The amount of compensation Manchester City will have to pay for George Swan and Louis Hutton will be decided next month. Although Leeds accept Man City broke no rules in signing the two youngsters, they believe the original offer of £70,000 was unacceptable. Quite right too given that Man City are ridiculously rich and Leeds have invested a lot more than £70k in the development of these two players.

Meanwhile, the future of the facility where all these youngsters are being trained – Thorp Arch – will be decided shortly. A meeting of council executives scheduled for tomorrow afternoon (17/09/09) will brief Leeds United executives on their decision. One of two possible outcomes will be given at this meeting. The first one is for the council to buy the premises and lease it back to Leeds United for a reasonable fee. The other option would be for the council to decide this matter is none of their business and refuse to help Leeds United at all. I’m quietly optimistic that the council will offer to help Leeds United, if only to help themselves. Facilities like Thorp Arch are integral to their 2018 World Cup host city bid and they’ll not want to see it lost for good.

Leeds’ captain Richard Naylor is set to return to action at the Riverside tonight for the reserves. Shouldn’t be too long now ’til he’s back to full fitness but whether he can split up the Marques and Kisnorbo partnership that’s done so well so far remains to be seen. Grayson’s given himself a lot of options in defence meaning no ones place is guaranteed.

In other news, Jason Crowe has made the League One team of the week. Tom Elliot has joined Bury on a three month loan and Leeds are rumoured to be competing for the signature of  Michael Misfud. We’re reportedly facing competition from super-rich Notts County, Championship side Sheffield United and fellow League One rivals Charlton for his signature.

  • What auditing role at LUFC do you have to know that you can quantify that LUFC has spent a lot more than £70k on developing these two players. Plus just because MCFC has the finances to pay for Rolls Royce players; does not mean that they should be forced to pay more than their value. Your article on the matter is very amateur to say the least.

    • TSS

      I’m assuming you’re a MCFC fan Gavin? It must be nice for you to be able to not worry about money at all.

      Our board have stated on many occasions that the figures offered to them by Premier League clubs do not cover the costs of developing these players. It’s clearly true as the transfer tribunal keeps awarding teams far higher ones.

      There’s a chance we may lose our training facilities as a consequence of the tactics used by Premier League clubs. Not directly because of these two players admittedly, but they’re the product of the academy and if we’re losing money on what’s produced then somethings clearly wrong!

      • I am sorry that you have been sucked in by the ramblings of Ken Bates. Clearly it is easy to quantify the running of your training facility at Thorp Arch. But at no point does a club like LUFC have the funds available to fully monetarily evaluate the cost of individual academy players under the age of 16 nor would it be prudent to do so even if excess funds were available. So any figure stated is purely plucked out of the air. Player valuations at that age are purely on chance prospective development which at these player’s age is very hit or miss unless you are a Wayne Rooney as you stand out on a national level; and so valuations for just good academy players are not that high to take into account the risk factor. Most deals include sell on percentage fees to give a good balance to most clubs. Mr Bates on the other hand cleary has spoken his mind in his own one dimensional perspective and your article has just leant towards his bitterness of the result of such a poorly run club that has led to your academy among other things to being seriously weakened.

        • TSS

          In defence of our “weakened academy”. If it was in the state you suggest, then why would the top Premier League clubs like yourselves and Chelsea, continue to scout and sign players that graduate from it?

          Leeds United has one of the best academys in the country. This has been proved by the amount of players that have come from it to play at the highest level.

          As for one-dimensional views. I’d take a look back at what you’ve written before making such comments. The FA’s tribunal will decide on an adequate amount of compensation for our players and I’m certain a neutral party such as this will award much more than the pathetic £70k you did.

          Having visited Thorp Arch on several occasions, I’m absolutely certain that the facilities there cost a small fortune to run. When you’re only likely to produce a handful of professional players from any given generation, £35,000 each is hardly going to keep a £10-12m (rough estimate of it’s value based on the council’s recent statement) facility running. The coaches alone will cost that a year EACH!

          • There is no point going any further with my attempt to educate you away from your deluded and ill informed views when you lower yourself to ending a rant with upper case letters and an exclamation mark.

          • Phil

            Wot he really means is your rite LOL

  • London White

    Agree with TSS. It isnt cheap to run facilities as big as Thorp Arch and its uneffective if Prem clubs are just going to come and steal what we produce for pittance. £70k was a joke of an offer in the first place.

    As for NOT overpaying, what do you call the figures youve shelled out so far?

    • martin

      ‘Although Leeds accept Man City broke no rules in signing the two youngsters, they believe the original offer of £70,000 was unacceptable. Quite right too given that Man City are ridiculously rich and Leeds have invested a lot more than £70k in the development of these two players’.
      If a millionaire and a pauper go to the pub for a pint together, they will both pay the same price for said pint.Why should buying footballers be any different? City have had to put up with this thievery every time they’ve tried to buy a player. In this instance, unfortunately for Leeds, they don’t.

  • jeff

    Bates is greedy grabbing.
    6hours coaching a week 30 weeks a year @ 20 quid per hour(that’s generous because the age groups are massive usually a 1: 20 ratio) = £3600per year
    age 9-14 is 6 years so max comp. they should get is £21,600 per child.

    The FA should do some sums

    • London White

      What the f**k are you talking about?

      Coaches are paid much more than that for a start and thats not the only running cost of an academy the size of Thorp Arch. We also employ a lot more than one coach and the training period of any season is a lot longer than 30 weeks. The kids will be with us from about 10 so its 6-8 years worth of development. Get yourself a calculator, get realistic, understand that Leeds United is a business that needs to make a profit, add in more than the one coach that worked on him, plus all the resources required and the rent of the facility then come up with a realistic fee and tell it to someone who cares. The FA will be the judge of this

  • Gary Anderson

    There is no way Leeds have invested more than 50k in each of the kids development. Premier League Academies get funded by the FA and Premier League anyway, so realistically who is Bates trying to kid. They nicked Fab Delph from Bradford and Bradford wouldn’t have received a significant amount if he hadn’t got his well deserved move to Villa. But he did and Bradford then got a decent amount of compensation but nothing compared to the amount Leeds got. So in this case, just like the Delph one, these two boys have left to go to a club they believe will bring them on better than Leeds. They are only 14 year olds so who is to say whether or not they will make the grade or not. But just because it is Man City a club that has got a lot of money, Bates is just trying to play the media like he usually does to get as much money as he can. He claims he got 5 million for the two boys that went to Chelsea. Well where did that money go? Not back into the academy thats for sure. They often have one coach per age group at leeds and who can blame two young lads thinking they have a good opportunity in going to a club where lack of resources will certainly not be an issue. Whether you are the biggest Leeds fan out there or just a neutral, it doesn’t take much common sense to figure out what Bates’ agenda is. If you ask the academy staff at Leeds, if the opportunity arose to join Man City’s academy staff would they go, I’m sure 99 percent of them would jump at the opportunity right now. So don’t be kidded by Bates games trying to make two 14 year old lads scapegoats in the national media to enhance his bank balance. If the academy was so good and the coaching, medical staff and resources were as good as Bates claims then surely we would not be seeing this mass exodus of young local lads many of them Leeds fans.

    • jeff

      I agree.
      If you have 20 kids in an age group and the coach gets £100 per hour(doubt it from Bates who would expect them to do it for the love of the club), its only £5 invested in each kid. Even if you times it by ten for all the debt they are paying on the posh building (which is mainly for the 1st team ) and junior physio’s they employ part time it only comes to maxiumum £50,000 over 6 years
      And they were offered a fair price £70,000 for 2 young kids who aren.t even old enough to have started studying GCSE’s