Today's most viewed
|
|
|
|
FOOD ON FRIDAY |
 | |
|
FRINGE COMPETITION |
|
| |
|
DOWNLOAD OF THE WEEK |
|
| |
| | WHAT'S ON | | | | |
| | GOING GREEN | | |
| | LETTERS TO THE EDITOR | | | | |
| | COMMENT AND ANALYSIS | | | | |
|
|
|
Kuipers: The pressure is all on Leeds
 |
| Michel Kuipers was inspired on Monday and Nottingham Forest were unable to find a way to beat him |
Albion have held one of the League One giants on their own patch and now the message is bring on Leeds.
The play-off chasing Seagulls head for Elland Road on Saturday, lifted by Monday's spirited goalless stalemate at Nottingham Forest.
Events at both the City Ground and elsewhere have shifted the emphasis and heaped more pressure on Leeds.
Albion's hard-earned point edged them two clear of the Yorkshiremen, although they have a game in hand and a far superior goal difference.
Leeds' form has, to say the least, been indifferent since Christmas. Last Saturday's 2-0 home win against Walsall was only their fifth in 17 matches.
That launched a crunch period for Gary McAllister's side, with games against Doncaster, Carlisle and Leyton Orient to follow Albion's visit.
Leeds had their lowest League One crowd of the season against Walsall. There were excuses - kicking off at tea time for live coverage on Sky in Siberian weather - but an attendance below 20,000 must have sent shivers down the spine of Ken Bates and co.
Albion can use the anxiety of the home supporters to their advantage, just as they did at the City Ground.
Michel Kuipers, the star of Albion's backs-to-the-wall effort at Forest, said: "They are playing at home, so they will have the pressure of the crowd on them. If we keep them at bay for 25 or 30 minutes they will get on their backs.
"It's a tough task for us but one we are looking forward to. All the players have gained loads of confidence from what happened at Forest.
"Everybody said beforehand this week was going to make or break us and at the moment it is the making of us.
"We have to make sure on Saturday that we put in a good performance again. If we performed the way we did on Monday then we are going to get a result.
"Forest are one of the best teams in the League and we got a fantastic clean sheet there. If we can repeat that we are definitely going to get something."
While Albion were doing their stuff in the East Midlands, others were helping their cause, especially doomed Bournemouth.
Their 2-1 home win over Tranmere enabled the Seagulls to edge back into a play-off slot for the first time since November, because they have scored three more goals than the Merseysiders.
Walsall needed a last-gasp equaliser to draw at home with Crewe and Orient and Northampton were both beaten, so some of the teams below Albion are falling away.
It now looks as if the Seagulls are fighting with Leeds, Southend, Tranmere and Walsall for fifth and sixth places. The trip to Southend next month will be significant, as will Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration.
The sooner that issue is resolved the fairer it will be for all the clubs involved in an intriguing play-off race.
Can Albion get a result at Leeds
5:46pm Tuesday 25th March 2008
Print 
Email this 
CommentPosted by: Rob Atkinson, West Yorkshire on 6:01pm Tue 25 Mar 08
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
Posted by: Nicky, Peacehaven on 6:07pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Yes Albion can get a result at Leeds if they play like they did against Forest. Leeds only just beat us at Withdean because of one mistake. Lets make sure we give them our full support up there.
Yes Albion can get a result at Leeds if they play like they did against Forest. Leeds only just beat us at Withdean because of one mistake. Lets make sure we give them our full support up there.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 7:23pm Tue 25 Mar 08
it may have been our lowest gate this term but it was our best performance. watch it freedman & becks are too good for you. you better believe it!!!!!!!!
it may have been our lowest gate this term but it was our best performance. watch it freedman & becks are too good for you. you better believe it!!!!!!!!
Posted by: jon, london on 8:10pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rob Atkinson[/bold] wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
[/quote] You're asking a bit too much of this paper with comments like that. Professionalism? What are you on????!!!!!
Rob Atkinson wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
You're asking a bit too much of this paper with comments like that. Professionalism? What are you on????!!!!!
Posted by: Mark, in the kitchen on 8:33pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rob Atkinson[/bold] wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration." The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional. [/quote] Fair point Rob, but what was the 15 point deduction for, not doing your own community service?
Rob Atkinson wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration." The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
Fair point Rob, but what was the 15 point deduction for, not doing your own community service?
Posted by: Daniel, Brighton on 8:49pm Tue 25 Mar 08
What are you sad Leeds fans doing on Brightons Local paper site?
Why don't you go off and watch a video of when you were actually a big club!
Fact is we are in the play-off zone and you are'nt so get ready for another humbling season in the third tier of english football.
What are you sad Leeds fans doing on Brightons Local paper site?
Why don't you go off and watch a video of when you were actually a big club!
Fact is we are in the play-off zone and you are'nt so get ready for another humbling season in the third tier of english football.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 8:58pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Mark[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Rob Atkinson[/bold] wrote: "Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration." The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional. [/quote] Fair point Rob, but what was the 15 point deduction for, not doing your own community service?[/quote] the 15 points are for not sticking to admin rules according to mawhinny and he probably un fortuanatly like most of us thinks bates is an ****!!!!!!!!!
Mark wrote:
Rob Atkinson wrote: "Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration." The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
Fair point Rob, but what was the 15 point deduction for, not doing your own community service?
the 15 points are for not sticking to admin rules according to mawhinny and he probably un fortuanatly like most of us thinks bates is an ****!!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Mark Viduka, Newcastle on 9:04pm Tue 25 Mar 08
Has anyone seen my half eaten pork pie I left in the Leeds United dressing room?
Has anyone seen my half eaten pork pie I left in the Leeds United dressing room?
Posted by: katie, eastbourne on 9:10pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rob Atkinson[/bold] wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
[/quote] lets get this right, leeds went in to administration to help write off their debts, then suddenly they start splashing the cash!
we at albion can sympathetic at a bad chairman running a club into the ground but we then dont suddenly get refinance that was already agreed which gives leeds an unfair advantage and is pure corperate fruad!
leeds supporters need to grow up and grasp reality!
for putting an appeal in they should be docked 10 more points!!!!!!
Rob Atkinson wrote:
"Leeds' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration."
The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don't journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
lets get this right, leeds went in to administration to help write off their debts, then suddenly they start splashing the cash!
we at albion can sympathetic at a bad chairman running a club into the ground but we then dont suddenly get refinance that was already agreed which gives leeds an unfair advantage and is pure corperate fruad!
leeds supporters need to grow up and grasp reality!
for putting an appeal in they should be docked 10 more points!!!!!!
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 9:23pm Tue 25 Mar 08
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
Posted by: JJ, Brighton on 9:56pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!![/quote] Only 23 other clubs had a vested interest, unless you believe that clubs in the championship and the premiership are still scared of the might of Leeds United.
simon wrote:
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
Only 23 other clubs had a vested interest, unless you believe that clubs in the championship and the premiership are still scared of the might of Leeds United.
Posted by: katie, eastbourne on 10:12pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!![/quote] leeds problems stem from them trying to think they are a giant of a club, they overspent overpaid and paid for it! they are no longer a big club,u paid for bad management and are in the position you are because thats where you belong your team were relegated 10 point deduction or no 10 point deduction, get over it!
and its now sour grapes trying to get this deduction overturned u broke rules and were punished by your peers accept it and be glad you are not relegated! even if you got your points back you proberly wouldnt go up with your form! accept your level
simon wrote:
there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
leeds problems stem from them trying to think they are a giant of a club, they overspent overpaid and paid for it! they are no longer a big club,u paid for bad management and are in the position you are because thats where you belong your team were relegated 10 point deduction or no 10 point deduction, get over it!
and its now sour grapes trying to get this deduction overturned u broke rules and were punished by your peers accept it and be glad you are not relegated! even if you got your points back you proberly wouldnt go up with your form! accept your level
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 10:13pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]JJ[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote: there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!![/quote] Only 23 other clubs had a vested interest, unless you believe that clubs in the championship and the premiership are still scared of the might of Leeds United. [/quote] i think you will find the 24 in league 2 would love to see us in their league for financial gain and the championship would hate to see a strong leeds united so yes all clubs in the football league do have a very big interest in our standing jj
JJ wrote:
simon wrote: there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
Only 23 other clubs had a vested interest, unless you believe that clubs in the championship and the premiership are still scared of the might of Leeds United.
i think you will find the 24 in league 2 would love to see us in their league for financial gain and the championship would hate to see a strong leeds united so yes all clubs in the football league do have a very big interest in our standing jj
Posted by: katie, eastbourne on 10:16pm Tue 25 Mar 08
strong leeds!!!! 5 wins in 17 keep taking the tablets dream boy!
strong leeds!!!! 5 wins in 17 keep taking the tablets dream boy!
Posted by: seagull, scotland on 10:29pm Tue 25 Mar 08
yes we can get a result at leeds i thought we were immense at forest therry racon was class so was cox play offs beckon
yes we can get a result at leeds i thought we were immense at forest therry racon was class so was cox play offs beckon
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 10:29pm Tue 25 Mar 08
[quote][bold]katie[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote: there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!![/quote] leeds problems stem from them trying to think they are a giant of a club, they overspent overpaid and paid for it! they are no longer a big club,u paid for bad management and are in the position you are because thats where you belong your team were relegated 10 point deduction or no 10 point deduction, get over it! and its now sour grapes trying to get this deduction overturned u broke rules and were punished by your peers accept it and be glad you are not relegated! even if you got your points back you proberly wouldnt go up with your form! accept your level[/quote] leeds problems stem from a walter mitty type regime when ridsdale cocked up we all know that but make no mistake , whatever league leeds are in they will always be a big club . its fan base that make you what you are and having support all over the globe secures this view. a few trophies on the way helps. just because we are in the 3rd division alone does not take that away. brighton for example would never be a big club if they were 10 divisions higher than leeds united!!!!!!!
katie wrote:
simon wrote: there is nothing wrong in spending when not in debt . it was insolvency rules during admin that were apparently broken. you cant have your peers voting against a club who have a vested interst in the out come . now most clubs who at last fully understand what they were voting for say they would change their mind. leeds say it is not right to vote in this way and of course it cant be right!!!!
leeds problems stem from them trying to think they are a giant of a club, they overspent overpaid and paid for it! they are no longer a big club,u paid for bad management and are in the position you are because thats where you belong your team were relegated 10 point deduction or no 10 point deduction, get over it! and its now sour grapes trying to get this deduction overturned u broke rules and were punished by your peers accept it and be glad you are not relegated! even if you got your points back you proberly wouldnt go up with your form! accept your level
leeds problems stem from a walter mitty type regime when ridsdale cocked up we all know that but make no mistake , whatever league leeds are in they will always be a big club . its fan base that make you what you are and having support all over the globe secures this view. a few trophies on the way helps. just because we are in the 3rd division alone does not take that away. brighton for example would never be a big club if they were 10 divisions higher than leeds united!!!!!!!
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 10:39pm Tue 25 Mar 08
lets keep knocking leeds, but lets see if we get our points back and automatic promotion with btighton 13 points adrift ,lovely!!!!!!
lets keep knocking leeds, but lets see if we get our points back and automatic promotion with btighton 13 points adrift ,lovely!!!!!!
Posted by: Steve Staunton, Gary McAllisters foot stool on 10:51pm Tue 25 Mar 08
I didn't get Ireland to Euro 2008 and I'll sure as hell assist Leeds in finishing outside the play off zone if its the last thing I do.
I didn't get Ireland to Euro 2008 and I'll sure as hell assist Leeds in finishing outside the play off zone if its the last thing I do.
Posted by: Mike, Ripon on 8:00am Wed 26 Mar 08
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation
Posted by: Chris, Lindfield on 8:44am Wed 26 Mar 08
Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another "big club" hanger on ? How sad.
Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another "big club" hanger on ? How sad.
Posted by: drew, Burgess Hill on 9:12am Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Mike[/bold] wrote:
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does\'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation [/quote] Nobody who regular reads this site is ever going to suggest that Naylor is a trainee reporter as that does a disservice to trainee reporters everywhere. However, if you read the article, he is merely stating that by Leeds standards you had a low crowd. My understanding of the 15 point deduction is that you came out of administration without an agreed CVA which is against League rules. You could have been thrown out of the league as an alternative. Bates tried to manipulate the rules and has so far come unstuck. From the legal perspective, I had read somewhere that a barrister had given an opinion that you had a 25% chance of success. That obviously means you have 75% chance for failing. Lets hope for the sake of football it is the latter.
Mike wrote:
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does\'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation
Nobody who regular reads this site is ever going to suggest that Naylor is a trainee reporter as that does a disservice to trainee reporters everywhere. However, if you read the article, he is merely stating that by Leeds standards you had a low crowd. My understanding of the 15 point deduction is that you came out of administration without an agreed CVA which is against League rules. You could have been thrown out of the league as an alternative. Bates tried to manipulate the rules and has so far come unstuck. From the legal perspective, I had read somewhere that a barrister had given an opinion that you had a 25% chance of success. That obviously means you have 75% chance for failing. Lets hope for the sake of football it is the latter.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 9:12am Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Chris[/bold] wrote:
Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \"big club\" hanger on ? How sad.[/quote] went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season
Chris wrote:
Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \"big club\" hanger on ? How sad.
went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season
Posted by: Rod, Hailsham on 10:27am Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Rob Atkinson[/bold] wrote:
\"Leeds\' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration.\" The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don\'t journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional. [/quote] Yes, you took the 10 point hit when you were already relegated, therefore negating any effect it may have had on you. I believe the 15 point deduction was agreed by your current board to ensure that you were playing this season. So therefore 10 points is due to the fact you tried to avoid a meaningful points deduction, and the 5 extra were linked to financial problems. Therefore the points deduction WAS due to you going into administration, just because that chairman of yours tried to pull a fast one. I do actually sympathyse with Leeds fans, as they have nop control over they way the club was (is) run, but please don't come on here and say that the points deduction is anything other than linked to the administration issue and mismanagement of the club by the current and previous boards.
Rob Atkinson wrote:
\"Leeds\' legal battle to reclaim some of the 15 points deducted for going into administration.\" The 15 point deduction was NOT for entering administration. We took the standard 10 point hit for that at the end of last season. Why does everybody keep getting this wrong? Don\'t journalists ever check their facts? Plenty have criticised Leeds for challenging the deduction, without having troubled to ascertain the reason (if any) behind it. Please try to be a little more professional.
Yes, you took the 10 point hit when you were already relegated, therefore negating any effect it may have had on you. I believe the 15 point deduction was agreed by your current board to ensure that you were playing this season. So therefore 10 points is due to the fact you tried to avoid a meaningful points deduction, and the 5 extra were linked to financial problems. Therefore the points deduction WAS due to you going into administration, just because that chairman of yours tried to pull a fast one. I do actually sympathyse with Leeds fans, as they have nop control over they way the club was (is) run, but please don't come on here and say that the points deduction is anything other than linked to the administration issue and mismanagement of the club by the current and previous boards.
Posted by: Drew, Burgess Hill on 10:30am Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Chris[/bold] wrote: Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \\\"big club\\\" hanger on ? How sad.[/quote] went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season[/quote] Precisely on what criteria are you basing this on? League status - no. League History - no. FA Cup Final appearances - no. Gates - no. Ah, just realized where Wrexham have achieved more than Brighton, winners of the Welsh FA cup. ****, if only we had entered that!
simon wrote:
Chris wrote: Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \\\"big club\\\" hanger on ? How sad.
went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season
Precisely on what criteria are you basing this on? League status - no. League History - no. FA Cup Final appearances - no. Gates - no. Ah, just realized where Wrexham have achieved more than Brighton, winners of the Welsh FA cup. ****, if only we had entered that!
Posted by: simon on 10:41am Wed 26 Mar 08
the reason the 15 point reduction is fundamentally wrong is 1/ it cant work out to be fair when leeds peers are asked to vote for their advantage( leeds would be 3rd now in a poor league)2/ its always the fans who suffer ( as if they havnt been through enough). if leeds actions are deemed to be wrong its the board that should suffer in a financial way. football should be won and lost on the field surely!!!!!!!!
the reason the 15 point reduction is fundamentally wrong is 1/ it cant work out to be fair when leeds peers are asked to vote for their advantage( leeds would be 3rd now in a poor league)2/ its always the fans who suffer ( as if they havnt been through enough). if leeds actions are deemed to be wrong its the board that should suffer in a financial way. football should be won and lost on the field surely!!!!!!!!
Posted by: Drew, Burgess Hill on 10:59am Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
the reason the 15 point reduction is fundamentally wrong is 1/ it cant work out to be fair when leeds peers are asked to vote for their advantage( leeds would be 3rd now in a poor league)2/ its always the fans who suffer ( as if they havnt been through enough). if leeds actions are deemed to be wrong its the board that should suffer in a financial way. football should be won and lost on the field surely!!!!!!!! [/quote] Only if the field on which teams are playing is level!
simon wrote:
the reason the 15 point reduction is fundamentally wrong is 1/ it cant work out to be fair when leeds peers are asked to vote for their advantage( leeds would be 3rd now in a poor league)2/ its always the fans who suffer ( as if they havnt been through enough). if leeds actions are deemed to be wrong its the board that should suffer in a financial way. football should be won and lost on the field surely!!!!!!!!
Only if the field on which teams are playing is level!
Posted by: LS16, Leeds on 1:54pm Wed 26 Mar 08
I'm sure I'll remember all this banter the next time one of you is outside ER again begging for coppers to ensure your survival. The article is biased and disrespectul to Bates - why not - but all also to Leeds fans as well when pointing out the "Excuses" regarding the attendance. Revenge friends is a dish served cold....
I'm sure I'll remember all this banter the next time one of you is outside ER again begging for coppers to ensure your survival. The article is biased and disrespectul to Bates - why not - but all also to Leeds fans as well when pointing out the "Excuses" regarding the attendance. Revenge friends is a dish served cold....
Posted by: simon on 2:10pm Wed 26 Mar 08
19000 would take an equally big club(wot!) like brighton 4 0r 5 games to match. if you take away what leeds do it could be back to 30000 on sat
19000 would take an equally big club(wot!) like brighton 4 0r 5 games to match. if you take away what leeds do it could be back to 30000 on sat
Posted by: Drew, Burgess Hill on 2:49pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
19000 would take an equally big club(wot!) like brighton 4 0r 5 games to match. if you take away what leeds do it could be back to 30000 on sat[/quote] not sure what point you're trying to make as doesn't appear to make sense!!! Also, you previously state it is the fans that suffer. Don't remember too many Leeds fans complaining when you were in the semi final of the Champions League on the back of financial mismanagement. Having said that, it is the fans that suffer, the fans of other clubs who are handicapped by trying to stick to the financial rules of the league!!!
simon wrote:
19000 would take an equally big club(wot!) like brighton 4 0r 5 games to match. if you take away what leeds do it could be back to 30000 on sat
not sure what point you're trying to make as doesn't appear to make sense!!! Also, you previously state it is the fans that suffer. Don't remember too many Leeds fans complaining when you were in the semi final of the Champions League on the back of financial mismanagement. Having said that, it is the fans that suffer, the fans of other clubs who are handicapped by trying to stick to the financial rules of the league!!!
Posted by: Mat, Yorks on 3:04pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]drew[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Mike[/bold] wrote:
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does\\\'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation [/quote] Nobody who regular reads this site is ever going to suggest that Naylor is a trainee reporter as that does a disservice to trainee reporters everywhere. However, if you read the article, he is merely stating that by Leeds standards you had a low crowd. My understanding of the 15 point deduction is that you came out of administration without an agreed CVA which is against League rules. You could have been thrown out of the league as an alternative. Bates tried to manipulate the rules and has so far come unstuck. From the legal perspective, I had read somewhere that a barrister had given an opinion that you had a 25% chance of success. That obviously means you have 75% chance for failing. Lets hope for the sake of football it is the latter.[/quote] Your understanding of the situation is incorrect. Leeds had a CVA and were forced to come out of it incorrectly by HMRC, and the league imposed an unfair restriction on Leeds following this.
drew wrote:
Mike wrote:
Must have been a trainee reporter that wrote this article. Does'nt no why the 15 points were deducted. Says Leeds are getting poor crowds (19000 for the third division - I would say is good. Leeds fans will get on the players backs after 20-30 mins (dont think so!) get your info correct or get a new occupation
Nobody who regular reads this site is ever going to suggest that Naylor is a trainee reporter as that does a disservice to trainee reporters everywhere. However, if you read the article, he is merely stating that by Leeds standards you had a low crowd. My understanding of the 15 point deduction is that you came out of administration without an agreed CVA which is against League rules. You could have been thrown out of the league as an alternative. Bates tried to manipulate the rules and has so far come unstuck. From the legal perspective, I had read somewhere that a barrister had given an opinion that you had a 25% chance of success. That obviously means you have 75% chance for failing. Lets hope for the sake of football it is the latter.
Your understanding of the situation is incorrect. Leeds had a CVA and were forced to come out of it incorrectly by HMRC, and the league imposed an unfair restriction on Leeds following this.
Posted by: never wrong dave, Brighton on 4:14pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Give me Millwall or Palace any day.There is only scum north of Watford.London and Brighton should only let in Irish or English people.Wales is full of non working scum liveing off Englands back.
Give me Millwall or Palace any day.There is only scum north of Watford.London and Brighton should only let in Irish or English people.Wales is full of non working scum liveing off Englands back.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 4:58pm Wed 26 Mar 08
in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****
in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****
Posted by: simon on 5:03pm Wed 26 Mar 08
i apologise to all you proper brighton people but he let you down and i got angry . i know 2 or 3 brighton fans that are welsh you would like them!!
i apologise to all you proper brighton people but he let you down and i got angry . i know 2 or 3 brighton fans that are welsh you would like them!!
Posted by: never wrong dave, Brighton on 6:41pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****[/quote] Thats another thing i hate about the Welsh Simon.They must be the most racist people in the world.Fact.
simon wrote:
in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****
Thats another thing i hate about the Welsh Simon.They must be the most racist people in the world.Fact.
Posted by: simon on 7:11pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]never wrong dave[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote: in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****[/quote] Thats another thing i hate about the Welsh Simon.They must be the most racist people in the world.Fact.[/quote] wales gets picked on by everyone even though you all come on holiday here , buy houses here , live here, work here, wont try to understand the language, we have to speak english in our own country incase you are offended and you think we are racist. the english invasion of wales is nearly as choking as all the foreigners arriving on your doorstep. are you related to anne robinson?
.good result for your team at forest ,did us a favour and i think you will find a tougher prospect in beckford& freedman though. the top6 is in our hands now. brighton have surprised me this season but wont have it in them to get a result against leeds who are starting to play some decent stuff, for an english outfit anyway!!!
never wrong dave wrote:
simon wrote: in wales all we see is **** english holiday homes stopping locals from buying. if it is racist remarks you want(which i dont approve of normally but you asked for it) **** off with the pakies and live with them in brighton . cmon lets talk football you ****
Thats another thing i hate about the Welsh Simon.They must be the most racist people in the world.Fact.
wales gets picked on by everyone even though you all come on holiday here , buy houses here , live here, work here, wont try to understand the language, we have to speak english in our own country incase you are offended and you think we are racist. the english invasion of wales is nearly as choking as all the foreigners arriving on your doorstep. are you related to anne robinson?
.good result for your team at forest ,did us a favour and i think you will find a tougher prospect in beckford& freedman though. the top6 is in our hands now. brighton have surprised me this season but wont have it in them to get a result against leeds who are starting to play some decent stuff, for an english outfit anyway!!!
Posted by: never wrong dave, Brighton on 7:29pm Wed 26 Mar 08
Thats one big chip you have there Simon,like all Welsh people.Can't you see you are not like the jocks or Irish there are millions of them,so they can look after themselfs.We keep you lot for free,but if you hate the English so much give it a go on your own and see how you get on.You lot cost the English millions but do we moan.Iv worked with Welsh men in London and Brighton and the Welsh get know trouble from English,or in the pubs.But its not like that for an English man in Wales.
Thats one big chip you have there Simon,like all Welsh people.Can't you see you are not like the jocks or Irish there are millions of them,so they can look after themselfs.We keep you lot for free,but if you hate the English so much give it a go on your own and see how you get on.You lot cost the English millions but do we moan.Iv worked with Welsh men in London and Brighton and the Welsh get know trouble from English,or in the pubs.But its not like that for an English man in Wales.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 8:03pm Wed 26 Mar 08
how is westy settling in?he was poor at leeds! how many tickets have you sold,no one came from walsall last week or cheltenham ,atleast you lot have some tradition, 1000-1500 would be ok.just going for a pint with my WELSH& ENGLISH mates and have some CHIPS on the way home. please give up now dave and talk about football and stop embarressing the good people of the south coast,who i have worked with!
how is westy settling in?he was poor at leeds! how many tickets have you sold,no one came from walsall last week or cheltenham ,atleast you lot have some tradition, 1000-1500 would be ok.just going for a pint with my WELSH& ENGLISH mates and have some CHIPS on the way home. please give up now dave and talk about football and stop embarressing the good people of the south coast,who i have worked with!
Posted by: vito, Brighton!!!!! on 8:48pm Wed 26 Mar 08
westy isnt bad acually maybe he works better with our tactics not just hoofing it to goal hanging kandol or bekford everytime the keeper gets the ball.
which is all i remmber leeds doing at the withdean staduim.
westy isnt bad acually maybe he works better with our tactics not just hoofing it to goal hanging kandol or bekford everytime the keeper gets the ball.
which is all i remmber leeds doing at the withdean staduim.
Posted by: simon, conwy, n.wales on 10:49pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]vito[/bold] wrote:
westy isnt bad acually maybe he works better with our tactics not just hoofing it to goal hanging kandol or bekford everytime the keeper gets the ball. which is all i remmber leeds doing at the withdean staduim. [/quote] you can keep him.lets see how many men you put behind the ball on sat and we will see who plays the football. wise has gone by the way and so has the long ball.
vito wrote:
westy isnt bad acually maybe he works better with our tactics not just hoofing it to goal hanging kandol or bekford everytime the keeper gets the ball. which is all i remmber leeds doing at the withdean staduim.
you can keep him.lets see how many men you put behind the ball on sat and we will see who plays the football. wise has gone by the way and so has the long ball.
Posted by: chris, telford on 11:27pm Wed 26 Mar 08
[quote][bold]simon[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Chris[/bold] wrote: Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \"big club\" hanger on ? How sad.[/quote] went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season[/quote] although i feel sorry for wrexham they are no where near brighton standards. for example in pre season we beat chester (a promotion favourite) 4-0
simon wrote:
Chris wrote: Surely Simom of N.Wales should be supporting his local club ? Thats Wrexham isnt it ? Another \"big club\" hanger on ? How sad.
went to see the lads against dagenham on mon we are even bigger than brighton and we will be non league next season
although i feel sorry for wrexham they are no where near brighton standards. for example in pre season we beat chester (a promotion favourite) 4-0
Posted by: Peter Palace, Goldstone Retail Park on 10:58am Thu 27 Mar 08
It's lovely to see the hoards shopping on the site of the old Albion ground and in Focus .... you'll never build Falmer :-)
It's lovely to see the hoards shopping on the site of the old Albion ground and in Focus .... you'll never build Falmer :-)
What are these links for?
If you liked this article and would like to share it with others on the web who might be searching for good content we've made it easy for you to do it.
At the bottom of all articles, you'll see links to six sites. These sites - commonly called 'social bookmark' or 'social news' sites - have large communities of web users who share and rate interesting, useful and fun things on the web.
Clicking the links will automatically add the address of the story you are reading to one of these sites, letting you share it with others. Each site will ask you to register to share stories. Registration is free and once a member, you can store, recommend and search for stories that interest you.
More on Digg
More on del.icio.us
More on Furl
More on reddit
More on NowPublic/
More on Yahoo!
