Leeds fail!

El Weirdo

Leeds get no points back according to SSN...:D

Sherifu

Hmmm?

patmac

Dead right too. Broke the law tried a sly one at the end of last year and didn't get away with it, rules is rules.

KBarry

Great news. It would have been a travesty if they had got ANY points back. They broke the rules and should accept the punishment. Unless they succeed in the play-offs it looks like another season with the riff-raff in League 1.

El Weirdo

Sherifu wrote: »

Hmmm?

????

RacoonQueen

patmac wrote: »

Dead right too. Broke the law tried a sly one at the end of last year and didn't get away with it, rules is rules.

That's not what the deduction was for. Do keep up.

Death or Glory

****ing stitch up

The 3 reasons they gave were

1. Signed a document agreeing to deduction in August

2.Left it too late to appeal

3.Not fair on other clubs

Load of ****e, Number 1- It was signed under duress, either sign this or you're kicked out of the league.

2. We ****ing appealed it in august and those utter ***** at the football league gave us a kangaroo court where 72 other chairmen with vested interests voted to ratify the 15 point deductio.

3.Not fair on other clubs? What about us? we won the points on the pitch!

Enjoy your title Swansea, a HOLLOW Victory

We'll do it in the playoffs

**** OFF TO MAWHINNEYAND **** OFF TO THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE

Keano

As a Forest fan I am relieved they didn't get the full 15 points back as if we win the weekend and Doncaster fail to win we go up automatically.

Leeds I believe will come up through the play-offs, IF they dont have to play Forest

Death or Glory

It'll be all the more sweeter when we go up in P.O's.

This is just gonna pump our lads up even more........ I feel sorry for Forest/Southend/Donny/Carlisle or whoever the **** we have to play ;-)

KdjaCL

Death or Glory wrote: »

**** OFF TO MAWHINNEYAND **** OFF TO THE FOOTBALL LEAGUE

Your club broke insolvency competition rules and your team and fans suffered, no point blaming anyone but Bates.



kdjac

Death or Glory

KdjaCL wrote: »

Your club broke insolvency competition rules and your team and fans suffered, no point blaming anyone but Bates.



kdjac

How can we break insolvency rules if weren't insolvent?

Yet again, people not keeping up.

KdjaCL

Death or Glory wrote: »

How can we break insolvency rules if weren't insolvent?

Yet again, people not keeping up.

page 25 onwards of the leeds thread, leeds fans wirth short memories.


kdjac

Death or Glory

KdjaCL wrote: »

page 25 onwards of the leeds thread, leeds fans wirth short memories.


kdjac

Don't need to read that. I've been follwing the in's and out's of all this for the past nine months and know what I'm talking about.

Your comment about breaking insolvency rules confirms that you do not

KdjaCL

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/leeds_united/7375942.stm

The penalty was a punishment for breaking competition insolvency rules

k



kdjac

Kingp35

KdjaCL wrote: »

Your club broke insolvency competition rules and your team and fans suffered, no point blaming anyone but Bates.



kdjac

Yes we broke insolvency rules BUT there was no rule in place that said any team who exited administration without a CVA would get a 15 point penalty. That rule was made up after we exited admin. We were done by a rule that didn't exist at the time of the crime. Utter rubbish.

This is a stupid decision by the Football League because they have set a precedent now that any club who exits admin without a CVA has to be deducted 15 points. There is no way the smaller clubs will be bale to deal with that and they are gonna be screwed. Idiotic decision by all involved.

Zaph

Hard to break a rule that didn't exist until it was made up on the spot. Leeds were docked 10 points for going into administration, in accordance with league rules. There was no penalty proscribed nor provision made in the league's rules for a club coming out of administration without a CVA in place. The fact that Leeds did so was due to outside agencies, specifically the messing about by the taxman which left the club with no alternative given that the season was about to start, so it's not as if it was done by choice, and yet this doesn't appear to have been taken into account either.

Not that I would wish such a penalty be imposed on any club, but I'll be watching to see whether Bournemouth, Luton or Rotherham are docked an additional 15 points should a similar situation occur when they come out of administration.

Death or Glory

KdjaCL wrote: »

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/l/leeds_united/7375942.stm



k



kdjac

Competition insolvency rules - i.e rules that were imposed by the football league rather than by law- that you must exit administration with a cva. These were not even in the FL rule book, as it said an exit with a cva is preferable, but not essential. so no rules were actually broken.

We actually HAD a CVA, and the FL voted AGAINST it

Death or Glory

Kingp35 wrote: »

Yes we broke insolvency rules BUT there was no rule in place that said any team who exited administration without a CVA would get a 15 point penalty. That rule was made up after we exited admin. We were done by a rule that didn't exist at the time of the crime. Utter rubbish.

This is a stupid decision by the Football League because they have set a precedent now that any club who exits admin without a CVA has to be deducted 15 points. There is no way the smaller clubs will be bale to deal with that and they are gonna be screwed. Idiotic decision by all involved.

They're changing the rules in the summer to ensure that no other team gets done for 25, meaning we'll be the only ones, which is sickening:mad::mad:

We can't even sue, cos arbitration is legally binding.

Kingp35

Death or Glory wrote: »

They're changing the rules in the summer to ensure that no other team gets done for 25, meaning we'll be the only ones, which is sickening:mad::mad:
[/SIZE]

Why does that not surprise me? Seriously this has been a total and utter joke all the way through. The Football League don't have a clue.

Zaph

Death or Glory wrote: »

They're changing the rules in the summer to ensure that no other team gets done for 25, meaning we'll be the only ones

That would be about right. :rolleyes:

Death or Glory

http://www.football-league.premiumtv.co.uk/staticFiles/4c/ec/0,,10794~126028,00.pdf

full football league arbitration verdict dossier

Death or Glory

"We have no doubt that if this dispute had been promptly and properly brought, then the other clubs vying for promotion might have addressed their season in a different way"

This bit cracks me up! What a ****ing joke

quarryman

patmac wrote: »

Dead right too. Broke the law tried a sly one at the end of last year and didn't get away with it, rules is rules.

no they didn't. Read the details before you post mis-information.

The fact is there was no rule on it.

Death or Glory

'The League in the course of the Hearing appeared to recognise the need to amend the Policy to make specific provisions where there is no CVA. It is to be hoped that this can be achieved during the coming close season. The Clubs should be entitled to clear guidelines, objectives and procedures.'

bull****

event

patmac wrote: »

Dead right too. Broke the law tried a sly one at the end of last year and didn't get away with it, rules is rules.

KBarry wrote: »

Great news. It would have been a travesty if they had got ANY points back. They broke the rules and should accept the punishment. Unless they succeed in the play-offs it looks like another season with the riff-raff in League 1.

lads, if ye are gonna take delight in another teams misfortune, as least have the brains to know what happened

yom 1

As an outside observer I feel sorry for Leeds especially with the reasons given. It seems as though the FA have tried to save face by saying fcuk Leeds they are only 1 club, we dont want to pi$$ other ones off and have this drawn out any longer.

Hope you do the job in the Play Off's. To come from -15 to be in them, is remarkable and you deserve it

Denis Irwin

Even if Leeds did get their points back it wouldn't have ended there as the other clubs such as Forest, Doncaster etc.. would have gone absolutely f***ing nuts and would brought it(and rightly so) all the way to the high court in London.

Zaph

yom 1 wrote: »

As an outside observer I feel sorry for Leeds especially with the reasons given. It seems as though the FA have tried to save face by saying fcuk Leeds they are only 1 club, we dont want to pi$$ other ones off and have this drawn out any longer.

Hope you do the job in the Play Off's. To come from -15 to be in them, is remarkable and you deserve it

Cheers yom, it's rare that anyone actually feels sorry for us.

Denis Irwin wrote: »

Even if Leeds did get their points back it wouldn't have ended there as the other clubs such as Forest, Doncaster etc.. would have gone absolutely f***ing nuts and would brought it(and rightly so) all the way to the high court in London.

So it's right that Forest, Doncaster etc., can go all the way to the High Court to defend their interests but Leeds can't? All the club were ever really looking for was to be treated fairly, and while I'm not happy about the outcome, or the reasons given, an arbitration panel is a lot fairer than having other clubs with a vested interest voting on a punishment. IMO the Football League really fcuked this one up. Their first, and only, step should have been arbitration and it should all have been done and dusted by the end of September, not with one game to go. Nobody would have been in any doubt as to how things stood from early on and at least Leeds would have had a fair hearing.

Kingp35

Death or Glory wrote: »

'The League in the course of the Hearing appeared to recognise the need to amend the Policy to make specific provisions where there is no CVA. It is to be hoped that this can be achieved during the coming close season. The Clubs should be entitled to clear guidelines, objectives and procedures.'

bull****

This is beyond a joke. Basically the Football League know they have screwed us over big time so they are amending the rules so other clubs won't lose 25 points like us. How is that fair? I am baffled by all this.

quarryman

yom 1 wrote: »

As an outside observer I feel sorry for Leeds especially with the reasons given. It seems as though the FA have tried to save face by saying fcuk Leeds they are only 1 club, we dont want to pi$$ other ones off and have this drawn out any longer.

Hope you do the job in the Play Off's. To come from -15 to be in them, is remarkable and you deserve it

good man yom.

we'll see you in the Champions league in 2011

leninbenjamin

absolute disgrace in my opinion. and i'm not a leeds fan. i dont think there is any chance of them having dealt with another club similarly. Leeds weren't the first to go bankrupt at the end of a season....

still, at the same time Bates alone probably deserves it.

yom 1

quarryman wrote: »

good man yom.

we'll see you in the Champions league in 2011

Look forward to it:pac:

patmac

event wrote: »

lads, if ye are gonna take delight in another teams misfortune, as least have the brains to know what happened

Ok I admit I have no great love for Leeds (something to do with nearly being killed at a Cup Quarter-Final in 1987) and I haven't gone into the legal side of things as Leeds obviously have done, but didn't Ken Bates put Leeds into administration when Leeds were already relegated in order to avoid a points deduction the following season or am I missing something? And did the following not happen:
The decision by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators means Leeds will not win automatic promotion from League One, though they are in the play-offs.

An independent three-man arbitration reached its verdict behind closed doors in London, ruling the League had not acted unfairly when docking the points.

The penalty was a punishment for breaking competition insolvency rules.

Most neutral supporters would think this is fair.

NotWormBoy

Most neutral supporters I've spoken to (and I'm a neutral) don't think its fair, to be honest. In fact the only neutral supporters I've spoken who think Leeds have been treated fairly are on Boards. I'm not an expert on this issue, however.

From what I've read, Leeds were punished for what Bates did, even though there wasn't an actual rule against it, until after Leeds had done it. You can't punish people for a rule that doens't exist. Of course, this is assuming what I've read is true.

Does anyone have a full and (more or less) fair account of the whole saga?

shanel23

Lets just face it - they all hate us and right now I could'nt give a toss what anybody says about it -

we got screwed like no other club would !

"Never Stop Fighting" is more apt now than it ever was !

Death or Glory

Course the f*cking league acted unfairly, they had a p*xy kangaroo court with 72 FL chairman with vested interests who of course were gonna vote to ratify the 15 points

Jokeshop

Q_Ball

patmac wrote: »

I haven't gone into the legal side of things

Maybe you should before you form an opinion on the situation...

patmac wrote: »

didn't Ken Bates put Leeds into administration when Leeds were already relegated in order to avoid a points deduction the following season or am I missing something?

Yes he did. And we were deducted 10 points for it. No one is arguing that. Boston united did it half way through their last match.

We argued that the other 15 points we were deducted for breaking a non existent rule were unjust and unfair. This had nothing to do with going into administration, rather coming out of it. Big distinction there.

leninbenjamin

Q_Ball wrote: »

Yes he did. And we were deducted 10 points for it. No one is arguing that. Boston united did it half way through their last match.

We argued that the other 15 points we were deducted for breaking a non existent rule were unjust and unfair. This had nothing to do with going into administration, rather coming out of it. Big distinction there.

and d'ya know what's even more hilarious? Leeds end up with a bigger points deduction than Milan did for the match fixing...

event

patmac wrote: »

Ok I admit I have no great love for Leeds (something to do with nearly being killed at a Cup Quarter-Final in 1987) and I haven't gone into the legal side of things as Leeds obviously have done, but didn't Ken Bates put Leeds into administration when Leeds were already relegated in order to avoid a points deduction the following season or am I missing something? And did the following not happen:
The decision by the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators means Leeds will not win automatic promotion from League One, though they are in the play-offs.

An independent three-man arbitration reached its verdict behind closed doors in London, ruling the League had not acted unfairly when docking the points.

The penalty was a punishment for breaking competition insolvency rules.

Most neutral supporters would think this is fair.

its not about those points though, no one is debating that (although shaun harvey has said tis false, there is no way he would put a club into administration on purpose)

other clubs did that before us, it wasnt illegal

but it wasnt about that, the 15 points are for something completely different, and if you had checked it out, you'd see that

SCULLY

I thought that they were being a bit smart going into admin after their relegation was assured thus making the 10 point deduction meaningless. That nonwithstanding I'm uneasy with any law that is applied retrospectivly. Don't know the ins and outs of the subsequent 15 point penalty (neither do most of the posters though it seems) but it does seem harsh. And this is from a Chelsea fan.

Zaph

SCULLY wrote: »

I thought that they were being a bit smart going into admin after their relegation was assured thus making the 10 point deduction meaningless.

Boston did the same thing and I've never seen anyone (on Boards or elsewhere) giving out about them doing it. It was a loophole that has since been closed, but at the time it was perfectly legal for clubs to exploit it the way Leeds and Boston did. I can't imagine that any other clubs in the same position wouldn't have done the same.