Frenchay Red Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Is our only hope of staying up that Portsmouth liquidate and Coventry go into administration? No, that only takes care of 2 relegation places. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Casual Connoisseur Posted March 1, 2012 Report Share Posted March 1, 2012 Sky Sports news have just stated that one if their players is on £36k per week!!!!! One way of them cutting costs would be to loan out their whole first team squad and play the youth team, they would get relegated but still survive, albeit in league one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Casual Connoisseur Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 36? Any idea who mate? Tal Ben-haeim (sp), bonkers eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toblerone Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They'll have to Go to at least tier 5. They won't be allowed to the conference or conference south. Not a problem if they can get a few thousand each week, they can near enough be pro and afford the best at each level. Conference = tier 5 Conference South = tier 6 They would be tier 7 - Southern League Premier - at best. To my knowledge there were only two full time clubs there last year and both were promoted (Truro and Salisbury), I don't believe there are any this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Hitler Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They'll have to Go to at least tier 5. They won't be allowed to the conference or conference south. Not a problem if they can get a few thousand each week, they can near enough be pro and afford the best at each level. That would be good to see. The club survives so the fans don't lose their club, but there is finally a reckoning for the stupid over-spending on players' salaries seen at club after club. Including this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ralphindevon Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They are a shambles and deserve all that comes there way. I remember last time they went into admin,' a few months later they had two players we were linked with, Liam Lawrence and Dave Kitson, who people were saying we couldn't afford their wages but apparently Pompey could. How can that happen? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eastonboy Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They are a shambles and deserve all that comes there way. I remember last time they went into admin,' a few months later they had two players we were linked with, Liam Lawrence and Dave Kitson, who people were saying we couldn't afford their wages but apparently Pompey could. How can that happen? They can "afford" it because they neglect to pay their bread and butter suppliers and creditors. Whilst they were signing these players on big signing on fees, agents fees, weekly wages exceeding the national annual salary, poor small businesses who were part of the original CVA are likely to get 4p in the £ on their original debt(if that!) Never mind the "fans", these are the people I feel truly sorry for, those whose jobs, houses and businesses are on the line due to the charlatans and scoundrels in charge of that poxy football club. The club tasted PL success and thought it was the panacea of all things football and chased the dream regardless of financial prudence or a moral compass. Fck them. They deserve everything that is coming to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 Behind all of this HMRC are fighting the football creditors rule. If they win it might be the one thing that really stops clubs paying stupid wages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SC&T Board Members Blagdon red Posted March 2, 2012 SC&T Board Members Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 For once, I'm fully behind the HRMC on that issue. I just don't understand how a particular industry can set up its own 'in-house rule' that circumvents the fiscal laws of the land and everyone sits back and thinks it's fine. Maybe plumbers should create the Plumbing Trade Creditors Rule and if any of their ilk gets into financial difficulties, they should pay all debts outstanding to colleagues in the plumbing trade before paying anything owed to the taxman or any other parties. It's a daft rule and the sooner it's gone, the better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They've just lost Liam Lawrence: Cardiff City FC @CardiffCityFC An agreement has been reached with Pompey to see Liam Lawrence join on loan for the rest of the season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slave to the rhythm Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They've just lost Liam Lawrence: Cardiff City FC @CardiffCityFC An agreement has been reached with Pompey to see Liam Lawrence join on loan for the rest of the season He's a good player. Just watch him score against us next week! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roger Red Hat Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 They've just lost Liam Lawrence: Cardiff City FC @CardiffCityFC An agreement has been reached with Pompey to see Liam Lawrence join on loan for the rest of the season Anything to get a scan on his foot! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Roughneck Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 It is incredible that Harry Redknapp (who signed Utaka on £80k a week, and many, many other extremely well-rewarded mediocrities) is being rocket-propelled into the England hot seat at the very same time that Portsmouth are sliding down the toilet, and that the English football press are giving the former saturation coverage and the latter fairly comprehensive coverage while nonetheless choosing to make zero connection between the two things. There's some talk on Portsmouth messageboards about taking over and swallowing up Havant & Waterlooville. The arrogance of this view, and the irony of some Pompey fans being happy to see another set of fans lose their club, is staggering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REDOXO Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 It is incredible that Harry Redknapp (who signed Utaka on £80k a week, and many, many other extremely well-rewarded mediocrities) is being rocket-propelled into the England hot seat at the very same time that Portsmouth are sliding down the toilet, and that the English football press are giving the former saturation coverage and the latter fairly comprehensive coverage while nonetheless choosing to make zero connection between the two things. There's some talk on Portsmouth messageboards about taking over and swallowing up Havant & Waterlooville. The arrogance of this view, and the irony of some Pompey fans being happy to see another set of fans lose their club, is staggering. I would point to the Irony more than the arrogance. Anyway its very unlikely that will happen. I can see Portsmouth reforming and I think I read somewhere they may be allowed entry at a pretty high level when you consider where Aldershot Accrington Newport and the like had to restart, however up to a point you can understand why. Can you imagine Cranleigh V Pompey in the combined counties with 6000 Pompey fans standing on the touchline!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 2, 2012 Report Share Posted March 2, 2012 It is incredible that Harry Redknapp (who signed Utaka on £80k a week, and many, many other extremely well-rewarded mediocrities) is being rocket-propelled into the England hot seat at the very same time that Portsmouth are sliding down the toilet, and that the English football press are giving the former saturation coverage and the latter fairly comprehensive coverage while nonetheless choosing to make zero connection between the two things. There's some talk on Portsmouth messageboards about taking over and swallowing up Havant & Waterlooville. The arrogance of this view, and the irony of some Pompey fans being happy to see another set of fans lose their club, is staggering. It's hardly Harry Redknapps fault is it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Watts Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 Is that a serious comment Andy? Redknapp identified the players....but the wages are paid by the board. For me, the responsibility for wages lies there. The buck must stop with those that oversee the club's finances and sign off on the deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Roughneck Posted March 3, 2012 Report Share Posted March 3, 2012 Gaydamak and Storrie were, I believe, doing all they could to keep Redknapp sweet. They felt Redknapp was bigger than the club. Ok, you could argue that the manager will always try his luck, and I’m sure Storrie was fighting Redknapp’s corner. Gaydamak should have stood up to both Storrie and Redknapp. What you can blame Redknapp for is signing a player like Nugent for £6m and never giving him a fair run in the first team, and others ad infinitum. If you want to know how Redknapp operates at a football club, get Tom Bower's book Broken Dreams. You can say it's hardly Harry Redknapp's fault. I'd say it's no coincidence that shortly after leaving them Bournemouth, West Ham, Portsmouth and Southampton were all in a financial mess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 It's ok Pompey are being allowed to sign a couple of strikers just in time to face us http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17284836 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bcfcbs20 Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 It's ok Pompey are being allowed to sign a couple of strikers just in time to face us http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/17284836 It makes the blood boil does'nt it, ok you feel sorry for them the first time but they are repeat offenders pay your bills or drop out the football league simple as that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolman Block B Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 It's ok Pompey are being allowed to sign a couple of strikers just in time to face us http://www.bbc.co.uk...otball/17284836 Wouldnt worry about it. It wont be no high profile, high earning type goalscorers unless certain clubs allow them to go on loan but still pay their wages Saying that, a few clubs will take pity on Pompey and probably allow it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Is that a serious comment Andy? Yeah, how is it Redknapps fault? If he asks for money, and the board sanction it...why would he or any manager question it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frank Reynolds Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Gaydamak and Storrie were, I believe, doing all they could to keep Redknapp sweet. They felt Redknapp was bigger than the club. Ok, you could argue that the manager will always try his luck, and I’m sure Storrie was fighting Redknapp’s corner. Gaydamak should have stood up to both Storrie and Redknapp. What you can blame Redknapp for is signing a player like Nugent for £6m and never giving him a fair run in the first team, and others ad infinitum. If you want to know how Redknapp operates at a football club, get Tom Bower's book Broken Dreams. You can say it's hardly Harry Redknapp's fault. I'd say it's no coincidence that shortly after leaving them Bournemouth, West Ham, Portsmouth and Southampton were all in a financial mess. Were you going out with Sandra before he married her? This is a highly slanted view of things! I agree to a point, Redknapp asked for Utaka, Nugent and the like. But he doesn't sign off on the wages, or the transfer fees; the board do that. With regards to the other teams, Bournemouth are victims of the complete apathy towards the club by the majority in the region. Fans are in short supply and so are sponsorship opportunities and other commercial activities. That is where their problem lies, not a manager who took them to some of their finest days (Man United victory etc.) Southampton were mismanaged by Rupert Lowe, and he was not there long enough to do any real damage. West Ham sold players that Redknapp brought through for more than £35m, and had some great European ties with him in charge. I feel for Pompey fans but it's not Harry Redknapp's fault. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Tansley Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Is that a serious comment Andy? You do know that the manager is not involved in negotiations? That's the job of the board of directors and chief exucutive... It's not actually like football manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chipdawg Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 It's ok Pompey are being allowed to sign a couple of strikers just in time to face us http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/17284836 Surely they must have a couple of 18 year old kids they can play? Makes a mockery of the whole point of them going into administration Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nickolas Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 But they are Pompey. They are a 'big' club. Yet another club living off of history. F&ck them. If the F.A allow this to happen then i smell favouratism! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 I believe they are allowed a one in one out policy. They won't be replacing like for like by any account. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tales From The Front Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 You do know that the manager is not involved in negotiations? That's the job of the board of directors and chief exucutive... It's not actually like football manager. But the manager like any other employee of a company has a duty of care. It always amazes me that football managers appear never to be held to account for financial mismanagement. Its funny that David O'Leary hasn't done to much more in the game. Sure Risdale rightly gets stick for his ridculous and catastrophic leadership but managers are also accountable. We as fans are the first to shout when a manager signes a technically or unerperforming player, as far as I'm concerned over priced and lack of value for money also come into the equation in a managers ability. As supporters of a club like Bristol City we should appreciate that our manager must find quality players but within a budget and that gives genuine value. I'm sure we can find plenty examples where as a club we have failed over the last five years...trouble is as fans we concentrate purely on the football and managers get let offf the hook. Perhaps with the current disaster at a genuinely massive club like Rangers, us punters shoudl re-define what makes a good manager as well as a good Chairman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Judge Roughneck Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 You do know that the manager is not involved in negotiations? That's the job of the board of directors and chief exucutive... It's not actually like football manager. That's quite a simplistic way to look at things. All clubs are ambitious of success, and for as long as the manager remains in favour of the chairman, that chairman will bend over backwards to give the manager what he wants. Especially if the said manager is a fans favourite - which when things were going well Redknapp was at most of his previous clubs. What will generally happen is that an agent will tout his player around offering him to different clubs at different rates hoping to catch the biggest bite whilst having a plan b or even c to fall back on should the more audacious deals come to nothing. Manager will do a bit of negotiating directly with the agent before going to his chairman stating a proposed deal. Only then will the board get involved. Now, some managers, especially those who are in demand with clubs that are bigger than the one they are at, have more leverage than others when it comes to budget breaking deals. The chairman is the egotist who wants everyone to love him for bringing success to the club, this is the same the world over, (This is especially true of our own club. How else could you expain the difference between how SL runs BCFC and how he runs HargreavesLansdown?). The chairman who wants to please his manager will bend over backwards to accomodate him especially when he has been promised success, such as building on a struggling 2nd division side knocking cup holders Man Utd out of the FA Cup. Here's a bit from Bower's book ... Ambitious for success, the club allowed Harry Redknapp to trade players despite the debt increasing between July 87 and June 1992 from £150k towards £2.6 million. In 1990 despite Redknapp's expenditure, including generous contracts with the players, the club was relegated to the 3rd Division. The club's debt was destined to increase to £4.4million. In 1992, the club's financial troubles compelled another change of ownership. Redknapp resigned. The 'worries and stress' of managing a club, Redknapp complained, prompted his resignation, but he boasted that during his six years, the club had earned £848,000 in profits by his transfers. That was not the legacy which Roy Pack, Bournemouth's subsequent financial adviser, recognized in 1997. Pack a former Arsenal & Portsmouth player became a corporate strategic planner, could only spot horrendous debts. Redknapp had increased the club's costs but not its income. The small profit on transfers had been swamped by the players' annual wages, which had rised about fivefold to around £1 million. "Harry made his demands and he got them". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
red and breakfast Posted March 7, 2012 Report Share Posted March 7, 2012 Seems like the board weren't strong enough to me. It is a good job that my preferred candidate as England manager will not have to be involved in signing players, just picking and motivating the best players at his disposal - a job he has done pretty blinking well recently! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.