High Court Match Thread (3 Viewers)

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
The punishment we should be concerned about is that from the Football League. If they feel that SISU have been playing fast and loose with the golden share, moving it from subsidiary to subsidiary without permission this is against FL rules. They could take a very dim view of such actions and give us more points deductions on top of the ten for admin. The FL take such matters very seriously.

There's nothing to suggest they have is there? When it was thought to have been moved to the holding company people were quick to point out that all the available evidence suggested it was with CCFC Ltd which is where it's been confirmed to be, can't see there being a problem there. The issue now I think is more to do with where the player registrations lie and if they have been moved is this allowed under league rules. Someone can probably look that up on the FL website.

Sky Blues · Mar 26, 2013

chiefdave said:
So the next thing to sort out now we know the golden share is with CCFC Ltd (the company in admin) is where the player registrations are. Is it correct that if they aren't in the same company we could have big problems with the FL or is that just an assumption that's been made on here? Looks like -10 this season and then hopefully no problems with the play registrations.

We then move on to admin itself, one point that hasn't been touched on is who is going to fund the losses in admin? I doubt SISU will if they don't think they will reatin control. In Pompey's case they had parachute payments and still had to have large sums put in by local businessmen to cover losses. Even bigger issue being in admin over the close season, doubt they will put season tickets on sale so there will be little or no income.

So what are the options from here? As I see it we have the following:

1) no buyer, SISU walk away and the club is liquidated - hopefully not very likley.

2) SISU retain control - possible, if they want to stay they are in pole position.

3) ACL / Higgs / Council takeover - wouldn't have thought it was likely, and maybe with the council not even legally allowed.

4) a new owner - for most this would be the favoured option, hopefully we don't rush in without being sure they are 'fit and proper'. The issue then would be do SISU / AVRO agree to any CVA, if they do and a takeover goes through quickly enough we should be good to go for the start of next season, if they don't we're looking at a second points deduction next season.

I was wondering what happens about the player registrations pre-hearing, but it sounds like ACL believe the golden share trumps everything and the players should be returned to the club. If the administrator gets the player registrations and has to cut costs quickly will we see a few high earners leave before their contracts are scheduled to end?

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

ccfc_Tom said:
We could potentially be relegated this season then?

Don't want to be accused of scare mongering but if its a genuine mistake by the club then I am sure FL will overlook it but if Fisher and co have tried to be clever without FL approval then we could be in serious bother, hopefully just a few more points but FL protects its golden share very strongly and make look to make an example of us. Hope they look upon us leniently and just give us a slap across the wrist.

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

chiefdave said:
There's nothing to suggest they have is there? When it was thought to have been moved to the holding company people were quick to point out that all the available evidence suggested it was with CCFC Ltd which is where it's been confirmed to be, can't see there being a problem there. The issue now I think is more to do with where the player registrations lie and if they have been moved is this allowed under league rules. Someone can probably look that up on the FL website.

Fisher was claiming that CCFC Ltd was a non-operating company - well if the football club and player registrations are in it then thats hardly a non operating company

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

Sky Blues said:
I was wondering what happens about the player registrations pre-hearing, but it sounds like ACL believe the golden share trumps everything and the players should be returned to the club. If the administrator gets the player registrations and has to cut costs quickly will we see a few high earners leave before their contracts are scheduled to end?

Well Pompey were desperate to get rid of their high earners and they only way they could do so was to agree a payoff with them to mutually cancel their contracts, if it was as easy as moving the player registrations elsewhere I'm sure they would have done it so my feeling is wherever they are they can't just be terminated. The bigger question is does the league allow them to be held in seperate companies?

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Fisher was claiming that CCFC Ltd was a non-operating company - well if the football club and player registrations are in it then thats hardly a non operating company

True but I can't see the FL giving out points deductions for something Fisher has said. If we get a deduction for everytime we've had a statement from SISU that's not true we'll be in the EvoStick!

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

chiefdave said:
Well Pompey were desperate to get rid of their high earners and they only way they could do so was to agree a payoff with them to mutually cancel their contracts, if it was as easy as moving the player registrations elsewhere I'm sure they would have done it so my feeling is wherever they are they can't just be terminated. The bigger question is does the league allow them to be held in seperate companies?

Our information is that it doesn't - player registrations have to be in same company as golden share otherwise technically players are "owned" by a third party ie Tevez at West Ham etc

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

chiefdave said:
True but I can't see the FL giving out points deductions for something Fisher has said. If we get a deduction for everytime we've had a statement from SISU that's not true we'll be in the EvoStick!

I am not saying they would deduct points because of any idiotic comment Fisher says otherwise we would have been in Blue Sq Prem ages ago but why else would they claim Ltd is a non operational company and the golden share is in Holdings and then it transpires it isn't. Like I said hopefully they have simply made an error but if they have tried to be clever with FL property (the golden share) then it could be serious.

theferret · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Fisher was claiming that CCFC Ltd was a non-operating company - well if the football club and player registrations are in it then thats hardly a non operating company

On the key issue of the Golden Share though, it appears it was not moved, and is where it should be and where it always was?

Player registrations is a different matter, but that alone would no merit additional punishment from the FL?

These are questions more than statements because I have no idea..

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

As ever with CCFC we have no idea what they have been up to with our club -I am simply pointing out possible scenarios. I am praying that the share hasn't been moved without permission and they have simply cocked up and effectively put themselves into admin and therefore FL takes lenient view and its no more than the 10 pts.

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Our information is that it doesn't - player registrations have to be in same company as golden share otherwise technically players are "owned" by a third party ie Tevez at West Ham etc

Think we need to wait and see where the player registations lie. If they are with the holding co we could be in a grey area if the holding co and ccfc ltd have the same owners as it wouldn't really be a 3rd party but no doubt the FL could get us on a technicallity. Would possibly depend on what mood the FL happned to be in that day!

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Don't want to be accused of scare mongering but if its a genuine mistake by the club then I am sure FL will overlook it but if Fisher and co have tried to be clever without FL approval then we could be in serious bother, hopefully just a few more points but FL protects its golden share very strongly and make look to make an example of us. Hope they look upon us leniently and just give us a slap across the wrist.

I hate the talk of 'us' being punished. If only there were a way for those actually responsible to face that alone.

SkyBlue_Bear83 · Mar 26, 2013

chiefdave said:
The bigger question is does the league allow them to be held in seperate companies?

Could be viewed as third party ownership of a player like Tevez and Mascherano at West Ham

Just seen Jan has already covered this point

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

so with all this with the player registrations and golden share do people feel SISU have made a spectalular cock up and put the wrong company into admin or are they going to pull some move nobody is expecting?

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

I vote for cock up driven through desperation to break Ricoh licence

rob9872 · Mar 26, 2013

Possibly an intentional 'mistake' by SISU - ruthless and untrustworthy, but not incompetent imo. Bound to be some ulterior motive behind this, but I can't think of an angle at present.

Perhaps I am being too cynical.

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

Brighton Sky Blue said:
I hate the talk of 'us' being punished. If only there were a way for those actually responsible to face that alone.

Couldn't agree with you more - as ever its us the fans who will be punished. We will be here long after SISU and ACL etc have gone, we will be left to pick up the pieces their incompetence leaves behind

Stafford_SkBlue · Mar 26, 2013

Bad news is that we have what appears to be an utter useless Administrator, looking ACL comments.

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

rob9872 said:
Possibly an intentional 'mistake' by SISU - ruthless and untrustworthy, but not incompetent imo. Bound to be some ulterior motive behind this, but I can't think of an angle at present.

Perhaps I am being too cynical.

Only thing it does give them is its their administrator who has been appointed but hopefully he will be guided by the law and his responsibility to all the creditors and not just to ARVO, who have effectively appointed him.

ashbyjan · Mar 26, 2013

Stafford_SkBlue said:
Bad news is that we have what appears to be an utter useless Administrator, looking ACL comments.

I expect seeing as he has only been involved since Thursday his information would mostly have come from the club and apparently they themselves don't know where the golden share or player regs are so it no wonder he has bum information.

SkyblueBazza · Mar 26, 2013

theferret said:
On the key issue of the Golden Share though, it appears it was not moved, and is where it should be and where it always was?

Player registrations is a different matter, but that alone would no merit additional punishment from the FL?

These are questions more than statements because I have no idea..

Not sure of the answer but I'm thinking that if the rule is that the Golden share & registrations have to be in the same ownership...& it's then proven that they aren't as far as we are concerned - I think we will be in line for additional punishment. I also think the precedent previously set indicates that, there are loopholes...but if you exploit them - prepare for the worst.

Pete in Portugal · Mar 26, 2013

SkyblueBazza said:
Not sure of the answer but I'm thinking that if the rule is that the Golden share & registrations have to be in the same ownership...& it's then proven that they aren't as far as we are concerned - I think we will be in line for additional punishment. I also think the precedent previously set indicates that, there are loopholes...but if you exploit them - prepare for the worst.

According to League regulations, player registrations must be held by the Football League 'Club' and not a 'third party'.

CCFC Ltd own the golden share, so they are the 'Club' as far as the FL are concerned. It would appear that the player registrations are held by CCFC (Holdings) Ltd who presumably are classed as a 'third party'.

TF may possibly try to persuade the FL that the Club and 'Holdings' are to all intents and purposes the same entity. The trouble with that argument is that it would mean CCFC (Holdings) Ltd are therefore also in administration.

It has all the hallmarks of a massive cock-up and the FL will not be amused.

chiefdave · Mar 26, 2013

Pete in Portugal said:
According to League regulations, player registrations must be held by the Football League 'Club' and not a 'third party'.

CCFC Ltd own the golden share, so they are the 'Club' as far as the FL are concerned. It would appear that the player registrations are held by CCFC (Holdings) Ltd who presumably are classed as a 'third party'.

TF may possibly try to persuade the FL that the Club and 'Holdings' are to all intents and purposes the same entity. The trouble with that argument is that it would mean CCFC (Holdings) Ltd are therefore also in administration.

It has all the hallmarks of a massive cock-up and the FL will not be amused.

I can't really understand the rules on the FL website to be honest but it seems to me that any transfer of player registrations has to be logged with the FL. If this is the case then why would they allow the registrations to be moved away from the club if that is against the rules.

Or are we thinking that SISU have tried to move the players as assets in some other way into the holding company If they think they've been clever and just moved the registrations but haven't done it in the way the FL requires that will be cock up number 2 and whatever they've done won't be valid. We need an SBT lawyer to explain it all!

Jack Griffin · Mar 26, 2013

Players contracts
1) TF made a statement that they'd been moved, the legality of this position is uncertain, the move may be definitely against or contrary to the spirit of the FL rules.
2) It looks to me like SISU were trying to outflank ACL by moving the important thigs to CCFC(H) Ltd, but couln't get FL agreement & may have done part of transition without permission.
3) If players contracts are with CCFC (H) Ltd, well AVRO own that, aren't 'they a 3rd party?
4) SISU are treating the players & the fans equally, like pawns in their game and in a disgraceful manner.

Football League
1) If SISU are playing technical games then I hope they'll see them off.
2) Should an organisation like that pass the 'fit & proper' persons test?

Finally tweets from Darryl Murphy

Darryl Murphy ‏@darryljoemurphy 27m
Other issue here which makes administration more complicated - Joy Sepalla is on board of Arvo (which owns both CCFC companies) and Sisu

Darryl Murphy Darryl Murphy ‏@darryljoemurphy 29m
Player contracts still a grey area. Claims they are owned by CCFC Holdings. This should not be the case - should be with club (CCFC Ltd)

Darryl Murphy Darryl Murphy ‏@darryljoemurphy 30m
On Thurs, CCFC Ltd went into admin, club said it was a 'non operating subsidiary'. Hearing at 2 will confirm this was not true #skyblues

Darryl Murphy Darryl Murphy ‏@darryljoemurphy 57m
#skyblues case adjourned until 2, but essentially, CCFC Ltd (the club, in its strictest sense) is is in admin (and has been since Thursday)

Jack Griffin · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
I expect seeing as he has only been involved since Thursday his information would mostly have come from the club and apparently they themselves don't know where the golden share or player regs are so it no wonder he has bum information.

I read bum inflammation first time, he might have that too!

Ccfcsj · Mar 26, 2013

Good old Tim has released another statement regarding the court case.

http://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/article/club-statement-260313-735012.aspx

Coventry City Football Club issue statement following this morning's proceedings in the High Court
Coventry City Football Club have released a statement following the outcome of this morning's High Court hearing.

Tim Fisher, CEO Coventry Football Club said: "I acknowledge that ACL has now accepted that it must withdraw its administration application from the High Court notwithstanding the fact that this was an unwelcome and unnecessary distraction.

"I hope all parties will now focus on re-establishing a constructive dialogue for the good of the Club and football in Coventry. We would like to ensure that Coventry City Football Club can, in the first instance, continue to play its remaining home matches this season at the Ricoh Arena.”

Brighton Sky Blue · Mar 26, 2013

ashbyjan said:
Couldn't agree with you more - as ever its us the fans who will be punished. We will be here long after SISU and ACL etc have gone, we will be left to pick up the pieces their incompetence leaves behind

All so unnecessary as I keep saying. Must admit I've nearly stopped caring about this whole mess-I just want the buggers gone.

coundonskyblue · Mar 26, 2013

Im struggling to understand this. Have I got it right that:

Ccfc ltd/The administrator has the league share, effectively the right to be a football club.

Ccfc holdings/sisu hold the player registrations, Ryton and the shop stock?

If that's the case does that mean sisu now have a load of players without a football club and the administrator owns a club without any players?

LoyalSupporters · Mar 26, 2013

Match Thread? What kind of joke is this!

ccfc92 · Mar 26, 2013

So what's going on :S?

RPHunt · Mar 26, 2013

Sky Blues said:
Who has the oranges?

JS, TF and ML no show according to Moz Baker.

Unsurprising that Ms Seppala did not appear in court. In a previous administration hearing, amongst other comments, the judge had this to say:

"Ms Seppala was the least satisfactory of all the witnesses. In making my general comments above, I said that no-one was deliberately lying. But I fear Ms Seppala has a distorted recollection of some events"

"considerable reliance is placed on what Ms Seppala had to say in her oral examination but I found much of what she had to say on the issue confusing and unhelpful"

Pete in Portugal · Mar 26, 2013

coundonskyblue said:
Im struggling to understand this. Have I got it right that:

Ccfc ltd/The administrator has the league share, effectively the right to be a football club.

Ccfc holdings/sisu hold the player registrations, Ryton and the shop stock?

If that's the case does that mean sisu now have a load of players without a football club and the administrator owns a club without any players?

Yes - that's certainly how it appears, with the rather incomplete information available to us at present.

I believe we will find out more when the FL announce their decision on a points deduction. If they deduct more than 10 points, they will probably have to give a reason. If it's only 10 points, (for now at least), then it will imply they have accepted that it's a straightforward case of Administration and that other FL rules have not been broken.

shoesmith81 · Mar 26, 2013

So we will be getting a minimum of 10 points deducted then?

Spencer · Mar 26, 2013

RPHunt said:
Unsurprising that Ms Seppala did not appear in court. In a previous administration hearing, amongst other comments, the judge had this to say:

"Ms Seppala was the least satisfactory of all the witnesses. In making my general comments above, I said that no-one was deliberately lying. But I fear Ms Seppala has a distorted recollection of some events"

"considerable reliance is placed on what Ms Seppala had to say in her oral examination but I found much of what she had to say on the issue confusing and unhelpful"

No doubt I'll be branded a SISU apologist (which I'm not) but it isn't unusual to see remarks like that made in the decision of a judge/arbitrator/adjudicator.

Often you will have two parties saying completely different things, without written evidence backing up either side, and it will be for the judge to decide, and substantiate with reasons, which party he believes.

1nilandwe... · Mar 26, 2013

Spencer said:
No doubt I'll be branded a SISU apologist (which I'm not) but it isn't unusual to see remarks like that made in the decision of a judge/arbitrator/adjudicator.

Often you will have two parties saying completely different things, without written evidence backing up either side, and it will be for the judge to decide, and substantiate with reasons, which party he believes.

Why don't you go marry SISU since you love them so much?

High Court Match Thread (3 Viewers)

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Jack Griffin

Guest

Jack Griffin

Guest

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Users who are viewing this thread

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency