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
Sky sports breaking news; no suprise.
Topic Started: 3rd August 2009 - 04:08 PM (808 Views)
Eastyorkswhite
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Villa agree fee with Leeds for Delph.... See how much the old twat gives Larry to spend..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
305miles2EllandRd
Member Avatar
Stand up Comedian
I reckon it will be a bit fat lonely 0
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
Good to see that the waccoe doom has made it's way over here.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bay Rebel
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
I guess we knew it was coming, still v disappointing though

Let just wait and see what happens now before we condemn anyone, besides the team is looking good without any 'major' signings
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
305miles2EllandRd
Member Avatar
Stand up Comedian
What do we now reckon the preferred midfiield will be this season then?

Robinson, Kilkenny, Howson & Snodgrass with Johnson & Prutton coming in as required.

Or will Grayson pull a new player out of the bag (free transfer of course) and suprise us all.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
billythebest
No Avatar
Newbie
bates will never get leeds promoted the cockney bastard
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
garlic bread
Member Avatar
SHIRT LIFTER!!!!!!!!!!
Matt
3rd August 2009 - 06:01 PM
Good to see that the waccoe doom has made it's way over here.
how else are you meant to take the news....positive???????

as i said on waccoe before it was confirmed, and will repeat here..

and this is the bit that annoys me. we dont need to sell, but bates will sell, undisclosed of course, as he has a £1m legal bill to pay for shooting his mouth off, and so he sells the family silver....as we wont even know where the transfer fee will go....

like most things in life, its the 'not knowing' that hurts
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
garlic bread
3rd August 2009 - 08:25 PM
Matt
3rd August 2009 - 06:01 PM
Good to see that the waccoe doom has made it's way over here.
how else are you meant to take the news....positive???????

as i said on waccoe before it was confirmed, and will repeat here..

and this is the bit that annoys me. we dont need to sell, but bates will sell, undisclosed of course, as he has a £1m legal bill to pay for shooting his mouth off, and so he sells the family silver....as we wont even know where the transfer fee will go....

like most things in life, its the 'not knowing' that hurts
I'm not saying it's good news he's going but being realistic, the reason everyone's annoyed is because Delph is so good. Too good for League one if you're honest.

Everyone is directing all the hate at Bates for Delph leaving but the reason Villa, Man City and Everton (if papers are to be believed) were interested is because he was good enough for them to sign him. Bates may have all the legal costs and it may well end up being an undisclosed fee but Delph leaving has very little to do with that. Delph would be leaving whether it was Bates, you or me in charge.

Quote:
 
bates will never get leeds promoted the cockney bastard


Quite correct Kbe... sorry Billy, Bates won't get Leeds promoted. But Grayson and the players could.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spoon Boots
Member Avatar
Least like you expect... 2005 !!!!!!!!!
grayson has a plan B he knew delph was on his way out

we will not be seeing big money signings coming in but while killandertonkenny recovers we have the midfield that beat premier league burnley or stick johnson in to replace prutton i still remember his season one, rated him then still do now if he can settle

bates is building his money chest to buy the ground back and thorpe arch - as - with that he get's his big bucks if he wants to sell however i still think he would prefer promotion x 2 to the premiership and two fingers to his enemies at the FA

just my view though

WE CAN STILL GET PROMOTED

p.s. Beckford had better stay :) or it will be pandamonium with the fans
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eastyorkswhite
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
garlic bread
3rd August 2009 - 08:25 PM
Matt
3rd August 2009 - 06:01 PM
Good to see that the waccoe doom has made it's way over here.
how else are you meant to take the news....positive???????

as i said on waccoe before it was confirmed, and will repeat here..

and this is the bit that annoys me. we dont need to sell, but bates will sell, undisclosed of course, as he has a £1m legal bill to pay for shooting his mouth off, and so he sells the family silver....as we wont even know where the transfer fee will go....

like most things in life, its the 'not knowing' that hurts
Exactly yes we all knew he would go at some point .But what happens to the money is always a secret .As for going up yes we should be good enough however this year the league is far better and stronger and we are one of our best players short now..
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mugsey
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
I just wonder how much we got for him??? We all knew this was on the way anyways, didn't we????
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Ray Hankin's shorts
Member Avatar
Acts of random kindness to donkeys
If it's true Bratfud have a 12.5% sell on clause, capped at £250k, then we should be able to make an educated guess at the figure he goes for - they'll definitely announce their slice of the pie I would have thought.

I hardly went to any games last season as most of you know but I did see a fair few on TV. The last part of the season (play offs excluded) we looked a very good League 1 team - possibly one of the best. In the games I did see Delph was good but he wasn't the be all and end all of the team. Infact, I'd say toward the end of the regular season he fell away a little and was a walking yellow card - probably trying too hard to get back to the level he'd been at earlier.

As for Bates, can't say I like the guy but where would we be without him? I'm sure we all remember how he had to FIGHT his way through the masses of people wanting to put their money into Leeds...... He's a business man, he knows putting us on a firm financial foothold with a team playing well will make him money - that team being in a league higher than we are now will only be a bonus to his back pocket.

IMO of course.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
spud
Member Avatar
Tech Expert
Repeating what's been said before - we all knew Delph was too good for this league, so his move is no supprise really.

I expect SG to have very detailed plans of what he's going to do now that its happened. I do not expect all the money to go into transfers - we don't need it - buying back TA and ER should be high on the priority lists, and a sensible amount on player as required to get us out of this league.

A successful club is worth more to KB than a 3rd Division club, even with its own ground and hotels and mega-casinos - so I back him to do what's best for the stability of the club. It may not be what we want short term, but I trust him not to get us into the state we were in chasing the dream.

What is frustrating is that we'll never know how much we got or where the money goes - but that is better than the old situation of ALL our laundry being done in public. imo.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
garlic bread
Member Avatar
SHIRT LIFTER!!!!!!!!!!
Just a couple of points...

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club
2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER
5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted
6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Eastyorkswhite
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
garlic bread
4th August 2009 - 09:57 AM
Just a couple of points...

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club
2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER
5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted
6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/

I totally agree Yes he did come in and help stablize the club however since then if we get any type of fee for a player its always undisclosed fee and we continue to get free transfers into the club.Its either fantastic buisness running or some old bugger sorting out his pension.....
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Kev Walker
Member Avatar
Services to LUFC for putting up with a scouser!!!
Finally this MB has something interesting to talk about - Saturday's crowd reaction should be interesting after just seeing KB's statement on the LUFC web-site. Spin or honesty - it's down to the fans choice?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wickywhite
Member Avatar
best all-rounder
Moderator
Matt
3rd August 2009 - 06:01 PM
Good to see that the waccoe doom has made it's way over here.
Ditto. We were reading Waccoe last night and it really frustrated me. All this speculation that Grayson won't have money to spend on a replacement, it'll go towards Bates' legal bills, hotels and the like. FFS.

We are in a much better place than we were a few seasons back and are favourites to go up. Optimism please, and bucket loads of it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Wickywhite
Member Avatar
best all-rounder
Moderator
garlic bread
4th August 2009 - 09:57 AM
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
This is something that Col and I have speculated on. However, I see it from a different point of view. Thope Arch had to be bought back within a certain time, so what's wrong with Bates buying it with his own money (as the club clearly haven't been able to afford to thus far) and then sell it on to the club when funds permit? Better than us losing it altogether as it's been a major asset.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bay Rebel
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
I'm very optimistic

I tend to side with those that believe it's in Bates own interest to get us out of league one
Whatever you make of how he goes about it, he won't want to be Chairman indefinitely and he'll want the best return, which he won't get with a L1 club, even if that club is LUFC

As for Teak owning TA and Bates owning Teak, what's the difference, who ever owns TA will be getting the £, whether it's Bates or not. And the club will get ownership back. Which is in our best interest.

We need a positive start to this season.
Back Larry and the players, they've shown they are good enough to get us out of this league.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bay Rebel
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Bay Rebel
4th August 2009 - 12:46 PM
I'm very optimistic

I tend to side with those that believe it's in Bates own interest to get us out of league one
Whatever you make of how he goes about it, he won't want to be Chairman indefinitely and he'll want the best return, which he won't get with a L1 club, even if that club is LUFC

As for Teak owning TA and Bates owning Teak, what's the difference, who ever owns TA will be getting the £, whether it's Bates or not. And the club will get ownership back. Which is in our best interest.

We need a positive start to this season.
Back Larry and the players, they've shown they are good enough to get us out of this league.
Should also add

Whether we needed to sell Delph or not, all clubs have their price for a player whoever they are and he was going to want to play in the Premiership.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Spoon Boots
Member Avatar
Least like you expect... 2005 !!!!!!!!!
garlic bread
4th August 2009 - 09:57 AM
Just a couple of points...

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club
2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER
5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted
6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/

The only issue i have with what you said mate is about the money - he's 70 what 9

He doesn't need the money I think he is more intersted in the fawning ego trip that is being part of a football club to be honest.

He loves a fight more than the dollar in my view

That for me makes him more dangerous.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Carlo Algatrensig
Member Avatar
Board Villain

Just gone up on Villas website that he's completed his medical and signed for an undisclosed fee.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
garlic bread
4th August 2009 - 09:57 AM
Just a couple of points...

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club
2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER
5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted
6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club - Every player has his price, and every player wants to play at the highest level. Delph is good enough so why shouldn't he play in the premiership? The long contract means next to nothing, the four year contract is only used to make sure we get a fair price for him. How long was Ronaldo's contract at Manure?

2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club - and? if he can get us back into profit, which the accounts prove, without using his own money why shouldn't he? I'll use ManUre as an example again, the Glazer's didn't put much if any of their money in and they are MILLIONS of quid in debt. We're not.

3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again. - again, so? Bates buying Teak, if he has that is, is nothing to do with him being a crook. ER and TA was sold and bought by someone long before bates came along. Even if he owns Teak so what? He's protecting his own investment while sorting Leeds out.

4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER - If Bates buys ER and TA back will you cut him some slack or will something else come up that will make him a crook?

5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted - name one other business where the owner/chairman/CEO doesn't want to make money? Name one other football club that wouldn't like to use a steady income base from it's supporters to get promoted?!?!? That's one of the strangest things i've ever seen. You're saying you DON'T want Leeds to get promoted due to it's fans getting them there?

6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/ - you're opinion and partly mine too. i don't think he's particularly trustworthy, however, keep believing Wackoff and the doom merchants on there and you'll never be able to see the truth when it finally does come out.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Bay Rebel
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Matt
4th August 2009 - 07:49 PM
garlic bread
4th August 2009 - 09:57 AM
Just a couple of points...

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club
2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club
3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again.
4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER
5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted
6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/

1. we didnt have to let delph go. He had a 4 year contract. The club could have decided to keep him. Just because people expected him to go, does not make it right. Bates even said in his own words that we dont have to sell delph and we can keep onto players like him cos we are not a selling club - Every player has his price, and every player wants to play at the highest level. Delph is good enough so why shouldn't he play in the premiership? The long contract means next to nothing, the four year contract is only used to make sure we get a fair price for him. How long was Ronaldo's contract at Manure?

2. Bates, in his own admission under oath, has not put 1p into the club - and? if he can get us back into profit, which the accounts prove, without using his own money why shouldn't he? I'll use ManUre as an example again, the Glazer's didn't put much if any of their money in and they are MILLIONS of quid in debt. We're not.

3. Teak trading own TA, I believe that Teak is owned by Bates, meaning that if the sale of delph goes towards the purchase of TA, he will have lined his own pocket, again. - again, so? Bates buying Teak, if he has that is, is nothing to do with him being a crook. ER and TA was sold and bought by someone long before bates came along. Even if he owns Teak so what? He's protecting his own investment while sorting Leeds out.

4. I will also believe when I see it, when Bates buys back TA and ER - If Bates buys ER and TA back will you cut him some slack or will something else come up that will make him a crook?

5. Who's to say that LUFC to bates is seen as a complete cash cow and him and whoever owns the club are just using the large fan base to create a steady income stream on the hope that we get promoted - name one other business where the owner/chairman/CEO doesn't want to make money? Name one other football club that wouldn't like to use a steady income base from it's supporters to get promoted?!?!? That's one of the strangest things i've ever seen. You're saying you DON'T want Leeds to get promoted due to it's fans getting them there?

6. the more i read about bates the less i like/trust/believe in/ add your own comment/ - you're opinion and partly mine too. i don't think he's particularly trustworthy, however, keep believing Wackoff and the doom merchants on there and you'll never be able to see the truth when it finally does come out.
All very well put Matt, better than I could manage anyhow

We all want to see our club back in the premiership but one of my biggest worries, bigger than what Bates does, it's the damage the doom merchants, as found on Wackoff, can do!
Constantly looking for fault in everything, trying to spot the conspiracy, when we need to be supporting this club
When Bates has been and gone, we will still be here. And right now I'm very optimistic for the future
I may end up looking like an idiot for believing Bates will get us out of this league. But it's a chance I'm prepared to take.
The club is now on a sound financial footing and the more I hear about the horrors going on at other clubs, the more I believe that this will become a big factor in taking our club forward.
Bates has appointed a very good manager and we have a very good team.
All we have to do is turn up and support and with a bit of luck we'll get the results we need.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Bay Rebel
4th August 2009 - 12:46 PM
Back Larry and the players, they've shown they are good enough to get us out of this league.
BR, i agree with everything you have said except the last line. The team have not shown they are good enough to get us out of this league or we would not still be in it. Beating a premiership team in one match does not mean you are good enough to win L1.

Despite that, I do beleive we will do it this season.

COME ON THE WHITES

SMITH IN :banana:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
5th August 2009 - 12:25 AM
Bay Rebel
4th August 2009 - 12:46 PM
Back Larry and the players, they've shown they are good enough to get us out of this league.
BR, i agree with everything you have said except the last line. The team have not shown they are good enough to get us out of this league or we would not still be in it. Beating a premiership team in one match does not mean you are good enough to win L1.

Despite that, I do beleive we will do it this season.

COME ON THE WHITES

SMITH IN :banana:
The players are good enough, as proved by the -15 season.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Lee D'su
Member Avatar
Funniest Poster and Getter of tickets
Admin
If you look at Larrys record since arriving I think you will find we are good enough.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Matt
5th August 2009 - 07:39 AM
The players are good enough, as proved by the -15 season.
The -15 season only proved they were good enough then. Last season they were not good enough - proved by the fact that we did not go up.

As I said tho, I do think we will be good enough this season.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
Member Avatar
100% Leeds
Lee D'su
5th August 2009 - 08:06 AM
If you look at Larrys record since arriving I think you will find we are good enough.
If you look at where we finished last season, I think you will find we werent. Maybe we will be this season, but the point is we have not "proved" we are good enough. 2 seasons ago, we proved we were. Last season the proof showed we werent.

This season ??? Who knows ??? Hopefully
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Matt
Member Avatar
Dee's a liar....
Sir Quej Of Quejdom
5th August 2009 - 08:06 AM
Matt
5th August 2009 - 07:39 AM
The players are good enough, as proved by the -15 season.
The -15 season only proved they were good enough then. Last season they were not good enough - proved by the fact that we did not go up.

As I said tho, I do think we will be good enough this season.
So have they proved they're good enough or not?

Quote:
 
The team have not shown they are good enough to get us out of this league or we would not still be in it.


Quote:
 
The -15 season only proved they were good enough then.


By the first statement you said they've never been good enough but the second one you say they have been good enough.

The players are good enough, as proved by the -15 season. The manager at the beginning of last season wasn't good enough, but the manager at the end of the season (by law of averages) would have been good enough.

So the team is good enough, as is the manager now. Delph only started playing last season so by following it through we've actually got a better team now as Delph played in the season where we didn't get enough points.

i know i'm being a pedantic git but it's fun.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Join the millions that use us for their forum communities. Create your own forum today.
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Rebels Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply