Search results

i noticed it too. is this just down to the author.. not understanding the rules, or will they escape the points penalty because technically they are under a CVA at the start of the season, albeit under challenge?

that does look bad. but... whats the debt owed to HMRC? wouldnt it be convienient if this new debt meant the HMRC share is less than 25% required to block a CVA?

sell to who? there was barely any transfer activity in the window, i cant see any club suddenly pulling a couple million from behind the filling cabinet to buy a player now, especially from Pompey who are rather shite.

compared to the quality they've been putting out upto now which had them 8 points adrift? :lolol: actually, seriously this the sort of reason why its only a 9/10 pts penalty, it gives clubs a chance if they are up for it, keeping them competitve. they get more money based on final league...

even without the deduction they have no hope. your predictions are hoplessly optimistic, i cant see them getting anything from any game other than the home games to hull, blackburn and wolves and maybe a cheeky result away. 10 points max and they are 8 adrift.

why is it that these people treat such rules like legal issues that have case law or wording loop holes? its part of the agreement to play in the league, theres nothing to test.

i hadnt thought of matchday staff, that would add up. but even then its a stretch to get to 600 unless its like 3-400 stewards. maybe they do, wheres the resident steward for their input? as for contracts, i would expect it has to be paid in full if cancelled, unless the player agrees...

i got the impression from the Palarse situation that the transfer ban is automatically lifted for a club in administration. the real problem, either way, is who would want any of the Pompey players ???

yes indeed. its one of the potential problems if UEFA go in heavy handed with regulations, not accounting for the different corporate governance between countries.

it is interesting. It seems to suggest that administration will prompt forward payments of TV money and permit sales outside the window (presumbably a specific rule allows this under administration). with relegation a certainty, can they invoke clauses to offload players? as i cant see teams...

to be fair, its due to two seperate authorities. there is no FA rule on the subject, maybe something that will come out of it. after all, the FL changed the rules as unforeseen circumstances arose, i suppose no one has ever thought of the scenario you suggest. also i cant help but think...

thats what happend at Leeds. but they had, in retrospect, set up the ownership and debt such that they could out vote the HMRC. I really dont think Portsmouth has been that organised, lurching from crisis to crisis. would they have gone for administration earlier? Does moving to...

problem with "dump the debt" is that if the HMRC doesnt play ball, the company will be wound up. they got tucked up on the Leeds situation and i think they are looking to make a point on Pompey. unless pompey have a similar secret offshore creditor who can out-vote the HMRC (ie have a bigger...

why are are insults necessary? whats the problem? for youth im thinking more WestHam days obviously, though i recall a few young players blooded in big games at Pompey too. as for the rest of the track record, he left Bournmouth 20 years ago, when did they have their financial trouble...

surely a club has more than one source of advise and know when to say "no, the budget is spent". seriously, did Redknapp kill a child or somthing, i can never fathom the dislike and hatred. few dodgy deals? so what, not my business. teams play good football, gets players going, brings on...

the slight but fundemental difference is that Storrie has had the power to determine the expenditure, while Redknapp hasn't. if the manager asks for 40k a week for some no mark african import, thats being a chancer; if the chairman agrees to paying 40k a week for the no mark, that his...

a) it doesnt look good if a PL team goes to the wall. b) it fucks up alot of other teams if they have to wipe the games played. c) they arent really doing anything, just pussy footing about hoping someone buys the club.

as already said, the window is a FIFA imposed rule. maybe once they have agreed their would need to be a round of consultation with the other PL teams, but id' have thoguht they'd all have agreed in principle before the PL approaches the FA/UEFA/FIFA formally. (yes, it have to go through each...

i think it will be a firesale regardless. the reasons for not selling in the window where because they had heads in the sand over their situation and no bugger wanted them, certainly not on the reputed wages.

transfer window is a UEFA/FIFA rule iirc. also, i think one point to note is they aren't facing administration but straight to winding up. the receiver will be appointed, not to run as a going concern and find a buyer, but to sell off all assets for the most possible then they will be closed down.