Rotherham

[Batch]

Daddies (sauce, geddit) added

http://www.football-league.co.uk/page/News/FLNewsDetail/0,,10794~1359838,00.html

FL BOARD STATEMENT

At its meeting this evening, the Board of Directors of The Football League considered applications for membership of The League relating to Rotherham United and AFC Bournemouth.

The Board also considered Rotherham United's request to play its matches at Don Valley Stadium, Sheffield.

- Rotherham United

The Board considered an application from a company - Rotherham United (New Co.) - which has applied to join League 2 in place of the existing club, which is currently in administration.

Rotherham United (Old Co.) has been unable to agree a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) with its creditors and as a consequence is unable to satisfy the normal conditions of The League's insolvency policy for exiting administration.

The Board decided, however, that it was prepared to exercise its absolute discretion under the 'exceptional circumstances' provisions of its insolvency policy. Therefore, in accordance with recent precedent, the Board has made the following offer to Rotherham United (New Co.). Acceptance of the Board's offer is a pre-requisite to the exercise of that discretion:

1. The club will be deducted 17 points for the 2008/09 season. This takes into account the fact that this is the club's second insolvency event in recent seasons.
2. The club must provide a legal waiver indicating that it will not challenge or appeal this decision.
3. The club must undertake to return to Rotherham within four years and provide an irrevocable bond of £750,000. This will be forfeited if the club fails to return within that timeframe, as will the club's membership of The Football League.
4. The club must pay unsecured creditors the amount offered at the time of the CVA hearing.

The Board's offer is subject to the club agreeing these conditions, and formal agreements being signed, by 12.00 noon on Friday.

[Rich Pullen]

17?? thats abit odd

That's what I thought - someone will be able to explain.

Although I'm inclined to think that those in charge pick a number out of the hat and that number decides the punishment.

[Batch]

On the Muff:

- AFC Bournemouth

The Board also considered an application under the 'exceptional circumstances' provisions of its insolvency policy relating to AFC Bournemouth.

However, the Board is not yet satisfied with the viability of the new company's proposals and consequently it has been asked to reflect further on its position.

The Board will meet tomorrow to consider the matter again.

[michael]

So basically it's 15 points for not agreeing a CVA (which is impossible thanks to FL rules), plus an extra 2 points for having a history of bad finances.

If this happened to us we'd be proper fucked yes?

Gawd bless you Andrew Fitton.

[Rich Pullen]

Bournemouth will be 'punished' though - I'm going to predict -15.

Thank gawd for Andrew Fitton indeed.

[Batch]

If this happened to us we'd be proper fucked yes?
Gawd bless you Andrew Fitton.

Seconded, though I'd still like confirmation that it is Andronikou that gets strung up by his meat and two veg rather than the club regarding "non-completion" (signoff) of our very own CVA!

[Dazzza]

That's an interesting one in Rotherham’s case and a little reminiscent of the Dongs albeit under different circumstances.

I wonder had the shit hit the fan we could have manoeuvred a similar deal.

Out of interest who do they stiff by only paying off the secured creditors?

[michael]

Secured creditors being "football" debts yes?

[michael]

I must admit I do find this sort of stuff interesting. I like knowing other people's business. Especially when I know it could have been me.

[Batch]

Ya know, I didn't really think of Rotherham's situation being anything like the Dongs.  I guess both moves it could be argued come down to financial survival.

But in Rotherham's case they can't be accused of trying to steal a league place for the city of Sheffield really! Enforced on Rotherham, chosen by the Dongs.

[Rich Pullen]

If Bournemouth get a hefty deduction then, really, Luton are right back in it... They'll still have a mountain to climb - it'll be more Kangchenjunga than Mount Everest!

[Spencer_White]

So when are the Dongs moving back to Wimbledon? Where is the timeframe FL?

[janaage]

That's what I thought - someone will be able to explain.

Although I'm inclined to think that those in charge pick a number out of the hat and that number decides the punishment.

Like the opposite of a cup draw, Trevor Brooking puts hand in bowl, swishes the balls around

Davies says ""Rotherham Utd will start on"

Brooking selects ball, shows number to camera "minus 17pts"

"Luton will start on"

"minus 30pts"

and Bournemouth will start on

"minus 21 pts"

That concludes the punishment handed out to these three evil sides, see you next summer!!

[Lumps]

That's an interesting one in Rotherham’s case and a little reminiscent of the Dongs albeit under different circumstances.

I wonder had the shit hit the fan we could have manoeuvred a similar deal.

Out of interest who do they stiff by only paying off the secured creditors?

A lot more reminiscent of Rovers move to Twerton Park in Bath to be honest, a temporary move forced by circumstances, that can easily end up lasting a lot longer than planned at a financially unstable club with a small fan base. It's probably that example that the League had in mind with this clause.

[tans]

So when are the Dongs moving back to Wimbledon? Where is the timeframe FL?

Thait is actually a very good point.