Jim Smith 2,314 Posted October 16, 2009 Has anyone else been following this story? Have been perusing their board and it is clear their fans are quite worried about it and possible further sanctions from the FL. They also think its the reason a recent deal to buy back their training ground fell through.Does our resident Essex hack have any inside track on whether the FL are considering action? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Jedi 0 Posted October 16, 2009 See you can post interesting threads (and on Leeds, too)!Would be awesome for them to get 10 points docked... the FA is usually spineless tho, so I wouldn''t bank on it whether there is an issue or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,314 Posted October 16, 2009 Will be the Football League though. They are not so spineless. If Bates has lied to them they may well come down on him hard again.Some earlier posts today were an imposter. They will be pinged when i see them later! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
PurpleCanary 5,554 Posted October 16, 2009 The Guardian''s excellent David Conn has been the man to read on this story, and on others to do with the ownership of football clubs, and how the investment that other clubs seem to be able to attract isn''t always quite what it appears at first blush. Anyway, for the latest on Leeds, and an embarrassing admission by the saintly Ken Bates:http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/oct/10/leeds-united-council-thorp-arch Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
First Jedi 0 Posted October 16, 2009 Ah right - no worries! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jim Smith 2,314 Posted October 16, 2009 [quote user="PurpleCanary"]The Guardian''s excellent David Conn has been the man to read on this story, and on others to do with the ownership of football clubs, and how the investment that other clubs seem to be able to attract isn''t always quite what it appears at first blush. Anyway, for the latest on Leeds, and an embarrassing admission by the saintly Ken Bates:http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/oct/10/leeds-united-council-thorp-arch[/quote] Last night was the deadline for the deal apparently and it didn''t happen. Most fans seem to think this is because Bates won''t reveal who the club''s owners are. If this is the case surely the FL will step in again? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Old Shuck 183 Posted October 16, 2009 No action will be taken against Leeds United -especially more points deductions- if and when the Football League follow this ownership thing through-so forget that happening.Besides, quite a few clubs would then be up for the same punishment!No, any action -and it would be severe- would surely be taken against Ken Bates as an individual? I am at a loss as to how he can say that he and a colleague own the company that own the club and then retract that and say it was an error-surely he should be rining alarm bells at football HQ, its not the fault of Leeds United the club he has made this statement and considerably muddied the ownership waters- if things are suspect and underhand as they seem then LUFC have been as deceived and let down as much as anyone and can''t and shouldn''t be punished for it.Thorpe Arch is one of the most advanced, state of the art football training facilities anywhere in Europe-it makes Colney, fantastic as it is-one of the top 6-8 in the UK, no question, maybe top 5- look like a portacabin or two on the village playing field in comparison. It has long been the pride and joy of that club, especially as their stadium, with the exception of one stand, is falling to pieces and very dated-not only that, the surroundings are hardly prosperous or attractive, no facilities and hotels/business centres or other shopping/entertainment facilities attached (see for yourself on Monday) is years past its sell by date and won''t be a part of any World Cup bid in England unless it is completely overhauled or the club moves. The ground itself has repeatedly switched ownership between the club and the local council since the 80''s, however, the Council always had one eye on Thorpe Arch, which has development value that is astronomical-and they know it! Would the Council buy the facilty and lease it back to the club when they could benefit from it in other ways? Thats one to ponder and keep an eye on.Does anyone think that Ken Bates invested -or did whatever he did to be the face of Leeds- for purely selfless purposes? Sure, there was a club going cheap and close to going under. But there was more to it than that. I rather think the heat might be on him now, he certainly has piqued the curiousity with his words and apparant reluctance to say whats what, and it''ll be interesting to see what happens. But, regardless, the club will march on, they as noisy and passionate a gathering of fans as any club (one of the problems they have had, cerrtainly in the eyes of certain media outlets, is that they are a big club in the North, they''ve achieved things, and they aren''t in Manchester or Liverpool-hence a lot of spite and negative publicity that surrounds them, one nasty tabloid has a regular agenda against the club and is as vilified in Leeds as another one is, in Liverpool), a good Manager and a squad of good players and some depth in talent as well, as well as one of the top youth academies in the country. They are hated by many, but it bothers them not one bit and a lot of it is false or mis-representation anyway. However, thats another story.They are being held up as an example of the whole club ownership issue, and with good reason. But it all goes a lot, lot deeper, than one club, one man. We have seen, in years previous, people buy into else invest in clubs, only for their real motives to become apparant way down the line. Wrexham are a good example and there are others. This is a huge issue in football and one that will grow and grow as the investment and mania for football club ownership grows. Do all these new owners have nothing but the welfare of the football club and its supporters at heart? Some, sure-but all of them? Do me a favour! QPR have two billionaires on board, look at them since their takeover-scratching around still, no sign of investment in the club, another mediocore season in the CCC likely-don''t you think their owners would like their club at the top end of the Premiership as soon as possible? Or is it that patch of West London where their stadium is, and where, soon and very close-by, that prime piece of real estate that is the BBC will be put up for sale and eventual redevelopment. Will the two sites be linked, surely not?!! Its speculation on my part, but I can''t help putting that one together. Its a shame that stories about football all so often now focus on ownership, take overs, and the like. Newcastle had someone who did love the club bail them out, he''s now hated and they are, no doubt, hoping for someone with more cash but perhaps less footballing scruples to take over.And so it goes on. And yes, we need that same investment and new ownership ourselves if we are to progress-the question is, are we all prepared for anyone, providing they have the cash, to come in, and worry about the football later? ( Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ncfcstar 287 Posted October 16, 2009 [quote user="Old Shuck"]No action will be taken against Leeds United -especially more points deductions- if and when the Football League follow this ownership thing through-so forget that happening.Besides, quite a few clubs would then be up for the same punishment!No, any action -and it would be severe- would surely be taken against Ken Bates as an individual? [/quote]Not a chance, if they did not punish the club think of all the others who have been punished by points deductions due to mismanagement who would then appeal. Southampton would be the perfect example, Lowe messed them around, but the club get punished. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Old Shuck 183 Posted October 16, 2009 Haven''t Southampton appealed already re.a similar club/issue (not Leeds) who didn''t get a points deduction.Southampton''s points deduction was ridiculous, as the persons responsible were out and free from the club before it was administered-so no-one who might have been cited for their wrong doings was actually punished, but the club were! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
canary cherub 1 Posted October 16, 2009 [quote user="Old Shuck"]we need that same investment and new ownership ourselves if we are to progress-the question is, are we all prepared for anyone, providing they have the cash, to come in, and worry about the football later?[/quote]Let''s not forget that the clubs who''ve hit the headlines for the wrong reasons are a minority. No we''re not prepared to accept anyone, but neither can we afford to be overly fastidious.Personally I still think it''s not just about money, when it comes to the crunch D&M are unwilling or unable to let go - and sadly, as things get better at NCFC so the likelihood of them selling up will probably decrease. You, me and Roy Keane''s dog all know that unless they find a way of bringing substantial new investment into the club - which effectively means letting someone else take over - the good times are going to be only too brief and we could end up in an even worse mess than before. But try telling them that. Hope I''m wrong, needless to say. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bill 1,788 Posted October 16, 2009 [quote user="Old Shuck"]Haven''t Southampton appealed already re.a similar club/issue (not Leeds) who didn''t get a points deduction.Southampton''s points deduction was ridiculous, as the persons responsible were out and free from the club before it was administered-so no-one who might have been cited for their wrong doings was actually punished, but the club were! [/quote]That''snonsense. Southampton were living beyond their means after they were relegated. They gambled on getting promotion. They lost, so they must pay the price. It''s rubbish to claim that because the previous administration had left, the club carried no responsibility.Much the same with the shysters down the road. For much of the past decade or so they have lived beyond their means. Using borrowed money to keep them in a false position for so long. Having ran out of all possible borrowing options they had little choice but to hand over their club to some greedy asset stripper, who is now obliging the club to start paying back some of that debt.If that is success then thank god we''ve a club that doesn''t recognise dodgy offshore ownership as success. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Metatron 0 Posted October 16, 2009 The David Conn pieces are excellent and well worth reading (especially about the Jersey court case)The same can be said for The Guardian''s coverage of ''who owns Notts County?''On a similar note, the recent debacle at Portsmouth may well be echoed in the coming months with the new owner of Birmingham.How can the FA say that these clubs are run by ''fit and proper'' people if they don''t actually know who the owners are? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Camuldonum 0 Posted October 16, 2009 David Conn is one of the few "news" football reporters left in the business and I, too, commend his pieces. I think that if, as seems likely, there has been some sort of cover up over the ownership of Leeds then the Football League will have to take action - whether this would involve a points deduction rather than or with a massive fine is very unclear to me. There is no doubt, I think, that there is a lot more yet to come out - and the same may well be true of Notts County.Personally, I am not over impressed with the Football League''s "investigatory powers" although they can, and perhaps will, call on expert outside help including forensic accountants.The Blazers tend to be a law unto themselves and it is very hard to predict what action they might take. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
The Fish Seller 0 Posted May 3, 2011 Well that''s that little problem put to bed.The owner of Leeds United FC is........Ken Bates.again.[:S]so everyone who thought he''d sold the club to himself via the Cayman based Forward Sports Fund (of whom Bates was the chairman) to avoid liabilities and a compulsory winding up order from HMRC back in 2007 was wrong . I mean how could Bates buy back Leeds now the liabilities have gone if he still already owned it?Clear as mud per usual where Kb is involved. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
