Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to 606 Rebels. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Wealso allow junior members.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
An Indipendant view of the situation
Topic Started: 2nd May 2008 - 11:40 AM (533 Views)
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
http://www.footballpools.com/pundits-corne...he-easy-option/

Nice to see what TRULY independant people think of it....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
strachans shinpad
Member Avatar
Most Sensible Poster 2005
Moderator
Indeed it is, but speaking as a fan of Ken, I wonder if the author would feel the same if he read the full text and realised just how much sleight of hand was being utilised by Mark Taylor.

Having stuck up for KB before now, the disclosure of the shennanigans of Taylor - and the knowledge that we could have started in League 2 or take the fifteen point hit are making me wonder if I have got it right.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
strachans shinpad
May 2 2008, 11:18 AM
Indeed it is, but speaking as a fan of Ken, I wonder if the author would feel the same if he read the full text and realised just how much sleight of hand was being utilised by Mark Taylor.

Having stuck up for KB before now, the disclosure of the shennanigans of Taylor - and the knowledge that we could have started in League 2 or take the fifteen point hit are making me wonder if I have got it right.

Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not. The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full. We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival. It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place. Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

We will go down in history as the ONLY club that has or will ever be given a 25 point deduction.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
305miles2EllandRd
Member Avatar
Stand up Comedian
It will be very interesting to see if Bournemouth & Luton start next season on -15, I bet they won't.

I haven't had time to read the full text yet but it sounds as if KB & co were trying to be too clever for their own good.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
305miles2EllandRd
May 2 2008, 01:06 PM
It will be very interesting to see if Bournemouth & Luton start next season on -15, I bet they won't.

I haven't had time to read the full text yet but it sounds as if KB & co were trying to be too clever for their own good.

You might be surprised
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
strachans shinpad
Member Avatar
Most Sensible Poster 2005
Moderator
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 11:59 AM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.

I'm not disputing anything else, I was just pointing out that having been a supporter of Ken and his policies, I am disappointed to only hear about this alternative now and not at the beginning. My understanding was the choice of points deduction or oblivion, nothing about League 2.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spud
Member Avatar
Tech Expert
strachans shinpad
May 2 2008, 12:21 PM
My understanding was the choice of points deduction or oblivion, nothing about League 2.

I do remember hearing about the League 2 thing last summer - cannot remember where though... it was about the time of the Scarborough going bust and having to start at the bottom of the pyramid, and *think* something was mentioned then... the gist being about being allowed to rejoin 2 divisions below current position, or the next league down after that which had space to accomodate a new team.

Sorry for not being less vague. :unsure:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carlo Algatrensig
Member Avatar
Board Villain

Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not. The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full. We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival. It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place. Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Exiled in the Black Country
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Hows it going dude???
Been a while!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carlo Algatrensig
Member Avatar
Board Villain

Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:33 AM
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.  The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full.  We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival.  It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place.  Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.

as an addition to what i've just said, if there challenge was about the Football creditors rule then HMR&C could have challenged the straight sale out of administration but they didn't. I think that shows that what they did in Leeds Uniteds case had nothing to do with the football creditors rule.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:49 AM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:33 AM
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.  The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full.  We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival.  It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place.  Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.

as an addition to what i've just said, if there challenge was about the Football creditors rule then HMR&C could have challenged the straight sale out of administration but they didn't. I think that shows that what they did in Leeds Uniteds case had nothing to do with the football creditors rule.

It was all to do with the FL's creditors rule, as it is with every other club.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fitz
Member Avatar
Perfectly formed member
Moderator
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:49 AM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:33 AM
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.  The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full.  We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival.  It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place.  Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.

as an addition to what i've just said, if there challenge was about the Football creditors rule then HMR&C could have challenged the straight sale out of administration but they didn't. I think that shows that what they did in Leeds Uniteds case had nothing to do with the football creditors rule.

Since HMRC have stated they are going to challenge every CVA for `Football Clubs, I can't see how it was anything BUT the creditors rule.

I also agree with SS. If I had known it was a choice betweeen L2 and -15, I wouldn't have supported KB bringing it to Arbitration. I feel we look a collective right tit now.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lee D'su
Member Avatar
Funniest Poster and Getter of tickets
Admin
Fitz
May 4 2008, 06:57 PM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:49 AM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:33 AM
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.  The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full.  We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival.  It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place.  Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.

as an addition to what i've just said, if there challenge was about the Football creditors rule then HMR&C could have challenged the straight sale out of administration but they didn't. I think that shows that what they did in Leeds Uniteds case had nothing to do with the football creditors rule.

Since HMRC have stated they are going to challenge every CVA for `Football Clubs, I can't see how it was anything BUT the creditors rule.

I also agree with SS. If I had known it was a choice betweeen L2 and -15, I wouldn't have supported KB bringing it to Arbitration. I feel we look a collective right tit now.

Am I reading this wrong, but wasn't the relegation to L2 an option for teams who go into admin after being relegated (which we never) and wasn't us coming out of admin without a CVA unique and no punishment is written into FL rules and is therefore why they called the meeting. I think the panel have misunderstood the rules as I can't see anyone appealing when they've got away with murder.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Fitz
Member Avatar
Perfectly formed member
Moderator
Lee D'su
May 4 2008, 07:09 PM
Fitz
May 4 2008, 06:57 PM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:49 AM
Carlo Algatrensig
May 3 2008, 12:33 AM
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
May 2 2008, 12:59 PM
Regardless of the fact that we could have been made to start in league 2 or not.  The fact remains that we were only in that situation because of the dispute between the FL and the HMRC regarding the fact that football creditors get paid in full.  We must not lose sight of that fact?

Anything that went on after that fact, was just a football club fighting for it's very survival.  It still all boils down to the fact that it was the football leagues own rules that prevented us from having a CVA in place.  Instead of coming up with a solution, it was easier to punish Leeeds United in a way that has never been seen and will never be seen again.

Lose sight of what fact exactly? Leeds united weren't in the situation because of the leagues rules. The football Creditors rule has gone to court previously and has been shown to be in the football leagues favour.

What HMRC were objecting to in leeds uniteds case as has been stated to in the KPMG letter to creditors (which is available somewhere on the internet) and the Arbitrations panel decision was the Voting rights assigned to certain parties most notably Astor Investments.

I'll probably get some abuse from some for what i'm saying seeing as i'm not a leeds fan but I've actually put down the facts here even though i am slightly pissed.

as an addition to what i've just said, if there challenge was about the Football creditors rule then HMR&C could have challenged the straight sale out of administration but they didn't. I think that shows that what they did in Leeds Uniteds case had nothing to do with the football creditors rule.

Since HMRC have stated they are going to challenge every CVA for `Football Clubs, I can't see how it was anything BUT the creditors rule.

I also agree with SS. If I had known it was a choice betweeen L2 and -15, I wouldn't have supported KB bringing it to Arbitration. I feel we look a collective right tit now.

Am I reading this wrong, but wasn't the relegation to L2 an option for teams who go into admin after being relegated (which we never) and wasn't us coming out of admin without a CVA unique and no punishment is written into FL rules and is therefore why they called the meeting. I think the panel have misunderstood the rules as I can't see anyone appealing when they've got away with murder.

Maybe you're right, but you'd expect a retired judge to be able to spot a loophole like that. I don't think KB refuted it either?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spud
Member Avatar
Tech Expert
spud
May 2 2008, 04:48 PM
I do remember hearing about the League 2 thing last summer - cannot remember where though... it was about the time of the Scarborough going bust and having to start at the bottom of the pyramid, and *think* something was mentioned then... the gist being about being allowed to rejoin 2 divisions below current position, or the next league down after that which had space to accomodate a new team.

Sorry for not being less vague. :unsure:

I did some more research on this... apparantly the rule is - if the club folds completely, they can apply to rejoin as a new entity (aka Sacarborough AFC rejoining as Scarborough Athletic AFC) two divisions below the previous clubs final position.

So relegating us to L2 would almost have fit under this rule... except that we were already relegated to L1 and we hadn't folded.

Anyway... -15 points rather than L2 would always be preferable, but neither was a previously sanctioned punishment... think thats what we were appealing against.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
b milner
Member Avatar
Forum Scientist
Hey Spud! Good to hear from a blast from the past!
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spud
Member Avatar
Tech Expert
b milner
May 11 2008, 09:33 PM
Hey Spud! Good to hear from a blast from the past!

...even if I am digging up old topics and replying to myself!! :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
« Previous Topic · Rebels Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply