League Division 2 = devalued L2.
What a shambles! One team to start on -30, another to start on -17 and yet another team yet to have their punishment decided upon, but which will probably be given -20 points. What sort of message does this give to the rest of the division? I'm sorry, folks, but our league has well and truly been devalued big time! Is it not time for the League to alter the way they punish teams that go into administration time after time? A straight demotion has to be the ultimate penalty. Otherwise, we will all end up being faced with what we as League two supporters will experience this coming season - a League with no real threat of relegation at all, a League that is totally devalued! That cannot be correct!

Give Luton a straight demotion and they would be back in the league next year, probably have a good season and decent crowds in the Conference having paid the small businesses and local traders a derisory 10p in the £ for all the money they owe them. Whilst the table does look a little daft and relegation is seriously undermined by these deductions I do not think your alternative is incentive enough for the perennial crisis clubs to stop and think about what they are doing when they pay the wages they do on the crowds they get. Maybe, just maybe, the message will get through and clubs will stop living beyond their means. In my opinion, the ONLY way to stop this sort of thing happenning and to restore some credibility to the league is to expel any club who does not enter into a CVA where they agree to repay ALL their debts in full over a 5 year period when they come out of administration. As I have said elsewhere this is what Altrincham FC did 7/8 years ago and they cut their cloth accordingly and survived to tell the story. The most galling thing about this is that we all know that when these clubs leave admin they will start the same old thing of signing players for fees they cannot afford on wages they cannot afford to "live the dream". Make this rule a condition of entry to every team in the league and there may just be the incentive for them all to live within their means.

The message to the rest of the division is cut your cloth accordingly. Why should they be dumped on the Conference, who probably wouldn't take them anyway. Now they don't mess about! Anyway, have Rotherham signed the new striker yet? :)

TGD - valid points. Captain - likewise. So what is the answer? I do not know! Maybe let such teams go the way Boston eventually did? As TGD says, each one must ensure all debts are fully paid up within a certain time period (and here I add my own bit) or if that team fails to do so then they start the season following the failure to have paid up with double the points loss they were originally given.

Maybe if they examined there accounts for the previous seasons and told the football clubs what there budget was and made them register all wage deals with the league.

I am sure we had to clear all new signings with the FL during the first season after administration. Just think if we needed to win at Rotherham to stay in the league. Ouch! It's cheating, simple as that.

It is a mess, however if rotherham and luton survive this term they willhave gotten away with it again really. Its time for a 2nd or 3rd insolvency event in a set period to equal relegation to the unibond, that should stop them. Oh and while we are on this, its time those trying to take over clubs stopped saying it was the regime not us, so we don't deserve this etc... If you look at the sheff star yesterday they were still on about signing players .........................

If Luton, Rotherham or Bournemouth are relegated - and I think at least of them wil be - they are in danger of bypassing the Conference. No pressure, then.

As you know I've been quite defensive of Schoey at times but the chairman's decision to ward him three years looks an odd decision with hindsight. I'll allow the chairman that mistake as despite some folks wishing to believe we had to "pay off" the full contract, it probably didn't cost us too dearly. He took his time but he got it right eventually, I'm glad enough supporters had some patience. You mean the "board's decision", surely? It's probably unfair to blame bad decisions on one person as much as it's unfair on the others to give all the plaudits to one person, IMHO.

What annoys me about this is that Rotherham are being allowed to exit administration both without a CVA agreement ith their creditors, and as "new co.". As far as I can see, this allows them to write off £1.5 million of debt and carry on the same old way they have before. It's a terrible precedent o set, and the FL seem to be colluding in it.