Leeds to get 5 point back

[clapham_gull]

Sorry..................but at the time, I don,t remember Spurs AGREEING to the penalty..............or Juventus for that matter..................or ANY OTHER CLUB...!

Well, Leeds didn't have a choice and can't believe I'm saying this in their defence, they gave their intention to appeal from the outset.

Unfortunately, there is something in law about signing a contract under duress.

An example of that could be (for instance) excessive economic pressure. You could argue that losing your place in the league is something along those lines.

I wouldn't, but Leeds might.

As I said, in my opinion (for all that's worth), the league have left themselves open for a possibly succesful appeal.

Yes it stinks, but...

 

[Easy 10]

The FL should just produce a nice laminated copy of the letter from Leeds confirming that they accept the 15 point penalty in exchange for the return of the Golden Share. Surely that amounts to a "gentlemans agreement" between parties, and they're all the rage I hear. At least they are in the FAPL.

Job done.

 

[kevo]

NSC is full of rumours, that’s its nature, so don’t blame you for disbelieving. It’s entirely your own prerogative but surely those who ridicule should know by now that you can’t name a reliable source or that’s the last you’ll ever hear from them / you get people, even extremely well connected ones at Leeds, into serious trouble? None of you will have heard of my source anyway, none of you would believe it even if Ken Bates had given me a world exclusive (he hasn’t). But I know this source is reliable so firmly believe Leeds are getting 5 points back before the end of the season. Deal’s been struck. If wouldn’t have bothered calling me out of the blue otherwise given he knows I’m an Albion fan. Not going to do anymore defending myself on this matter. Just thought I’d share this news. That’s all.

So you don't mind if we quote this back at you when it turns out not to be true, then?

First of all, the hearing is on the 14th not the 17th. Secondly, the arbitration hearing is being presided over by a High Court judge who will make the decision.

If a 'deal has been struck' with the judge, that would be very interesting indeed as he would clearly be guilty of corruption.

 

[Simster]

The FL should just produce a nice laminated copy of the letter from Leeds confirming that they accept the 15 point penalty in exchange for the return of the Golden Share. Surely that amounts to a "gentlemans agreement" between parties, and they're all the rage I hear. At least they are in the FAPL.

Job done.

But as Clapham says, Leeds will argue they had no choice but to sign it. Its like someone forcing you to sign a contract handing over all your possessions while holding a gun to your head.

The 15 points penalty was made up on the hoof.

 

[clapham_gull]

Is this share really golden ? or something made out of cardboard and sprayed with metallic paint.

I mean they are probably quite easy to knock up yourself.

The 15 points penalty was made up on the hoof.

That's the first I've heard of a horse being involved, care to elloborate ?

 

[cjd]

Well, Leeds didn't have a choice and can't believe I'm saying this in their defence, they gave their intention to appeal from the outset.

Unfortunately, there is something in law about signing a contract under duress.

An example of that could be (for instance) excessive economic pressure. You could argue that losing your place in the league is something along those lines.

I wouldn't, but Leeds might.

As I said, in my opinion (for all that's worth), the league have left themselves open for a possibly succesful appeal.

Yes it stinks, but...

Under "duress".........?

The only "duress" they were under , was would their crooked dealings make their fortune or not.
"Duress" , my arse...!

 

[Caveman]

Life's unfair isn't it?

Can be, but this is not of its own making! So it doesn't need to be unfair.

 

[rusty redeyes]

Won't happen, Leeds paid off all the football creditors.

I seem to be disagreeing with everyone on here over this, but my heart is in exactly the same place.

Unfortunately my head isn't.

Not sure if you're having a laugh here, but did the Weeds really pay off all their football creditors? I thought it was a penny in the pound, does that count as paying off?

And what about the amounts still owed to former players, are they not football creditors, though I'll admit it's stretching the definition of footballer when it comes to Danny Mills!!!


£7M to the tax man, could build a new West Pier with that

 

[Simster]

Under "duress".........?

The only "duress" they were under , was would their crooked dealings make their fortune or not.
"Duress" , my arse...!

If someone says "say you'll accept a 15 point deduction or we'll throw you out of the league", what sort of choice is that?

 

[clapham_gull]

Under "duress".........?

The only "duress" they were under , was would their crooked dealings make their fortune or not.
"Duress" , my arse...!

Well that's for the legal teams to argue isn't it. What's very clear is they didn't want to sign it and gave their intention to appeal against immediately.

 

[bright1064]

If someone says "say you'll accept a 15 point deduction or we'll throw you out of the league", what sort of choice is that?

A fair choice in terms of the FL structure imo.

And Leeds made the choice.

15 point deduction it is, and so should stay that way.

 

[El Presidente]

Not sure if you're having a laugh here, but did the Weeds really pay off all their football creditors? I thought it was a penny in the pound, does that count as paying off?

And what about the amounts still owed to former players, are they not football creditors, though I'll admit it's stretching the definition of footballer when it comes to Danny Mills!!!


£7M to the tax man, could build a new West Pier with that

The rules are that football creditors get 100% of what is owed to them, to ensure that paupers such as Danny Mills and Robbie Fowler don't have to be selling the Big Issue, THEN worthless parasites such as St John's Ambulance get 8p in the pound......if they're lucky.

 

[clapham_gull]

Not sure if you're having a laugh here, but did the Weeds really pay off all their football creditors? I thought it was a penny in the pound, does that count as paying off?

And what about the amounts still owed to former players, are they not football creditors, though I'll admit it's stretching the definition of footballer when it comes to Danny Mills!!!


£7M to the tax man, could build a new West Pier with that

Not I'm not having a laugh.

Football League rules state all 'football creditors' have to be paid in full if a club is to come out of administration and play in the League

In the big scheme of things that's a very important ruling and is primarily why we are in this situation.

It's something to think about when clubs are criticised for not paying St Johns Ambulance isn't it ?

Boston were thrown out the league for not being able to do so.

 

[Simster]

A fair choice in terms of the FL structure imo.

And Leeds made the choice.

15 point deduction it is, and so should stay that way.

I hope it does. But there was nothing about a 15 point penalty in the rule book and that is the problem. Presumably Leeds will argue that the punishment does not fit the crime which is why a reduction in the points deduction is possible.

It never ceases to amaze me how the clowns running the league have no proper rules in place. And they f***ed up over the ITV Digital deal too. Have they ever heard of "lawyers". Utter utter twats.

 

[clapham_gull]

I think the system was put in place so, if for instance, Leeds owed us half a million in transfer fees then Leeds would have to pay up before re-entering the league.

It's there to ensure other clubs aren't affected by the financial plight of another.

Unfortunately it also extends to ex-players on bloated contracts.

The Inland Revenue don't like that situation one bit which is why they have got involved throught the courts on a number of occasions and in some way affected the outcome of administration.

Examples: Leeds and Boston.

 

[cjd]

If someone says "say you'll accept a 15 point deduction or we'll throw you out of the league", what sort of choice is that?

No....wrong way round....Leeds formed a new club............the league said...."you can join if you want, but you,ll have a -15 point start".All other clubs have to work their way throught the football pyramid..........but not f***ing, cheating leeds of course.......I mean they,re special aren,t they............champions of europe i believe...?

 

[clapham_gull]

No....wrong way round....Leeds formed a new club............the league said...."you can join if you want, but you,ll have a -15 point start".All other clubs have to work their way throught the football pyramid..........but not f***ing, cheating leeds of course.......I mean they,re special aren,t they............champions of europe i believe...?

Well again, I sure clubs have created new holding companies in the past....

Havent we ?

.. Bates definately has

What was the 15 pts deducted for actually... I've read two different things.

 

[Simster]

No....wrong way round....Leeds formed a new club............the league said...."you can join if you want, but you,ll have a -15 point start".All other clubs have to work their way throught the football pyramid..........but not f***ing, cheating leeds of course.......I mean they,re special aren,t they............champions of europe i believe...?

How is that different to, say Bristol City in 1982 or Middlesbrough or Charlton?

None of them were thrown out of the league.

 

[rusty redeyes]

Not I'm not having a laugh.

Football League rules state all 'football creditors' have to be paid in full if a club is to come out of administration and play in the League

In the big scheme of things that's a very important ruling and is primarily why we are in this situation.

It's something to think about when clubs are criticised for not paying St Johns Ambulance isn't it ?

Boston were thrown out the league for not being able to do so.

but seeing as they are now a new club, were those football creditors actually paid off?

 

[Brovion]

Sadly I tend to agree with clapham and Simster. It may be morally wrong and I hate it as much as anyone but I think Leeds have a very good case for getting the 15 points back.

The penalty was a hideous fudged compromise by the League between doing what they SHOULD have done (which was make Leeds go down the same route as Aldershot, Newport County, Accrington Stanley, etc) and just letting them get away with it. The random 'finger-lick' nature of plucking a figure of 15 points out of the air has no basis in the rules and they were probably hoping that most people, having 'got away with it', would just take it on the chin and accept it - a bit like West Ham did.