If AC are only docked 8 points for blatant cheating IN the game...

platypus said:
I think it was the fact that most of their players were found guilty of this match rigging scandal.
Click to expand...
Really? I heard something about Buffon having his house searched but that was it. Which players were involved?
 
weringo said:
Really? I heard something about Buffon having his house searched but that was it. Which players were involved?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'd heard some players had been implicated but no more than that.
 
IIRC the italian clubs initial punishments where much harsher and heralded by our press as an example to follow but of course the punishments where reduced.

Here.
 
Gilly said:
Yeah, I'd heard some players had been implicated but no more than that.
Click to expand...
How do four teams go about fixing matches, without players being involved?

Thirteen of Italy's World Cup-winning squad play for the clubs involved, with five at Juventus, who also have Patrick Vieira, Lilian Thuram, David Trezeguet, Pavel Nedved and Zlatan Ibrahimovic in their ranks.
Click to expand...
I don't see how else it could add up.
 
NokkonWud said:
AC were docked less because they are a top Italian team. Everyone knows how important Italy is to Fifa, they couldn't give a **** about England though.
Click to expand...
I was about to say the same thing. It's been so harsh on Leeds tbh, a once great club ruined.
 
platypus said:
How do four teams go about fixing matches, without players being involved?

I don't see how else it could add up.
Click to expand...

But you said:

platypus said:
I think it was the fact that most of their players were found guilty of this match rigging scandal.
Click to expand...

I have bolded the most important part. Just because you don't know how else it could add up doesn't mean they were found guilty.
 
I'm just glat that Bates didn't succeed in his bid to take over at Sheffield Wednesday or I'm sure we'd be in a similar situation.

Have to say the recent 15 points seems harsh but I agree with some punishment this season. The 10 points deducted last year was no punishment because Leeds would have gone down anyway. Bates pulled two fast ones here and if it wasn't for the additional meddling Leeds would have only had the one punishment.

I have to say - the whole system of being able to write off debt by going into administration is rubbish really. People and organisations that can't afford to be stung get stung and I'm glad the Inland Revenue wouldn't have it.

Someone needed to be made an example of as a warning to others. I only hope that future punishment for similar offences remains as harsh for other clubs or it's no deterrant from going into administration. It's time football clubs collectively learned to operate as businesses properly.

Edit: Look on the bright side - they let Leeds back into the league. They didn't have to!
 
ken bates is a xxxxxxx ... read what he did to partick thistle in scotland, seems he is doing it to leeds as well. he forced that club into near liquidation and other clubs ended up with other fans helping pthislte out of the mess
 
One of my mates has had a bet that leeds make the playoffs. His theory being that they will still be one of the best sides in that league. If Manu where docked 15 points they would still easily make the top 6 to make a playoff.

Personally I hope he wins his bet and leeds do make it.

AC Milan did far worse in my opinion than Leeds, they cheated on the pitch yet are then rewarded with a champions league place. Sickening really.
 
Reesy said:
One word for leeds utd.

Guilty.
Click to expand...


Why should the football club be branded as guilty, when it is apparent that it was all down to higher management. OK they sanctioned the buying of top flight players paying high salaries that they evidently couldnt afford, and when the results went downhill and they were relegated into the championship it got worse and those players were sold for next to nothing.

Ok you can say "blame the players" for the poor results, but with the club in the state it is, and the players not being paid it is bound to affect the results.

The 10 point deduction at the end of last season was harsh, but the rules state it as a punishment for going into receivership. But to start the season in Div 1 with a 15 point defecit is plain wrong. Hasn't the club and it's fans suffered enough, just a few years back a champoins league semi-final was being played for. I have to agree with Gilly what Ridsdale has done is bordering on criminal and he should be punished not the club as for Bates well he is just a parasite that needs erradicating from the game.

I'm a northern lad, and obviously a big football fan. And I hope the day comes soon when I can welcome them back to St James park for a good old game of league football.
 
Tbh, Leeds got off lightly compared to Boston who went down 2 divisions because they had to enter into a CVA. Neither punishment is warranted though and whilst the big club of Leeds may get this over-turned eventually, every Boston fan (both of them - watched Hartlepool play there last year, dire ground, no fans and Mystery Meat burgers...) would wish they'd only been docked 15 points this season.
 
dannyjo22 said:
One of my mates has had a bet that leeds make the playoffs. His theory being that they will still be one of the best sides in that league. If Manu where docked 15 points they would still easily make the top 6 to make a playoff.

Personally I hope he wins his bet and leeds do make it.

AC Milan did far worse in my opinion than Leeds, they cheated on the pitch yet are then rewarded with a champions league place. Sickening really.
Click to expand...

I thought they'd sold pretty much all their decent players though? I was under the impress they'd be struggling for mid-table.
 
Uriel said:
Have to say the recent 15 points seems harsh but I agree with some punishment this season. The 10 points deducted last year was no punishment because Leeds would have gone down anyway. Bates pulled two fast ones here and if it wasn't for the additional meddling Leeds would have only had the one punishment.
Click to expand...
Those are the rules. You can't just change the rules to suit when a club/chairman you don't like are in trouble.

Uriel said:
I have to say - the whole system of being able to write off debt by going into administration is rubbish really. People and organisations that can't afford to be stung get stung and I'm glad the Inland Revenue wouldn't have it.
Click to expand...
HMRC were being far worse than Leeds. They were trying to force them outside the boundaries of the CVA, which would've screwed the other creditors far more than Leeds were attempting to provide.

It isn't just football teams doing this.

Uriel said:
Someone needed to be made an example of as a warning to others. I only hope that future punishment for similar offences remains as harsh for other clubs or it's no deterrant from going into administration. It's time football clubs collectively learned to operate as businesses properly.
Click to expand...
Businesses can also write off debt by going into administration. It just isn't in the limelight like football is.

Uriel said:
Edit: Look on the bright side - they let Leeds back into the league. They didn't have to!
Click to expand...
True. Though it still doesn't make what has been done to Leeds right. Not by a long shot.
punky_munky said:
I thought they'd sold pretty much all their decent players though? I was under the impress they'd be struggling for mid-table.
Click to expand...
I believe we'll be at least mid-table but have hopes of a higher position. It wasn't long ago that players like Heath, Douglas, Prutton, Derry, Thompson etc were plying their trade in top flight football, then we have some very talented youngsters like Jonny Howson, Ben Parker, Frazer Richardson, etc.
 
Open letter from Ken Bates

United chairman Ken Bates this week wrote to all Season Ticket holders, Members, lapsed Season Ticket holders from 2006/07, lapsed Members, and current and lapsed corporate clients.

For those of you that haven't received a letter, here is a copy....

Dear Leeds Club Member August 2007

I have delayed my usual pre season letter until the outcome of recent events was resolved.

I can understand if you feel frustrated by the lack of information coming out of the Club but negotiations on many fronts have been both delicate and confidential. Unfortunately information given to fans is picked up by the media and we are then at the mercy of individual media reporters and editors who sometimes interpret (or in some cases misinterpret) a story according to their views or prejudices.

Only now do I feel comfortable in informing you of the position and it will be a long letter because you should know of the many aspects of the recent past including many parties, plots, intrigue and much more.

THE ADMINISTRATION (CVA)

KPMG were advised throughout by Walker Morris the Leeds based Insolvency Lawyers as well as two Senior Barristers. In view of several press articles and comments by the Football League it is essential to state that all parties behaved properly at all times. The common desire was to save Leeds United and stop the taxman's attempt to close it.

In view of the behaviour of certain parties with hidden agendas, KPMG decided to invite fresh offers but at the end of the day the offer from the Forward Sports Fun ('FSF') was still the highest and best.

After the original creditors meeting there is a period of 28 days for anybody to object. The taxman objected at 3pm on the last day just before the court closed.

At the insistence of the League, KPMG tried very hard to meet the Taxman's objections and the negotiations were conducted at the highest level. The first demand/condition was that all monies from FSF to KPMG should be paid upfront. That was agreed. The second demand was that the Football Creditors should not get preference and be paid any more than anybody else. This was an impossible demand. If Leeds didn't pay the Football Creditors in full then the Club didn't get membership of the League. We were between the devil and the deep blue sea. Damned if we do, damned if we don't. The Taxman then proposed that a sum equal to that going to the Football Creditors be paid into the general pool for all Creditors putting them in a better position. FSF agreed. The Taxman then refused to withdraw their appeal and further stated officially that they would vote against any other proposal if Football Creditors were ever paid in full. Indeed they stated that they would oppose any further CVA when Football Clubs were involved. Clearly this is an impossible situation.

What really irks the Taxman is that until 2003 they got preferential treatment in any insolvency. Now they don't. That is not Leeds fault or that of the League.

Finally, we believe that the actions of the Taxman were illegal. In the case of Wimbledon the very question of the Football Creditors was challenged in the High Court and the Taxman lost on Appeal.

Secondly, Newcastle United won in the High Court against the Taxman because of their refusal to allow VAT on Agents' fees as a deduction. Despite losing, the Taxman still submitted a huge claim for VAT on Agents' fees which was illegal. The Taxman is questioning the validity of some creditors' claims. They do not have clean hands in this matter. This dispute is not about Leeds United, it is about opposing the Football League's Rule that Football Creditors must be paid in full.

ALTERNATIVE BUYERS

At the time of buying the Club from the Administrators, FSF promised to talk to any other would be purchasers with a view to any possible cooperation. We did the best we could. This is a summary of what did or did not happen.

1. DUNCAN REVIE - Did not and has not made any offer at all. Neither has he contacted me or any other Director.

2. SO CALLED AMERICAN INVESTMENT FUND - One phone call and they have not been in contact since. Absolutely no discussion.

3. REDBUS - Mark Taylor, a lawyer, had one meeting and one phone call. No proposal.

4. SIMON MORRIS - He made contact through a middle man. We informed him to call us direct. We weren't prepared to negotiate through a third party. We haven't heard from him. In the newspaper it was reported that in buying Leeds it would be part of a £500/600 million pound development in the surrounding area. Unfortunately (for him) he doesn't own the land and Leeds City Council have put it out to possible public tender.

He also employed two PR companies to run a dirty tricks campaign against me which backfired. We obtained a background memo, a copy of which is enclosed. PROJECT PEACOCK is the code name for Leeds and PROJECT PILGRIM is the code name for Boston United. Gerald Krasner was the Administrator for Boston United and Morris hoped to get the Boston Club ground for redevelopment but he was unsuccessful.

Despite all the media speculation we knew of no other interested party.

Project Peacock 1 Project Peacock 2 Project Peacock 3

MELVYN LEVI

Levi was a member of the Yorkshire Consortium (YC) who briefly owned Leeds United until it was sold to the FSF in January 2005.

For technical reasons, FSF acquired 50% of the Club at the time and had an option to buy the other 50% in June 2005. FSF exercised the option but Levi refused to sign over the shares.

All decisions by YC had to be unanimous, consequently Levi's actions blocked the deal. From that day to this Levi has worked in the background attempting to frustrate every effort to strengthen the Club's finances. We planned a rights issue to raise a further £5m for the Club but Levi frightened off the participants. Last October we agreed a deal with an Irish consortium who would put £10m of new capital into the Club and lend us the money to buy back Elland Road and the training ground. Levi found out and rang the would be investors and put them off. This is well documented.

Then Weston (see later) got in on the act with Levi and they demanded 10% of the Club, £200,000 in cash and Directors' Box tickets for life in return for honouring the option. Levi has denied this but we have witness statements on file.

This is a brief summary of what has occurred but suffice to say Levi has been actively trying to frustrate all our efforts to strengthen the Club's financial position. He even went to court and obtained an injunction against Leeds printing a match programme. The Judge threw out his case after 40 minutes.

Robert Weston is the first husband of Levi's wife. Levi arranged with Weston (who lives in Jersey) to handle Leeds season ticket credit card transactions. For two years we have been trying to recover the £190,000 which Weston owes to Leeds. He has used every possible delaying tactic to avoid repaying the money which he has acknowledged he owes. We have at last obtained judgment and should get the money this month. Weston has been in jail for trying to pervert the course of justice.

Levi is a disgrace.

PLAYERS, BUYING AND SELLING

Player transactions are very complicated and when fans jump to conclusions they do not always know the full facts which, for important reasons, cannot be revealed at the time.

Let me take David Healy as an example. Healy's agent voted against the CVA. Healy had one year left on his contract which meant he could sign a pre contract in January and walk out next June on a free transfer. Everybody said we should get £3m+ for him but nobody offered it. He was a high earner and his agent wanted him away. Fulham's was the only genuine offer and we got £1m for him plus add-ons. He cost us £750k from Preston plus 20% of any profit. We still owed Preston £200k so of the £1m we actually got £750k net. We have already spent £500k on buying Casper and Hughes.

A year ago Danny Rose refused to go to Chelsea because he "loved Leeds". Last month his agent refused a new contract and Rose walked out. After a lot of haggling we got £750k plus add-ons of £250k. To buy or sell a player (a) he has to want the move (b) the other Club must be willing to do a deal and (c) we must afford him, otherwise we are back in a Ridsdale situation.

One example is of a young promising striker from the South. Free transfer and earning £600 a week. Deal done, except that his agent suddenly demanded £6,000 a week in wages. No deal.

I know it is frustrating sometimes for fans but we do not reveal our plans publicly, it just alerts the opposition.

Rest assured, Wisey plans to recruit experienced but mainly younger players who are hungry for success and want to achieve things, not those looking to delay their retirement with no ambition other than to have another pay day.

THE WAY FORWARD

We now have a Club with no debt, the last legacy of the Ridsdale era is behind us.

We still have the consequences of the Krasner, Levi and Morris actions with us. They sold Elland Road for £8m. We have to buy it back at £15m meanwhile paying £1.1m a year in rent.

We have tightly controlled budgets and all the staff know that every penny counts.

We are willing to have discussions with any serious investor who has the Club's best interests at heart, rather than hoping to make a quick buck from the property.

We are preparing plans to develop Elland Road to enable non footballing income to come into the Club to strengthen our buying power on a permanent basis.

We will invest in our scouting and youth policies to continue Leeds' great history of developing home grown players.

The 15 point "sanction" is a scandal and a travesty of justice. We are appealing that decision to the Football Association but meanwhile will get on with the job of strengthening the team and getting back firstly to the Championship and then the Premiership.

Dennis, Gus and myself are here for the long haul. So the mindless minority who do their silly chants had better get used to it.

On a lighter note may I point out that under the Sex Discrimination Act demonstrations that invite men getting their shirts off is only legal if the Ladies do the same!

Finally, thank you all for the tremendous support throughout the difficult time. Fulham, Man City, Derby, Aston Villa and Middlesbrough have all been in our current position, look where they are now.

Marching on Together

Ken Bates
Chairman
Click to expand...

I still don't know whether to trust him, and the MOT at the end leaves a sour taste in the mouth.

Most of it makes perfect sense though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom