Arrogant Ramblings Of Deluded Barnsley Manager TSS November 26, 2011 Leeds United 80 Comments Barnsley’s manager, Keith Hill (I’d never heard of him either) has taken it upon himself to spice things up a little ahead of today’s fixture, telling the Yorkshire Post that Simon Grayson has no right to complain about players lost, but should instead be satisfied with those recruited. Contrary to popular belief that Ken Bates has been a hindrance to Leeds United’s promotion push by failing to supply adequate funds for the manager – instead pouring funds into the redevelopment of the East Stand – Keith Hill’s delusional rant suggests he thinks Simon Grayson’s budget is reflective of our current position. The Tykes manager’s exact words were; “Give every manager in the Championship or every respective league the same budget and let’s see who the best team and the best manager is, “But it’s not like that. It’s unbalanced. There are those who have and those who have not. “I would like to see what Arsene Wenger suggested a few years ago because he was 100 per cent right. At the beginning of the season, every Championship club should pool their resources and share it equally amongst the teams and the managers. Let’s see who gets promoted and who gets relegated. Let’s do that. I would probably finish top!” Setting aside Keith’s enormous ego for a second, he really should have taken a little peek at the respective spending of each club this summer, as it may prove enlightening for him. Barnsley’s summer transfer activity saw the sale of Jason Shackwell for around £1,000,000 with Craig Davies brought in for circa £700,000. A net gain of approximately £300,000. Using Keith Hill’s “I am God” theory on football success, cash spent is directly equal to the quality of team you end up with – thus, Barnsley’s team decreased by £300,000 in terms of quality. At Elland Road meanwhile, Simon Grayson made just one signing. Andy Lonergan arrived for the bank-busting fee of £300,000, whilst the sale of Kasper Schmeichel and Max Gradel was believed to bring in somewhere in the region of £2,500,000 – Leeds therefore have lost £2,200,000 worth of quality. Strange then that a manager who “would probably finish top” if it wasn’t for the uneven field he has to battle on finds himself 10 places below Simon Grayson despite the £1,900,000 difference in net transfer fees. Maybe it was that hefty £700,000 Simon spent the year previous, when Barnsley spent erm… around £300,000 more? What about 2009/10 when Leeds spent a grand total of absolutely nothing despite selling Fabian Delph for £7,000,000 worth of East Stand executive boxes? This would be the exact same season that Barnsley bought Andy Gray for £1,000,000 and Adam Hamill for around £500,000. As damaging as this may be to Keith Hill’s over-inflated ego, the facts tell you everything you need to know about Simon Grayson’s allegedly “good budget.” It’s non-existent. Yet despite three consecutive transfer windows where Leeds have lost their best players and made financial gains rather than pushing the boat out for big name players, and despite the fact we lost half our first team as Bates cashed in, Leeds still sit 10 places above Barnsley and their God-like manager. This is why I’m all for Keith Hill’s idea to level things out. If Simon Grayson is ten places above him with a disadvantage, just imagine how easy this league would be if we levelled things out. In fairness to Keith, the rest of his interview was actually quite balanced and complimentary towards Leeds, but his delusional self-belief was hard to ignore. Read the full interview on the Yorkshire Post website.