In writing the match report for the 4-0 defeat at home to Cardiff last night I paid little attention to the dreadful challenge Jay Bothroyd put in on Luciano Becchio, partly because I’d not had chance to watch the replay on Sky+ but mainly because even at ten men, we wouldn’t have beaten them.

The challenge (posted on WACCOE by Rowley Birkin QC)

My initial thoughts inside Elland Road were that it was definitely late, definitely dangerous and unquestionably a red card, but Luciano got up and soldiered on (albeit, with a limp) so I just wrote it off as one of those unfortunate decisions the referee misses and moved on.

However, after seeing Jay Bothroyd’s dismissive reaction I was left enraged at the indifference he expressed towards nearly breaking an opposing players leg. When asked about the challenge, he excused it by saying he was pushed first so everything was OK, noticeably amused by his own actions.

His reaction is akin to primary school children telling the teacher ‘he started it’ after getting caught bullying another child.

There’s been a lot of talk about reckless challenges in football over the last few weeks, and last night we saw another example of this dangerous phenomena. Whilst I tend to agree with the masses that football is a contact sport, so you have to accept there will be some hairy moments, Jay Bothroyd’s reaction doesn’t suggest he sees it as an unfortunate accident, but more a case of vengeance on another player – and that’s worrying!

Whether Jay Bothroyd will receive any punishment for his actions is a question of debate on WACCOE at the minute (where you can also see a video of the challenge). Many point to the suspension Jermaine Beckford received a couple of seasons ago that was a decision made after the fact by the FA as a precedent they should stick to with Bothroyd.

However, some users are suggesting Cardiff are answerable only to the Welsh FA, who are notoriously biased towards their own teams. If this is true, why on earth are the Welsh FA governing their own teams? That’s like Leeds City Council determining punishments for Leeds United FC!

  • Charles Letterman

    It was potentially a career ending tackle and I’m amazed the referee let it go. Bothroyd’s reaction is unforgivable, and I hope that the authorities take a serious view of the incident.

    I’m also surprised that the two tackles resulting in the substitutions of Watt and McCartney (I think) against Middlesborough haven’t been discussed further. Both were nasty fouls. Maybe it’s because we won!

    The refs in both matches were fairly unfussy, and I generally liked that style, but there are limits.

    Charles Letterman

  • henry vincent lewis

    I agree that the ref let the game flow but both he and his linesman contributed to the emphatic victory.
    The linesman in particular as he had a good view of the diabolical foul by Jay Haemorrhoid, (or Hemlock take your pick), and the offside for the second goal.
    Add to that the fact that Haemorroid scored the third.
    The fourth was a piledriver, pardon the pun!!
    I thought Nunez looked very promising in a bad situation. He looks a confident lad!
    Somma is only good when he gets a good supply, but he is very weak with his back to goal.
    Lucciano was excellent and should have got the man of the match for just getting up after that tackle!!
    I am sure Jay ‘Arrogant Craphouse’ will be punished.
    It would set a bad precedent for horrendous fouls in the future.
    I will be surprised if Lucciano got up today without pain.
    No 1 on my team sheet every time!!
    OK, you are sick of hearing me say it!
    I thought Bruce did OK apart from the first goal, and he is quicker than I realised. We should keep him in the team.
    I thought Faye was OK too, but not match fit yet.
    Very calm on the ball.
    Rob Snodgrass is not match fit either but gave 100% as usual.

  • saltburnwhite

    Glad becchio is ok . However ive done some homework , and id like to know why grayson paid money plus wages for connolly , collins (rabbit in headlights) , bruce and bessone when there were proven fighters with premiership quality that surely would have helped us get out of the division or at the very least stay in it? These players im going to list are all unattached and are cureently available on free transfers , some are a bit old but some are quality and surely could do a job in the championship for a couple of years …..wages would be a bit higher but , net spend would have been nil , and the donkeys grayson has just signed for a million plus wages between them must amount to the same ?
    JAY DE MERIT, CURRENT USA CB INTERNATIONAL, 30 YEARS OLD, FREE
    STEVE FINNAN, PREMIERSHIP QUALITY RB , 34 YEARS OLD , FREE
    MICHAEL BALL, PREMIERSHIP QUALITY LB, 31 YEARS OLD , FREE
    BEN THATCHER , PREMIER QUALITY LB/LCBTHUG , 35 BUT STILL CLASS

    These are just some players ive found that surely would have been better than the dross we have just signed .

    • Tim Campbell

      DeMerit looks good – was part of a reasonably successful Watford team and is a United States international. I know we are again taking the view that these freebies are the only players we could be looking at. We need 2-3 million invested in possibly 3 quality championship/premiership players. Hopefully we could get rid of a few duff players too – but then the way they have been playing who would take them?

      • Gryff

        I thought this about DeMerit in the preseason too. He sounded like he wasn’t in any rush to go to a team he deemed below his level, though, and he might be a little too expensive for our former Chelsea Tsar…

  • saltburnwhite

    Also someone posted on the last post (if that makes sense) about collins.
    grayson has tried collins & naylor , then dropped naylor for bruce , then put naylor back in , and now bruce back in ……something obviously is making the pairings brittle …………………hmmmmmmmm????cant quite put my finger on it…….oh yea COLLINS!!!! talk about the blind leading the blind , he needs his contract torn up and get him sent to the deer park at harewood house!

    • timm

      @saltburnwhite No chance! I drive past that deer park every day, & the last thing i want to look at is that bloody donkey! What’s the problem with Bromby? I wonder if Kisnorbos shoulders are starting to ache from the weight of every Leeds fans expectation on them?!

  • Stefan Prosser

    Being a Welsh Leeds fan I think the FAW are often heavy handed in handing punishment because of this idea they will be bias. I don’t think anything will come of this if the FAW or FA look at it though and that is almost as disgusting as the tackle.

    • Gryff

      @Stefan Prosser
      Possibly, but then Gunter was banned for a while after his stamp on Watt. That said, the manager kicked up a fuss at the time.

  • The Valley Walker

    As another Welsh Leeds fan I can tell you it’s not nice having to sit down here and take the taunts from all and sundry…I hope they get promoted to be honest..so we don’t have to play them – they truly are one of our bogie teams.

    Interested to see your image…I texted the exact same pic to someone at the game last night…you havemanaged to pause the exact same time as my shot…oh aye and the crop is perfect in line with mine too…lol

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/thevalleywalker/5115509208/

    • TSS

      @The Valley Walker

      Haha, it was posted on WACCOE so I assumed it was fair game!

  • Mark R

    SG & the development of our team are at a crossroads.

    SG can keep preparing the team as he is, placing his loyalty & faith in players who on the whole did a job last season in Lge 1.
    Result > we’ll remain inconsistent, confidence will ebb from the team and squad, and we’ll be in a relegation battle come Xmas, potential recruits will not want to come in January, SG’s position on the line.

    OR/ He can learn from these first 13 matches of the season and try and approach things in a different way – new tactics, formation and try other players in the squad, as well as recruit some experience for midfield. He could also take on some expertise to address the defence & midfield defensive set up of the team – which he and his staff have been unable to do.
    Result > A different approach will produce a different outcome, we’ll have a chance to stop the slide, and get back on track, and be attractive to potential recruits in the January window. SG improves as a Manager, the team improves, and we remain in the Championship.

    All is not lost, but SG needs to be brave now and look at different solutions to the problems.

    MOT

  • les irwin

    first of all had neil warnock been our manager becchio would have been fined for not going down under that tackle i remember him barrating one of his players live on sky for not going down for a pen ,.maybe thats the problem we are not nasty enough he should have gone down and stayed down maybe then bothroyd might not of had chance to score again . Good news is paynter scored for reserves as did clayton why is he playing robbo in reserves he has no future according to him .does anyone know what has happened to lloyd sam ????????????????????????????????????????????

  • Nasty Jim

    That tackle could have ended becchio’s career.Bothroyd should be fined and banned for 3 games.

    • les irwin

      that tackle should be dealt with however we have to remember it would be the welsh F A not the english one who would do it, it was horrendous becchio is a lucky lad or bothroyd is ,it should be a 4 match ban

  • les irwin

    just thought i would mention that simon grayson or bates needs to address the situation at leeds maybe that might mean getting some experience in to help anything is worth a try at the moment clearly snodin and co are not helping

  • Tim Campbell

    I feel we should seriously look at who is the deadwood in the squad and who could still do a job for us
    Players I would keep would include:-
    Kasper Schmeichel, connolly (just), kisnobro, gradel, sam, howson,parker, paynter (untested), clayton, nunez, McCormack (when fit), snodgrass, somma, becchio
    As for the rest get what we can for them and replace them with MUCH better

  • Tim Campbell

    What I would give for another david batty, billy bremner, norman hunter type player who was’nt afraid to get stuck in

  • steve underwood

    Not sure wat graysons problem is with some players.once you fall out with him thats it surley robinson is better than johnson i said on the other post collins can do no wrong in grayson eyes.on parker ive seen him play cb before looked good there maybe give hime a chance there cant be any worse.on last night not sure kasper was ready he looked very rusty smacks of grayson starting to panick.One last thing on grayson wat does he say at half time to the players the number of times we just fall apart mins after halftime ,was it me but cardif looked liked they had more players or did they just move more m o t

  • Mark R

    @Bandit Steve

    Good point about half time – the team’s performance recently has tailed off after 45 mins.

    What the hell is happening ?

    The team should be fired up after half time, and understand exactly what they have to do to get something out of a game .

    @ Tim Campbell – absolutely Tim. We’re too lightweight. nobody is bossing the middle of the park at all.

    MOT

  • Mark R

    Hellfire SG …give us some passion and committment on the park…..we want teams to be intimidated to come to Leeds, and we need teams to think twice about trying to kick us off the pitch, we need to start imposing ourselves.

    MOT

  • steve underwood

    dont think we have that type of player all lightwieghts in midfield one thing i did see last night was howson ran himsefl into the ground same with becchio pity thats just not enough at this level.Will some also give johnson a lesson in how to pass shoot tackle run.am i the only one who thinks somma is not good enough,yes i know he has 7 goals but there is a big BUT not sure time for clayton nunez but plz not gradel we have got plenty of headless chickens in the side

  • Colin

    Bothroyd won’t be laughing when he gets a 3 match ban from the disciplinary panel.

    And that’s what he’ll get.

    Bothroyd has got previous for being an idiot.

  • Tim Wilsom

    Andy Robinson and Bromby would get time in my book. I honestly didn’t think we were all bad last night, unfortunately when we were, it was glaring.

  • steve underwood

    Not sure wats up with snoddy on monday looked like he had concrete in his boots,i still think bruce would be better in holding role he can tackle pass better than faye who looks ready for knackers yard ill say again play
    kasper
    connolly naylor bromby mcartney or hughes
    bruce killa
    snoddy howson nunez
    becchio

  • Steve G

    Any examples of the Welsh FA giving Welsh clubs preferential treatment? I’d like to stick it to my Welsh mate.

  • Gryff

    @TSS well of course! We bend over and take it rough from Scotland and Wales in every arena because it would be simply awful if they left the union! Think of the lack of… sheep…. or…. Fat Glaswegians?….

    Horror tackle, and something the FA really should look into after they banned Gunter for a little stamp. This guy was kicked out of Arsenal for being an unruly kid, and he just looks like your bog-standard chav to me.

  • White to the core

    When have leeds ever got justice from any football association. Not in my lifetime.

  • Matt BB

    I cant imagine Bothroyd will get any sort of sanction from the FAW, and to be honest only when Cardiff are answerable to the FA will we ever get that team and its fans to behave.

  • Dje

    WOW. Just WOW.

    Latest public remark by Bates:

    “…[i]t became an issue because inevitably you get a few sick-pots who support Leeds who blame me for everything, even when it is raining and I am getting a bit tired of it and I tend to treat it with the contempt they deserve because they express their opinion without finding out the facts.”

    Without finding out the facts? Coming from a man who goes to extreme lengths (allegedly) to bamboozle one and all away from said facts.

    Unbelievable.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/leeds-united/8089893/Leeds-chairman-Ken-Bates-in-collision-course-with-Sky.html?

  • Craig

    @djedjedje

    I just read the article as well and thought exactly the same! It must be frustrating being in any position where there are so many critics who think they can do better without having to prove it but Ken is way out of order this time.

  • Matt BB

    @craig – as opposed to all the other times when hes sane?

    He has a point concerning Sky ruining our weekends, hitting our turnover and so on, but he ruins it with his latest rant about fans.

    If youre a millionaire playboy who wants to throw away £50M please apply to :-

    Kens Beeston Bistro & Hotel & 5 aside Complex, Elland Road etc..

    • Craig

      @mattbb

      Having been at the ‘top’ of an organisation and thus had to live with endless ill-informed and half-baked opinions I have some sympathy with Ken’s rant but he really does make it so much harder for himself by ensuring there is so much to speculate about!

  • Gryff

    If Kenneth doesn’t like us criticising him he and his regime can begin with some glasnost. Perhaps not spreading misinformation/downright ignoring injuries would help? I don’t think anybody gained any advantage from hiding the real extent of Paynter/Schmeichel’s injuries.

  • Colin

    Have to defend Ken on this one – read the article properly. He isn’t having a go at Leeds fans in general. He is having a go at those who called Bates money grabbing because Sky moved the games.

    Bates is telling the facts and they’re all true:

    – The games were moved by Sky (and BBC), not by Bates.
    – Leeds/Bates actually lose out – fans have to travel on mondays, take time off work etc. and make less money than if they were not on TV.
    – Leeds get the same money from Sky as Scunthorpe do.

    What has Ken Bates said in that article that isn’t 100% correct and common sense?

    And if some Leeds fans want to call Bates a money grabber, when Leeds take less money through being off TV than on it, then they’re stupid for saying it.

    Bates makes good points on being televised. Why have Leeds been televised 5 times in 13 games? Because the TV companies make money out of it. And that’s not a problem, as long as Leeds get better money than other clubs from Sky for getting them more viewers. But to get the same as a club that won’t pull in as many viewers just isn’t fair. And if Bates wants to give Sky a rollicking, then I’m fully behind him.

    Leeds don’t need £100,000 for a home game being televised – that won’t even cover a weeks wages.

    • TheReaper08

      @colin Exactly, I have read the article in full and I think his comments are totally justified. To quote…..

      “It became an issue because inevitably you get a few sick-pots who support Leeds who blame me for everything, even when it is raining, and I am getting a bit tired of it”

      I think he must read the site.

      • Dje

        @TheReaper08 @colin

        For what it is worth, the Telegraph re-wrote the article from when it first came out around 2pm this afternoon and the tidied up version that appeared around 6pm. The original version placed Bates’s snipe at the sick-pots as an after-thought at the end of the article, a chance for him to have another go in public at his critics, and completely disconnected with the earlier point about lack of revenue resulting from televised games on Sky.

        Of course a true LUFC sick-pot would not flinch to accuse Bates as being the angry phone call and legal threat behind the Telegraph pulling their finger out and quickly redrafting their article. Either that or the lazy ass journalist came over all queer and decided to actually do their job properly for once.

        _________

        As to the Sky issue. Yes there’s a logic to his argument – but a logic existing in a game increasingly becoming illogical (the F.A.W.’s refusal to punish Bothroyd being the latest example). And I don’t see it as a major grievance.

        Yes the fans get messed about, but have no doubt that Bates’s bitterness is about supposed loss of revenue from match days.

        Given the choice he’d play everyone of our homes games on a Saturday afternoon and everyone one of our away games midweek regardless of how far a field folk had to travel in the middle of a work week to see their team play. I’d be surprised that he isn’t trying to seek compensation from the Football League for this inconvenient arrangement.

        Besides, put in more home performances like we have been doing recently and I doubt his budget of 25,000 turning week after week at Elland Road will ever become likely. May be then Bates will denigrate Sky’s deliberate avoidance of Leeds matches and how we are losing out on £100,000 for each home match of ours they refuse to show.

        I don’t recall the complaints from him when we got pay days in the cup run last season. And the BBC and Sky aren’t that unalike – they both know a troublemaker worth avoiding when they see him coming. Remember, Sky are the big players in the Premier League – that golden dream of ours to return to one day – do we really want to jeopardise any future windfall (hopefully under a new chairman) for a bit of current penny pinching?

        • TheReaper08

          @djedjedje Cup runs are in addition to predicted match day revenue as opposed to instead of. Whilst may clubs hope and in some cases budget for a limted/extended run in the cup things such as opposition can not be planned for. Forgive me but I think that’s a really poor argument.

          His argument is about how many times and how much notice we are asked to move games, complaints I myself have read countless times by fans. The only difference being he is looking at it from an economical perspective.

        • Colin

          @TheReaper08
          I think another important point comes in Bates words – he has a go at “a few sick-pots who support Leeds” and defends Leeds “fans” who get messed about by fixture changes.

          Bates would never ever attack Leeds fans. He’s not stupid. But he would attack those who associate themselves with Leeds, but aren’t really fans and are just fickle and I think they are the “sick-pots” he refers to.

          Incidentally, he’s clever, very clever – he gets coverage in a top newspaper discussing an issue that deflects from the fact that Leeds have lost 4 in 5. He’s taking pressure off Grayson and this becomes a talking point to replace the headlines of “Cardiff thrash Leeds” – if he hadn’t have come public and had a go at Sky, it would have been the ref or someone else.

          Bates will take stick to deflect it from the team. Do I think he really means some of the stuff he says? No. Did he just bump into a Telegraph journalist in Monaco? No. It was set up to deflect criticism from the team. It takes some of the heat of the team, which is maybe a bit of a game, but one that I think he’s good at. And I think it’s ultimately a good thing for the club.

          • Colin

            i got confused – my previous reply was for @djedjedje not @TheReaper08
            either way, my comments are still valid i think.

          • Dje

            @TheReaper

            The point I was trying to make about the cup runs was the fact that ours, recently have been away from home and televised. I believe under FA rulings (for the FA Cup at least), like gate receipts, the revenues from these televised matches are shared equally between the home and away team. So we cashed in on Man Utd, Tottenham, and even Histon.

            Upsetting the media barons at Sky and BBC mandarins who decide which games they will show in each round of the cup could come back to economically haunt us if they want to put one in the eye of Bates because of his demands for more money from home games in the league televised matches.

            As we will be back to the third round entry of the FA Cup there is a reasonable reason that we wont be chosen as a televised match when the ‘big boys’ all enter this round in January. An away fixture against say West Brom probably wouldn’t be a great prospect for neutrals up and down the land, but having previously pissed off those that choose the games in advance, Bates, it could be argued, might have missed potential revenue that otherwise could have been coming.

            Sky and its commerciality will always go for the big teams and who they are playing – which puts it down to luck whether we once again get drawn against them – but the BBC has the old defense of potentially showing ‘the lesser teams’ (ie. “us”) as part of the romantic twist of the FA Cup, and to showcase fixtures that aren’t regularly feature in the Premiership each week.

            True, kowtowing to them is demeaning, but unquestionably the finances behind the Premiership – and hopefully our future league – are down to the previous decade of kowtowing too them, and this isn’t about to change.

            _______

            @colin

            You are probably right about Bates using his undoubtable cunning (or wisdom) to deflect away form such criticism of his team and manager, lack of investment etc. I forget the guy’s name, but Bates is very much in with the Telegraph. It makes sense why they have got to print with something that is a valid argument but one that is otherwise a bit of a non-new news item. For surely it irks the bigger teams when it happens to them too – ie Newcastle, West Bromwich last season? Cardiff, Norwich, Leicester and Nottingham Forest this season? And I’ve only ever heard such criticism from fans.

            Finally, I noticed that Bates has not really suggested an answer to this problem. Essentially is it if you are a big club then you get more money than a match featuring a small club at home? Nice if you are a big team and it is exactly what Man Utd and Co want to do in the Premiership, Celtic and Rangers in the Scottish Premiership – but fortunately, so far, they have been thwarted as it is understood that bigger payments to these clubs will be at the expense of smaller clubs. Cold market economics it is, good for the long term health of the national game, is more questionable.

    • timm

      Spot on Colin. I read it too & i totally agree with every word of it. I reckon we’d have had 24-25000 at the Cardiff game if it wasn’t on Sky? Bates reckons that Sky are messing us around with kick off times & also getting us on the cheap, & he’s spot on. On a personal note, i live in Harrogate, which is a 25-30 minute drive from ER on a saturday, but when we have a night match it takes a minimum of 90 minutes to get there! (2hrs on monday!!) Please can we have some saturday 3 pm games?!

  • Colin

    Breaking news – Bothroyd will not be punished by FAW for the Becchio challenge because “the referee saw it” and therefore they can’t bring a charge.

    Rubbish.

  • henry vincent lewis

    “the ref saw it” Colin!
    What an admission.
    We all assumed he must have missed it, not having even booked, let alone sending off Botharse!!
    Perhaps the ref will be banned for 3 games?

    I heard an interview with Ken today and he says they are actively looking for players and they will back Simon with whoever he wants!!!
    It seems they have realised, at last, that we do need better players.
    Ken actually said “much better players”!! Or words to that effect.
    The penny may be dropping?

  • les irwin

    not only has he laughed off he has got off F A W has not done anything and will not

    • Craig

      @number1in yorkshire

      Please can you put these words in a different order so that they make sense? ;)

  • Colin

    @henryv @number1inyorkshire
    This is annoying. Can anyone tell me what the point is of the FA (or FAW) Disciplinary Committee if they have no power to punish a player for a bad tackle “if the referee saw it”?

    If I understand it correctly, if a player breaks someone’s leg (and possibly ends their career) in a malicious and meditated attack, but the clown referee sees it but takes no action, then the player gets no punishment?

    But if the referee sends someone off for “afters” a la Gradel (and I don’t disagree with that), then they can then act and give a player a 4 match ban, which is what Gradel got.

    Gradel was stupid, flared up but had no intention of hurting a player = sending off and 4 match ban.

    Bothroyd went studs in off the ball, knowing he would likely injure the player = nothing.

    As @henryv says – okay there’s a technicality that if the ref sees it then the disciplinary panel can’t act – so either disband the panel or if the ref makes such a bad error then he should be banned for the amount of time that the player would have been, had the referee not seen it.

    If that happens, then there would be a lot more match reports from refs saying either “i didn’t see it” allowing the panel to act or the ref would take the appropriate action at the time.

    • les irwin

      colin the people punishing bothroyd should be neither the f a w or f a but the football league they were playing in their competition thats again the problem there are too many chiefs and not enough of the rest of us the fine would affect the football league as they wouldn,t get it and the ban would have no bearing on the f a as its not their competition what with the prmier league ,the f a .football league and in bothroyds case the f a w who is in charge, my opinion i think leeds should go play in scotland we might finish in top 3 of scot prem every season in real terms is it as riddiculous as a welsh team playing here when they have their own league or as often gets mentioned rangers and celtic playing here in fact i like the look of the spanish league if only for the weather half of the season

      • Dje

        I think you are looking at the ‘ridiculousness’ from the wrong end, @number1inyorkshire.

        That two Welsh teams play in an English league is more an anomaly of the fact that we have four different F.A.’s in the one nation that is the United Kingdom.

        The historic roots of these F.A.’s is just that, history. The fact that they still exist is inter-dependent with the existence of England, Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland as distinct international sides that compete in World Cups and European Cups despite actually being integrated parts of that political beast, United Kingdom.

        In truth there should only be one international team, United Kingdom, and from this there should be one pyramid system of football that is topped by one (or more) United Kingdom league(s). No doubt further down the pyramid would quickly break into respective regional leagues for poorer quality teams more likely to be harder up for cash (Northern Ireland, Scotland, Southern England, the North, Wales).

        The reason that this is not the case are:

        1.) A headache of history (and the oldest F.A.’s in the world being based here, as are the roots of the game).

        2.) The acceptance of UEFA and FIFA to essentially turn a blind eye to this massive anomaly and distinct advantage it gives the collective United Kingdom in FIFA voting (essentially 4 votes rather than the one we should only have as United Kingdom).

        3.) The charming good grace that other international nations continue to show us about not kicking off about the above point.

        4.) And, possibly the biggest, the very big question mark whether any Welsh, Scottish, and Northern Ireland team or player would sustain a place in the top flight and/or international team of United Kingdom. I suspect that it would be more likely to be a yes to the former (in relation to Celtic and Rangers, and possibly Cardiff), than, aside from some kneejerk positive discrimination, the latter point.

        As a caveat though, I think it would seriously improve the Scottish and Northern Ireland football standard over the mid-term, and the consequence of this could see the emergence of better quality teams in the higher leagues of the United Kingdom, and better quality players coming through in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland – giving them a better chance of featuring in the UK national team.

        But it would take guts to make a move for such a decision, so don’t hold your breath.

  • Gryff

    Well, he’ll probably end up with some sweet comeuppance like Haaland did when he met Roy Keane for a second time!

    The problem with football, though, is that it thinks it is above the law. For instance, to stay in the FL teams in debt must pay off other footballing businesses before paying the taxman. This is actually illegal and often denies £millions which are then stumped up from families across the country. Yet nothing is ever done about it. Furthermore there are rare incidents of grown, responsible men acting like undisciplined children, and setting out to cause serious bodily harm to somebody else. Roy Keane is the most notable example, Ben Thatcher a more recent example, and this tackle on Lucci just the latest. These incidents are caught on national television, yet the morons get away with what aren’t football-tackles but physical assaults on other individuals.

    A bit stupid, tbh.

  • Matt BB

    Looks like Ken will be putting his hand into his pocket after all, new faces sooner rather than later.. perhaps that prospect will motivate a few of our crew.

  • Craig

    Love the, presumably recent, addition to Wikipedia’s entry on Andy O’Brien: “He then joined the mighty Leeds united, where he was soon nicknamed the new Naylor.”

  • Dje

    Weren’t we connected with O’Brien a few years back? I cant remember now how it all fell through.

    Well, if it is true:

    ~ He’s got bags of experience
    ~ He comes from a team that is associated with the kind of football that will serve him well in our league.
    ~ One month loan is good for an initial observation for Grayson and Co to see if ‘it will work’ for a longer loan spell.
    ~ Cant be worse than what we already have at centre back, surely?

    Downside:
    ~ He’s only played 12 matches since the 2008-09 season, so at 31 he might be a bit of a rusty Nayl(or!).

    All in all, looks a positive enough move – and I can hardly criticise Bates and Grayson as I’ve been calling out for a change for weeks now.

    Now, what about that defensive midfielder, Mr BateS?

  • LoveLeeds

    Just wish bates and grayson realised this before the start of the season.

    Grayson said he was suprised as to how bad the defence is this season as they were so solid last season. I think he forgot we were soild when kisnobo was playing and Grayson must have been asleep in the last 12 games of last season beacuse we were terrible at the back.Poor really not to have realised that.

  • Mark R

    Good to see SG taking action. He’s trying to change things so it’s step in the right direction.

    Scunthorpe will be a hard match, their last 2 results were victories at Watford & Preston, not to mention their September thrashing of SheffU 4-0 away.

    We need something from the next 2 matches to turn this around.

    MOT

  • Colin

    @djedjedje
    I have to disagree with you on 2 points:

    1) FIFA allow teams to play which represent their country. England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland are countries. There should not (and there can’t be) a UK team as the UK is not a country, it’s officially a ‘sovereign state’. UK is an abbreviation of United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. That’s why we have the unusual nationality setup – ie. on passports, if you’re born in Germany you’re German, but if you’re born in England you’re not English, you’re British. Strange perhaps, but in a good way I think.

    So the “UK” has 4 teams because it has 4 countries.

    2) And this annoys me – you mentioned (re. Sky vs Bates argument and Leeds losing money out of live games) that “For surely it irks the bigger teams when it happens to them too – ie Newcastle, West Bromwich last season? Cardiff, Norwich, Leicester and Nottingham Forest this season?

    Cardiff, Norwich, Leicester and Nottingham Forest – are not even close to comparable with Leeds United when it comes to financial administration and the money coming in and out of the club. Are they better at football? Perhaps. But do they have more money coming in than Leeds? No chance.

    Try comparing Leeds to the top half of the Premier League and that’s much more realistic.

    ‘Premier League’ Blackburn Rovers are available for £46m. If someone offered Bates & Co. £46m for ‘Championship’ Leeds in our current position, they wouldn’t even consider it.

  • Dje

    @colin

    England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Islands are countries, but are ‘constituent countries’. Even the UK government is lazy at times to officially acknowledge this. They are legally defined ‘constituent’ parts of the sovereign state, the ‘UK’ – hence it is the UK (although sometimes wrongly referred to by other countries, our selves, and especially in the press as ‘Great Britain’ (which otherwise excludes Northern Ireland)) that does the political wrangling in the EU, G8, UN and Nato. If Wales wanted to try to stamp its own distinct voice as a country at the UN it would be politely told to do so through its constituent componency of the sovereign state of the UK.

    Not that we are along in this anomaly. Denmark, Faeroe Islands and Greenland also use this constituent countries arrangement to permit the former two to be registered with FIFA. Greenland, coincidently, are not allowed to be members of FIFA – but this is because of their lack of grass turf – and currently have to play in the FIFI Cup (one of the fascinating non- or partially-recognised testing grounds for wannabee breakaway nations and independence movements that FIFA surreptitiously supports like a bastard son).

    Granted though that it is from within these constituent countries that each of the F.A.’s have emerged and the historical legacy of them has continued to this day. The same applies in Rugby Union with the four constituent countries representing themselves in the linguistically puzzling ‘six nations’ (even though there are not six nations taking part). The inconsistent approach to rugby is then blurred once more by the existence of the ‘British Lions’ – which is essentially a free for all form the often overlooked grouping of ‘the British Isles’.

    Personally the fact that we are called the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Northern Ireland only confuses matters more. If Scotland rumped up some new New Pretender to the Scottish throne would that then offer greater validation to their devolution as a breakaway KINGdom from the UK? You’d imagine not, but you can see why confusement exists when non-native English speaking people try and figure out what we are and what we are called. State, nation, countries, kingdoms, islands – essentially anything but a republic or a federation.

    Ultimately, whilst the anomaly exists, legal or otherwise, I have never heard an outcry about it from other nations, even though it actually (in theory) creates greater competition for the few European alloted places at the World Cup and European Championship finals. Those polite Europeans! Maybe when the Russians and the Spanish/Portuguese joint bid for the 2018 World Cup final goes array then they might kick up a fuss if they miss out.

    _________

    As to the other big-ish teams in the Championship. I indicated them owing to their average home attendance in the Championship which are all on parr with our own – and not their turnover. I couldn’t find the figures for Newcastle and West Brom last seasons – but I imagine they were higher than our current average owing to their consistently high league position. I wouldn’t contest that any of them have a bigger revenue potential that ours, but Bates main complaint was down to the loss of attendance numbers.

    He reckoned that we would have had 25,000 against Cardiff if not being televised. I doubt he could have been so confident considering our recent bad home form – but even saying that this would have been the case, this means that 4,300 didn’t show up because of Sky.

    But we did get £100,000 compensation.

    That is £23.25 for every person that didn’t go, presuming they would have done. Considering the different regions of the stadium, kids rates and pensioners and those with disabilities (presuming they have personally demonstrated this to Bates himself), I’d say that sounds about average – perhaps a few quid under, but nothing major.

    Now corporate boxes might lose more money – but it is sheer guesswork how many of these snubbed the chance of seeing Cardiff on Monday night rather than Saturday afternoon. Some clients might like to be ‘treated’ on a weekend at Elland Road, others might prefer to spend it with their wife and kids at home or in some shopping centre, and go on Monday instead? But then corporate boxes are a different world to me and other than the over-the-odds they contribute to the clubs coffers I couldn’t really give a monkeys about them.

    Considering that we pay astronomical rates for Championship tickets, yes the other big-ish clubs who charge more modest fares for the calibre of football on offer would have saved or made more from this than us, but really the biggest point I can see coming from Bates and his steely pecuniary mind, is the loss of sales of 4,300 programmes, pies, burgers and revolting drinks.

    Yes that is money lost, I guess – if all we are are economic units expected to consume. Yes it helps the club financially, Bates and his building project too, but you might consider that a Sky game could have equally worked as a great chance to showcase what wonderful football we play at Elland Road (umm, backfired there!) and tempt back fair-weather Leeds fans to come back regularly on a Saturday afternoon and try and get out average attendance up from 24,000 to 27,000. Corporate boxes and all.

    Noticeable was that he didn’t lament the missing 4,300 souls for their vocal support to will us to win. But then that is free.
    _____

    Finally, no Bates wouldn’t sell for £45m but this really tells us more about Bates and his involvement with LUFC than anything else.

    Considering whoever bought the club four odd years ago would reap a near double return on their investment despite us being at the same place in the same league, and having mortgaged off our stadium and our academy, having only made a £15,000 profit last year (and on the back of £2m of player sales), with no real player assets of merit, and no real funds to push for promotion to the financial promised land of the Premiership – you’d have to ask what fool would NOT jump at getting £45m for LUFC.

    Of course if you actually owned the stadium, the academy, and made a far better profit than your accountancy team let on, then sure you might want more, but that would suggest … dot … dot … dot.

    so, after that exhuastive

    • Dje

      Christ that was a long post!! Apologies.

  • Colin

    @djedjedje

    Yes it was a long post but it was quality and all valid. I agree with what you’ve said – i think we’re in agreement.

    My only points to add is that while Norwich, Cardiff, etc. get good attendance – that’s it, if they go to the Prem, it won’t get considerably larger. If Leeds get into the PL, then add another 10,000, which would take us to 35,000 average attendance.

    As for buying Leeds, I’d say you’d be lucky if you got it for £100m, especially when you’d have to pay £25 for ER and TA. If Leeds (rightly) get the World Cup site, then the bidding would start at £150m in my opinion.

    As for O’Brien – uurrgh – more of the same IMHO, he was mediocre at best at Newcastle when he should have been in his prime.

    We had so much youth coming through in the past – woodgate, kewell, paul robinson, lennon, milner, smith etc., and I guess we lost that youth investment when the money ran out, but surely that money was so much more worthwhile investing than getting the likes of O’Brien on loan. Bolton reject – enough said.

  • Matt BB

    Bates is no fool, he knows if he waits for a couple of more years – keeps us in the championship or at best blags us into the premier league his initial £10M investment will return him vastly more, think more like £100m as a number of people suggest.

    Until someone comes along and offers him that we are are where we are unfortunately. Have we made progress since he took over? Well thats a difficult one, we are back to where we were after massive underinvestment in the squad under blackwell and wise. I’m sure many will point to Bates being at the behest of the scenario set out by the yorkshire consortium as the reasons for that, but how many times were we told the club was now debt free – so the administration was part of the bates business plan?

    We all say it, and it never happens, investment is what Leeds need, its all that will get us up into the top flight.

    As for Andy O’Brien, well I think he’s a calm head, experienced, and has played at a higher level than Collins and Naylor, and more regularly. He may also provide some of the leadership we’ve missed in recent weeks. I’d settle for a few 1-0 and 0-0 results at the moment and a tight back four and midfield, great that we want to attack teams and open them up but recent results show that opposition managers know our game plan so we need to modify it.

    Off on my hols now, see you round.

  • Ross

    Andy O’Brien was offered Leeds in the summer but was not willing to drop his wage to the amount Leeds were willing to pay.

    Can’t say I’d be impressed if they think he’s significantly better than what we have and the quality Bates thinks will turn our defence round!

  • Matt BB

    I dont think hes the only signing we’ll get, i think there will be another central defender and a holding midfielder. And to be honest he is better than what we’ve got.

  • steve underwood

    Most of the posts on here keep saying how bad the defence has been since kisnorbo got injured well correct me if im wrong but the rot set in jan while kisnorbo was still in the team,i remenber some terrible deafeats to swindon not to mention all the other games we lost in that period,yes it will be great to get him back but lets not get carried away thing he will sort out the defence all on his own.now onto bates/grayson most people blame bates for everything and yes he has got thing wrong,but without him were would leeds united be now out of business maybe i dident see a long line of people when he came in,on players grayson has allways said when he has wanted a player bates has backed so the poor players we have now is maybe down to grayson more than bates.Bates is an easy target with hie chelsea connection i just wish at this point we need every one to pull in same direction as the song goes WE ARE LEEDS lets all stick together get behind the team grayson bates nayler uncle tom cobley and we might just turn things around.rant over that feels better

  • les irwin

    andy obrien is a good loan for us we should have got him earlier in august now it looks like kenneth william has hit the panic button and realised that we are in danger of going down ,iam not saying its too late in terms of us staying up but it is in terms of signing players if he had spent money on quality to start he wouldn’t have ended with the freebie dross we have and they would well be playing as a team by now so now we have to pay the freebie dross aswell as the new signings do we think this will be a lesson learned i very much doubt it

  • Gryff

    Building on what @banditsteve123 was saying, there’s not even any guarantee that Kisnorbo will be any good when he comes back. Although strikers rely on pace & technique much more than centre-halfs, i’m sure we all remember the difference when Michael Bridges came back from a long-term injury, and the difference between Owen & Rooney (as another example, though they’re yet more strikers) before their recurring injuries is plain to see.