Dear Football League, I am writing to you regarding the application by Portsmouth Football Club (2010) Ltd to be placed into administration under the supervision of UHY. You are aware of the history surrounding the football club between Aug 2009 until today so I won't go into past history. What I want to raise is the worrying scenarios of either a pre-pack administration (similar to that experienced by Leeds Utd when they entered/exited administration) deal where PFC exit administration without a CVA or a gerrymandered CVA agreement which sees the CVA agreement agreed for the oldco Portsmouth City Football Club Ltd dramatically reduced to the benefit of the one secured creditor of PFC 2010 Ltd. There are only three assets of value with regards to Portsmouth Football Club - some of the younger players; the footprint that the stadium sits upon; and the parachute payments. Of these, the major asset is the remaining parachute payments with a scheduled payment in March followed by two payments of £8m for seasons 2012/13 and 2013/14. The two scenarios described above would in effect see the secured creditor of PFC 2010 Ltd claw a significant proportion of the parachute payments to himself in lieu of his charge whether directly or through a sale to a.n.other. Such an outcome would be repugnant to myself and many other supporters of Pompey. There is considerable shame and anger about the current plight of smaller creditors from the previous administration. As you are aware, there was a promise to pay all creditors under £2,500 in full. This has not happened and buck-passing has occurred with the club and its last two owners. The subject is repeatedly raised in questioning to officials of the club in forums and phone-in shows - the fans have not forgotten. The thought of that commitment being abandoned through another administration and exit would create considerable angst amongst the supporter base. Portsmouth supporters have a very low opinion of the Fit and Proper Person's Test so I want to propose actions that the Football League can take in co-ordination with the Premier League and Football Association to ensure that "fit and proper" action occurs during the next period of administration should it be approved on the 17th. You have a commitment to financial fair play and you have rules to prevent clubs benefiting from administration. In Portsmouth Football Club case, the benefit being sought is financial rather than league position. It is to reduce liabilities while retaining parachute payments. Therefore I request that Football League take the following actions: 1. On entering administration, PFC 2010 Ltd golden share is suspended and the club will no longer have full member rights 2. On entering administration, PFC 2010 Ltd has the parachute payment schedule suspended 3. To ensure financial fair play, any new ownership of PFC will have to honour in full the CVA agreed for PCFC Ltd in order to access parachute payments These actions would be consistent with your financial fair play policies as the club would not benefit from a secondary administration. It would also set a good example for the Football League in tackling speculative owners only interested in stripping out value from the club. I must emphasise that it is not enough to punish the club through points deductions, its only through preventing financial benefits that will benefit both the club and the league. An adoption of this stance ahead of Friday's hearing would be most welcome. I as a Portsmouth fan request that the Football League do everything in their power to protect the club and the league against predatory owners and creditors. Yours sincerely