Luton stood for all that was wrong with 1980s football.

If the plastic pitch wasn’t bad enough, they were the club that embraced the obsessional sports minister Colin Moynihan’s conviction that the travelling supporter was really the Devil incarnate.

Two months before the Valley Parade fire, a game between Millwall and Luton at Kenilworth Road was abandoned after just 14 minutes amid scenes of shocking violence.

Luton chairman David Evans, a prospective Conservative MP, reacted by introducing a draconian membership scheme which banned away fans altogether. Nobody else was coming in; not just the Millwall thugs who had caused the trouble.

This whitewash solution was applauded by the Tory Government, who held it up as a shining example for the rest of the game to follow.

But Luton’s heavy-handed actions were despised by every fan outside of Bedfordshire. The Hatters became a figure of hate and their subsequent demise down the years has not caused me too many sleepless nights.

At least that was the case until the Football League and FA teamed up to give them a kicking over the summer.

Already docked ten points for the coming season for transfer misdealings on the part of the previous regime, Luton then lost another 20 for failing to meet the stringent rules on coming out of administration.

So they will kick off on August 9, needing ten wins just to reach zero. In effect, promotion-winning form will be required just to keep them from dropping into non-league.

I don’t dislike Luton any more. I feel deeply sorry for them.

Yes, they broke the rules, but surely there are ways and means of dishing out a suitable punishment.

How about some kind of suspended sentence for part of the points penalty? Or are the League so desperate to hammer home the message against clubs spending beyond their means that they are prepared to shove them into the oblivion of the Blue Square Premier?

Compare the severity of Luton’s treatment with that of the likes of West Ham during the Carlos Tevez saga. It smacks of double standards.

City joint-chairman Mark Lawn certainly thinks so.

From a Bantams point of view, seeing a potential promotion rival like Luton saddled with such a handicap should be a good thing. The same with Rotherham and Bournemouth, who are also facing a minus start.

Given City’s recent financial history, Lawn appreciates there has to be a tough deterrent in place but he questions the motives.

“The league have to decide whether they are there to help the clubs or just to make them suffer,” he said.

“Luton have had an unfair advantage by paying wages they couldn’t afford but does it do anybody any good if they go out of the league?

“They’ve had to pay 16p in the pound as well – they’ve been forced to do that.

“So would you pay £3m to £4m just to stay in the league when you’re going to go down? They might as well go straight into the Conference.

“It’s not fair what is happening with Rotherham, either. They’ve had to put a bond down that they will be back playing in the town in four years – yet Wimbledon are allowed to go to Milton Keynes and never return.

“There is no standard ruling. We look for consistency with referees and it’s the same with the League and FA.

“It should be the same for everyone. You can’t make one rule for Leeds United because they’ve got a certain size of fanbase and then another for Luton – that’s unfair on everybody.”

Fuming Hatters boss Mick Harford describes football’s leaders as “total buffoons” trying to destroy the club. Lord Mawhinney, the League chairman, insists they are only protecting the “integrity of the competition”.

Make your own mind up which one of them is speaking sense.