I can remember way back at the start of the season when they were first protesting about the points doc and you even agreed with me about this point.
I agreed that the rule should change. It has. That doesn't mean Leeds should be punished. They did what they did when it was perfectly fair, and any other club would have done the same. Leicester got a free stadium out of it IIRC.
now I know that the points deduction wasn't due to going into admin at all. My point is that it should never have got that far they should not have been docked 10pt the season before insted it should have happened this season.
In future it will happen that way, at the time it was perfectly fair to do what they did. Technically they weren't even relegated at the time.
In a kind of twisted way Leeds got what they deserved, karma's a ***** aint it
Leeds had already been punished enough through relegation and the inability to move forward due to crippling debts.
I hope Leeds get every point back. It's a complete joke for the football league to punish Leeds because they didn't have their rules tight enough.
Gilly, do you mind educating me on the reason you got deducted the second load of points for this season?
Very, very basically, Football League rules state that to come out of administration a club
must have a CVA in place. This is an agreement whereby parties a company owes money to are allotted a percentage of the money they are going to be paid back. This is because the company cannot afford to pay the bills (if they could there'd be no need for administration) and if an agreement didn't take place then the creditors likely wouldn't get anything back.
In the footballing world, in order to qualify for the golden share (handed out by the league to football clubs in order for them to compete in the league - no share no football) you must repay 100% of footballing creditors.
Historically HMRC were protected under UK law as a preferential creditor. This meant that essentially they shared the same privilege as football creditors. They were paid in full and all other non-footballing creditors shared what was left.
This was changed recently and HMRC are known to be unhappy that the Football League have the clause protecting Football related debts.HMRC raised an issue with two of the Creditors that voted in favour of the CVA. One of which was Yorkshire Radio (whom Ken Bates has involvement in).
HMRC felt they should not have been allowed to vote but the Administrators (KPMG) (it was not Leeds Utd being taken to Court but the Administrators) were more than happy to defend the issue in court having previously taken advice from Counsel on the matter (Counsel are Court appointed Barristers that advise on legal issues in advance of an item going to Court so that you can understand how a Court is likely to view such matters.)
The matter could have been dealt with relatively quickly and was expected to be scheduled before the next Football League meeting.
HMRC then added the issue of the Footballing debts being given priority to the issue to be discussed. In effect, the HMRC were taking KPMG to Court to dispute Football League rules! Leeds Utd were not under scrutiny but these matters meant the club were not able to exit administration.
The additional 'issues' meant that the Court hearing was extended to five days, and the court schedule meant this could not be heard until September 2007, some four months after the CVA was approved and two months beyond the start of the season. The Administrators were now forced to either find the running costs to keep the club going, or take alternative action (wind the club up or sell the club outright).
Running costs could not be found (other interested parties did offer to meet running costs but this was conditional and those conditions were not practical) so
KPMG decided the only way forward was to sell the club outright, securing the best possible price for the creditors. A closed bidding process followed that Ken Bates and Co. won outright. He had now bought the club but there was no '75% approved CVA' in place - he now had to apply for the clubs League share back under the yet untested 'Exceptional Circumstances' clause.
What followed was a Football League Announcement that Leeds Utd would be allowed to re-enter the League as they had 'Exceptional Circumstances' but would be docked 15 points for the 2007-08 season. Leeds appealed and the Football League agreed to put the matter before the other members (teams in the Football league) - a vote followed which the Football League unsurprisingly won. Leeds requested an independent review which was repeatedly turned down by the Football league and have since appealed to the FA who distanced themselves from the whole process and in failing to get anyone to review the case, then decided to issue a High Court Writ against the Football League. The League eventually responded
on the final day they had to respond with an offer of Arbitration -
which is all Leeds asked for in the first place.
Arbitration is a way to resolve disputes without the formality (and costs) associated with a Courtroom. Rather than a judge presiding over matters, an Arbitration panel is formed, consisting of three men - one independent and one selected by each of the parties in dispute. Leeds Utd's hearing will be chaired by retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton, with the other two members being former Premier League chief executive Peter Leaver and Peter Cadman, a lawyer who has chaired Premier League disciplinary commissions in the past. The Hearing will take place behind closed doors and an undisclosed location and whilst less formal than Court, each side will be allowed to present any evidence and respond to any allegations in the normal manner. Arbitration is sometimes used to find a compromise between disputing parties although this in not believed to be the case here as Leeds are stating that the Football League acted incorrectly in deducting points, not that the penalty was too harsh.
The full details of Leeds dispute is not known however it is expected the following will be raised;
Leeds united have still not been informed what rule has been broken despite repeated requests. Leeds complied with the rules in so much as the League agreed they had exceptional circumstances which was required. The argument could be that if Leeds did not have a CVA and did not have exceptional circumstances, then they could be let back into the League with a penalty -
but this was not the case.
Leeds DID have an approved CVA, and the final offer to buy the club outright was higher than the CVA offer. The League were aware the only reason the CVA could not progress in the timescale
was because HMRC were disputing the Leagues own rules.
The Football League voted against the CVA when they were guaranteed a 100% return of their debt due to their own rules. How have the League voted in the past? Why did the Football League cite one of the reasons for the point deduction of exiting administration without a CVA which was actually relating to the action of KPMG, not Leeds Utd, that they'd voted against!?
Why were other League 1 clubs asked to vote when the outcome directly benefited themselves, this is an easily visible conflict of interest.
Leeds United feel strongly they have complied with the laws of the land, the question is whether the Football League have done the same. Any club or association can introduce it’s own rules, but they must comply with the laws of the land.
Whilst there is nothing legally binding to stop further action from either party following the decision by the panel, both sides have agreed to comply with the result, and further action is only likely if one party feel that the Arbitration has not followed the correct procedures.
If the 15% deduction stands, the Football League will be duty bound to punish Rotherham, Bournemouth and Luton in exactly the same way, casting the very future of them into doubt, because HMRC have pledged that they will
vote against every single CVA and will
legally challenge every club/administrator to go into administration so that the Football League have to review their rules.
When you get right down to it, Leeds and their former administrators are caught in a power struggle between the Football League and HMRC. Other clubs will go the same way until something is done about it.
Sorry to go on, I wrote a lot more than I planned to, and as you may guess some of it is plagiarised.
.
