Exactly my thoughts in the opening post. It all seems way too coincidental.

As others have said, I've got no particular affinity for Luton Town, but the FA's 30-point deficit is fucking rank judgement. It stinks. There seems to be a link today with Blatter's cuntbrained announcement and this piece of 'action' in that it asks the question why these contemptuous wankers are in charge of the sport. Is it 'Let's Be Cunts' Day for football's administrational bodies?

ian.64 wrote:

QUOTE:
Is it 'Let's Be Cunts' Day for football's administrational bodies?

Isn't it always?

Amor de Cosmos wrote:

QUOTE:
Another 10 point deduction, that makes 25 in the past six months.

QPR supporters (and others) have all kinds of reasons not feel warm and fuzzy about Luton Town and their fans, but I can't help but wonder why the wrong people are being punished. Those guilty of mismanagement and misconduct are gone but the club and its supporters continues to pay the price. Also, it's probably paranoia but a decline in Luton's fortunes suspiciously parallels a rise in MK Dons'. If the club slides into the Conference — a distinct possibility — who benefits? Where do the fans go? A coincidence perhaps, just like the white shirts.

Well, yes and no.

I was part of the FSA-organized petition at the League Cup final they played Forest in, and was appalled about the number of (usually female, and usually with a brood of kids) people wanting to know if I'd sign "their" petition in favour of ID cards.

Had this been then, my reaction would've been "fuck 'em", and the trains, coaches, and cars they road in on.

But Evans is long gone, and I'd suspect the majority of these "fans" have fucked off to IKEA on a Saturday afternoon where they belong as well.

The "for the fans" argument is bollocks because they weren't complaining when they were winning having done this, but to knock 30 points off is draconian - the league have effectively decided to relegate them before the season starts, and this cannot be right.

By all means, deduct the 10 points - or whatever, and then the 20, but suspend the 20 points for a season and apply it if they're in the same situtation again

It does smack of administrative lack of bottle. Effectively relegating a club before the season begins is pointless. Just bloody relegate them, if that's the punishment, and get on with it. Promote Cambridge in their place.

The Football League never used to be scared of relegating teams for financial misdemeanours. They took Swindon's place in Division One away once just three days after they'd won the showpiece Playoff Final at Wembley (as Big Dave's Gusset will be able to recall).

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:

QUOTE:
It does smack of administrative lack of bottle. Effectively relegating a club before the season begins is pointless. Just bloody relegate them, if that's the punishment, and get on with it. Promote Cambridge in their place.

The Football League never used to be scared of relegating teams for financial misdemeanours. They took Swindon's place in Division One away once just three days after they'd won the showpiece Playoff Final at Wembley (as Big Dave's Gusset will be able to recall).

You're forgetting though, it is "essential to preserve the integrity of the competition"...

QUOTE:
Promote Cambridge in their place.

much as I'd love that, a) I'd feel a bit bad as it's their long-suffering support that would suffer away trips to Grays as a result of dodgy administrators who are no longer there. A bit bad, mind; b) I believe the Conference don't accept clubs in administration, so they'd be right down the pyramid.

Bournemouth must be terrified. I would think at least -15 is coming their way, as they are in admin for the second time in recent seasons (Luton being -20 because it's their third). What with the taxman voting down every CVA, and no CVA meaning another points deduction to come out.

Luton have no recourse on these latest -20 points, as they have signed a Leeds-like letter accepting the punishment in return for their place in the League Two next season. One would hope the FA sees sense and gives them the -10 back for the previous offence, the one they provided the prosecution with all the evidence of.


Given that Cambridge were the inventors of the "Go into admin in the final week of the season, having been already relegated, and so duck the -10 point punishment" stunt, I don't think we have much of a moral leg to stand on if L2020 group thinks sod it and pulls the plug before the season begins. Would be better to play League Two with 23 clubs.

Would the league be able to apply sanctions to individuals or companies who were no longer involved with one of its members?

That's what the 'Fit And Proper Persons' test is designed to do.

And this is where it's blatant hypocrisy. Luton weren't given a suspended points deduction for their previous 'insolvency events' at the time - the League took no action at all.

Yet, the League also say that they cannot take into account the history of directors before the 'Fit and Proper Persons Test' was introduced. So Luton can be docked 20 points for transgressions previous directors made - without censure - ten years ago, but Ken Bates is considered fit and proper, despite liquidating the companies that owned the league placings of Chelsea and Leeds United.

For me the most worrying aspect of the Football League's decision is the demand that Luton sign away their right of appeal as a condition of being allowed into League 2. This smacks of blackmail and is a denial of basic rights, surely this must contravene some UK or EU law?

I think it's time that the UK government stepped in and took control of football out of the hands of the old boys blazer brigade before they destroy it completely.

A very belated hello to the new look OTF.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/football_league/article4333579.ece

"Cherry Newbery, the club secretary at the time, was the employee who drew attention to the directors who were paying agents through a holding company, rather than from the club's bank account. Luton adopted this method because Mike Newell, the manager at the time, did not like paying agents for deals.

The club had expected that the FA would take this, and their full co-operation during the inquiry, into account when it passed judgment. The FA, however, will argue that the club broke its rules and that Newbery, as a secretary, cannot be viewed as a club official. "


This argument by the FA pretty much says the FA wants to shut the lid on any future whistleblowing by employees. Why would any employee report their bosses knowing thats how the authorities will treat them? Absolutely staggering in its implications regarding the FA's claim to want to "clean up the game".

Wrong, wrong, wrong...

Yet more punishment without deterrence. The message here isn't that the game takes this seriously, and will root our payments made by side companies (in Luton's case, it was done 'honestly' but if they're guilty of using the methods of crooks, if not sharing their motives). It's that you should at all cost avoid employing people with principles who might whistleblow. It's asinine beyond belief.

The only thing which would work here is a reliable system of inspection and oversight; the deterrence comes from the knowledge that there's a good chance you'll be caught, which the vast majority of bent clubs know if simply not a real-world possibility.

QUOTE:
The "for the fans" argument is bollocks because they weren't complaining when they were winning having done this

I understand your point. But it doesn't reflect the actual reality of what happened at Luton during this period (even the 04/05 season doesn't fit the charge).

We sure as hell have been complaining for the past 3 seasons (which covers the FA charges and practically all the losses that have caused administration). Ironically we started losing much more than we were winning a few months after we started cheating. Go on to the supporters trusts site (TiL) or the Loyal Luton site. You will see that there has been a long running campaign by supporters groups regarding the issue of financial probity at the club.

We have complained very loudly, sadly nobody much outside of Luton has been listening (certainly not people in Soho Square or Navigation Way). An issue that I am pretty sure that supporters of most clubs outside the Premiership are all too familiar with in regards to their own clubs problems.

Had the club managed successive promotions and signed £14m worth of players during this time, I could understand the schadenfreude of administration. However the reality is that the opposite happened.

Er, rant over.

Yours

Angry Formerly of Bedfordshire.

QUOTE:
Newbery, as a secretary, cannot be viewed as a club official

Well, that's bollocks for a start.