Samdy Gray
Dirty sneaky traitor weasel
 Offline
Posts: 27180
|
 |
« Reply #45 on: Wednesday, October 31, 2007, 16:51:36 » |
|
yeah. i'm the guardian of the TEF. Nah, I'd say you're more of an Independent or Daily Express. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Reg Smeeton
Walking Encyclopaedia
Offline
Posts: 34913
|
|
« Reply #46 on: Wednesday, October 31, 2007, 17:17:10 » |
|
yeah. i'm the guardian of the TEF. Nah, I'd say you're more of an Independent or Daily Express. SY is more like the Daily Mail of the TEF. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
sonic youth
|
|
« Reply #47 on: Wednesday, October 31, 2007, 18:48:49 » |
|
that is downright insulting.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
wheretherealredsare
Change me
Offline
Posts: 3136
|
|
« Reply #48 on: Thursday, November 1, 2007, 12:10:16 » |
|
I do not believe the Daily Mail will take any offence at the comparison.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
STFC Bart
Offline
Posts: 1114
|
|
« Reply #49 on: Saturday, November 3, 2007, 18:58:48 » |
|
Apparantly we have been told by the league that if the cva is not settled in full by 01/12/07 we will obtain a 15 point deduction
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
wheretherealredsare
Change me
Offline
Posts: 3136
|
|
« Reply #50 on: Saturday, November 3, 2007, 19:04:03 » |
|
And your custard is???
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Fred Elliot
I REST MY FUCKING CASE
Offline
Posts: 15736
|
|
« Reply #51 on: Saturday, November 3, 2007, 19:11:12 » |
|
And your custard is??? true |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lebowski
|
|
« Reply #52 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 13:55:12 » |
|
failed CVA is -10 points, not -15.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lebowski
|
|
« Reply #53 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 13:56:06 » |
|
not that -10 points is much better, but the point is that some things are being said now which are blatantly false.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #54 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:09:17 » |
|
Is there a set points deduction for each offence? If the CVA doesn't get paid I'd assume that would mean administration, hence the -15 points, because that's the new precedent set by Leeds.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
STFC Bart
Offline
Posts: 1114
|
|
« Reply #55 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:09:48 » |
|
they have had 5 years to pay this, Bills money was to pay this, totally unacceptable
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lebowski
|
|
« Reply #56 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:14:21 » |
|
the leeds -15 points penalty was, basically, because they didn't set up a CVA.
the scarborough -10 points penalty was because they failed a CVA.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Simon Pieman
Original Wanker
Offline
Posts: 36334
|
|
« Reply #57 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:17:04 » |
|
the leeds -15 points penalty was, basically, because they didn't set up a CVA.
the scarborough -10 points penalty was because they failed a CVA. The Leeds thing was because they failed to come out of administration before the start of the season. Scarborough aren't even in the football league. You're 'facts' are as good as anyone elses. I'm not saying you're wrong but your posts are equally as speculative as the rest of everyone elses, mine included. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lebowski
|
|
« Reply #58 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:21:46 » |
|
may i suggest that you go and read up on the leeds situation? here, i will help: leeds situation |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lebowski
|
|
« Reply #59 on: Sunday, November 4, 2007, 14:26:02 » |
|
looking at the bigger picture here, if we expect a 15 point deduction then we will all be quite pleased if it's only 10.
a pessimist is never disappointed.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
