As a minimum. Good idea. But a second administration is taking the piss IMOM U R T Y wrote:Either that or the punishments for entering administration need to be reviewed - 10 point penalty is not enough of a deterrent to clubs to keep their house in order.
Maybe if a "double relegation" was the result, clubs may not gamble so much
More to the issue, this isn't a football rule. It's a rule that if a company is in trouble, employees have first rights. Happy for this to change in the case of football, but only if doesn't knock on to others such as when Woolworths went bankrupt.Royal With Cheese wrote:Those would be the contracts put in place to attract players you couldn't afford to pay in the first place and, by the looks of it, the previous administrators knew they couldn't pay?Porstmouth Idiot wrote:"So basically the biggest issue now is the player contracts. If there was no Football Creditors rule these players could be sacked and we may have a chance. Come on then all you big earners, time to stand up and demonstrate what this club means to you. Rip up your contracts and move on."
I presume the players will demonstrate exactly what the club means to them and maintain their contracts are paid in full.
They actually came within a whisker back in the mid seventies too. They never seem to learn, buying players that they were never ever going to be able to afford. They cheated to get promotion and cheated to win the FA cup too.Snowball wrote:As a minimum. Good idea. But a second administration is taking the piss IMOM U R T Y wrote:Either that or the punishments for entering administration need to be reviewed - 10 point penalty is not enough of a deterrent to clubs to keep their house in order.
Maybe if a "double relegation" was the result, clubs may not gamble so much
You have a shite usernameM U R T Y wrote:Either that or the punishments for entering administration need to be reviewed - 10 point penalty is not enough of a deterrent to clubs to keep their house in order. Maybe if a "double relegation" was the result, clubs may not gamble so much
Another couple of jolly sensible posts from Finerain (where did it all go wrong?!)FiNeRaIn wrote:Agreed. If portsmouth do stay afloat it should be these guys that oversee and find a suitable takeover. Its also imperative they have at least some long term input into the running of the club.
And Birch said yesterday that anyone that buys the club will need to be prepared to put in a lot of money upfront as well.exileinleeds wrote:Can't even be taken over by Bad Company now....
http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/sport/pompe ... _1_3580739
I particularly liked this bit:
‘There are just too many cumbersome and fiscally imprudent contracts signed that in our view would only further plunder the club all over again even if someone could buy it for zero pounds sterling since the loss carried forward is insurmountable.
Yes.weybridgewanderer wrote:so will we have a game on Tuesday night?
by Barry the bird boggler » 02 Mar 2012 08:27
02 Mar 2012 08:27
I've always said that in the past but I'm not so sure this time around. They really are deep in the shyte. Administrator was on the news this am saying that even if they survive this season, they are going to lose a frightening amount of money next season and he had serious doubts as to whether anyone would be prepared to take on that liability.M U R T Y wrote:It won't happen, how many clubs have been in administration over the past, say 10 years? And how many have been liquidated?
Kitson might have to get a lift upweybridgewanderer wrote:Rumours abound that pompie can;t afford to pay for their team bus.
As Reading is not so far, is the hope the players drive up independently and park in the HP car park?
As long as they pay for the parking as we all have to!weybridgewanderer wrote:Rumours abound that pompie can;t afford to pay for their team bus.
As Reading is not so far, is the hope the players drive up independently and park in the HP car park?
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 16 guests