Portsmouth sign Manchester City youngsters on loan

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊









Sussex Nomad

Well-known member
Aug 26, 2010
18,185
EP
They SHOULD NOT be allowed to sign anyone, whether on loan or full time. They are up to there necks in shit, they should be relegated and that is it. They owe money to ex owners, the tax man (which affects all of us), local businesses that will go to the wall because of them, they are still contracting 30k a week players. If that is not enough reason to be angry I don't know what is.
 








krakatoa

Member
Jan 21, 2010
472
HOVE
They've shipped out big earners like Liam Lawrence and Mullins and brought in kids to make up the numbers so they can put a squad out. Makes sense to me. And they're far from the first club to get in a financial mess under dodgy owners, and they won't be the last.
 


El Presidente

The ONLY Gay in Brighton
Helpful Moderator
Jul 5, 2003
40,008
Pattknull med Haksprut
I was delighted they beat our play-off rivals midweek.

Would you rather all their well paid players were shipped out so they face certain defeat each week, and put out a team of kids against Hull and Palace, with the Albion finishing 7th behind Hull as a result?
 


Mendoza

NSC's Most Stalked
Birmingham and Coventry had transfer embargoes slapped on them because of their finances. They are not even in administration. How Pompey are allowed to sign 3 players whilst in administration is an absolute piss take out of the rest of the football league.
 






D

Deleted member 18477

Guest
As long as they aren't paying the wages it doesn't matter. If they beat some of our playoff rivals I will be very very happy! Although I do want to see them relegated... But you gotta look after number 1 first (ourselves).
 


Simster

"the man's an arse"
Jul 7, 2003
54,952
Surrey
I was delighted they beat our play-off rivals midweek.

Would you rather all their well paid players were shipped out so they face certain defeat each week, and put out a team of kids against Hull and Palace, with the Albion finishing 7th behind Hull as a result?
Much as we'd all love to see Portsmouth get relegated, this is the truth of the matter.
 






les dynam

New member
Oct 10, 2008
1,640
Hove
Birmingham and Coventry had transfer embargoes slapped on them because of their finances. They are not even in administration. How Pompey are allowed to sign 3 players whilst in administration is an absolute piss take out of the rest of the football league.

is the correct answer
 


Shooting Star

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2011
2,883
Suffolk
Birmingham and Coventry had transfer embargoes slapped on them because of their finances. They are not even in administration. How Pompey are allowed to sign 3 players whilst in administration is an absolute piss take out of the rest of the football league.

This. It will be an absolute farce and an injustice if they stay up. For me, not just because of this latest fiasco, but simply because they've been in administration. Gus is right, administration should mean relegation, at the least. I feel sorry for teams like Forest and Donny, teams who spend within their means. Forest told McClaren before the season they wouldn't spend any money, and they stuck to this and have paid the consequences in a poor league position. Pompey spend recklessly and still have a viable shot at staying up. So so so immoral.
 




Shooting Star

Well-known member
Apr 29, 2011
2,883
Suffolk
In unrelated matters, love the avatar [MENTION=17215]LondonBlue[/MENTION], it would make a cracking flag.
 


Blackadder

Brighton Bhuna Boy
Jul 6, 2003
16,121
Haywards Heath
After their win against Brum, I think they have a fair chance of staying up. Bristol City are bombing at the moment and Cov and Donny are drawing too many.

However, we need all teams at the bottom to be fighting for the lives. Whilst they all have a chance of staying up, they will take points off our rivals. We don't play any of them again this season.

Same goes for Ipswich, Leicester and Leeds (apart from their last game). We don't play them again but they will do damage to others.

Happy for pompey to go down after all that.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
53,153
Goldstone
If they're not paying the wages I see no problem with it - in fact there can be circumstances where it's ok even if they do pay some wages, eg, let one of their better players go to another team while bringing in a cheaper player = worse team and money saving.

Teams like pompey cheating is down to the pathetic -10 points rule, and I think the whole system should be changed.
 


Triggaaar

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2005
53,153
Goldstone
Birmingham and Coventry had transfer embargoes slapped on them because of their finances. They are not even in administration. How Pompey are allowed to sign 3 players whilst in administration is an absolute piss take out of the rest of the football league.
What are the details of those embargoes? Are they not allowed to sign free loans - or should we not let facts get in the way of a rant?
 




Pinkie Brown

Wir Sind das Volk
Sep 5, 2007
3,637
Neues Zeitalter DDR 🇩🇪
The rules need changing. When a club goes into administration for a second time or third in the case of Pompey, the points deduction should be doubled. Potentially Pompey could escape relegation plus come up with some shifty deal to pay back creditors 5p in the pound or similar if someone is mug/dodgy enough to take ownership of them. What punishment or deterrent to other clubs would that be if Pompey survive in the same division plus knock all their creditors again?

Hopefully HMRC will dig their heels in & demand full whack.

If a club like Portsmouth want to ship out their high earners, fine. Should they be allowed to bring in replacement's whether they are paying the wages or not? No way. All clubs who enter administration should be subject to an inbound embargo, no matter. It would make administration less of an attractive proposition for those who may wish to 'play the system'.
 




Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top