View Full Version : Crazy loophole saving Leeds 10 points
Al From Bromley
14-05-2007, 06:24 PM
No wonder football is going down the shitter. Put yourself in administration and take a ten point hit THIS season instead of next. The football world has gone mad I tell you!.
Nork1
14-05-2007, 06:29 PM
I reckon Don Revie will be delighted at this breaking news.
Can someone please tell me where I can find a thread on Nugent? Ta
I think they'll be closing this loophole very soon.
But I agree - the whole season stinks for me.
Hedgehog
14-05-2007, 06:42 PM
Originally posted by Al From Bromley
No wonder football is going down the shitter. Put yourself in administration and take a ten point hit THIS season instead of next. The football world has gone mad I tell you!.
Didn't I read somewhere another team went into administration 10 minutes before the final whistle of the final game to save them some how? I can't remember the details.
Originally posted by Hedgehog
Didn't I read somewhere another team went into administration 10 minutes before the final whistle of the final game to save them some how? I can't remember the details.
Boston I believe
Nork1
14-05-2007, 06:56 PM
Leicester did a similar thing a couple of seasons back... went into administration, wiped out their debts and suddenly got themselves a shiny new stadium named after a bag of crisps.
dannycpfc
14-05-2007, 07:03 PM
before you know it clubs will be breaking transfer rules and get caught out and not have any points deducted
GreatGonzo
14-05-2007, 07:04 PM
Originally posted by Nork1
Leicester did a similar thing a couple of seasons back... went into administration, wiped out their debts and suddenly got themselves a shiny new stadium named after a bag of crisps.
That was what brought in this new rule.
As long as you go into administration before the end of the season you take the hit that season - that is fair enough.
Rotherham did it the other way last year and went into administration a couple of days after the end of the season cos they stayed up.
There are always loopholes in things. It was well known that Leeds would take the deduction this year - what i cannot believe is that you thought this was actually news and are actually surprised! :eek:
stevek
14-05-2007, 07:20 PM
What really surprises me is Palace fans making any comment on the situation, given that we went into administration and received no points penalty.
Nork1
14-05-2007, 07:31 PM
Originally posted by GreatGonzo
It was well known that Leeds would take the deduction this year - what i cannot believe is that you thought this was actually news and are actually surprised! :eek:
Me? I think the oh so wacky and sarcastic tone of my first post on this thread might suggest otherwise. I have my finger on the pulse of all things football related.
m355y
14-05-2007, 09:23 PM
I'm amazed people are still talking about this.
If there's a loophole there, we're doing nothing wrong exploiting it at all. After such an apalling season it's a huge relief we start next season with a clean slate and I don't personally feel in the least bit guilty about it. We needed a break somewhere.
Sunny Fan
14-05-2007, 09:31 PM
Yup, Boston did it ten minutes before the end of their last game this season once relegation was assured.
Sussex Eagle
15-05-2007, 01:48 AM
Originally posted by m355y
We needed a break somewhere.
:D Poor little Leeds!
littlecsaesar
15-05-2007, 07:46 AM
Originally posted by stevek
What really surprises me is Palace fans making any comment on the situation, given that we went into administration and received no points penalty.
Its a bit different as we were a test case as to how it all unfolds. If it had only been us and an isolated incident, I don't think the points penalty would be in place, its just that many clubs have gone into administration since.
As for Boston, the fact that the players hadn't even been paid for 3 months I don't blame them.
Yet Leeds have got off very lightly here as Bates has shafted many creditors out of millions owed. I think the thing with Leeds is its not what they have done, its the fact that its been done by that fat santa look-a-like muvver fooker Bates, who people forget left Chavski in a right mess. He is a very bad business man and I can't beleive the club was then sold back to one of his companies! Thats the dodgy part of it.
Al From Bromley
15-05-2007, 08:10 AM
22f3
There is no correlation between Palace and Leeds at all.
stevek
15-05-2007, 09:16 AM
Originally posted by littlecsaesar
Its a bit different as we were a test case as to how it all unfolds. If it had only been us and an isolated incident, I don't think the points penalty would be in place, its just that many clubs have gone into administration since.
As for Boston, the fact that the players hadn't even been paid for 3 months I don't blame them.
Yet Leeds have got off very lightly here as Bates has shafted many creditors out of millions owed. I think the thing with Leeds is its not what they have done, its the fact that its been done by that fat santa look-a-like muvver fooker Bates, who people forget left Chavski in a right mess. He is a very bad business man and I can't beleive the club was then sold back to one of his companies! Thats the dodgy part of it. And we didn't shaft people out of what they were owned? Goldberg went into administration hoping to keep control of the club, don't forget.
We were lucky that we were relatively early at going into administration so the penalty didn't apply. Leeds were lucky (but far from unique) in that they used the timing to minimise the impact of the 10 points. They, like us, were just working within the rules as they stood at the time. For us to criticise them for doing so is hypocrisy in the extreme.
littlecsaesar
15-05-2007, 10:18 AM
Originally posted by stevek
And we didn't shaft people out of what they were owned? Goldberg went into administration hoping to keep control of the club, don't forget.
We were lucky that we were relatively early at going into administration so the penalty didn't apply. Leeds were lucky (but far from unique) in that they used the timing to minimise the impact of the 10 points. They, like us, were just working within the rules as they stood at the time. For us to criticise them for doing so is hypocrisy in the extreme.
We did indeed but not to the some of 35million!
m355y
15-05-2007, 11:07 AM
Originally posted by Sussex Eagle
:D Poor little Leeds!
yeah, try getting relegated, going into administration and having Ken Bates as chairman!! People can mock all they want but we're not the big, arrogant premiership club anymore, we're a league 1 club in all kinds of shit. Starting next season on -10pts would have been a continuation of this seasons nightmare, at least we start with a clean slate now.
New LP
15-05-2007, 11:12 AM
Leeds haven't broken any rules expoiting this loophole though. However, perhaps there should be a cut off point in future, say 10 games before the seasons end where after clubs who go into administration will be docked the points the following season.
leonard1style
15-05-2007, 11:52 AM
I think it's a shit rule which just kicks clubs while they're down, fair play to Leeds or anyone who takes advantage of it
Cleon
15-05-2007, 12:52 PM
The Palace administration was caused by Goldberg being completely screwed. He lost virtually all his wealth as a result (he he should have).
Bates however has taken Leeds into adminsitration to suit his own ends rather than pay the creditors the money Leeds owe them. He will not be ruined as a result of this move.
Al From Bromley
15-05-2007, 12:59 PM
Ridsdale is of course to blame. Isn't he still involved somehwere? cardiff is it? The business laws in this country are rubbish when it comes to allowing people to get away with what is akin to financial murder.
littlecsaesar
15-05-2007, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Al From Bromley
Ridsdale is of course to blame. Isn't he still involved somehwere? cardiff is it? The business laws in this country are rubbish when it comes to allowing people to get away with what is akin to financial murder.
He can't be blamed totally, as a PLC he was spending other people's money granted, yet there were others on the board who could have said no and stopped him. He was a yes man in that when O'Leary wanted a player and he said yes at any cost. The famous Seth Johnson negotiation has epitimized the whole debacle.
Cleon
15-05-2007, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by Al From Bromley
Ridsdale is of course to blame.
I'm not sure that's true to be honest. Whilst Risdale was certainly to blame for the fall from grace to the Championship, once Bates had taken over financial stability was surely achieved. Bates had a team in the play-off final last year.
But Bates has made numerous bad decisions, including the appointment of the pixie-faced weasel, and now they find themselves even further down the ladder.
This is Bates' mess, yet as you rightly point out, he seems to be able to not only walk away unharmed, but actually come back to re-buy the club.
Cleon
17-05-2007, 03:20 PM
This is ••••••• outrageous.
Krasner fury at Bates' Leeds bid - BBC Online
Krasner and Bates during happier times at Elland Road
Former Leeds chairman Gerald Krasner says Ken Bates' offer to pay off the club's creditors is "derisory". And Krasner has offered to represent the creditors free of charge to prevent chairman Bates retaining control.
Bates placed Leeds in administration this month and could get the go-ahead to buy the club back as director of a new company at a meeting on 1 June.
He has offered to settle the club's debts at 1p in the £1 and has the backing of the club's major creditors. The creditors are owed a reported £22million.
But in a letter sent to creditors Krasner said: "Having now seen the papers in connection with the proposed CVA, it appears that Mr Bates' new company is proposing a dividend of 1p in the £1.
"Effectively, he will have bought the club back debt free for approximately £500,000, including professional costs.
"Quite frankly I consider this offer utterly derisory and unless you agree with this proposal, it is up to you as a creditor to make your voice heard."
Krasner added: "I have had a lot of approaches recently from fellow professionals, acting either for creditors or for third parties, who wish to invest in the club, but do not want to deal with Mr Bates.
"They have all asked me the same question, 'What can be done?'
"My answer has always been that if the Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) proposal by the joint administrators is voted down, then I believe that substantial new investment would come quickly into the club and the return to creditors would be much higher."
Krasner, director of Leeds-based solicitors Bartfields, has stressed he has no financial interest in the matter, but is acting on behalf of a number of creditors who have already approached him.
Leeds went into administration with debts of £35million following a winding-up order issued by the Inland Revenue, who are owed £5million in unpaid taxes.
The business was, with administrators KPMG's approval, almost immediately bought by a new company, Leeds United Football Club Limited, of which Bates is a listed director.
But the sale is subject to approval by the club's creditors who will be furnished with full details of takeover plans put forward by other consortia at the meeting on June 1.
27f
Alex_S
17-05-2007, 05:27 PM
Boston did the same thing, so why not the uproar about that as well?
Well the question is hypothetical as I know the answer myself. Everyone hates Leeds and wants them to f**k up even more, me included.
Shame they managed to exploit this loop hole - would be great to see them starting life in league 1 with minus 10 points.
vBulletin v3.5.3, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0