Phone-In Thread

[Publius Ovidius]

They're hardly what you'd call reliable sources. The ones who decide are the Football League - not Leeds United and not the media, who let's face it, love to create a story out of their expenses-paid whisky-driven heads, and pass it off as 'rumour'.

Surprised to see you re-gurgitating it, Harty.

Sounds more like sabre-rattling from Leeds United to me.

with all due respect alan, a couple of the "wiskey driven" Journo's I spoke to yesterday for BBC radio Leeds and Radio Yorkshire have been following this situation since it began, they have been to the press conferences given by all parties, including the legal epresentaives of both parties and have "sources" as they should.

I tend to believe them who have the experience more that somebloke who lives in Brighton, and the only thing he has is an opinion.....no offence like!

Perhaps that is why Harty is "re-gurgitating it".

I suppose your post above is like Deductions commenting on the Falmer decision knowing absolutely f*** all about the planning process, public enquiries etc etc

 

[The Large One]

Hang on - are you saying that the legal representatives of the Football League have been holding press conferences where they have been saying - albeit off the record - that they think they will give Leeds five points back?

Are they completely insane?

1. For insinuating that they are giving the five points back and
2. For telling anyone that before - BEFORE - the issues are heard?

Just what in the name of fucketty is going on?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

Hang on - are you saying that the legal representatives of the Football League have been holding press conferences where they have been saying - albeit off the record - that they think they will give Leeds five points back?

Are they completely insane?

1. For insinuating that they are giving the five points back and
2. For telling anyone that before - BEFORE - the issues are heard?

Just what in the name of fucketty is going on?

what I am saying is that in the same way as we were fed drips of "its in the bag" and " FDC havent a clue" by people in the know, certain things are coming out of various parties in Leeds and the FL that people are putting together and making a judgement based on those "sources".

Almost everyone I spoke to yesterday was of the opinion based on what they had heard was that they would get 5 points back.

The premis seems to be that the 15 points was an abitary sum put on by the FL. Leeds were told that unless they signed the agreement to take the 15 points and not appeal, then the FL would give them the golden share and not expel them from the league.

Bates is now arguing that they signed this under duress( threat of expulsion) which as everyone knows if a contract is signed under duress it holds no leal standing) - his argument is full 15 points back - the suggestion isthat teh compromise wouldbe 5 points back

 

[Yorkie]

So can Swindon now appeal about being relegated two divisions a few years ago and go straight to the Prem?

 

[BensGrandad]

If Leeds get back the 15 points would Bournemouth Luton etc get all their 10 point back for going into administration?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

So can Swindon now appeal about being relegated two divisions a few years ago and go straight to the Prem?

But that is the whole argument now about the FL rules and the point I made on the radio

If Leeds are allowed to challenge, then how can the fL charge clubs 10 points. The rule must surely be unfair!!!

i think it will run and run!

 

[Superphil]

Did I hear Phil get turfed off the radio?

Shame he turfed me off, I wanted to say more, think I could have chosen better words.

Have to say though, the piece Bates wrote in the program was actually quite good in places, really laying into the other type of scum that is MPs and the like.

Still stand by what I was saying, I think the man should be removed from any involvement with football in this country. Don't think I need to elaborate.

Interesting on the train back to York after the game we were talking to two STH at Elland road, god they were up their own arses. Said that Leeds ran us ragged for the whole game, reckoned Murray dived at least 15 times in the box trying to win a pen, and that basically they should have walked the game, had all the possession, and had loads of shots on goal whereas we hardly had any. Oh, and also we were offside more times than the linesman indicated too. And even asked "What has Ken Bates ever done wrong?"

 

[BensGrandad]

IMHO it all boils down to the fact that there is and cannot be any legal challenge to the FL Rules and that every club agrees, of their own volition, to abide by the rules as laid down, with the appeal proceedures etc in place, when they are accepted into the league and this is a condition of acceptance.

As stated by a High Court judge when Steve Foster and BHA tried to take the FA to court. They are an autonimus body who you have readily agreed to accept the rules of and the courts cannot change that.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

Was Ken Bates on the FA/FL committee at the time Swindon were demoted?

 

[Publius Ovidius]

IMHO it all boils down to the fact that there is and cannot be any legal challenge to the FL Rules and that every club agrees, of their own volition, to abide by the rules as laid down, with the appeal proceedures etc in place, when they are accepted into the league and this is a condition of acceptance.

As stated by a High Court judge when Steve Foster and BHA tried to take the FA to court. They are an autonimus body who you have readily agreed to accept the rules of and the courts cannot change that.

that is fine but the points deduction is 10 points! 15 points was given arbiterially(sp)

 

[Yorkie]

that is fine but the points deduction is 10 points! 15 points was given arbiterially(sp)

It's a 10 point deduction for going into administration. Leeds were already in administration so the deduction wasn't for that.
It was in return for the Golden Share or whatever they call it. Totally different.

 

[BensGrandad]

This would then give substance to your claim/rumour that they will get back 5 points to bring them in line with other clubs. What was the reason behind the extra 5 point deduction, I have forgotten or not paid enough attention to it.
Was it because Leeds went into administration after it was known that they had been relegated.

 

[Da Man Clay]

This would then give substance to your claim/rumour that they will get back 5 points to bring them in line with other clubs. What was the reason behind the extra 5 point deduction, I have forgotten or not paid enough attention to it.
Was it because Leeds went into administration after it was known that they had been relegated.

No, it was because they came out of administration without an aggreed CVA in place (I believe). Not because of anything to do with when they went into admin (of that im sure).

 

[The Large One]

what I am saying is that in the same way as we were fed drips of "its in the bag" and " FDC havent a clue" by people in the know, certain things are coming out of various parties in Leeds and the FL that people are putting together and making a judgement based on those "sources".

The difference is that we were never drip-fed the final decision. We BELIEVED we would get the nod on the back of a more robust case. And that's the point - AFTER the case was heard, not before.

No more than the Football League should 'drip-feed' their decision. These sources you refer to in the Leeds case make it sound as though the decision has already been reached BEFORE the hearing has taken place.

 

[m20gull]

IMHO it all boils down to the fact that there is and cannot be any legal challenge to the FL Rules and that every club agrees, of their own volition, to abide by the rules as laid down, with the appeal proceedures etc in place, when they are accepted into the league and this is a condition of acceptance.

As stated by a High Court judge when Steve Foster and BHA tried to take the FA to court. They are an autonimus body who you have readily agreed to accept the rules of and the courts cannot change that.

I think there can be a legal challenge if the FL have been shown not to have abided by their own rules in applying the 15 point penalty.

 

[The Large One]

So - what precisely was the 15 points penalty for?

 

[Superphil]

So - what precisely was the 15 points penalty for?

For being Ken Bates

 

[Lord Bracknell]

And who takes the FL decision?

The member clubs of the Football League, surely?

I don't remember Uncle Dick (or anyone else for that matter) saying that the clubs had already been consulted.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Where is this "rumour" that Leeds will have FIVE points restored?

Leeds had 10 points deducted last season, because they went into administration. That football club subsequently went out of business.

This season, a new football club (unconnected with any other and with no history) came into being and applied to the Football League to play in League One.

The FL agreed, subject to the new football club accepting a 15 point deduction. The new football club AGREED to this.

The new football club is saying that this arrangement wasn't in line with FL rules.

If they are right, then the FL shouldn't have allowed them into the league. If they are wrong, then the AGREEMENT to have FIFTEEN points deducted should stand.

I don't see ANY basis for a ten point deduction being the final result.

My understanding is that Leeds are challenging whether the league was allowed to deduct points in this situation. It is therefore an all or nothing case. If Leeds win then they will get all 15 points back, if they loose the 15 points stands. There is no provision for reducing it in this particular challenge.

 

[Harty]

with all due respect alan, a couple of the "wiskey driven" Journo's I spoke to yesterday for BBC radio Leeds and Radio Yorkshire have been following this situation since it began, they have been to the press conferences given by all parties, including the legal epresentaives of both parties and have "sources" as they should.

I tend to believe them who have the experience more that somebloke who lives in Brighton, and the only thing he has is an opinion.....no offence like!

Perhaps that is why Harty is "re-gurgitating it".

I suppose your post above is like Deductions commenting on the Falmer decision knowing absolutely f*** all about the planning process, public enquiries etc etc

Careful Dave the Withdean PPF might issue a fatwah against you.

Seriously we wouldn't have even touched on it without checking it out, and its come from a number of different sources, a London based journalist I know even said Gus Poyet mentioned it in passing after a Spurs press conference, not to have some creedence.

Like I said I hope it is not the case but if we do end up with the shitty end of the stick and Leeds end up leapfrogging us after getting 5 points back then it opens up a whole new can of worms.