Forgot your password?
Bexley, March 2, 2010 in Main Discussion - Norwich City
It annoys me how some clubs seem to get off lightly with the administration thing. Ok the 10 point deduction is a small hit, but Southampton have had all debts written off and are rebuilding a strong team. IMO regardless of any new owners, the club should still be responsible for paying off the people they owe money too, when they have the means to pay it. If they want to get away from paying the debt, the club should be dissolved, and have to reapply to join the football league, probably in at least 2 divisions lower. Similar to what has happened at Kings Lynn.
This would mean, the administration option is more like a limited time freeze on debt payments, meaning the clubs can survive, but must sort out their overspending and quickly. If no progress was being made they would have to be wound down by the administrators over time until they were a viable financial concern.
I''m sure this would make clubs far more reluctant to take the adminstration thing as an easy option to get back on track, with the 10 points being a very limited penalty for years of overspending and living beyond their means.
[quote user="Smudger"]I think that the 10 point deduction theory is way off to be honest. Do you believe that we would be sat in the play-offs now if we started the season with a 10 point deduction? It is more than merely a points deduction - it has a mental impact upon a clubs fans, players and officials for months after that penalty is handed down to them.
I am not sure it is. Without the 10 pt penalty would it have been realistic for them to be aiming for automatic promotion of 90 points? Yes it was. Even with the deduction that leaves 80pts and comfortably in the play offs. Having spend £1.25m on lambert and invested in loans and players during the season play offs was def the aim.
despite that they remain well off the pace for a play off slot.
They are now in a rich vein off form which will hopefully impact our competitors ; but like MK dons they have been too inconsistent across the season. They have not been focused enough to succeed where we have. For me that is a manager and club underperforming and not matching the ambition they should have held...
I think the key issue is the strength of their squad now compared to before the window. The addition of Barnard and Puncheon as well as Fonte and Seabourne (let''s not mention Semmy!) has given them both strength in depth and a very varied and potent attacking threat. Had they had that squad from day one I suspect that they would be very close to a play off spot now, and they should be shoo-in for automatic promotion next year.
Agreed. I think to be hones they are a more balanced and more measured side than us now. I think Barnard and Lambert are the equal of Holt and Martin up front. Plus I think Puncheon and Lallana offer quality from out wide which we simply can''t match. I agree with Smudge that Barnard would have been a great signing but financially could it have worked? Would he have been happy with spending time on the bench? Would it have unsettled Chris Martin?
I think the big error was not going in for Puncheon. He is the sort of right sided player we were crying out for. He has help to take points off us twice this season (remember that free kick for MK Dons as well?). If we had him in the side we could deploy the 4-4-2 as a genuine alternative.
lambert 1 million
grant holt 5 hundred thousand
nearly same amount of goals. enough said
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Already have an account? Sign in here.