LeeCovFox Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 I know that this has been discussed many times before, but surely it is time for the football authorities to think of a new sanction for poor financial management. League Two looks set to begin with three clubs on minus points, and possibly even with just 23 clubs competing if Rotherham canot provide assurances about their financial viability. Something has to be done. The fans of Luton Town now face relegation out of the Football League. This is a club which was in the top flight as recently as the early 1990s. Have their fans not suffered enough without being further punished for a problem which is a million miles from being their responsibility? Rotherham and Bournemouth also face a relegation fight. Not for footballing reasons, but for financial incompetence. So why is the punishment directly football related? Why can the owners/chairmen of these clubs not be fined or banned from involvement in football clubs. Just something which wouldn't put fans at risk of losing their football club for good. I don't have the answers. But there has to be a more viable solution. Of course, those who flout the rules have to be punished. But thats the problem. The fans haven't flouted the rules, yet it is they who suffer.
davieG Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 I know that this has been discussed many times before, but surely it is time for the football authorities to think of a new sanction for poor financial management. League Two looks set to begin with three clubs on minus points, and possibly even with just 23 clubs competing if Rotherham canot provide assurances about their financial viability. Something has to be done. The fans of Luton Town now face relegation out of the Football League. This is a club which was in the top flight as recently as the early 1990s. Have their fans not suffered enough without being further punished for a problem which is a million miles from being their responsibility? Rotherham and Bournemouth also face a relegation fight. Not for footballing reasons, but for financial incompetence. So why is the punishment directly football related? Why can the owners/chairmen of these clubs not be fined or banned from involvement in football clubs. Just something which wouldn't put fans at risk of losing their football club for good. I don't have the answers. But there has to be a more viable solution. Of course, those who flout the rules have to be punished. But thats the problem. The fans haven't flouted the rules, yet it is they who suffer. It exists because the Chairmen of these clubs, with the exception of LCFC voted for it. These are, more and more here today gone tomorrow people flitting from one club to another so are unlikely to vote for sanctions against themselves. I'd like to think that fans may have voted differently but I doubt it especially after the 'hate the cheating Leicester' media campaign that preceded the vote. One of the main instigators of this punishment was Sheepshanks of Ipswich who'd conveniently and quietly put Ipswich into and out of Administration in a week or two which of course many people didn't even notice and at the same time slagging of LCFC, calling us cheats and clamouring for points deductions.
act smiley Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 I feel really sorry for Rotherham - the League are demanding that they prove they're going to return to the town within 4 years, yet they're struggling financially, so how the hell are they going to be able to move back to a town where the only league-standard stadium is run by the morons who put the club in that state in the first place? I mean, I'm no fan of teams moving about the place Wimbledon-stylee, but having a long term work-in-progress plan to come up with a new stadium is one thing, expecting a club thats already on its knees to do it instantly is something else.
LeeCovFox Posted 29 July 2008 Author Posted 29 July 2008 It exists because the Chairmen of these clubs, with the exception of LCFC voted for it. These are, more and more here today gone tomorrow people flitting from one club to another so are unlikely to vote for sanctions against themselves.I'd like to think that fans may have voted differently but I doubt it especially after the 'hate the cheating Leicester' media campaign that preceded the vote. One of the main instigators of this punishment was Sheepshanks of Ipswich who'd conveniently and quietly put Ipswich into and out of Administration in a week or two which of course many people didn't even notice and at the same time slagging of LCFC, calling us cheats and clamouring for points deductions. I agree, I don't believe that had the fans of Football League clubs had a vote on the matter that the outcome would have been any different. But two wrongs don't make a right. Many of those clubs at the time were naive enough to think that it would never happen to them. Time and incompetence have conspired to prove them wrong. But I still don't want clubs to cease to exist.
Jon the Hat Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 Point deductions for financial reasons are the biggest load of toss in the history of football. Pay the fee, stay in the league should be the limit of the concerns of the league and FA when it comes to the finances of football. No one, and I mean no one has ever come up with a rational explanation of how it mkaes a difference whether your money comes from screwing Russian peasants or your suppliers. These guys MADE our football clubs into a business, and they should let the market set the standards. Don't pay your squad? Breach of contract and they walk away. Can't afford the League fees? OUT! Cannot pay your suppliers? Go into admin and let someone else have a go.
Webbo Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 Spending money you don't have to sign better players you can't afford is giving you an unfair advantage and is therefore cheating. It might be unfair on the fans if their team is given a point deduction but it is also unfair on other teams who live within their budget and miss out on promotion as a result. Just saying that teams should go into administration and let the suppliers chase them for the money is not only morally wrong but it would also lead to firms not wishing to do business with teams because they would be seen as bad risks.
Daggers Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 Spending money you don't have to sign better players you can't afford is giving you an unfair advantage and is therefore cheating. It might be unfair on the fans if their team is given a point deduction but it is also unfair on other teams who live within their budget and miss out on promotion as a result.Just saying that teams should go into administration and let the suppliers chase them for the money is not only morally wrong but it would also lead to firms not wishing to do business with teams because they would be seen as bad risks. So be it. Moral and football parted company a long time ago - which is why when something decent is done it makes the news worldwide.
Head Honcho Posted 29 July 2008 Posted 29 July 2008 I know that this has been discussed many times before, but surely it is time for the football authorities to think of a new sanction for poor financial management. League Two looks set to begin with three clubs on minus points, and possibly even with just 23 clubs competing if Rotherham canot provide assurances about their financial viability. Something has to be done. The fans of Luton Town now face relegation out of the Football League. This is a club which was in the top flight as recently as the early 1990s. Have their fans not suffered enough without being further punished for a problem which is a million miles from being their responsibility? Rotherham and Bournemouth also face a relegation fight. Not for footballing reasons, but for financial incompetence. So why is the punishment directly football related? Why can the owners/chairmen of these clubs not be fined or banned from involvement in football clubs. Just something which wouldn't put fans at risk of losing their football club for good. I don't have the answers. But there has to be a more viable solution. Of course, those who flout the rules have to be punished. But thats the problem. The fans haven't flouted the rules, yet it is they who suffer. Many clubs get themselves into financial troubles due to mismanagement yes but their aim was to play a higher standard of football or to put it simply promotion. Therefore the penalty must fit the crime. You're still going to get the odd chairman going for it by putting the club in debt hoping for promotion so a points deduction is surely the only solution.
Jon the Hat Posted 30 July 2008 Posted 30 July 2008 Spending money you don't have to sign better players you can't afford is giving you an unfair advantage and is therefore cheating. It might be unfair on the fans if their team is given a point deduction but it is also unfair on other teams who live within their budget and miss out on promotion as a result.Just saying that teams should go into administration and let the suppliers chase them for the money is not only morally wrong but it would also lead to firms not wishing to do business with teams because they would be seen as bad risks. Exactly, so the market does the job. You speak utter utter rubbish. Cheating? Can you explain how it is cheating to borrow money to buy players rather than invest money your chairman may have got from another business? Are we punishing QPR for having rich owners? I must have missed the call for their points deduction. Chelsea have made bigger losses than any club in the history of the game. Is that any business of the FA or Premiership?
Webbo Posted 30 July 2008 Posted 30 July 2008 You speak utter utter rubbish. Sorree! Look at Ken Bates at Leeds last year, He put the club into admin halfway through the last match of the season, shafted all the creditors and then bought the club back for a pittance. All perfectly legal, but it still stank, if it hadn't had been for the points deduction they would have been promoted and got away with the minor inconvienience of a season in league 1. That's as good as cheating in my book.
davieG Posted 30 July 2008 Posted 30 July 2008 Sorree!Look at Ken Bates at Leeds last year, He put the club into admin halfway through the last match of the season, shafted all the creditors and then bought the club back for a pittance. All perfectly legal, but it still stank, if it hadn't had been for the points deduction they would have been promoted and got away with the minor inconvienience of a season in league 1. That's as good as cheating in my book. And the arsehole is still there and still involved in running a football club! So why haven't the Football League ensured that people like him are excluded from the game instead of punishing fans & players. This shows more than anything they are hitting the wrong target and that a heavy points deduction especially as the sole punishment is the wrong type of punishment
billyfox1 Posted 7 August 2008 Posted 7 August 2008 Rotherham to lose 17 points. This is getting ridiculous http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/7543195.stm
dandannieldanok Posted 7 August 2008 Posted 7 August 2008 Rotherham to lose 17 points. This is getting ridiculoushttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/7543195.stm Bournemouth look like they are set to lose 17 points too, Luton's chances of staying in the league suddenly increase.
Simi Posted 7 August 2008 Posted 7 August 2008 Rotherham to lose 17 points. This is getting ridiculoushttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/7543195.stm Well that's sorted out League 2 relegation. I hope everyone concerned is proud of themselves.
Asha Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 I just saw on SSN that Bournemouth are set to lose 17 points as well.
isaidno Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 I just saw on SSN that Bournemouth are set to lose 17 points as well. Bottom of league 2 Bournemouth -17 Rotherham -17 Luton -30
Asha Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 Bottom of league 2Bournemouth -17 Rotherham -17 Luton -30 In a way that's a slight positive as it's now 2 of 3, and it's not just the 2 decided already.
Tevez Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 Wasting so much money on wasters like the English National Team when it could of been given to teams in need. Joke.
Asha Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 Luton manager on SSN now. Saying that he had 7 players yesterday, and they've signed 13 players in 24 hours through loans and short term free contracts. How the fcuk are they going to stay up?
Tevez Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 Luton manager on SSN now.Saying that he had 7 players yesterday, and they've signed 13 players in 24 hours through loans and short term free contracts. How the fcuk are they going to stay up? Simple really, win games. I'm going to be going Bookies tommorow to stick a cheeky 5er on them to stay up.
Fox You Forest Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 Simple really, win games.I'm going to be going Bookies tommorow to stick a cheeky 5er on them to stay up. I think that they do have a chance what are the odds do you know i might have a fiver aswell.
Basingstoke Fox Posted 8 August 2008 Posted 8 August 2008 So be it.Moral and football parted company a long time ago - which is why when something decent is done it makes the news worldwide. Lye sess ter City :laugh:
Brainy Posted 1 September 2008 Posted 1 September 2008 Just heard on SSN that Kevin Bond has left Bournemouth, although I cant find any information anywhere, not even on their OS.
dandannieldanok Posted 1 September 2008 Posted 1 September 2008 Just heard on SSN that Kevin Bond has left Bournemouth, although I cant find any information anywhere, not even on their OS. http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...uth/7592896.stm Sacked.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.