Hehehe
Great news, thought it would be reduced if not canned
Feck off Leeds, horrible club
Great news, thought it would be reduced if not canned
Feck off Leeds, horrible club
Leeds United 15 point deduction!!!
- Thread starter duffer
- Start date
Agreed, I've thought for years that they were a club without which football would be better off.
Table
Played Won Drew Lost F A Pts
21 Tranmere 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 Walsall 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 Yeovil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24 Leeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 -15
Played Won Drew Lost F A Pts
21 Tranmere 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
22 Walsall 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
23 Yeovil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
24 Leeds 0 0 0 0 0 0 -15
And now they reap their just desserts for that.
I am surprised that the points deducted wasn't not reduced on appeal, but by the sounds of things that was never an option. It seems it was 15 points or none.
I think there is a sense of justice here. Leeds should have at least started this season ten points down because they went into administration. I know what they did was within the rules but it was underhanded and they were trying to use a technicality to escape any punishment.
Plus the offer to the creditors was a joke 1 pence on the pound. The way that Bates regained control of the team after it went into administration a second time (because the Inland Revenue wouldn't accept 1 pence on the pound) was a sham. Bates regained control again but did not complete the CVA with his creditors. No club that has failed to reach a CVA with their creditors has even been allowed back into the League.
What with all the indecision by the football authorities over the last couple of years and the lack of punishment for offenders, it is good to see someone in authority has the guts to make the tough calls. As for Leeds taking an appeal to the courts, the last think we need is more threats of lawsuits, I have had enough of the courts getting involved with the game.
Leeds are lucky that they are still playing football. I feel sorry for the Leeds players and their fans, but they should accept their punishment and get on with it
I think there is a sense of justice here. Leeds should have at least started this season ten points down because they went into administration. I know what they did was within the rules but it was underhanded and they were trying to use a technicality to escape any punishment.
Plus the offer to the creditors was a joke 1 pence on the pound. The way that Bates regained control of the team after it went into administration a second time (because the Inland Revenue wouldn't accept 1 pence on the pound) was a sham. Bates regained control again but did not complete the CVA with his creditors. No club that has failed to reach a CVA with their creditors has even been allowed back into the League.
What with all the indecision by the football authorities over the last couple of years and the lack of punishment for offenders, it is good to see someone in authority has the guts to make the tough calls. As for Leeds taking an appeal to the courts, the last think we need is more threats of lawsuits, I have had enough of the courts getting involved with the game.
Leeds are lucky that they are still playing football. I feel sorry for the Leeds players and their fans, but they should accept their punishment and get on with it
Leeds United
From the current issue of Private Eye:
The key unanswered question behind events at Leeds United is why should its biggest offshore creditor, Astor Investment Holdings (owed £17.6m), be prepared to waive that debt but only so long as Leeds Chairman Ken Bates was able to buy back the failed club?
Astor appointed administrators KPMG who believed everything they were told and accepted that Astor and its five discretionary trusts had nothing to do with Bates. So that must be right. But who not only writes off alomst £18m but then volunteers to help fund the second Bates coming? Not a commercial lender. And Bates has few of those since events at Chelsea, which might have sunk under its burden of debt but for the arrival of Roman Abramovich.
Bates pocketed £17.5m from the sale of his Chelsea shares held in a British Virgin Island company. Five other offshore companies which, like Astor and former offshore creditor Krato Trust, plus the offshore owner of Leeds, Forward Sport Fund, appeared to march in step with him, received a further £8.6m. Again no Bates link was ever proved to the five offshore companies. They just happened to agree with him.
But is it possible that this Chelsea money in some way relates to the funding of Leeds? Could it be that these are discretionary family trusts from which Bates personally may not benefit but he knows who does and can somehow influence their continued an remarkable generosity?
That would certainly explain a lot. But it can't be true, can it, because Bates says he has no link to the trusts.
From the current issue of Private Eye:
The key unanswered question behind events at Leeds United is why should its biggest offshore creditor, Astor Investment Holdings (owed £17.6m), be prepared to waive that debt but only so long as Leeds Chairman Ken Bates was able to buy back the failed club?
Astor appointed administrators KPMG who believed everything they were told and accepted that Astor and its five discretionary trusts had nothing to do with Bates. So that must be right. But who not only writes off alomst £18m but then volunteers to help fund the second Bates coming? Not a commercial lender. And Bates has few of those since events at Chelsea, which might have sunk under its burden of debt but for the arrival of Roman Abramovich.
Bates pocketed £17.5m from the sale of his Chelsea shares held in a British Virgin Island company. Five other offshore companies which, like Astor and former offshore creditor Krato Trust, plus the offshore owner of Leeds, Forward Sport Fund, appeared to march in step with him, received a further £8.6m. Again no Bates link was ever proved to the five offshore companies. They just happened to agree with him.
But is it possible that this Chelsea money in some way relates to the funding of Leeds? Could it be that these are discretionary family trusts from which Bates personally may not benefit but he knows who does and can somehow influence their continued an remarkable generosity?
That would certainly explain a lot. But it can't be true, can it, because Bates says he has no link to the trusts.
Some good questions there Frosty that have been asked more than a few times by Leeds fans....been no answers so far.
Given Astor's attitude to Bates' repurchase you'd have to think the idea that they just trust his business acumen is laughable.
Astor is the ONLY reason Bates is in charge at Leeds but until someone (my money is on Jason) proves there is a link between the two nothing can be done to oust Bates.
I think people forget just how close Chelsea were to going to the dogs. I read that they were weeks, if not days away from administration, or a massive player sale to service their debts before they were bought.
Out of interest, how much have Leeds spent on players since Bates took over?
Out of interest, how much have Leeds spent on players since Bates took over?
Hi Marching.
I'm just going to blame Peter Ridsdale and get on with my life now.
Until the next time you get relegated. See you in May.
I don't usually laugh at people when they are down in the gutter, but......
LMFAO
Couldn't happen to a nicer club
LMFAO
Couldn't happen to a nicer club