Saints VS the Football League

SE7 Expat

Now I might need some help to understand why yet again its seems that the football league are kicking a club why they are down ?

The Pinnacle group were ready to take over (apparently) but the league won't remove the 10points deduction because they got into administration. Isn't easier to say for 1 season even if they end up in a promotion place they cannot be promoted ? All I can see its partly due to some football league rules that they are in this mess (obviously only 10%).

Good luck Southampton

KBslittlesis

But then from the flip side. A consortium, led by someone who is supposed to love the club, are willing to let the -10pts issue stand in the way between a team playing in the league or going out of existance altogether!? I was led to believe the sticking point was the Football League wanted whoever took over the club to guarentee they wouldnt take them to court over the points issue? Either way, i feel for their fans.

nth_london_addick

they deserved their 10 point deduction the same as we would have the howwould it have looked to Luton and Leeds if the FL said to Southampton ok we will get rid of your deduction

it is not kick in them when they are down it is merely following rules i hope they come through it as i dont like to see any club go out of existance but if they do i am sure we could run a bus down to them and call it the hampshire express ;-)

Henry Irving

It does seem harsh but they are the rules they agreed to.

Did Soton fight for Luton or Leeds or Rotherham or Bournemouth etc etc to have their deductions reduced?

If a mega rich buyer takes over Soton and they so how dodge the penalty would that be fair on the other 23 teams in the division who have avoided going into admin? The alternative is going back to what happened before with Leicester when they dodged the debt on the stadium but carried on buying players and got promoted. Unfair advantage.

Feel for the Saints fans (other than the ones who introduced themselves at St Mary's and the Lib Club) but there are good reasons for the rules.

seth plum

All points taken, however my fading memory seems to remember a quite recent event where Tottenham wriggled out of a points deduction. One rule for....etc etc?

Friend Or Defoe

How can they complain about the points deduction? The rules were there at the start of the season.

Henry Irving

[cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]All points taken, however my fading memory seems to remember a quite recent event where Tottenham wriggled out of a points deduction. One rule for....etc etc?

True but the Prem doesn't have the 10 point rule and yes they were Spurs. Ditto West Ham where the Premier League didn't show the bottle that The FL have.

McLovin

The other side of this though is that teams like Leicester abused the situation and merrily popped into administration to wipe out the debts that they built up building their ground and on rubbish players - 5M Matthew Jones being a great example. That meant that clubs that spent conservatively and within budget were at a disadvantage and were now paying more for credit because nobody wants to lend into an industry where administration is seen as an easy way out.

Luton totally deserved what happened to them. They spent a couple of years merrily popping in and out of admin, ripping off employees, businesses and other clubs as they did. Shame for the fans, but clubs have to see that there's a consequence on the pitch to this kind of skullduggery/incompetence.

If the league back down on Saints it will be the wrong thing, even if that kills them.

Oggy Red

As I said on another thread, it's only a 10 point deduction.

It might cost them promotion ...... but if the club is run properly it won't cost them their existance.

In any case, a couple of years ago Leeds were handed a 15 point deduction.
After losing their appeal, they knuckled down and the team got off to a flying start - made up the entire 15 point deduction within 6 or 7 games and had a cracking season.

Yes, they would have been automatically promoted, but still made the play-offs.
So it was still in their own hands to win promotion.

Same with Southampton - a 10 point deduction is even more manageable, 3 wins and a draw then it's wiped out,
which creates the momentum of a winning mentality to have a great season. Depends on their attitude.

SE7 Expat

All good point but if -10 points decides the life and death of a club I think its pretty harsh... its not about punishing the club in this case its about destroying it and with that all their fans.

I know for sure that the -10 is not the most important for Le Tiss but its normal that the investors don't want them.

Friend Or Defoe

If you're going to punish a club you have to do it properly, and the only way to do that is by taking away points.

The new rules of punishing clubs who don't operate correctly is why traditionally big clubs like Leeds & Sheff Wed have dropped down the leagues and Hull, Doncaster & Peterborough have gone up.

BBClaus

[cite]Posted By: SE7 Expat[/cite]All good point but if -10 points decides the life and death of a club I think its pretty harsh... its not about punishing the club in this case its about destroying it and with that all their fans.

I know for sure that the -10 is not the most important for Le Tiss but its normal that the investors don't want them.

the FA have to be consistent and if the backers are serious about the club then they will accept the points penalty. i have no blame for the FA in this situation at all. They set the right precedent and are sticking to it.

i agree with Mclovin about teams like leicester abusing the system. The points deduction is a good idea because clubs that go through administration emerge from it in a stronger financial position than well-run rivals because they just write off large chunks of their debts. So while southampton will suffer by being on -10 they may well soon be in a stronger financial position than teams like charlton who are managing their debts.

I seem to remember that when Leeds went through this same thing when Ken Bates took over, they signed an agreement saying they wouldn't appeal the penalty and then did so anyway. So that maybe explains why the FA are being so careful this time.

I'm a little fed up with the head of the pinnacle consortium and le tiss trying to shift attention (and blame) on to the FA

SE7 Expat

[cite]Posted By: BBClaus[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: SE7 Expat[/cite]All good point but if -10 points decides the life and death of a club I think its pretty harsh... its not about punishing the club in this case its about destroying it and with that all their fans.

I know for sure that the -10 is not the most important for Le Tiss but its normal that the investors don't want them.

the FA have to be consistent and if the backers are serious about the club then they will accept the points penalty. i have no blame for the FA in this situation at all. They set the right precedent and are sticking to it.

i agree with Mclovin about teams like leicester abusing the system. The points deduction is a good idea because clubs that go through administration emerge from it in a stronger financial position than well-run rivals because they just write off large chunks of their debts. So while southampton will suffer by being on -10 they may well soon be in a stronger financial position that teams like us who are managing our debts (like charlton).

I seem to remember that when Leeds went through this same thing when Ken Bates took over, they signed an agreement saying they wouldn't appeal the penalty and then did so anyway. So that maybe explains why the FA are being so careful this time.

sure but will you say that if no one saves the club and it disapears. Also look at Luton.... I find it a great shame not for the actual club but for the fans

Oggy Red

[cite]Posted By: SE7 Expat[/cite]All good point but if -10 points decides the life and death of a club I think its pretty harsh... its not about punishing the club in this case its about destroying it and with that all their fans.

I know for sure that the -10 is not the most important for Le Tiss but its normal that the investors don't want them.

But the 10 point deduction in itself doesn't decide the life and death of the club.

It might make the difference in regaining automatic promotion, but if the club's is run properly, then there is no reason why they couldn't manage to qualify for the play-offs, so promotion is still well within their own hands.


The points deduction has already been made, so how can incoming investors come in afterwards and try to revoke a previous ruling made by the Football League against the previous administration .... ?

If Le Tissier and co decide themselves to send Southampton to the wall - rather than use the 10 point deduction to motivate the club, then it is apparent they don't have the interests of the club truly at heart.

JohnBoyUK

[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]

[cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]All points taken, however my fading memory seems to remember a quite recent event where Tottenham wriggled out of a points deduction. One rule for....etc etc?

True but the Prem doesn't have the 10 point rule and yes they were Spurs. Ditto West Ham where the Premier League didn't show the bottle that The FL have.

Spurs never went into administration though. Spurs were found guilty of "Financial Irregularities" during former chairman Irving Scholar's regime) and got a £2m fine along with an initial 6 points deduction and banned from the FA Cup. Sugar appealed and got the points deduction and Cup ban overturned in favour of a £8m fine. Given £8m was an awful lot of money in 1993 (more than what we got for selling Gazza to Lazio and three times what we bought Klinsmann for in the same period - a good comparison being Milan paid Marseille a world-record fee of £10m for Jean-Pierre Papin around the same sort of time) so to say Spurs wriggled out of it is somewhat of an exaggeration.

Then bearing in mind West Ham were only fined £6m 15 years later for cheating on the pitch for fielding Tevez and breaking the rules does sort of indicate the significance of the fine Spurs paid out!

Kap10

if the league were to waive the 10 points I am sure that Bates for one would be round there with a summons before you could say FA

seth plum

[quote][cite]Posted By: JohnBoyUK[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: seth plum[/cite]All points taken, however my fading memory seems to remember a quite recent event where Tottenham wriggled out of a points deduction. One rule for....etc etc?[/quote]

True but the Prem doesn't have the 10 point rule and yes they were Spurs. Ditto West Ham where the Premier League didn't show the bottle that The FL have.[/quote]

Spurs never went into administration though. Spurs were found guilty of "Financial Irregularities" during former chairman Irving Scholar's regime) and got a £2m fine along with an initial 6 points deduction and banned from the FA Cup. Sugar appealed and got the points deduction and Cup ban overturned in favour of a £8m fine. Given £8m was an awful lot of money in 1993 (more than what we got for selling Gazza to Lazio and three times what we bought Klinsmann for in the same period - a good comparison being Milan paid Marseille a world-record fee of £10m for Jean-Pierre Papin around the same sort of time) so to say Spurs wriggled out of it is somewhat of an exaggeration.

Then bearing in mind West Ham were only fined £6m 15 years later for cheating on the pitch for fielding Tevez and breaking the rules does sort of indicate the significance of the fine Spurs paid out![/quote]


Using the term wriggled seems pretty appropriate and quite kind doesn't it?

BBClaus

[cite]Posted By: SE7 Expat[/cite]sure but will you say that if no one saves the club and it disapears. Also look at Luton.... I find it a great shame not for the actual club but for the fans

i will yeah. I hope they survive but if they don't then it would be wrong to blame the FA for following the rules. If they let them off then it will just let more teams get away with doing the same thing. The consortiums trying to buy saints must have known the situation and must have known the FA couldn't and wouldn't back down. maybe they've just been wasting peoples time.

Oggy Red

[cite]Posted By: BBClaus[/cite]


The consortiums trying to buy saints must have known the situation and must have known the FA couldn't and wouldn't back down. maybe they've just been wasting peoples time.

Exactly, Santa.

Couldn't have put it better.