Jump to content

The cost of administration


sage

Recommended Posts

I think the clubs going into administration should pay a longer term price for their financial mismanagement. There should be stronger sanctions or reparations to pay over several years.

They should either be forced to pay a % of their income to outstanding creditors for the next ten years or the largest creditor, usually us the taxpayers should own the ground and lease it back to them to help repay debts. If they don't pay the rent, knock the ground down for housing or sell it to West Ham.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Have you seen the SPL new rules. 15 points or one third of the previous season total whichever is higher. That would have put rangers third bottom and has apparently put buyers off

.

Harsh - but very fair to the rest of the league. Little comfort though to all the small traders that they will have screwed over. It is certainly more of a deterrent than the current 10 points.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a difficulty here which is that football clubs continue to flaunt the preferred creditor rules and argue they are an integral part of the community. The financial reality is that only the elite few turn over £50m plus and as such most clubs, particularly in leagues 1 and 2, are run in an un-businesslike way. Fans of clubs then claim what happens on the pitch is more important and fail to realise that if the club isn't run right that the club may not exist. Some believe that ownership of a club means continual bail outs and a right to not pay HMRC.

Too much power rests with players and their agents, excessive wages prevail for average players and the result is high admission prices, falling attendances and clubs in financial difficulty.

Regulation is the way forward and not punishment, sure this will benefit clubs with higher incomes, some will claim this protects those in the Premier League, ultimately the government will step in if clubs don't introduce workable financial fair play regulations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harsh - but very fair to the rest of the league. Little comfort though to all the small traders that they will have screwed over. It is certainly more of a deterrent than the current 10 points.

If it wasn't Rangers the club would have to reform at grass routes level, we all know why the SPL can't impose this on Rangers though!! No TV revenue if Celtic and Rangers aren't in the SPL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it wasn't Rangers the club would have to reform at grass routes level, we all know why the SPL can't impose this on Rangers though!! No TV revenue if Celtic and Rangers aren't in the SPL.

And possibly the demise of the SPL!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel very strongly about this - the cost of administration should be relegation.

No excuses, no exceptions - if a football club is so poorly financially managed that it has to call in administrators, they should be docked the necessary number of points at the end of that season to relegate them at the end of that season. If they have already been relegated that season, then they should go down another division.

i.e. if Portsmouth were to go down this year, they should go down to League Two

The financial state of football clubs (not just in this country) is an absolute disgrace. Taxpayers & small businesses in the local community are routinely robbed over the medium term...just in order to attract some mercenary players on obscene wages & chase success at any cost.

Ten points is simply not a deterrent - look at the amount of teams who have still gone into administration since the 10 point penalty was brought in. I believe Darlington & Rotherham have had 10 points deducted twice!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you consider the points deduction both Luton & Wrexham got for going into admin, then Portsmouth have got off lightly.

Didn't they get 20-30 points deducted both seasons, meaning both fell into the Conference.

Not sure if Luton's & Wrexham's penalties were due to some technicality relating to their CVA (creditors voluntary agreements) - a bit like when Leeds got stung for 25 points after getting relegated to League One.

I'm not particularly sure why there should be a "better" type of administration that only means 10 points can be deducted though!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think relegation should be a certainty.

The question I'd like to raise is why is this only happening here? Apparently clubs in Spain have masses of debt, Barcelona, Atletico ect but there's no talk of uncertain futures, and im pretty sure UEFA wouldn't ban them from Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's debt and there's not paying your bills. If you deliberately continue to buy players and give out big contracts instead of paying your bills then you deserve to be thrown out of football (or any business for that matter) for ever.

Trading while insolvent should be where the line is drawn. If only the taxman came down as hard on big companies as he does on the self employed/small businesses it would never happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...