• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Breaking News Stewarts Law LLP/PG Site v SUFC - 26 June 2024 - DISMISSED WITH COSTS

Does this mean the NL's grounds for the embargo have evaporated?

No, the NL bond is to prove, whilst under the ownership of Martin, that we have the finances to finish the season.

The Bond only goes if one of the 2 conditions in their statement is met.

COSU taking official ownership of the club being number 1.
 
No, the NL bond is to prove, whilst under the ownership of Martin, that we have the finances to finish the season.

The Bond only goes if one of the 2 conditions in their statement is met.

COSU taking official ownership of the club being number 1.
That's the bond though, which is separate to the embargo. I think the worry was that if the WUP were adjourned but COSU took over the club, that would deal with the bond but the embargo would still be in place.

If COSU take over the club, and the WUP has been dismissed, doesn't that mean that the embargo and bond (threat) are gone?
 
That's the bond though, which is separate to the embargo. I think the worry was that if the WUP were adjourned but COSU took over the club, that would deal with the bond but the embargo would still be in place.

If COSU take over the club, and the WUP has been dismissed, doesn't that mean that the embargo and bond (threat) are gone?

I do apologise, I misread your post.

I would certainly hope that means the embargo can be lifted.

Unless the NL make some more rules up to suit them and not us!
 
That's the bond though, which is separate to the embargo. I think the worry was that if the WUP were adjourned but COSU took over the club, that would deal with the bond but the embargo would still be in place.

If COSU take over the club, and the WUP has been dismissed, doesn't that mean that the embargo and bond (threat) are gone?
Embargo yes (hopefully), bond threat no until COSU officially own SUFC…. which might also happen today if we’re lucky (no inside info on that)…
 
That's the bond though, which is separate to the embargo. I think the worry was that if the WUP were adjourned but COSU took over the club, that would deal with the bond but the embargo would still be in place.

If COSU take over the club, and the WUP has been dismissed, doesn't that mean that the embargo and bond (threat) are gone?
I think the Bond is more related to the financial future whereas the Umbongo is the lack of filing of accounts & WUPs so that I guess could go.
 
Back
Top