Grounds for Appeal

[Beer Engine]

Section 12.3.1 (b) of the League Rules states that any Club which becomes the subject of an Administration order will be deducted 10 points.

 

In Section 1 "Club" is defined as any football club that is a member of the League.

 

The League report accompanying the decision to deduct 10 points concluded that: "The three entities (the Holding Company, SFC and the stadium company) comprise the football club and they are inextricably linked as one economic entity."

 

The League have taken the view that a "football club" is a separate legal entity from the company or companies that own the club's assets and/or take responsibility for discharging the club's liabilities (eg paying the players and repaying the mortgage on the stadium).

 

This view is at odds with other provisions of the League Rules which are consistently formulated on the assumption that Clubs ARE companies (as opposed to being owned by companies). See for example Appendix IV concerning the "Fit and Proper Persons Test" which refers to "Directors" as persons "registered as a director or secretary of the Club with the Registrar of Companies".

 

If the entity registered as a Member of the Football League and which holds a Share in the Football League Limited is Southampton Football Club Limited then: (a) Section 12.3.1 of the League Rules does not apply to Southampton Football Club Limited because it is not in Administration; and, (b) the Football League Rules do not apply to Southampton Leisure Holdings plc because SLH is not a Member of the Football League.

 

Appeal

 

Section 12.3.5 of the League Rules provides that a Club may only appeal against an automatic deduction of points on the grounds that the Club went into Administration owing to an event that was both unforeseeable and unavoidable. This would seem to rule out the possibility of an appeal even if we contend that the League's decision is perverse.

 

In any event, who could lodge the appeal? None of SFC Limited, SHL plc or the company that owns the stadium can lodge an appeal on their own because none of those entities comprise the whole of a "Club" as that term has been interpreted by the Football League.

 

At the core of this problem is the question: "What is Southampton Football Club?".

 

Assuming that SFC Limited holds the League Share then the best bet would be for SFC Limited to ask the High Court to to review the decision of the Football League and set it aside - on the grounds that (a) it is not a reasonable decision that any governing sports body could reasonably have taken and (b) the involvement in the decision of influential figures at other clubs interested in the relegation battle (Norwich) is a breach of the principles of Natural Justice.

 

It is commonly believed that the High Court has little if any jurisdiction to review the decisions of sports' governing bodies - but that may not apply in cases where the aggrieved party (SFC) has no other avenue of redress.

[Gingeletiss]

Informative.........thank you.

[The Incongruous Monk]

According to the Insolvency Policy of the FL as published here http://www.football-league.co.uk/staticFiles/f2/8f/0,,10794~102386,00.pdf. We could be kicked out of the League if this isn't sorted soon.

 

A club will not be eligible for membership of The Football League if by the second Saturday in May

in the current year it:-

· Has a manager, receiver or administrative receiver appointed in respect of that club or any part of its property.

· Has had a petition presented and not discharged in respect of it for an administration order or if an administration order has been a) applied for; or b) made and not discharged in respect of that club.

· Has had a winding up order made and not discharged in respect of that club.

· Has passed a resolution for the winding up of that club.

· Has proposed or entered into an arrangement with its creditors or some part of them in respect of the payment of its debts or part of them as a Company Voluntary Arrangement under the Insolvency Act 1986 or Scheme of Arrangement under the Companies Act 1985 (in each case as amended by subsequent legislation or Regulation) and that arrangement has not been agreed by the club's creditors or approved by the Court.

 

Also I note from above that not being in Administration is no grounds for appeal against the docking of points due to being in administration. Nice.

[OLYMPIC]

I just saw the FA spokesman on the news and he said that as far as they were concerned Saints had no grounds on which to appeal there decision.

Now if this is the case and we push ahead and appeal anyway could the FA dock us even more points?

[badgerx16]

I just saw the FA spokesman on the news and he said that as far as they were concerned Saints had no grounds on which to appeal there decision.

Now if this is the case and we push ahead and appeal anyway could the FA dock us even more points?

I don't think they can deduct points because we are challenging them, but I can see them witholding the 'golden share' that allows us to play in their sand-pit. I think the additional deductions would come in from financial irregularities or non-fulfillment of fixtures.

[Mole]

I don't think they can deduct points because we are challenging them, but I can see them witholding the 'golden share' that allows us to play in their sand-pit. I think the additional deductions would come in from financial irregularities or non-fulfillment of fixtures.

 

I'm not disputing this point, but it's a bit strange if they could effectively ban us from the FL if we dared to appeal.

 

If they can do this i'd tread carefully, but if they can't we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

 

Our new owners (esp if two consortiums combine) will have a few quid so i say let's get some good lawyers and make Mawhinney squirm.

[badgerx16]

I'm not disputing this point, but it's a bit strange if they could effectively ban us from the FL if we dared to appeal.

 

If they can do this i'd tread carefully, but if they can't we have nothing to lose and everything to gain.

 

Isn't this what they did to Leeds though ?

[CB Fry]

It doesn't matter what the rules say.

 

We've got ten points deducted and we won't win an appeal.

 

We don't actually have a legal right to be part of the Football League you know. They could kick us out - it's a private members club and the members make the rules as they go along.

 

And, as others have said, they could just punish us more for wasting their time with pointless appealling.

 

At the end of the day we had a dopey little ruse which was never ever going to work, we got two weeks grace while the League mooched about "investigating", and then we got the punishment we had coming to us.

 

We deserve ten points deduction according to the rules we helped put into place and we got it.

[Lord Duckhunter]

It doesn't matter what the rules say.

 

We've got ten points deducted and we won't win an appeal.

 

We don't actually have a legal right to be part of the Football League you know. They could kick us out - it's a private members club and the members make the rules as they go along.

 

And, as others have said, they could just punish us more for wasting their time with pointless appealling.

 

At the end of the day we had a dopey little ruse which was never ever going to work, we got two weeks grace while the League mooched about "investigating", and then we got the punishment we had coming to us.

 

We deserve ten points deduction according to the rules we helped put into place and we got it.

 

Bang on the money.

 

We need to move on and try to stay up so the 10 points are deducted this season. It would give us a small glimmer of pride and would help future generations of supporters to claim, we were only relegated by events and rules off the pitch. Unfortunatly I cant see the players having enough fight and belief to win the remaining 2.

 

People talk about 6 point games, but these are 10 point games for us.

[Soggy Bottom]

They don't want us to appeal, because it's going to open a can of worms. They want this put to bed as soon as possible, you watch them change the rules as soon as the dust settles.

 

 

It sounds like a boys asking why he needs to pick up his coat and the parent says "because I said so, that's why"

[LestWeForget]

Section 12.3.1 (b) of the League Rules states that any Club which becomes the subject of an Administration order will be deducted 10 points.

 

In Section 1 "Club" is defined as any football club that is a member of the League.

 

The League report accompanying the decision to deduct 10 points concluded that: "The three entities (the Holding Company, SFC and the stadium company) comprise the football club and they are inextricably linked as one economic entity."

 

The League have taken the view that a "football club" is a separate legal entity from the company or companies that own the club's assets and/or take responsibility for discharging the club's liabilities (eg paying the players and repaying the mortgage on the stadium).

 

This view is at odds with other provisions of the League Rules which are consistently formulated on the assumption that Clubs ARE companies (as opposed to being owned by companies). See for example Appendix IV concerning the "Fit and Proper Persons Test" which refers to "Directors" as persons "registered as a director or secretary of the Club with the Registrar of Companies".

 

If the entity registered as a Member of the Football League and which holds a Share in the Football League Limited is Southampton Football Club Limited then: (a) Section 12.3.1 of the League Rules does not apply to Southampton Football Club Limited because it is not in Administration; and, (b) the Football League Rules do not apply to Southampton Leisure Holdings plc because SLH is not a Member of the Football League.

 

Appeal

 

Section 12.3.5 of the League Rules provides that a Club may only appeal against an automatic deduction of points on the grounds that the Club went into Administration owing to an event that was both unforeseeable and unavoidable. This would seem to rule out the possibility of an appeal even if we contend that the League's decision is perverse.

 

In any event, who could lodge the appeal? None of SFC Limited, SHL plc or the company that owns the stadium can lodge an appeal on their own because none of those entities comprise the whole of a "Club" as that term has been interpreted by the Football League.

 

At the core of this problem is the question: "What is Southampton Football Club?".

 

Assuming that SFC Limited holds the League Share then the best bet would be for SFC Limited to ask the High Court to to review the decision of the Football League and set it aside - on the grounds that (a) it is not a reasonable decision that any governing sports body could reasonably have taken and (b) the involvement in the decision of influential figures at other clubs interested in the relegation battle (Norwich) is a breach of the principles of Natural Justice.

 

It is commonly believed that the High Court has little if any jurisdiction to review the decisions of sports' governing bodies - but that may not apply in cases where the aggrieved party (SFC) has no other avenue of redress.

 

Not the case - Neil Doncaster did not vote on the decision. So please stop harping on about conspiracy theories

[Beer Engine]

Morally, the League have got the decision right even though, from a legalistic viewpoint, their rules don't adequately address the holding company situation.

 

Speaking for myself, I think we ought to accept the deduction and move on.

[VectisSaint]

It doesn't matter what the rules say.

 

We've got ten points deducted and we won't win an appeal.

 

We don't actually have a legal right to be part of the Football League you know. They could kick us out - it's a private members club and the members make the rules as they go along.

 

And, as others have said, they could just punish us more for wasting their time with pointless appealling.

 

At the end of the day we had a dopey little ruse which was never ever going to work, we got two weeks grace while the League mooched about "investigating", and then we got the punishment we had coming to us.

 

We deserve ten points deduction according to the rules we helped put into place and we got it.

This is the way i see it as well. There is a huge risk in appealing that the punishment will be increased, as CB Fry says, there is nothing to stop the FL expelling us from their organization. We do not have a leg to stand on. We have been shafted by not going into Administration before the deadline. Lowe's arrogance has caused this, believing he was not only right but that he knew better than the FL what would happen. Forget it, accept what has happened and move on.

[Nolan]

Not the case - Neil Doncaster did not vote on the decision. So please stop harping on about conspiracy theories

 

So what if he didn't vote on the decision.... his presence in the meeting and at the discussions, meant he was able to influence the decision.

 

from Norwich Evening News

 

Neil Doncaster Said:

 

"As one of the three Championship clubs representatives on the Football League board I along with the others seven directors discussed the Southampton situation at length, I declared an interest as is proper to do so and did not vote on the Southampton question."

Edited 24 April, 2009 by Nolan

[kelkel31]

They don't want us to appeal, because it's going to open a can of worms. They want this put to bed as soon as possible, you watch them change the rules as soon as the dust settles.

 

 

It sounds like a boys asking why he needs to pick up his coat and the parent says "because I said so, that's why"

 

this is bang on the money, the football league are relying on idle threats of increased sanctions and even being thrown out of the league( i believe one of there laws that they would not be able to enforce is that no member club can sue the football league). as i understand it in the case of leeds, they made threats and leeds backed down.

 

http://msnsport.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11700_5228800,00.html

 

read this on sky sports, i watched it live and is an accurate transcript of what he said, that they consider all football clubs to be there own legal entity in the own right. tell me if you asked they LSE if the football club was in administration and they will tell you NO!

 

the football league dosnt have a leg to stand on, they are puffing out there chest and somebody need to grow a pair of balls and bring them down a peg or two, time for real change in the governing bodys of english football is now, lets get football people that know about football running our game, id be happy if saints are the ones who step up to the plate!

 

IMHO!

[saintbletch]

It doesn't matter what the rules say.

 

We've got ten points deducted and we won't win an appeal.

 

We don't actually have a legal right to be part of the Football League you know. They could kick us out - it's a private members club and the members make the rules as they go along.

 

And, as others have said, they could just punish us more for wasting their time with pointless appealling.

 

At the end of the day we had a dopey little ruse which was never ever going to work, we got two weeks grace while the League mooched about "investigating", and then we got the punishment we had coming to us.

 

We deserve ten points deduction according to the rules we helped put into place and we got it.

 

I tend to agree with this. That said if the rules can be exploited I wouldn't be surprised to see us try. If we didn't appeal I would imagine there would be many who who ask why.

 

I have two questions about the Plc and FC being inextricably linked.

 

Ironically, would we have been better off with that white elephant of a radio station and Southampton Insurance Services? In that this would have been a non-football revenue stream.

 

Secondly, if it were possible ( forgetting the practicalities ) to host a concert at St. Marys every 7 days. Surely the Plc would be receiving a strong revenue stream not related to the football club?

 

So us failing to host concerts every 7 days might have been the reason that the Plc is in administration rather than our football team's ineptitude.

 

I'm sure our appeal will be full of such straw clutching.

[derry]

Section 12.3.1 (b) of the League Rules states that any Club which becomes the subject of an Administration order will be deducted 10 points.

 

In Section 1 "Club" is defined as any football club that is a member of the League.

 

The League report accompanying the decision to deduct 10 points concluded that: "The three entities (the Holding Company, SFC and the stadium company) comprise the football club and they are inextricably linked as one economic entity."

 

The League have taken the view that a "football club" is a separate legal entity from the company or companies that own the club's assets and/or take responsibility for discharging the club's liabilities (eg paying the players and repaying the mortgage on the stadium).

 

This view is at odds with other provisions of the League Rules which are consistently formulated on the assumption that Clubs ARE companies (as opposed to being owned by companies). See for example Appendix IV concerning the "Fit and Proper Persons Test" which refers to "Directors" as persons "registered as a director or secretary of the Club with the Registrar of Companies".

 

If the entity registered as a Member of the Football League and which holds a Share in the Football League Limited is Southampton Football Club Limited then: (a) Section 12.3.1 of the League Rules does not apply to Southampton Football Club Limited because it is not in Administration; and, (b) the Football League Rules do not apply to Southampton Leisure Holdings plc because SLH is not a Member of the Football League.

 

Appeal

 

Section 12.3.5 of the League Rules provides that a Club may only appeal against an automatic deduction of points on the grounds that the Club went into Administration owing to an event that was both unforeseeable and unavoidable. This would seem to rule out the possibility of an appeal even if we contend that the League's decision is perverse.

 

In any event, who could lodge the appeal? None of SFC Limited, SHL plc or the company that owns the stadium can lodge an appeal on their own because none of those entities comprise the whole of a "Club" as that term has been interpreted by the Football League.

 

At the core of this problem is the question: "What is Southampton Football Club?".

 

Assuming that SFC Limited holds the League Share then the best bet would be for SFC Limited to ask the High Court to to review the decision of the Football League and set it aside - on the grounds that (a) it is not a reasonable decision that any governing sports body could reasonably have taken and (b) the involvement in the decision of influential figures at other clubs interested in the relegation battle (Norwich) is a breach of the principles of Natural Justice.

 

It is commonly believed that the High Court has little if any jurisdiction to review the decisions of sports' governing bodies - but that may not apply in cases where the aggrieved party (SFC) has no other avenue of redress.

 

Excellent post, SLH could take action against the league on the grounds that it's value for sale had been damaged by the league's actions which are not in accordance with the letter of their rules. Thereby increasing the losses to creditors and shareholders.

[Highfield Saint]

this is bang on the money, the football league are relying on idle threats of increased sanctions and even being thrown out of the league( i believe one of there laws that they would not be able to enforce is that no member club can sue the football league). as i understand it in the case of leeds, they made threats and leeds backed down.

 

http://msnsport.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11700_5228800,00.html

 

read this on sky sports, i watched it live and is an accurate transcript of what he said, that they consider all football clubs to be there own legal entity in the own right. tell me if you asked they LSE if the football club was in administration and they will tell you NO!

 

the football league dosnt have a leg to stand on, they are puffing out there chest and somebody need to grow a pair of balls and bring them down a peg or two, time for real change in the governing bodys of english football is now, lets get football people that know about football running our game, id be happy if saints are the ones who step up to the plate!

 

IMHO!

 

The FL won't actually care unless we stay up as it will be only then that there will be any real ramifications - If we are relegated anyway it will just be a question of how many points will we start with and this can be argued over the summer.

 

If we stay up and the 10 pt deduction relegates us then the implications of a successful appeal will scare the FL to death.

 

Wouldn't it be ironic??

[Flyer]

Excellent post, SLH could take action against the league on the grounds that it's value for sale had been damaged by the league's actions which are not in accordance with the letter of their rules. Thereby increasing the losses to creditors and shareholders.

 

No, their rules state they can do exactly as they have.

 

Rule F that was posted here. They can take off points if for all purposes, they club is in admin without being legally in admin and that is exactly the case here.

 

At the very best, Saints would come out of it with more points knocked off, at the worst, they be relegated again or thrown out of the league.

[Justin C]

I think if we go down with out the 10 points coming off this season then we have more chance of winning the appeal and starting on zero next year. However if we stay up and then they take the 10 points off us we don't have much chance of winning an appeal as it would open a can of worms for the teams around us. So in mu opinion we will start next year at zero either way. Just my opinion.

[aintforever]

I think if we go down with out the 10 points coming off this season then we have more chance of winning the appeal and starting on zero next year. However if we stay up and then they take the 10 points off us we don't have much chance of winning an appeal as it would open a can of worms for the teams around us. So in mu opinion we will start next year at zero either way. Just my opinion.

 

Wouldn't make any difference, if we start next year on zero, despite finishing in the bottom 3, it would open a can of worms with every team in League 1.

 

We will be on -10 next season, -25 if no CVA is agreed in time.

[Window Cleaner]

No, their rules state they can do exactly as they have.

 

Rule F that was posted here. They can take off points if for all purposes, they club is in admin without being legally in admin and that is exactly the case here.

 

At the very best, Saints would come out of it with more points knocked off, at the worst, they be relegated again or thrown out of the league.

 

Our best ploy is to appeal pleading 'exceptional circumstances' ie our players were a lot crappier than we first thought.

[Whitey Grandad]

So what if he didn't vote on the decision.... his presence in the meeting and at the discussions, meant he was able to influence the decision.

 

from Norwich Evening News

 

Neil Doncaster Said:

 

"As one of the three Championship clubs representatives on the Football League board I along with the others seven directors discussed the Southampton situation at length, I declared an interest as is proper to do so and did not vote on the Southampton question."

I should have thought that if he was involved in discussions of any sort regarding out position then that was a perfectly valid ground for appeal. Just excusing himself from a vote is not enough, and he knows it.

[bridge too far]

I should have thought that if he was involved in discussions of any sort regarding out position then that was a perfectly valid ground for appeal. Just excusing himself from a vote is not enough, and he knows it.

 

It would be interesting to see the FL's Standing Orders (if they have any). Most organisations require a Declaration of Interest to be declared BEFORE pertinent discussions take place, not just for a vote.

[Whitey Grandad]

It would be interesting to see the FL's Standing Orders (if they have any). Most organisations require a Declaration of Interest to be declared BEFORE pertinent discussions take place, not just for a vote.

In most organisations the person involved would walk out of the room.

[bridge too far]

In most organisations the person involved would walk out of the room.

 

Exactly my point

[The9]

It is commonly believed that the High Court has little if any jurisdiction to review the decisions of sports' governing bodies - but that may not apply in cases where the aggrieved party (SFC) has no other avenue of redress.

 

Tell that to Newport County, banned from playing football in South Wales for refusing to join the (now) Welsh Premier League until they went to the High Court and beat the FA of Wales on the grounds of "restraint of trade".

 

Trouble is even if we win an appeal the FL can just penalise us for taking them to court anyway, cos even that's against their rules.