Thirty Points deduction!

[First Wizard 0]

At least thats the crack on the Col Who Offy MB site:

''''Really looking forward to this points deduction now, Just hope it''s the 30 points that has been suggested on 606 by someone''''

[Lord Flashheart 0]

That sounds hugely unlikely to me, but if it''s true how many people would be angry at Mr McNally? [*-)]

[I am a Banana 0]

30 points is high - 60 is pointless in going up.

 

if lambert left col u and then joined us nothing was wrong.

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

At least thats the crack on the Col Who Offy MB site:

''''Really looking forward to this points deduction now, Just hope it''s the 30 points that has been suggested on 606 by someone''''

[/quote]

 

more chance of the doc and micky nelson having gay intercourse

[yellow blood 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"]

At least thats the crack on the Col Who Offy MB site:

''''Really looking forward to this points deduction now, Just hope it''s the 30 points that has been suggested on 606 by someone''''

[/quote]

[Lord Flashheart 0]

It sounds to me like Col Who''s complaint is based on the lack of agreement over compensation. [*-)]

[Wembley_Canary 0]

Why are we even talking about this, this is exactly what Cowling and tin pot fans of Col Who want to see, us sweat over our clubs future for doing something that clearly isn''t worthy of such punishment. If it wasn''t for Cowling and his big gob, after he made comments about an outrageous points deduction earlier on in the season then we wouldn''t even be talking about this now.

[InLambertWeTrust! 0]

First Wiz in posting sensationalist attention seeking rubbish shocker!

[gary 0]

and they base this on all those other clubs that got points deductions in circumstances such as these , such as ? and ? oh no one ever has !!!!!

[Syteanric 1]

if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen!

[Shaun Tilly Lace 0]

Cowling and his cohorts would have to start worrying about a furious backlash from about 50,000 City fans if a 30 point penalty was imposed.

[jammis 0]

And the someone who suggested it on 606, colu_mike, is a crackpot

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[PhatCanary 0]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]

The most likely outcome is a big fine and a slap on the wrist,30 point deduction is just complete BS!!

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="Wembley_Canary"]Why are we even talking about this, this is exactly what Cowling and tin pot fans of Col Who want to see, us sweat over our clubs future for doing something that clearly isn''t worthy of such punishment. If it wasn''t for Cowling and his big gob, after he made comments about an outrageous points deduction earlier on in the season then we wouldn''t even be talking about this now.
[/quote]

I''m not sweating over it all. There''s punishment and compensation. IMO the punishment will be a small fine, small because of the mitigating circumstance that Norwich were given permission to talk to Lambert and Lambert resigned anyway. As for a points deduction if this had ever been an option the FL would have called the tribunal much earlier, not wait until the season is effectively over.

As for compensation this is always linked to consequential damage or loss as a result of an action. Norwich were given permission by Cowling to talk to Lambert. The view that a tribunal would take is that if Col Utd valued Lambert so highly and wished to retain his services they would have refused permission. Lambert then joined Norwich and very quickly afterwards Col Utd appointed Adie Boothroyd who, at the time, was generally regarded as a more established manager with a better track record than Lambert. Indeed, Cowling boasted that he had secured the services of a better manager than Lambert. Moreover, this all took place when the season had only just started. Under their new manager, Col Utd stayed in the top 6 virtually until the end of the season and, at times, challenged closely for the second automatic promotion spot. Lambert''s success at Norwich, a much larger club than Col Who, could arguably be linked to the fact that he had a better, larger squad than Boothroyd. Therefore, for what it''s worth, my view is that the tribunal will judge that Col Utd could have chosen to prevent Lambert''s move to Norwich by refusing permission to Norwich to speak to Lambert. That, by giving permission for Norwich to approach Lambert, Col Utd were, in effect, encouraging Lambert''s move. That, arguably, Col Utd had already decided that they wanted Boothroyd instead and that Cowling thought that he could get his man and also compensation for Lambert i.e. having his cake and eat it. Cowling''s bragging that he had (so quickly) brought in a better manager than Lambert is consistent with this proposition but, even if it isn''t, it clearly demonstrates that Cowling believed that Col Utd would not be disadvantaged by Lambert''s departure, instead it created the opportunity to bring in a "better manager" - why say it if you don''t believe it ?

 

So, all in all, I really do think this is much ado about nothing or rather, very little and that there will definitely be no points deduction, a punsihment fine of probably no more than £10K and possibly £30 or £40K compensation to Col Who although, in truth, as the cosnequential damage or loss to Col Utd was so small, on very small compensation should be awarded.

 

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="PhatCanary"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]

The most likely outcome is a big fine and a slap on the wrist,30 point deduction is just complete BS!!

[/quote]

Awwww so I won''t be playing in goal, bugger was looking forward to that [:D]

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"][quote user="PhatCanary"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]The most likely outcome is a big fine and a slap on the wrist,30 point deduction is just complete BS!!

[/quote]

Awwww so I won''t be playing in goal, bugger was looking forward to that [:D]

[/quote]So was I mate, especially if you were wearing tight short shorts![;)]

[PhatCanary 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"][quote user="PhatCanary"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]The most likely outcome is a big fine and a slap on the wrist,30 point deduction is just complete BS!!

[/quote]

Awwww so I won''t be playing in goal, bugger was looking forward to that [:D]

[/quote]So was I mate, especially if you were wearing tight short shorts![;)][/quote]

[:|]Easy Wiz,your getting excited!!

[Joanna Grey 0]

If it was mike who suggested this ludicrous amount on 606 then wiz should be ashamed of himself posting it here. wiz knows every colwho poster intimately having spent most of his time on their forums and would realise that mike is a wind-up merchant. Still +1 posts eh wiz?

[First Wizard 0]

[quote user="Mustachio Furioso"]If it was mike who suggested this ludicrous amount on 606 then wiz should be ashamed of himself posting it here. wiz knows every colwho poster intimately having spent most of his time on their forums and would realise that mike is a wind-up merchant. Still +1 posts eh wiz?[/quote]Strangly, I only reconise Col.1, he''s a good lad, the others apart from old Camuldung himself are not known to me.............so there!![:P]

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="First Wizard"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"][quote user="PhatCanary"][quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]The most likely outcome is a big fine and a slap on the wrist,30 point deduction is just complete BS!!

[/quote]

Awwww so I won''t be playing in goal, bugger was looking forward to that [:D]

[/quote]So was I mate, especially if you were wearing tight short shorts![;)][/quote]

 

Hahaha mate hmmmm not a pretty sight [:D]

[Norfolk Mustard 106]

[quote user="Alf Tupper"]

[quote user="Wembley_Canary"]Why are we even talking about this, this is exactly what Cowling and tin pot fans of Col Who want to see, us sweat over our clubs future for doing something that clearly isn''t worthy of such punishment. If it wasn''t for Cowling and his big gob, after he made comments about an outrageous points deduction earlier on in the season then we wouldn''t even be talking about this now.
[/quote]

I''m not sweating over it all. There''s punishment and compensation. IMO the punishment will be a small fine, small because of the mitigating circumstance that Norwich were given permission to talk to Lambert and Lambert resigned anyway. As for a points deduction if this had ever been an option the FL would have called the tribunal much earlier, not wait until the season is effectively over.

As for compensation this is always linked to consequential damage or loss as a result of an action. Norwich were given permission by Cowling to talk to Lambert. The view that a tribunal would take is that if Col Utd valued Lambert so highly and wished to retain his services they would have refused permission. Lambert then joined Norwich and very quickly afterwards Col Utd appointed Adie Boothroyd who, at the time, was generally regarded as a more established manager with a better track record than Lambert. Indeed, Cowling boasted that he had secured the services of a better manager than Lambert. Moreover, this all took place when the season had only just started. Under their new manager, Col Utd stayed in the top 6 virtually until the end of the season and, at times, challenged closely for the second automatic promotion spot. Lambert''s success at Norwich, a much larger club than Col Who, could arguably be linked to the fact that he had a better, larger squad than Boothroyd. Therefore, for what it''s worth, my view is that the tribunal will judge that Col Utd could have chosen to prevent Lambert''s move to Norwich by refusing permission to Norwich to speak to Lambert. That, by giving permission for Norwich to approach Lambert, Col Utd were, in effect, encouraging Lambert''s move. That, arguably, Col Utd had already decided that they wanted Boothroyd instead and that Cowling thought that he could get his man and also compensation for Lambert i.e. having his cake and eat it. Cowling''s bragging that he had (so quickly) brought in a better manager than Lambert is consistent with this proposition but, even if it isn''t, it clearly demonstrates that Cowling believed that Col Utd would not be disadvantaged by Lambert''s departure, instead it created the opportunity to bring in a "better manager" - why say it if you don''t believe it ?

 

So, all in all, I really do think this is much ado about nothing or rather, very little and that there will definitely be no points deduction, a punsihment fine of probably no more than £10K and possibly £30 or £40K compensation to Col Who although, in truth, as the cosnequential damage or loss to Col Utd was so small, on very small compensation should be awarded.

 

[/quote]

I love the way you express things Alf; I have always thought that Cowling was rather naive stating he would appoint another manager who ''is as good as, if not better than Paul Lambert'' - those words may well come back to haunt him?

[ncfc90 0]

Typical attention seeking

[Mr. Bump 0]

I heard a rumour it was 50 pointsEnjoy League Two. Thanks for nothing McNally. [:|]

[Snoots 0]

[quote user="Norfolk Mustard"][quote user="Alf Tupper"]

[quote user="Wembley_Canary"]Why are we even talking about this, this is exactly what Cowling and tin pot fans of Col Who want to see, us sweat over our clubs future for doing something that clearly isn''t worthy of such punishment. If it wasn''t for Cowling and his big gob, after he made comments about an outrageous points deduction earlier on in the season then we wouldn''t even be talking about this now.
[/quote]

I''m not sweating over it all. There''s punishment and compensation. IMO the punishment will be a small fine, small because of the mitigating circumstance that Norwich were given permission to talk to Lambert and Lambert resigned anyway. As for a points deduction if this had ever been an option the FL would have called the tribunal much earlier, not wait until the season is effectively over.

As for compensation this is always linked to consequential damage or loss as a result of an action. Norwich were given permission by Cowling to talk to Lambert. The view that a tribunal would take is that if Col Utd valued Lambert so highly and wished to retain his services they would have refused permission. Lambert then joined Norwich and very quickly afterwards Col Utd appointed Adie Boothroyd who, at the time, was generally regarded as a more established manager with a better track record than Lambert. Indeed, Cowling boasted that he had secured the services of a better manager than Lambert. Moreover, this all took place when the season had only just started. Under their new manager, Col Utd stayed in the top 6 virtually until the end of the season and, at times, challenged closely for the second automatic promotion spot. Lambert''s success at Norwich, a much larger club than Col Who, could arguably be linked to the fact that he had a better, larger squad than Boothroyd. Therefore, for what it''s worth, my view is that the tribunal will judge that Col Utd could have chosen to prevent Lambert''s move to Norwich by refusing permission to Norwich to speak to Lambert. That, by giving permission for Norwich to approach Lambert, Col Utd were, in effect, encouraging Lambert''s move. That, arguably, Col Utd had already decided that they wanted Boothroyd instead and that Cowling thought that he could get his man and also compensation for Lambert i.e. having his cake and eat it. Cowling''s bragging that he had (so quickly) brought in a better manager than Lambert is consistent with this proposition but, even if it isn''t, it clearly demonstrates that Cowling believed that Col Utd would not be disadvantaged by Lambert''s departure, instead it created the opportunity to bring in a "better manager" - why say it if you don''t believe it ?

 

So, all in all, I really do think this is much ado about nothing or rather, very little and that there will definitely be no points deduction, a punsihment fine of probably no more than £10K and possibly £30 or £40K compensation to Col Who although, in truth, as the cosnequential damage or loss to Col Utd was so small, on very small compensation should be awarded.

 

[/quote] I love the way you express things Alf; I have always thought that Cowling was rather naive stating he would appoint another manager who ''is as good as, if not better than Paul Lambert'' - those words may well come back to haunt him?[/quote]

 

You reminded me of that yesterday in another thread !

[Wembley_Canary 0]

[quote user="Mr. Bump"]I heard a rumour it was 50 pointsEnjoy League Two. Thanks for nothing McNally. [:|][/quote]50 points and Mcnally''s left testicle.

[William Darby 0]

If it''s 30 points who wants a pitch invasion?

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"]if we get deducted 30 points then i''m in the England squad for the world cup... it wont happen![/quote]

And i''d be in goal

[/quote]

That means I''d have to play on the wing, and have a paramedic running along side me, Did I say running? still you have to laugh.    

[Forever Norwich 0]

i LOL at a 30 point dedcution beter chance off col who going up in the next 25 years

[G 0]

LOL. That was worth posting. Like someone else said, it would be like the case with ? and ? oh nobody...