We may not even be put into Admin !!
I think I would be correct if I said that nearly all on this forum base our opinions on this whole situation on hearsay and media reports rather than any real knowledge.
It amazes me then that nearly everyone in the media seems to be reporting that we need to be in administration by the 4th Thursday in March or have to take the 10pts deduction next season. This is totally incorrect. The rules are very clear.
If admin is achieved by the above date then the pts are deducted immediately no matter what position in the league you are at the time.
If you fail to meet this date you still have until the end of the season to be placed into administration.
However, if you are in the relegation zone at the end of the season (before any pts deduction) then the 10 pts will applied the following season.
If you finish 1pt above the relegation zone (before any reduction) you will take the 10pts this season and be relegated.
In our case if we get 70 pts as long as we are in administration by the end of the season we would take the 10 pts this season and finish on 60 pts.
As I said at the start if the media can't get something printed in black and white reported correctly what hope on all the speculative stuff?
Yup, that's about it. For the third time: http://www.skybluestalk.co.uk/threa...g-and-us-losing-10-points?p=393686#post393686
Myself, I'd bet on SISU avoiding Admininstration. As others have commented, expect more twists and turns yet.
Not sure if just paying up prevents being put into administration. A court will take other things into account, such as on going viability to run the business, baring in mind we have not submitted accounts yet to Companies House as required by law and for the third year running and i'm not sure on the rules/law with foreign companies which SISU are.Not is SISU pay up-they could end all this now.
You say it's the 3rd time but I'm not talking about supporters not knowing their arse from their elbow. I'm talking the media. Even last night on the cwr phone in it was mentioned as fact by the presenter that if its not by 28th then it's 10 pts next season.
Stop repeating ur self
Sorry Osprey60.....hope this helps.
Leeds United filed for administration with only a few days remaining in the 2006–07 season, which automatically triggered a 10 point penalty. This placed Leeds at the bottom of the table and relegated the club, but they were extremely likely to have been relegated anyway. By entering administration during the 2006–07 season, they hoped to avoid starting the 2007–08 season on −10 points. The Football League saw this as a club trying to exploit a loophole and changed the rules. From 2007–08, any club entering administration after the fourth Thursday in March would have their 10 point deduction suspended until the following season. Similarly, if a club were relegated the deduction was also to be suspended until the start of the following season.[21]
On 26 February 2010, Portsmouth became the first Premier League club to enter administration.[22]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football)#cite_note-Portsmouth-22
I see things like this.......We may be having the hearing before the 4th Thursday in March, but if the final decision isn't made till after that date, then the above statement applies...ie= 10 points deduction will be made in the following season.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football)#cite_note-Portsmouth-22
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football)#cite_note-Portsmouth-22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_(British_football)#cite_note-Portsmouth-22
You see the number 21 on what you posted, thats a citation, if you click that you can see where the information came from, if you follow that link you will see that what you posted is an oversimplification and so you are wrong.
There are 2 sentences after the one you quoted. they change how it affects us totally.
"From next season any club going into administration after the fourth Thursday in March will have their 10-point deduction suspended.
If the club is relegated the points will be deducted from their tally at the start of next season.
If the club stays up the 10 points will be taken off their final total."
If we go into admin. Do we then lose any players on loan? And if so will that leave us with some position on the field where we are not covered? Please forgive my ignorance for not knowing!
Thanks for explaining Noggin. didn't know that!
SISU don't have to pay full amount but just show they are attempting to pay. In fact because they are paying for match day costs they are already doing that. Business as usual after the court hearing ...............
If they are attempting to pay and can't that is more reason for admin, not less.
Spot on!
They have to show they have the means to pay, otherwise, they are trading insolvently. They don't actually have to pay - at least not until ordered to but that would take an entirely different court case.
one we already have had havn't we before christmas? meaning ACL could have issued a winding up order, fortunatly they havn't.
It was a third party debt order, not pre court directions. ACL could have taken the more draconian measure of winding up CCFCI didn't believe so - a court asset order (or whatever it is called) is an interim order protecting a party that is "likely in the view of the court" to win a pending court case.
In this regard we haven't been to court yet, more pre-court directions.
It was a third party debt order, not pre court directions. ACL could have taken the more draconian measure of winding up CCFC
They had that opportunity on 5/12/2012,they did not turn up.It was an interim third party debt order which is awarded by a judge without hearing the parties.
A full hearing will be required before SISU are ordered to pay - it is the basis of English law that each party has the right to present their case in the full facts of the case made against them. We are not at that stage yet - the wheels on these things roll slowly.
If they are attempting to pay and can't that is more reason for admin, not less.
Not that anyone could say with a straight face that SISU are attempting to pay the rent.
The Escrow money was legally required to be kept at 500k at all times-it isn't a rent payment in any shape or form. Don't swallow that Fisher bullshit!
The debt continues to build (rent).
SISU had no intention of paying.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?