Portsmouth fc

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Totally agree. One thing is for sure. As long as SJM has anything to do with the club, I cannot see our business ethics changing. The second it looks like he's lost his influence and certain things start to happen behind the scenes, he'll walk. This will be our first sign of a troubled road ahead.

So what power or influence does SJM have at the moment? He might be chairman in name, but he has only 49% of the company and no real power.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I'd say we've been fairly cautious in our welcoming, even though he has many hallmarks that make him being dodgy as feck unlikely.

Really? Try publishing anything even vaguely questioning about him and see what reaction you get.

[Mr Angry]

Is this thread going to change to an anti-Anton/TSI thread?

Cos I'm sure that there are a few other threads on the Team board where individuals who want to express themselves on that subject can do so, rather than hijacking a thread about something completely different.

[wolsey]

Is this thread going to change to an anti-Anton/TSI thread?

Cos I'm sure that there are a few other threads on the Team board where individuals who want to express themselves on that subject can do so, rather than hijacking a thread about something completely different.

Depends on people's agenda

[Mr Angry]

Just a question for you all....

Assuming the Trust take over Pompey, at what point do they get disassociated from the sins of the past in people's minds - or will they always have the deeds of past owners hanging over them? They will financially, of course, and will always be at a disadvantage from that, but morally when will people stop hating them and wishing them ill because of what previous owners did?

Personally I think that Portsmouth FC should be liquidated and a new club start afresh as they should have been in 2010; as long as the "old" Portsmouth exist, I'll forever associate them with financial mismanagement and cheating that cost many clubs - including ours - points, money and glory.

And that will be the same whether or not the Trust take over.

Furthermore, I think it would be good for English football for a club like Portsmouth to go under; it will remind ALL owners that there is jeopardy in acting in a similar manner to chase success, and may make things more of a level playing field for ALL clubs as a result.

[Mr Angry]

Is this thread going to change to an anti-Anton/TSI thread?

Cos I'm sure that there are a few other threads on the Team board where individuals who want to express themselves on that subject can do so, rather than hijacking a thread about something completely different.

Depends on people's agenda

Well, quite.......

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Just a question for you all....

Assuming the Trust take over Pompey, at what point do they get disassociated from the sins of the past in people's minds - or will they always have the deeds of past owners hanging over them? They will financially, of course, and will always be at a disadvantage from that, but morally when will people stop hating them and wishing them ill because of what previous owners did?

Personally I think that Portsmouth FC should be liquidated and a new club start afresh as they should have been in 2010; as long as the "old" Portsmouth exist, I'll forever associate them with financial mismanagement and cheating that cost many clubs - including ours - points, money and glory.

And that will be the same whether or not the Trust take over.

Furthermore, I think it would be good for English football for a club like Portsmouth to go under; it will remind ALL owners that there is jeopardy in acting in a similar manner to chase success, and may make things more of a level playing field for ALL clubs as a result.

Couldn't agree more with this, Mr A.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Totally agree. One thing is for sure. As long as SJM has anything to do with the club, I cannot see our business ethics changing. The second it looks like he's lost his influence and certain things start to happen behind the scenes, he'll walk. This will be our first sign of a troubled road ahead.

So what power or influence does SJM have at the moment? He might be chairman in name, but he has only 49% of the company and no real power.

Right now, I'd think that Anton values SJMs presence and insight to the point that the percentage is of little relevance. What happens when this honeymoon period is over is anyone's guess.

[Friday's Legacy]

Obita scores on his Pompey debut.

[Who Moved The Goalposts?]

Obita scores on his Pompey debut.

Good for Jordan. Pleased for him.

Still irksome that my club are helping them out though.

[Ian Royal]

I'd say we've been fairly cautious in our welcoming, even though he has many hallmarks that make him being dodgy as feck unlikely.

Really? Try publishing anything even vaguely questioning about him and see what reaction you get.

Yeah, but you've got an obvious agenda based on not a lot.

So what power or influence does SJM have at the moment? He might be chairman in name, but he has only 49% of the company and no real power.

Well being Chairman and owning 49% of the club he has a major voice in the way the club is run. He can be ignored, but he has to be heard. He has clearly been left with the reigns in his hands whilst Anton is out of the country. Given how much we know about Madejski and his stated (and demonstrated) aims and methods for the club, we therefore know that Anton's must be similar - at least short-term, or he wouldn't have given Madejski any control, no matter how transient it may be. And we also know that Madejski is unlikely to hang around in the roll if he thinks things are being gone about in the wrong way that put us at risk.

So whilst Madejski is happy as Chairman / Life President, Anton is saying all the right things and continues to be reasonably visible. And whilst we continue to operate relatively financially soundly and perform ok. I see no real reason to worry. Especially with Anton's behaviour so far and links to the area.

The second we get a sniff of something dodgy, we'll sit up and take notice. Just look at the response the suggestion that Pog was going to be on £65k a week got. Or that we should sign Owen. Or Rhodes for £6m. Or that we had a chance of signing Defoe! They were all met with caution and a hint of alarm that maybe we weren't going to be run in a sound financial way afterall. And none of them seem to have materialised as a problem.

A wholly different circumstance to welcoming some bloke no one's ever heard of or seen, who's never around and starts chucking money the club didn't have last week at big name players who are past their prime, or should be playing for a far better club. And celebrating a trophy win based on that conscience free.

[sandman]

Obita scores on his Pompey debut.

Good for Jordan. Pleased for him.

Still irksome that my club are helping them out though.

I think it's more about Brian trying to help out Appleton.

[Dare to Dr£am]

I'd say we've been fairly cautious in our welcoming, even though he has many hallmarks that make him being dodgy as feck unlikely.

Really? :shock: Try publishing anything even vaguely questioning about him and see what reaction you get.

Yeah, but you've got an obvious agenda based on not a lot.

So what power or influence does SJM have at the moment? He might be chairman in name, but he has only 49% of the company and no real power.

Well being Chairman and owning 49% of the club he has a major voice in the way the club is run. He can be ignored, but he has to be heard. He has clearly been left with the reigns in his hands whilst Anton is out of the country. Given how much we know about Madejski and his stated (and demonstrated) aims and methods for the club, we therefore know that Anton's must be similar - at least short-term, or he wouldn't have given Madejski any control, no matter how transient it may be. And we also know that Madejski is unlikely to hang around in the roll if he thinks things are being gone about in the wrong way that put us at risk.

So whilst Madejski is happy as Chairman / Life President, Anton is saying all the right things and continues to be reasonably visible. And whilst we continue to operate relatively financially soundly and perform ok. I see no real reason to worry. Especially with Anton's behaviour so far and links to the area.

The second we get a sniff of something dodgy, we'll sit up and take notice. Just look at the response the suggestion that Pog was going to be on £65k a week got. Or that we should sign Owen. Or Rhodes for £6m. Or that we had a chance of signing Defoe! They were all met with caution and a hint of alarm that maybe we weren't going to be run in a sound financial way afterall. And none of them seem to have materialised as a problem.

A wholly different circumstance to welcoming some bloke no one's ever heard of or seen, who's never around and starts chucking money the club didn't have last week at big name players who are past their prime, or should be playing for a far better club. And celebrating a trophy win based on that conscience free.

I might have missed the answer last time, so I apologise, but why is Dirk Gently posting from two different usernames?

[Alexander Litvinenko]

Yeah, but you've got an obvious agenda based on not a lot.

Really? If it's so obvious please do tell me what it is....

.... Well being Chairman etc ..... (I won't quote it all, for brevity) .

Everything you say in this is based on supposition or trust - there's nothing that any of us actually know for sure.

[Alexander Litvinenko]

I might have missed the answer last time, so I apologise, but why is Dirk Gently posting from two different usernames?

The answer wasn't given publicly, but if you really want this clarified, the DG ID was retired when I resigned as a STAR Board member and stopped speaking on their behalf - in many people's eyes that ID was irredeemably linked to STAR, so I wanted to disassociate what I posted from that point from anything to do with STAR. That ID will only ever be used very rarely - and only then when responding to something that dates back to those days and specifically refers to that ID.

This is my own personal ID, from which I post only personal opinions, and do not represent any body or organisation.

[Geekins]

So STAR doesn't like spiders then!

[Mr Angry]

All the loanees are only there for a Month aren't they? Presumably, the idea is to try and get in finance (either via the Trust or more likely Chainrai to come back in) to fund things going forward; but if that DOESN'T happen, then what?

I can quite easily see Pompey being unable to fulfill their fixtures, possibly this side of Xmas.

[Nick Shorey my Lord!]

Stupid questions are stupid.

Are there any restrictions on the number of loan players you are allowed to field in a starting 11?
Are there any restrictions on the number of loan players you can have in a season?

[Geekins]

Didn't Pompey have 5 loanees last season or the season before and one every week had to be out of the squad as only 4 allowed? Remember Sonko always being the one left out!

[Mr Angry]

Stupid questions are stupid.

Are there any restrictions on the number of loan players you are allowed to field in a starting 11?
Are there any restrictions on the number of loan players you can have in a season?

47.3.1 A maximum of 5 loan Players (either Short Term or Long Term) can be named in the
sixteen Players listed on a team sheet for any individual Match. This figure shall
include any additional loan of a goalkeeper approved by the Executive under the
provisions of Regulation 49.

It doesn't appear that there is a limit to the number of loan players in a season, though I always thought it was only 7 (but I'm probably way out of date on that!).