Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Harty upsets the leeds fan
- Thread starter vulture
- Start date
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
link to article??
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
steward 433
Back and better
Harty is spot on except i think they should have been dropped two divisions like Swindon
surrey jim
Not in Surrey
and Boston, how did they avoid that and get the 15pts instead??
steward 433
Back and better
In what respect?
But they were punished because they, and predominantly Bates, tried to pull the wool over the Football League's eyes at the end of last season, when they went into virtual 11th-hour administration.
It was, in my opinion, a blatant attempt to flout the rules and, given that every other club has had 10 points deducted when they have gone down that route — and in Rotherham United's case it was twice in 18 months — a further five-point penalty was justified.
mostly those paragraphs.
we were deducted ten points, what further five penalty?
It was, in my opinion, a blatant attempt to flout the rules and, given that every other club has had 10 points deducted when they have gone down that route — and in Rotherham United's case it was twice in 18 months — a further five-point penalty was justified.
mostly those paragraphs.
we were deducted ten points, what further five penalty?
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
I agree with the sentiments, but Harty is not "spot on".
It was nothing to do with them engineering the 10 point deduction last season after they'd already been relegated. They were deducted 15 points for coming out of administration without an agreed CVA in place, which is a breach of FL rules.
It was nothing to do with them engineering the 10 point deduction last season after they'd already been relegated. They were deducted 15 points for coming out of administration without an agreed CVA in place, which is a breach of FL rules.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,877
Yep, whether you agree or not with the penalty he seems to be confused about what the 15 points was taken for.
The 15 points has NOTHING to do with last season, even the FA have admitted that.
indeed. but he is not the first, nor will he be the last to run his mouth without the full facts.
steward 433
Back and better
eastlondonseagull
Well-known member
Was gonna say the same. It's murky territory for Harty to venture into. I hate Leeds and the false 'big club' mentality, but I know very little about the legal ins and outs of this case, so wouldn't dream of writing a piece like that. If it's a 'comment' piece, then he might be able to get away with it, but beardy Bates will no doubt get his lawyers to analyse the story word for word. Reckon Harty thought that a story in a tiny Worthing newspaper would pass by without mention
.
Sajerz
Member
Harty might aswell 
Nice one.
Nice one.
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
To my knowledge, no other club has done this. Its unprecedented.
But that doesn't mean it can go unpunished as a result.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,877
It's never happened before, which is how Leeds are aguing the case about the 15 points.
Nothing in the rule book actually says what happens if you come out of admin without a CVA.
What it says is that is the league preferred way unless they are exceptional circumstances. The league agreed there were exceptional circumstances then slapped the point ban on.
Like it or not, this was always going to end up in the courts.
blockhseagull
Well-known member
If it turns out that the appeal is successful, can the league not revoke the golden share ?
steward 433
Back and better
Remind me why all those years ago why Aldershot were dropped all those leagues?
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
It's a shame if Harty has slightly undermined the strength of this piece with some factual errors, because the main thrust of it and opinion being expressed is totally correct.
I think the obvious point is that you can't suddenly start moving the goalposts at this tense stage of the season, it's plainly absurd. Everyone (including Leeds) has known where they stood all season, and Brighton, or Tranmere, or Southend do not deserve to be now edged out of the play-offs should they make it there.
Unfortunately I doubt we would go to expensive litigation over this, for reasons we're all too familiar with. And I'd be as annoyed as Harty if Bates, who is basically just a bully, got his way because he had the money to throw at the lawyers.
I think the obvious point is that you can't suddenly start moving the goalposts at this tense stage of the season, it's plainly absurd. Everyone (including Leeds) has known where they stood all season, and Brighton, or Tranmere, or Southend do not deserve to be now edged out of the play-offs should they make it there.
Unfortunately I doubt we would go to expensive litigation over this, for reasons we're all too familiar with. And I'd be as annoyed as Harty if Bates, who is basically just a bully, got his way because he had the money to throw at the lawyers.
Last edited: