesterday that Storrie was quoted as saying that withholding the TV money Poopey's idea ?

 

I believe that he stated that the monies should be distributed to the relevant clubs via the PL,and PFC suggested this.

 

I suspect however he is now disputing the fact that the funds should have been witheld at all and it is beyond the jurisdiction of the PL to do so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_John

Saint_John

Posted
Posted

 

Has anybody found out more about this case ?

 

I've scanned the High Court of Justice web site

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/courthearings.htm

looking for which court / judge etc but can find no mention of the case ?

or am I missing something ?

 

(the only mention of anything to do with Skatetown is a Smith v the City Council and a Hopwood v the NHS cases).

 

I looked though all the cases on Friday (15th) and again today (for Monday 18th), but can see no mention of it. Equally I would have expected one of the papers (Evening Standard ?) to be at the Court, but the only report is "second hand" in the Skate News.

 

There has been SO SO SO SO MANY lies coming out of Skatetown this year I am starting to question whether this case is really going on ?

 

 

 

For info, I believe that Storrieteller case due to be held at Southwark Court Court on Thursday will be displayed here on Wed

http://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/current/crown/indexdailies.htm

If they do not change their naming standards the url will be

http://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/current/crown/sthwk_T100121.01.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
AVRAM GRANT will make a personal plea to Roman Abramovich in a bid to get Portsmouth's transfer embargo overturned.

 

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/sport/683521/GRANT-MAKES-PERSONAL-PLEA-TO-ABRAMOVICH.html

I would have thought Abramovich would have been a little peeved that a player they sold for 4m was then quickly sold on for 12m? and they still didnt pay them the money due. I do accept Grant may be able to persuade him though.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gorgiesaint

Gorgiesaint

Posted
Posted
I assume Pompey are so desperate to get the ban lifted so they can bring in loan players? Because they sure as hell don't have the money to actually buy anyone!

 

Just where are they getting the money to pay their solicitors from? At the moment, they are fighting the revenue & the Prem League - have they gone to one of these no win, no fee places? There was a point made by someone earlier that Pompey's appeal against the Inland Revenue was not showing anywhere on the court listings - the other question is why was no mention made in the media of what is going on this case as this has potential massive implications for football (either a PL team being wound up or the VAT implications if Pompey win).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
I assume Pompey are so desperate to get the ban lifted so they can bring in loan players? Because they sure as hell don't have the money to actually buy anyone!

Barry Silkman (Football Agent) was on Solent a couple of days ago saying that he didn`t know of any agents that were prepared to deal with P**pey. I assume that agents are still involved even with loan moves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint si

saint si

Posted
Posted

It seems Pompey are disputing the Premier League's application of rule C47 in respect of the TV money.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1243860/Weve-broken-rules-TV-money-say-cash-strapped-Portsmouth.html

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_5866519,00.html

 

Storrie: "They have absolutely no right to withhold TV money in advance of future payments or payments to foreign clubs."

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11674_5863170,00.html

 

Storrie: "we instructed the premier league 2 weeks ago to pay clubs in the UK and also to foreign clubs, which leaves a balance"

 

 

Rule C47 (and C48 ) are below:

 

Power to Deduct

47. If any Club or Relegated Club (“the debtor Club”) fails to make any payment due to any

creditor of the description set out in Rule C.48, upon being reasonably satisfied to that effect, the Board shall be empowered to deduct the amount of any such payment from any

distribution of UK Broadcasting Money, Overseas Broadcasting Money, Commercial Contract

Money, Radio Contract Money or Title Sponsorship Money payable to the debtor Club, paying

the same to the creditor to which it is due.

 

48. The creditors to which Rule C.47 applies are:

48.1 another Club (or club); or

48.2 the Company; or

48.3 any Associated Undertaking, Fellow Subsidiary Undertaking, Group Undertaking, or

Subsidiary Undertaking of the Company; or

48.4 any pension or life assurance scheme administered by or on behalf of the League; or

48.5 the Football League; or

48.6 any Associated Undertaking, Fellow Subsidiary Undertaking, Group Undertaking, or

Subsidiary Undertaking of the Football League; or

48.7 the Football Foundation.

 

It would appear Pompey might be right in regard to future payments, as these are not mentioned anywhere above. However payments to foreign clubs would very definitely be covered by 48.1 as "club" (lower case "c") is defined in the same rules document as follows:

 

“club” means an association football club not in membership of the League;

 

Irrespective of that, the above section does not give the EPL the right to place a transfer embargo on Pompey. That right sits in rule M37:

 

37. If any Transferee Club acts in breach of Rules M.29 or M.32 to M.36 inclusive:

37.1 the Board shall have power to refuse any application by that Transferee Club to register

any Player until any sums then payable to its Transferor Club are paid;

37.2 out of any monies held by the Board for or on behalf of or to the order of that Transferee Club (whether in the Compensation Fee Account or otherwise), the Board shall have power to pay to its Transferor Club any amount not exceeding the sum due to it from the Transferee Club under the provisions of this Section of these Rules;

 

These seem to back up rule C47 and gives the EPL the right to withhold TV money and use it to settle Pompey's transfer debts.

 

The sticking point in regard to TV money therefore will likely prove to be what payments Pompey have actually missed (as opposed to what they may owe in future but have not yet missed) and what agreements they have made with the creditors in respect of these payments (e.g. if they've agreed to lower amounts, or to relax payment dates).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
EastleighSoulBoy

EastleighSoulBoy

Posted
Posted
It seems Pompey are disputing the Premier League's application of rule C47 in respect of the TV money.

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1243860/Weve-broken-rules-TV-money-say-cash-strapped-Portsmouth.html

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_5866519,00.html

 

Storrie: "They have absolutely no right to withhold TV money in advance of future payments or payments to foreign clubs."

 

http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11674_5863170,00.html

 

Storrie: "we instructed the premier league 2 weeks ago to pay clubs in the UK and also to foreign clubs, which leaves a balance"

 

 

Rule C47 (and C48 ) are below:

 

 

 

It would appear Pompey might be right in regard to future payments, as these are not mentioned anywhere above. However payments to foreign clubs would very definitely be covered by 48.1 as "club" (lower case "c") is defined in the same rules document as follows:

 

 

 

Irrespective of that, the above section does not give the EPL the right to place a transfer embargo on Pompey. That right sits in rule M37:

 

 

 

These seem to back up rule C47 and gives the EPL the right to withhold TV money and use it to settle Pompey's transfer debts.

 

The sticking point in regard to TV money therefore will likely prove to be what payments Pompey have actually missed (as opposed to what they may owe in future but have not yet missed) and what agreements they have made with the creditors in respect of these payments (e.g. if they've agreed to lower amounts, or to relax payment dates).

 

There you have it then, in slightly more than a nutshell.

 

Interestingly, reading that second link, it reinforces how lucky Saints are with ML as owner compared to the likes of Manyoo, Liverpool and Notts County and all their shenanigans!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hamster

hamster

Posted
Posted

As an aside that made me laugh yesterday.

 

I called my brother (the Pompey supporting one) whilst on the way to Millwall. He didn;t know the game had been called off and I suggested that they'd orchestrated it as they had palyers away in the African Cup of nations. He said it was most likely cos they didn't want to have to pay a win bonus! I almost spat out my Fanta.

 

Note: He laughed also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Torrent Of Abuse

Torrent Of Abuse

Posted
Posted

To be honest, I can see the skates' points. If a bill isn't due, it's not strictly covered by those rules - although the PL could rule that they are including payments due within the window (e.g. Watford). I don't think they should be publicly skapegoating the PL like this though. They will need their support this season.

 

It's also the the PL's rules to apply as they like. With the stakes being so much higher, I wonder if they will get any more leeway with their appeal than we did with our campaign against the 10 point deduction? Maybe. Still I'm partly relieved that we took our penalty rather than hitched about it in the media and raised law suits.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted
Alot of the stuff pompey are coming out with is just for show, they have to appear to be doing something just to stop the chavs rioting.

 

You do wonder if threatening to sue the two organisations - EPL & HMRC - who hold your future in their hands is such a good idea, don't you? Or is it sending your keeper up for a corner time?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Torrent Of Abuse

Torrent Of Abuse

Posted
Posted

Also doesn't say much for Pompey's finances that they are quibbling over £2m being payable now rather than later. What happened to securing their short term future? I guess that £2m was supposed to be January's pay.

 

Arguing the PLs rules with the PL.

Arguing tax rules with the tax man.

What next? Challenging gravity to argue that things in freefall don't have to go down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sidthesquid

sidthesquid

Posted
Posted
To be honest, I can see the skates' points. If a bill isn't due, it's not strictly covered by those rules - although the PL could rule that they are including payments due within the window (e.g. Watford). I don't think they should be publicly skapegoating the PL like this though. They will need their support this season.

 

It's also the the PL's rules to apply as they like. With the stakes being so much higher, I wonder if they will get any more leeway with their appeal than we did with our campaign against the 10 point deduction? Maybe. Still I'm partly relieved that we took our penalty rather than hitched about it in the media and raised law suits.

 

Also, they should remember the hard lesson we learnt - it's a members' club & ultimately they can make up the rules as they go on & if you don't like it you can go elsewhere

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DS

DS

Posted
Posted
You do wonder if threatening to sue the two organisations - EPL & HMRC - who hold your future in their hands is such a good idea, don't you? Or is it sending your keeper up for a corner time?

 

Nah its not that- they'd have to extend his contract by 12 months based on appearances if they did that. :smt081

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint_John

Saint_John

Posted
Posted
That hearing was brought by Pompey challenging the winding up order by the HMRC.

As it states its still pending an outcome,which will be disclosed Monday.

 

I still believe there should be a record of the case taking place on the High Court web site

http://www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk/cms/courthearings.htm

 

I also got the date wrong for the Storrieteller case, it is on Wed (20th) and NOT Thurs therefore should be posted sometime on Tuesday.

http://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/current/crown/sthwk_T100120.01.htm

 

....

For info, I believe that Storrieteller case due to be held at Southwark Court Court on Thursday will be displayed here on Wed

http://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/current/crown/indexdailies.htm

If they do not change their naming standards the url will be

http://www.courtserve.net/courtlists/current/crown/sthwk_T100121.01.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
miserableoldgit

miserableoldgit

Posted
Posted
Oh,and now they are not going to sue.....

 

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/news/story?id=726747&sec=england&cc=5739

 

This really is a farce.

Do i take it that PFC are expecting people to take pity on them.

 

"Portsmouth have enlisted Maurice Watkins, the high powered lawyer who represents Manchester United, to help them argue their case." He won`t be cheap!! Hope he gets his fee!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beatlesaint

beatlesaint

Posted
Posted

Footballers are not the most intelligent of people by and large BUT even given that why are Pompey so worried about getting the transfer embargo lifted ?

 

Who in their right mind is going to sign for a club where you have no idea if you are going to be paid each month ?

 

The best they can hope for is out of work footballers, and I cant imagine there are too many of them who are Premiership standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
St Marco

St Marco

Posted
Posted

As i said in my post the other day. The PL would now be taking a hard line aproach against the club. They realise they are going to go into admin anyway and the £2m they are with holding is most likely needed to pay the wages this month. If the PL gave them the money they would just be in the same situation next month if they could not shift some players. What is the point of lifting the embargo and signing players if those players would not be paid? The PL as Scudamore mentions have to represent english football and by allowing that to happen would be very wrong. If Portsmouth have the finances under control as they claim to have then they should provide evidence of it. When we get a loan, or get credit or whatever we have to provide evidence of our financial situation. They are not immune to that. It seems to me they think they should be able to get the money and the embargo lifted because they "promise" by word things are better now. If people did business that way there would be a lot of rich conmen out there!

 

Portsmouth suing the PL is the end of their help, they have shot themselves in the foot by behaving like that. They have nobody to blame but themselves so trying to shift responsibility is not going to help. We were in the same situation, the previous board blaming the board before them. A line needs to be drawn and everything below the line needs to be forgotten. They are scrapping the barrel for every penny they can get. The Faraj brothers have no money and they should not have bought the club without any.

All that is happening is these arabs are finding out just how much money you have to have to own a football club in england. Unless you really are rich you got no chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fitzhugh Fella

Fitzhugh Fella

Posted
  • Author
Posted
Just take a butchers at who's in a takeover bid at Cardiff. None other than someone who was in for buying Saints back last summer

 

http://www.sportinglife.com/football/news/story_get.cgi?STORY_NAME=soccer/10/01/16/manual_134501.html&TEAMHD=soccer

 

God I shudder at the thought of some of the people who were interested in us.

We certainly seem to have got very lucky with ML but his motives and reasons for getting involved still intrigue me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})

  I accept