Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Desert Fox

Darlington go in to administration

Recommended Posts

Cam,

I agree about more to come. On a selfish basis, lets hope for one or more in the Championship. Most clubs going in to administration in recent years are those that have tried to redevelop the ground and come unstuck (Ipswich, Leiecester etc). Southampton appear to be the obvious cnadidate, but they are still in the mix unlike Darlington.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to say i have said this before and i will say it again I think we might just stay up due to a few clubs going into administration. Im pretty sure Southampton will go into administration. Charlton might to and Watford dont seem to be doing well. Saw today they had to loan out John Joe O''Toole who is one of their best players as they couldnt afford to pay him

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at the background it isn''t unexpected:

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4153892.Quakers_lose___54_000_a_week___Houghton/

 

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/news/4154410.George_Reynolds__Don_t_blame_me/

 

I agree that Southampton are in difficulty but I think any clubs fighting relegation in any division are better to try and rely on their own performance rather than hoping that someone will go under.  You can be sure that if you want something to happen it won''t!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ndhscanary,

Without wishing too much misery on creditors and other teams supporters we need all the help we can get. By the way, Watford also have a major ground redevelopment in the pipeline, so I suspect that some of their problems may be related to this. I am less sure how Charlton have got into the mess that they have - they appear to be following the Leeds model of blowing away their Prem inheritence on wages as I am not aware that they have huge infrastucture or off field activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I know that most of administration cases are due to poor management of the clubs, but I can''t help but feel that it should just be the games on the pitch which decide whether or not a club succeeds/fails, as in most cases it is not the fault of the fans, players or manager.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Desert Fox"]

ndhscanary,

Without wishing too much misery on creditors and other teams supporters we need all the help we can get. By the way, Watford also have a major ground redevelopment in the pipeline, so I suspect that some of their problems may be related to this. I am less sure how Charlton have got into the mess that they have - they appear to be following the Leeds model of blowing away their Prem inheritence on wages as I am not aware that they have huge infrastucture or off field activities.

[/quote]Funny you should ask DF I read an interesting article on Charlton today on the BBC site.Seems they were following the Leicester model.Let me have a little rummage in my history thingy.............www.makeyourownfootballstatsup.com......................www.russianwives.com.....................www.10001nastythingstosayaboutdelia.co.uk...........  Ah here we go found it: Link The Charlton model (Whats gone wrong at Charlton?)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That makes for an interesting read Buckethead - thanks. Thinking about it all, it does seem that instability is the biggest killer of them all. Charlton, Southampton and ourselves have been guilty of prudence in terms of managerial appointments. I think that if a board makes a managerial appointment, it has to be because they believe that appointment to be the best, and then must support that decision through thick and thin - Sir Alex being a prime example. Quick fixes can only work so many times!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Buckethead,

Thanks for that - an interesting read. At least Charlton are paying the price by being trying to be ambitious on the football pitch rather than us who are paying the price for our failed attempt to be a house builder. Neither position is a happy poistion to be in, but I would rather go down having tried to invest in the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t understand what administration means.  I had assumed it was related to bankruptcy, but then having the league rape a team that is down for 10 or 25 points seems counterproductive to regaining solvency.  I don''t see how NCFC could be close to administration based on my obviously wrong understanding of it, so please enlighten me on it someone, anyone. [B]

 

(Then I can reply as to why you''re all wrong about it ha ha)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Houston,

Administration is a bit like Chapter 11 in the States as far as I understand it. The points penalty is there as a disincentive to avoid teams having their cake and eating it. By this I mean racking up debts to buy success, but then walking away from creditors when it goes wrong. This came in after Liecester managed to get promoted on the back of screwing their creditors. It has worked in Ipswich''s benefit twice. Meanwhile we have struggled with the consequences of servicing our debt (the fact that Board recklessly built up the debt is another matter) without screwing our creditors.

I dont believe that anyone is seriously suggesting we are going in to adminsitration, although too many years in division 3 could chnage things. My original point about Southampton is that we could get out of jail by other teams being forced to take the penalty. Yes this is unfair, but it is equally unfair to allow teams who are over trading to buy their league position by borrowing money they cant repay.

Hope this helps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, DF.  I guess I was not too far off when I thought administration was related to bankruptcy, but you have greatly clarified it for me so now I know.

I did not mean to suggest this thread was saying we are headed for admin, just that I have seen it in many threads I look at, and have thought that it seemed kind of over-the-top ezaggeration, which apparently, it is. 

I was always confused by the points penalty until you explained why that is part of the process. The FA is trying to force its clubs to act responsibly, or at least it is giving the impression that is what they are encouraging, so I like that idea.

I definitely DID understand what you meant by Norwich benefiting with avoiding relegation if others are penalized points, so you didn''t need to clarify that for me, but there is likely someone else less willing to admit how clueless (I don''t mind admitting I don''t know) they are that will benefit from your answers, so thanks again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not sure there are that many teams that would go into administration that would really give us any more chance.For example you say Southampton - but at the moment it is in their best interests to play more games to see if they stay up. I say that because if they manage to stay up and then they go into administration you are looking at being in this league but starting with a ten point defecit - that''s surely better than being in League One and starting with a ten point defecit.Watford are probably never going to go into administration now Sir Elton is back involved with the club. If worse came to worse he could bail them out.Of the rest you have Blackpool - who seem to be operating within their means. Nottingham Forest - if they can afford £2million + for a player I don''t think they are struggling for money. Barnsley - don''t know enough about them to pass a comment, Plymouth - so far as I understand operate within their means and possibly Doncaster who I doubt would be having just been promoted.That leaves Charlton. I would have thought that if they had forseen struggling with or for money they would sold on more players in January and as they havn''t I can''t see them doing so - that''s not to say they will not but I think it unlikely.Out of all of it I find it strange that whilst the current system is in place to prevent abusers it actually hurts those that are genuine. The Luton''s and Southampton''s of this world that have not made the financial risks that the likes of Leicester and Leeds made and came a cropper on. Teams that simply run out of funding can not be blamed for their predicament unless there is proof of too big a risk taking or shady goings on.And to me that is down to the FA to govern. The FA are meant to ensure that the sport remains to be fair and an example to all. You look at Darlington or Weymouth and you have to feel sorry for the fans who have done nothing wrong but get to see their team punnished as a result. There is operating beyond your means but if the revenues in the lower leagues are not high enough to sustain a professional team then English football will suffer. The more teams that are drawn into this the more the FA will be shown up to be doing nothing more than catching the loose change out of the premierships pocket.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Buckethead"][quote user="Desert Fox"]

ndhscanary,

Without wishing too much misery on creditors and other teams supporters we need all the help we can get. By the way, Watford also have a major ground redevelopment in the pipeline, so I suspect that some of their problems may be related to this. I am less sure how Charlton have got into the mess that they have - they appear to be following the Leeds model of blowing away their Prem inheritence on wages as I am not aware that they have huge infrastucture or off field activities.

[/quote]

Funny you should ask DF I read an interesting article on Charlton today on the BBC site.

Seems they were following the Leicester model.

Let me have a little rummage in my history thingy.....

........www.makeyourownfootballstatsup.com..........

............www.russianwives.com.....

................www.10001nastythingstosayaboutdelia.co.uk...........  Ah here we go found it: Link The Charlton model (Whats gone wrong at Charlton?)
[/quote]

That article mentions a debt of £37m but doesn`t explain how they racked that up.  As we are constantly told that banks won`t lend to buy players/pay wages etc. i`d like to know.  Is it remaining from rebuilding the Valley quite a few years ago?  In the comments at the bottom one supporter mentions a £9m stand in recent years as well.  It seems to me that racking up huge debts to pay for infrastructure is the most dangerous thing to do in football and we`ve done it- twice.  I wonder if Doncaster will talk about "doing a Darlington" in his next column......? [^o)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...