Comments on: League Two Points In The Wrong Direction

By: Gary Andrews

Gary Andrews — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 09:34:28 +0000

Nice use of the word imbroglio there Ron!

I take your point as well about clubs with new consortiums having cash to splash around, and what you’re describing is very much what happened to Leeds last year. However, unlike Luton, Leeds could take the hit. For all the talk of money, I doubt whether Luton would have been pushing for the playoffs this season even without such a large points deduction.

I wouldn’t disagree with the idea that the League needs to punish clubs who live beyond their means, but when part of those rules make it nigh-on impossible for clubs to comply with (the CVA & HMRC) then you’ve got to look at the rules and revise them.

At the end of the day you’ve still got plenty of clubs who are in debt and haven’t written these off – in a perfect world all clubs would start from the same position, but sadly that’s not going to happen and its about how well the clubs manage themselves. Sadly, all to often they’re unable to do this and its the fans and the new people who come in and get hit with the penalties when those who caused the damage get off largely scott-free.

By: Ron Ipstone

Ron Ipstone — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:03:46 +0000

The trouble with the Luton imbroglio is that everyone, except the FA and League approaches it from the perspective of Luton Town FC.

I would ask the author to look again from the perspective of the smaller clubs in the Division, who have debts and budgets dictated by those debts. They will be in competition with a newly reformed LTFC operated by a new company called LTFC 2020 Ltd. This company has announced that it has a budget of Â£10 million to take Luton Town forward.

It could of course use this money to pay off in full the creditors of the old company now in administration, or it can
apply for the share in the Football League which belonged to the old company, which would allow it to compete in the League competitions. If it does the latter it must do so on the conditions of part payment of the creditors of the old company, and a 20 point deduction. By doing the latter it will of course have the greater part of its Â£10 million budget to take Luton forward.

It will be buying players and paying the players’ wages with this money. This will be in competition with the likes of Macclesfield, Daggers, Accrington etc, who have not written of millions of pounds of debt, and have to pay tax bills and wages.

The League are right to redress the balance with a points deduction. It is a far from perfect solution, not least because the League positions could be determined by HMRC, but in the circumstances it provides a rough justice. Luton may get relegated to the Conference or it may survive, it certainly wont get promoted.

It might have been better for Luton to start in the Conference, but I understand that there would have been problems with the administration of the old company not being completed.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 07:36:32 +0000

Would it not just be better for them just to be relegated now and save them a season?

By: Phill Oliver

Phill Oliver — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 03:39:29 +0000

As a Luton fan its great to see how many fans from so many different clubs giving us support. Its also fantastic to see the majority of media also show great support but what will it mean in the end? Nothing as the FA are a law unto their own and do not care about anyone but themselves. They are assuming this matter (trivial to them) will be forgotten about in a few weeks and they can carry on living their 5 star lifestyles while we the true fans will be suffering for months and possibly years to come.

By: Michael Flaherty

Michael Flaherty — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:59:20 +0000

Excellent article Garry, it raises many valid points about the league’s insolvency rules that many other journalists have also highlighted. Which begs the question, why if so many people can see the problems with the rules why can’t the league? It makes you wonder if they really care that much about the clubs or if trying to uphold an image of strong, responsible management is more important to them? If it’s the latter they are failing miserably in my humble opinion

By: Ken

Ken — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:42:40 +0000

Mention is made of Luton going into administration after they collapsed with debts of around Â£4.5m. But many Luton fans would also point to the amount of money that was made from the sales of prominent players that seems to have disappeared into thin air and the fact that the authorities are not interested in finding out where this has gone.

By: jhodgski

jhodgski — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:04:18 +0000

There’s a fair chance that there will more clubs with points deductions this season (for entering administration), so if Harford can get some results together this time round then there should be maybe 3 or 4 teams we (Luton) can finish ahead of.

But it’s a shame when the state of the game means other teams going into administration is your main hope of survival…

By: Gary Andrews

Gary Andrews — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:59:37 +0000

Yes, you’re largely right there Ben, although then opens a rather confusing can of exact financial terminology worms.

HMRC are definitely footballing debts, but (unless I’m completely wrong here) they’re not considered a football creditor by the FA, so don’t get preference in the CVA, hence why they vote against it.

It’s just another reason why the rules could do with a bit of shaking up.

By: Ben Terrett

Ben Terrett — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:12:51 +0000

You mention that HMRC are not footballing creditors – technically I suppose not, but in light of the fact that the PAYE/NIC payments due are mainly from players’ wages then in reality, they are footballing debts. Although I suppose you could argue that Luton’s “players” last year – Currie, Jackson, Morgan, Goodall et al – are not footballers at all