SBK, why are you arguing that the FL league have untold power over clubs when as is clearly being demonstrated by our club, this is not the case at all.
Now to bring it back to what Samo was trying to get across to you. There are guidelines that need to be followed that the FL have set.
But this isn't the FL getting involved with the running of the business. That's not something they do.
As for waiting to see, hopefully we won't need to.
After reading what was said on the Arsenal fans site I think SISU are in for one f**king massive shock. They seem to have something a bit special in store during the match. If it's what I think it is, it couldn't happen to more deserving people. Thank you Arsenal fans
Frankly I was amazed that Otium Entertainment Ltd. were allowed to stay at the same level, as for the life of me I can't see how we're not a new club!
Then again, when Sky Blue Sport and Leisure took us over as the holding company of Ltd and, errm, Holdings, this all looked to me like a surefire case for a 10 point penalty we never got... so what do I know!
In effect Maidstone and Aldershot were expelled for going bust, though. Maidstone probably weren't revivable, Aldershot maybe less so.
Going wa-ay back, Leeds City were expelled for dubious practices (their manager Herbert Chapman was originally banned from football for life). Port Vale were too, but were allowed to be re-admitted straight away after a vote among clubs.
Then then again, the whole change to various rules was Bristol City in effect setting up again and sidestepping some debts, yet keeping their league place. In theory(!) it's far stricter now than it ever was!
Frankly I was amazed that Otium Entertainment Ltd. were allowed to stay at the same level, as for the life of me I can't see how we're not a new club!
Then again, when Sky Blue Sport and Leisure took us over as the holding company of Ltd and, errm, Holdings, this all looked to me like a surefire case for a 10 point penalty we never got... so what do I know!
I think we have Sisu's lawyers to thank (?) for that. Basically I'm guessing Sisu said "prove you didn't make a mistake in court" and the FL went "Would you like that wrapped or to go?", it seems those in charge in the early 1900s were made of stouter stuff than the likes of Greg Clarke.
Then then again, the whole change to various rules was Bristol City in effect setting up again and sidestepping some debts, yet keeping their league place. In theory(!) it's far stricter now than it ever was!
I think we have Sisu's lawyers to thank (?) for that. Basically I'm guessing Sisu said "prove you didn't make a mistake in court" and the FL went "Would you like that wrapped or to go?", it seems those in charge in the early 1900s were made of stouter stuff than the likes of Greg Clarke.
Not necessarily. The only reason we stayed in the league is we bribed Bury to throw their games against us! Our chairman was banned (but could still leave us a hefty sum when he died) but the club carried on in the league. Anyway, lawyers may explain now (and let's face it, it does indeed seem the league ballsed up in a major way, doesn't it!), but I'd absolutely love OSB if he's passing to attempt to shed light on how th SBS&L setup from what was there before didn't merit a points deduction!
Did we actually sidestep any debt? Wasn't that the point of the (unenforced) rule about paying ACL?
I was pointing out more the rules of just winding up a club and setting up a new one in its place are supposedly far tighter now, and the reason they're tighter is because of the Bristol City events.