I have to say this. I for one think we SHOULD be deducted 10 points.. Sorry!

[Saintmike666]

As I've said in the title.

 

Now lets just get the obvious out of the way first, I'd consider myself to be a huge Saints fan. I travel down from were I live in the Midlands as much as possible to get to the home games. In fact this season I've been to 20 games home and away, which I think is a pretty reasonable tally for someone who lives so far away. Just thought I'd clear that one up.

 

BUT none the less, as a football fanatic in general I think that Southampton, like any other club in the land has to abide by the set rules. The fact that its the 'Holding Company' that has gone into administration and not the club can surely only be viewed as a technicality in this case, after all SFC is SLH in every way but the name.

 

I think its incredibly sad its come to this, but ultimately why should we get away without punishment when others haven't? I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion! Either way, I don't think that we'll stay up this season, there's just not enough about the team to do it. Which would mean starting next season in League One on minus 10 points. Well I say so be it! Its the rules, its morally right and as much as it pains me to say, its the way it should be.

 

I agree with a lot said in this article -

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/04/07/football_league_must_deduct_10_points_from_southampton

 

But its also my opinion that Saints will come back, maybe not straight away, but in time with the right backers this great club will rise back up from the depths of League 1 and eventually re-claim its place in the Premiership, we just have to put up with a little more pain first...

[Arizona]

Of course we should, morally speaking. The club has been badly mismanaged financially and we're trying to get out of it through some sneaky loophole.

 

We can only hope this loophole stands up to the investigation they're conducting.

[John B]

Yes I agree I said so in another thread

[alpine_saint]

I reckon we are down, one way or the other.

 

So I am hoping that the League see that as punishment enough.

 

Therefore, that they deduct the points if we manage to get out of the zone, and dont if we go down automatically.

 

In that way, not other club suffers because of our financial incompetence, but we get a squint at the possibility of survival.

[SFC Forever]

The FA pussyfooting around as they are , are only making it worse for the club and fans. It is almost like being punished twice.

[alpine_saint]

The FA pussyfooting around as they are , are only making it worse for the club and fans. It is almost like being punished twice.

 

Its not the FA.

[Saint Billy]

Agreed, if they do not apply the -10 pt rule other clubs will be up in arms and others will also be using the loophole in the future.

 

If admin was so close as it is now apparent it was, sfc should have gone for the -10pts before the deadline. A masterstroke it was not, another very bad gamble it was.

[John B]

I reckon we are down, one way or the other.

 

So I am hoping that the League see that as punishment enough.

 

Therefore, that they deduct the points if we manage to get out of the zone, and dont if we go down automatically.

 

In that way, not other club suffers because of our financial incompetence, but we get a squint at the possibility of survival.

 

That will set another precident wont it?

[rpb]

I also agree - I will not complain if we do get away with it but would be furious if I supported another team.

[alpine_saint]

That will set another precident wont it?

 

No, it wont. We arent outside the letter of the rules.

 

If they want to then close their loophole, so be it.

[INFLUENCED.COM]

I think that Southampton, like any other club in the land has to abide by the set rules.

 

but in time with the right backers this great club will rise back up from the depths of League 1 and eventually re-claim its place in the Premiership, we just have to put up with a little more pain first...

 

Its not yet decided that we have failed to abide by the rules, Technicality = 'meaningful or relevant'

 

I'm sure thats what all the Leeds fans say

[captain sensible]

Are you Pompey in disguise?

[Saintmike666]

I also agree - I will not complain if we do get away with it but would be furious if I supported another team.

 

Yeah that's completely my standing on it. If we were to get away with it I'd be relieved that's for sure but possibly not all that proud.

[Saintmike666]

Its not yet decided that we have failed to abide by the rules, Technicality = 'meaningful or relevant'

 

I'm sure thats what all the Leeds fans say

 

I think we'd be kidding ourselves a little bit to say that SLH is a completely detached entity from SFC. In fact quite the contrary. I think that (as I've said above) SFC and SLH can only be considered the same in all but for the name. Thus we become punishable. We'd be incredibly lucky to get away with it!

[lordswoodsaints]

The FA pussyfooting around as they are , are only making it worse for the club and fans. It is almost like being punished twice.

 

if the football league thought they had a strong enough case they would have acted today,they havnt got a case so they are dragging it out to make it look like they are investigating.

there is no case to answer,we wont be getting the 10 point deduction the football league are too lightweight to enforce anything against us.....they know it and so do the club.

 

going back to the original post,we do deserve the points as we have conned the league with a loophole,but this sort of sh1te goes on all the time in the legal world,criminals walk free all on a daily basis because of a loophole or technicality....... so **** the rest of the league,theyare just p1ssed off cos they never thought of it.

[stevegrant]

I also agree to a point.

 

However, football is such a competitive industry these days, where the smallest advantages count for so much. The likes of West Ham scandalously cheated their way to Premier League survival and it ended up only costing them £20m when they stood to lose more than double that if they were relegated.

 

You can guarantee that any other club in our situation would be doing everything possible to avoid a points deduction, and therefore I have no reason to argue against SFC from doing likewise.

 

If people don't like us, meh, big deal. We don't make the rules, the Football League knew about our ownership structure when we were relegated in 2005 and gave it the thumbs-up then, and they also knew about the loophole that may become evident if we were to have financial problems. They chose not to close that loophole - it's their problem.

[wild-saint]

As I've said in the title.

 

Now lets just get the obvious out of the way first, I'd consider myself to be a huge Saints fan. I travel down from were I live in the Midlands as much as possible to get to the home games. In fact this season I've been to 20 games home and away, which I think is a pretty reasonable tally for someone who lives so far away. Just thought I'd clear that one up.

 

BUT none the less, as a football fanatic in general I think that Southampton, like any other club in the land has to abide by the set rules. The fact that its the 'Holding Company' that has gone into administration and not the club can surely only be viewed as a technicality in this case, after all SFC is SLH in every way but the name.

 

I think its incredibly sad its come to this, but ultimately why should we get away without punishment when others haven't? I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion! Either way, I don't think that we'll stay up this season, there's just not enough about the team to do it. Which would mean starting next season in League One on minus 10 points. Well I say so be it! Its the rules, its morally right and as much as it pains me to say, its the way it should be.

 

I agree with a lot said in this article -

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/04/07/football_league_must_deduct_10_points_from_southampton

 

But its also my opinion that Saints will come back, maybe not straight away, but in time with the right backers this great club will rise back up from the depths of League 1 and eventually re-claim its place in the Premiership, we just have to put up with a little more pain first...

 

Thats utter crap. The rules state and only state that the club must go into administration to face a points deduction. To the letter of the rules we are breaking none. Clearly the issue is the fact the rules have been ill thought out and as such are open to interpretation.

 

How the F is that our fault. It states nothing in those sames rules that if the PLC(holding company) files for administration that unless X% is related to non football related income then the deduction applies.

 

What do people not get about that?

 

Clearly I agree that we are benfitting from the leagues fook up but hey thats life. Moving forward they will tighten the loop hole to stop others using the same one. What is morally wrong with that? Should Derby face a points deduction for retrospective breaking of rule that changed after they committed the offence?

[Saintmike666]

Thats utter crap. The rules state and only state that the club must go into administration to face a points deduction. To the letter of the rules we are breaking none. Clearly the issue is the fact the rules have been ill thought out and as such are open to interpretation.

 

How the F is that our fault. It states nothing in those sames rules that if the PLC(holding company) files for administration that unless X% is related to non football related income then the deduction applies.

 

What do people not get about that?

 

Clearly I agree that we are benfitting from the leagues fook up but hey thats life. Moving forward they will tighten the loop hole to stop others using the same one. What is morally wrong with that? Should Derby face a points deduction for retrospective breaking of rule that changed after they committed the offence?

 

Its not like Southampton Leisure Holding owns anything else. If it did I would probably view it differently. But SFC is, to all intents and purposes SLH. And I'm sure that's the way the rest of the Football world will look at it and more importantly the way the Football League should look at it.

Edited 7 April, 2009 by Saintmike666

[rpb]

Are you Pompey in disguise?

 

No, I'm a Saint - hence the moral conscience...

[Saintmike666]

No, I'm a Saint - hence the moral conscience...

 

Good comeback.

[Burnsie]

Thats utter crap. The rules state and only state that the club must go into administration to face a points deduction. To the letter of the rules we are breaking none. Clearly the issue is the fact the rules have been ill thought out and as such are open to interpretation.

 

No. What about the League's discretion to impose a penalty where a club's debts are reduced in insolvency proceedings? (clause 15(b)(whatever it was) We'll be absolutely bang to rights on that front and it'll be scandalous if the League doesn't act accordingly.

[The Worm]

we should get a deduction, hope we dont though

[Big_Bald_Si]

Guys - I'd like to call upon the example of Derby a couple of seasons back - they had a very similar arrangement to ours, avoided the deduction and changed owners.

 

Hoping the Football League see it as similar enough.

 

I'm also lead to believe that the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool are structured in the same way as us (i.e. parent company owning 100% of shares in the football club) to avoid any potential points deduction years into the future - don't quote me on that though.

[Saintmike666]

Thats utter crap. The rules state and only state that the club must go into administration to face a points deduction. To the letter of the rules we are breaking none. Clearly the issue is the fact the rules have been ill thought out and as such are open to interpretation.

 

No. What about the League's discretion to impose a penalty where a club's debts are reduced in insolvency proceedings? (clause 15(b)(whatever it was) We'll be absolutely bang to rights on that front and it'll be scandalous if the League doesn't act accordingly.

 

Correct, I think that's were people are getting slightly confused. It's my understanding that contrary to popular belief the rules aren't really in our favour on this one.

[sotonist]

I thought the points deduction was in place to stop clubs from wriggling out of the debts they owed to other clubs. I could be completely wrong.

 

As things stand we're only potentially dropping some of the overdraft owed to the gits that have accelerated this situation and Aviva are willing to do a deal.

[Burnsie]

Guys - I'd like to call upon the example of Derby a couple of seasons back - they had a very similar arrangement to ours, avoided the deduction and changed owners.

.

Please, please, please stop bringing this example up. There was no such thing as a points deduction until several months after this occurred. It is not a relevant precedent.

[Saintmike666]

Guys - I'd like to call upon the example of Derby a couple of seasons back - they had a very similar arrangement to ours, avoided the deduction and changed owners.

 

Hoping the Football League see it as similar enough.

 

I'm also lead to believe that the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool are structured in the same way as us (i.e. parent company owning 100% of shares in the football club) to avoid any potential points deduction years into the future - don't quote me on that though.

 

Didn’t Derby go into administration before the 10 point deduction rule became mandatory in any case?

[warsash saint]

Thats utter crap. The rules state and only state that the club must go into administration to face a points deduction. To the letter of the rules we are breaking none. Clearly the issue is the fact the rules have been ill thought out and as such are open to interpretation.

 

How the F is that our fault. It states nothing in those sames rules that if the PLC(holding company) files for administration that unless X% is related to non football related income then the deduction applies.

 

What do people not get about that?

 

Clearly I agree that we are benfitting from the leagues fook up but hey thats life. Moving forward they will tighten the loop hole to stop others using the same one. What is morally wrong with that? Should Derby face a points deduction for retrospective breaking of rule that changed after they committed the offence?

 

Gotta fully agree with the above post. FL should have closed the loophole after Derby went into admin...they didn't - that's not our fault.

[Kenilworthy]

I think this may be academic as I am sure they will find some way to impose a points deduction. I too would feel a little embarassed at getting away the points deduction. But perhaps it would even up all the times that legal matters have not gone our way - such as the number of times we had work permit applications rejected when bigger teams had them nodded through? Or the decision that Pandiani, who scored for Birmingham against us in 2005, was legally registered even though the fax arrived after the transfer deadline?

[hoozonside10]

Guys - I'd like to call upon the example of Derby a couple of seasons back - they had a very similar arrangement to ours, avoided the deduction and changed owners.

 

Hoping the Football League see it as similar enough.

 

I'm also lead to believe that the likes of Man Utd, Chelsea and Liverpool are structured in the same way as us (i.e. parent company owning 100% of shares in the football club) to avoid any potential points deduction years into the future - don't quote me on that though.

 

Unfortunately, I believe Derby went into administration before the 10 point rule came into being.

 

I see no problem with us not being deducted 10 points, and any other club would do exactly the same thing in our situation ;so let's concentrate on winning a few games and let the FL close the loophole after us.

[Legod Third Coming]

I think that the Football League needs a long hard look at itself.

 

Between it and the Premier League (of which I readily concede we were a contributor), they have screwed the funding of football to the extent that the vast majority of clubs are now living on debt.

 

We are simply the first of many outside of the top division (and some within it) who will go 'bust' because we already WERE bust!!!!

 

This is fundamentally because of the distrubution of wealth within football.

 

I am not asking for special treatment - we 'broke the rules' we deserve whatever punishment we get.

 

But the gulf for clubs relegated from the Premiership without a sugar daddy is such that there is no hope for any club attempting to be run within sensible financial parameters.

 

Brian Mawhinny needs to do MORE to ensure that there is more wealth flowing into league clubs. Perhaps that means setting a mininum fee for players bought from League clubs, or a collective bargaining agreement re tv rights for cup games or selling the rights to the League internationally by marketing the heritage of the clubs, who knows.

 

Instead, the League sit and pretend all is well and then sit back and watch century old football clubs fail.

 

Rather than dishing out penalties, how about WORKING ON BEHALF OF THE MEMBERS.

 

I really feel for the fans of Luton Town and thought they were unlucky... who's next I wonder...

[Window Cleaner]

I still think the league will try to cut an under the table deal with us. Go down quietly and start on 0 points next season. We all know what goes on in the corridors of power.

[Saintmike666]

I still think the league will try to cut an under the table deal with us. Go down quietly and start on 0 points next season. We all know what goes on in the corridors of power.

 

You sure they haven't already ;-) It would sure explain last Saturday.

[Legod Third Coming]

I still think the league will try to cut an under the table deal with us. Go down quietly and start on 0 points next season. We all know what goes on in the corridors of power.

 

BREAKING NEWS: That deal WAS cut... on August 4th 2008...

[Window Cleaner]

You sure they haven't already ;-) It would sure explain last Saturday.

 

 

 

Well you can say "I think" but "they have" is a big no-no on the legal front, allegedly.

[St Paul]

We may get away with out the -10, but that wont be the end of it. If we exit admin without a CVA the league can impose any terms they want before we receive our Golden Share back. There is nothing to stop the League giving our share back in return for us agreeing to start the season with -25. This is how they got Bates back after he found his loophole, and was the reason for the -15.You have to sign your right of appeal away and accept their terms to compete the following season.

[jimmysaint7]

i dont think we should get ten points deducted. if derby were able to get away with it then why should we get the deduction. in my eyes they have made a rod for there own backs

[Stoozer]

People get let off for murder on technicalities. I for one think we shouldn't get the 10 point hit if no rule has been broken. Whether that is morally right or not is beside the point.

[Saintmike666]

i dont think we should get ten points deducted. if derby were able to get away with it then why should we get the deduction. in my eyes they have made a rod for there own backs

 

OK, how many times does this need to be said. Derby went into administration BEFORE the 10 point deduction rule came into effect.

[Ponty]

I don't want us to get it and I'm slightly blinkered against any reason as to why we should morally. If we've legally worked the system in our favour then great. If we do have to accept it then let's hope we do enough to avoid relegation on merit and then have to take the 10 points which put us down. I really don't fancy starting next season in L1 on -10.

[Window Cleaner]

OK, how many times does this need to be said. Derby went into administration BEFORE the 10 point deduction rule came into effect.

 

It needs to be said about every 10 minutes, same as every other fact that's on offer.It's a notable trait of this forum that FACTS are constantly submerged in sh*tty speculation of all varieties.

[aintforever]

Unfortunately, I believe Derby went into administration before the 10 point rule came into being.

 

I see no problem with us not being deducted 10 points, and any other club would do exactly the same thing in our situation ;so let's concentrate on winning a few games and let the FL close the loophole after us.

 

I believe we went into administration before any 10 point rule about holding companies came into being.

 

Morally we should be docked, but legally I think we shouldn't get docked and if the League want to close the loophole they should afterwards.

[VectisSaint]

While I agree with the sentiments of the OP, the fact (depending on the outcome of the FL investigation) is that we have not broken any rules. We have been owned by a Holding Company plc for many years (far too many IMHO) and no-one in the FL has worried about this before. In the past the plc has owned other "businesses" (radio station, insurance) and still owns the catering I believe, the fact the the plc has divested itself of most of these other revenue streams to remain in business proves that the plc and SFC are separate.

 

Morally we may not agree with what is happening and won't be too shocked if we get a deduction, but factually, which is important, there is no breach of the rules. I feel confident that the Admins, together with Lowe and Cowen, have been over this with a fine-toothed comb (one of the few positive things related to Lowe). The fact that the FL sees the need to investigate rather than impose a points deduction shows that it is seriously worried that any attempt to impose a points deduction would be met with a vigorous legal argument by those representing the Football Club, something the FL cannot countenance.

 

I think there is even a possibility that we could see 25 teams in the CCC next season.

 

That said, I think we will be relegated anyway. On the evidence of Saturday we have no hope of escaping through football.

 

COYR

[Fitzhugh Fella]

I also agree to a point.

 

However, football is such a competitive industry these days, where the smallest advantages count for so much. The likes of West Ham scandalously cheated their way to Premier League survival and it ended up only costing them £20m when they stood to lose more than double that if they were relegated.

 

You can guarantee that any other club in our situation would be doing everything possible to avoid a points deduction, and therefore I have no reason to argue against SFC from doing likewise.

 

If people don't like us, meh, big deal. We don't make the rules, the Football League knew about our ownership structure when we were relegated in 2005 and gave it the thumbs-up then, and they also knew about the loophole that may become evident if we were to have financial problems. They chose not to close that loophole - it's their problem.

 

Yes, like you Steve I agree to a point. But like you say there is not much morality left in English football and to succeed (if that's what we all want) then you have got to exploit whatever you can. Football is not played on a level playing field anymore!!!!

[derry]

As I've said in the title.

 

Now lets just get the obvious out of the way first, I'd consider myself to be a huge Saints fan. I travel down from were I live in the Midlands as much as possible to get to the home games. In fact this season I've been to 20 games home and away, which I think is a pretty reasonable tally for someone who lives so far away. Just thought I'd clear that one up.

 

BUT none the less, as a football fanatic in general I think that Southampton, like any other club in the land has to abide by the set rules. The fact that its the 'Holding Company' that has gone into administration and not the club can surely only be viewed as a technicality in this case, after all SFC is SLH in every way but the name.

 

I think its incredibly sad its come to this, but ultimately why should we get away without punishment when others haven't? I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion! Either way, I don't think that we'll stay up this season, there's just not enough about the team to do it. Which would mean starting next season in League One on minus 10 points. Well I say so be it! Its the rules, its morally right and as much as it pains me to say, its the way it should be.

 

I agree with a lot said in this article -

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/04/07/football_league_must_deduct_10_points_from_southampton

 

But its also my opinion that Saints will come back, maybe not straight away, but in time with the right backers this great club will rise back up from the depths of League 1 and eventually re-claim its place in the Premiership, we just have to put up with a little more pain first...

 

 

I understand your position but I think you should consider the followng.

 

SFC were bought out in a reverse takeover by Secure Retirement, as a result SFC became a quoted public company.

 

The league/FA would not allow a football club to operate as a public company because the public company had to comply with public company rules not League rules eg not allowed to sue the football authorities but would accept the use of tribunals. The League required a completely separate independent company to be formed to run the football club.

 

Therefore to comply with the league criteria, SFC became SLH Ltd a plc then a wholly owned company became SFC Ltd, the football club in the league.

 

Irrespective of the wish to be even handed there are two important points, firstly the league themselves have caused this situation by insisting on the separation, secondly the football club is not in administration.

 

This enquiry is because the board, club directors, are not qualified to make a decision. Anybody that thinks the league haven't already legally dissected and come to a conclusion on this rule are naive.

 

They do know the answer but are ducking the decision to avoid flack from other clubs who cannot sue the league under the rules. That is why a legal enquiry has been convened so that under the league rules the committee can hold their hands up and say there is nothing that can be done.

 

It's not a holding company issue it's because SLH is a plc. If the league get this wrong they will get the pants sued off them by a public company.

 

The league know that and I bet the result will be "they are separate but we are going to look at the rules again."

Edited 7 April, 2009 by derry

[solentstars]

I understand your position but I think you should consider the followng.

 

SFC were bought out in a reverse takeover by Secure Retirement, as a result SFC became a quoted public company.

 

The league/FA would not allow a football club to operate as a public company because the public company had to comply with public company rules not League rules eg not allowed to sue the football authorities but would accept the use of tribunals. The League required a completely separate independent company to be formed to run the football club.

 

Therefore to comply with the league criteria, SFC became SLH Ltd a plc then a wholly owned company became SFC Ltd, the football club in the league.

 

Irrespective of the wish to be even handed there are two important points, firstly the league themselves have caused this situation by insisting on the separation, secondly the football club is not in administration.

 

This enquiry is because the board, club directors, are not qualified to make a decision. Anybody that thinks the league haven't already legally dissected and come to a conclusion on this rule are naive.

 

They do know the answer but are ducking the decision to avoid flack from other clubs who cannot sue the league under the rules. That is why a legal enquiry has been convened so that under the league rules the committee can hold their hands up and say there is nothing that can be done.

 

It's not a holding company issue it's because SLH is a plc. If the league get this wrong they will get the pants sued off them by a public company.

 

The league know that and I bet the result will be "they are separate but we are going to look at the rules again."

 

i think you have spot on with reply thats how i see it.

[Leslie Charteris]

Great post, Derry.

 

WE (the fans) don't deserve the punishment. The players don't deserve the punishment. All the people who work at SMS don't deserve the punishment. As has happened at Luton, Bournemouth and elsewhere, the people who do desrve punishment get off scot free and live to form other companies, etc, etc..

[Junior Mullet]

As I've said in the title.

 

Now lets just get the obvious out of the way first, I'd consider myself to be a huge Saints fan. I travel down from were I live in the Midlands as much as possible to get to the home games. In fact this season I've been to 20 games home and away, which I think is a pretty reasonable tally for someone who lives so far away. Just thought I'd clear that one up.

 

BUT none the less, as a football fanatic in general I think that Southampton, like any other club in the land has to abide by the set rules. The fact that its the 'Holding Company' that has gone into administration and not the club can surely only be viewed as a technicality in this case, after all SFC is SLH in every way but the name.

 

I think its incredibly sad its come to this, but ultimately why should we get away without punishment when others haven't? I know this isn't going to be a popular opinion! Either way, I don't think that we'll stay up this season, there's just not enough about the team to do it. Which would mean starting next season in League One on minus 10 points. Well I say so be it! Its the rules, its morally right and as much as it pains me to say, its the way it should be.

 

I agree with a lot said in this article -

 

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/samgreen/blog/2009/04/07/football_league_must_deduct_10_points_from_southampton

 

But its also my opinion that Saints will come back, maybe not straight away, but in time with the right backers this great club will rise back up from the depths of League 1 and eventually re-claim its place in the Premiership, we just have to put up with a little more pain first...

 

You cant go around making up the rules after the event mate, there would be chaos. Trying telling any business that they should be penalised, pay tax, undo a deal because whilst they had had regard to the law and didnt infringe it they are morally wrong.

 

******.

 

The FL should remove this loophole once Saints have been let off if they are really that bothered.

 

Rules are rules - we should all have certainty that if we abide by them we will be fine.

 

The PLC and the club Ltd co are two entirely separate people. It's the same as Gaydamack going bankrupt - that it quite different to Pompey fc going into administration. It astonishes me that people simply cant get to grips with this after all this time.

[St Landrew]

I don't what all the fuss about deducting points is about. IF Saints have breached the FL rules, then points should be deducted, and no doubt will. If Saints haven't breached the FL rules, then points will probably not be deducted. There has been a set precident, and it is Derby County, who weren't deducted points when their parent company went in administration.

 

Anyone wringing their hands over the moral rights and wrongs will not change a thing. Just wait to see what happens.

[saint63]

Great post, Derry.

 

WE (the fans) don't deserve the punishment. The players don't deserve the punishment. All the people who work at SMS don't deserve the punishment. As has happened at Luton, Bournemouth and elsewhere, the people who do desrve punishment get off scot free and live to form other companies, etc, etc..

 

It would be ironic if we - the supporters - had redress against those responsible for the financial mess. Not likely but worth a muse....