saint lard Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 (edited) Did we not try to play the 'the football club is not in admin' ruse? Am i wrong in thinking that Liverpool are trying the same thing, yet it appears the PL are more than happy to accomodate them...... Would we have cause to 'complain' about double standards..... "One urged caution citing the example of Southampton who were docked league points after claims that their parent company, and not the club, had gone bust, were dismissed by the Football League. But a source familiar with the process told the ECHO: “A deal's been done to make sure those nine points aren't deducted from Liverpool. “It's not actually the football club that goes into administration, it's the holding company." Read More http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2010/10/01/liverpool-fc-safe-from-nine-point-deduction-100252-27377261/#ixzz11IL81DG0 Edited 3 October, 2010 by saint lard Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Huffton Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Afer what the PL have let the skates get away with theres not a hope in hell. The PL is a total joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Block 5 Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 FL & prem are 2 different animals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brightspark Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Yes it is double standards but what can anyone do about it? The PL seems more powerful than the goverment itself - and clearly a Liverpool points deduction would bring negative press to the PL - and yes, it would "damage their image". I've learned to put up and live with the corruption and double standards in football... I guess I just don't care about this kind of sh*t anymore!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMikey Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Liverpool won't go into admin, it's one rule for one club and another for the next. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mightysaints Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I forsee within the next 10 years the Premier leaque falling apart as 1 club after another goes pop. If they treat each club differently on the same issues then things will go very wrong for the PL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicestersaint Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 The Premier League has allowed the clubs to behave in ways that are scarcely ethical - look at Portsmouth and Liverpool and manUtd - they aren't likely to change now. Frankly the PL is a disgrace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Gabriel's Halo Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I believe West Ham and their holding company are, or were, in a similar situation following the Icelandic banking collapse. And like some of you above I believe there is absolutely NO chance of the PL deducting points from Liverpool or any other so called big club should they do a Portsmouth. Can you imagine the untold damage that would do to their brand image ? Now, on the other hand, should Liverpool get relegated into the FL.....!!?? Hmmm, what a juicy prospect that would be...!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I believe West Ham and their holding company are' date=' or were, in a similar situation following the Icelandic banking collapse. And like some of you above I believe there is absolutely NO chance of the PL deducting points from Liverpool or any other so called big club should they do a Portsmouth. Can you imagine the untold damage that would do to their brand image ? Now, on the other hand, should Liverpool get relegated into the FL.....!!?? Hmmm, what a juicy prospect that would be...!![/quote'] Even if they did I suspect they would get special dispensation and be able to stay up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Would we have cause to 'complain' about double standards..... How can it be "double standards" when the Football League and the Premier League are two different governing bodies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimmy Gabriel's Halo Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Even if they did I suspect they would get special dispensation and be able to stay up I agree with your sentiment but that would have to be something very special after losing at home to Blackpool today... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jollyjohn Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I am surprised that you lot are not spitting feathers over this I know I would be in your shoes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I am surprised that you lot are not spitting feathers over this I know I would be in your shoes The Premier League and Football League are different governing bodies and have different rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graffito Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 The Premier League and Football League are different governing bodies and have different rules. Agreed but my recollection is that the FL did not apply it's rule in respect of Saints' holding company having gone into administration and instead applied the 10 point penalty to the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Right sider Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 West Ham was different in that the holding companys primary business was as a bank, that owned a club. Our holding company was formed to run a football club wholey. Not sure on situation at Liverpool but suppose it depends on what/how the holding company does. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 West Ham was different in that the holding companys primary business was as a bank, that owned a club. Our holding company was formed to run a football club wholey. Not sure on situation at Liverpool but suppose it depends on what/how the holding company does. Yep....this is a crucial difference. SLH and SFC were deemed to be one and the same thing. If Liverpool's "holding company" has significant other subsideries under it (one of them being Liverpool FC) then they will be OK I believe. Mr Lowe's mistake in coming up with the holding company 'ruse' was not to buy a significant other subsidery to run alongside SFC under SLH. Well, that's my understanding anyway.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 I agree with your sentiment but that would have to be something very special after losing at home to Blackpool today... Really? heh, heh, I've been out playing footie for my local women's team and obviously this was the first site I checked when I got home. Ooff for a snicker... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew Le God Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Mr Lowe's mistake in coming up with the holding company 'ruse' was not to buy a significant other subsidery to run alongside SFC under SLH. Well, that's my understanding anyway.... Saint's holding company was created 7 years before the Football League's insolvency rules were written. You aren't trying to exploit a loophole if the rules the loophole are in, are 7 years in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lordswoodsaints Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 The premier league will never allow one of it's members to go bust.....but what they will do is shepherd them out of the league to the championship,basically keep a club going until they get relegated.....similar to Pompey. By Brushing a failing club out of the league,the club becomes somebody elses problem and the brand stays intact with the help of some clever damage limitation engineering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
altoniansaints Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 This could get very interesting, can someone find out what other assets Kop Holdings own if in fact they do own other assets? If they don`t then surely the same rules must apply and yes i know that the PL and the FL are two different entities and thus they can rule differently but in the interest and iintegrity of football as a whole then surely the ruling must be the same! Having said that i don`t think, even with a 9 point deduction, Liverpool will be fighting relegation come May. However if the bank seizes control and strips the assets/players to recoup it`s money then relegation could be a distinct poss. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Saint's holding company was created 7 years before the Football League's insolvency rules were written. You aren't trying to exploit a loophole if the rules the loophole are in, are 7 years in the future. No, but the ruse was still a ruse when Lowe tried it on, and it was a hamfisted attempt to swerve the rules. And the holding company thing was itself a ruse those seven years ago to get around another rule, which is was that football clubs themselves couldn't be PLCs (or something, can't quite remember the precise rule). Spurs started it, and we (and others) followed in creating shadow PLCs wholly owning clubs. SLH was SFC. SLH had no other reason to exist than SFC and SLH went into admin because of debts related to the football club. Not quite the same as West Ham's situation. Liverpool I'm not so sure about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torrent Of Abuse Posted 3 October, 2010 Share Posted 3 October, 2010 Yep....this is a crucial difference. SLH and SFC were deemed to be one and the same thing. If Liverpool's "holding company" has significant other subsideries under it (one of them being Liverpool FC) then they will be OK I believe. Mr Lowe's mistake in coming up with the holding company 'ruse' was not to buy a significant other subsidery to run alongside SFC under SLH. Well, that's my understanding anyway.... Surely we also had a radio station and an insurance company? Or were they counted as part of the football club itself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minsk Posted 4 October, 2010 Share Posted 4 October, 2010 Surely we also had a radio station and an insurance company? Or were they counted as part of the football club itself? If I remember correctly, they were sold before SLH went into admin. Ironically, had they not have been we may have avoided the points penalty. 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