Will They Or Won't They 2nd Installment

[bendix]

Those bastards at the FL sent a request to Leeds for over 3000 pages of documents on Thursday - an obvious attempt to muddy the waters and slow the process down. Load of bullshit - those guys know they are in the wrong and are being very defensive.

Im not that entirely confident we'll get much back. In some ways, I'm not too worried. Getting to the playoffs with that handicap is a huge achievement.

[miniwai]

I'm not sure what to make of it all, seems like a right propper f$&k up all round. Something tells me that a deal must have been sorted out othewise how can the FL say Swansea are promoted? On the other hand LUFC seem very confident and must have been given very positive advice. Surly one thing is for certain it must be all or nothing, 15 points back or none. Oh well roll on next weekend should know by then.

I would really love to see us go up through a play-off final at wembly that would be awsome for the fans and the team after a nightmare year. Automatic qualifacation is much easier though..... MOT

[bendix]

The Swansea situation is irrelevant. They are promoted as things currently stand, in the same way we are sixth with 67 points, as things currently stand. What happens next is anyone's guess.

The FL is in a terrible situation, and I for one couldnt be more chuffed. The points deduction was arbitrary and random and completely outside of their powers. They STILL haven't explained what it was for and what rules have been broken. Ken Bates might not be the most loved person at Elland Road, but he has done a fantastic job fighting this and he deserves credit for that.

I agree with the comment that it's 15 points back or nothing. This is not about points. It's a matter of principle; we either broke rules or we didnt. If we broke rules, then I will reluctantly accept the 15 point punishment. If we didnt, then there shouldnt be any compromise- the points deduction should be completely overturned. It's no point other clubs compaining; we have earned those points.

Either way . . what a fantastic achievement this season has been. It's rekindled my passion for Leeds.

In some ways, to lose the appeal but go up in a Play-off final with 36,000 Leeds fans telling the Football League to <deleted> off would be even sweeter.

[percy2]

What do you think of this summary bendix?

Arbitration for Leeds - Overview

By Rich Baggott April 14 2008

Leeds Utd and the Football League begin Arbitration proceedings on Wednesday in a dispute over the 15 point sanction imposed on the club at the start of the season. The penalty was imposed after Leeds went into Administration but were unable to secure a '75% approved' CVA which is built into League rules to allow the club to rejoin the League and continue to play.

Administration

When a team enters Administration, it effectively loses it's League position or 'Golden Share' into the Football League. The Administrators can continue to allow the team to compete but in exiting Administration, the Football League will automatically transfer the Golden Share back to the organisation controlling the club, providing they have CVA in place that has been approved by at least 75% of the Creditors. A further addendum to this rule is that Footballing debts (Players, clubs and officials) MUST be paid in full. This is to protect other clubs and players.

The Football league rules state that a 75% approved CVA must be gained, UNLESS IN EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES - all clubs entering Administration tot his point had an approved CVA in place so no club has ever applied under the 'Exceptional Circumstances' rule in the past.

CVA

When Leeds Utd entered Administration last May, a deal was quickly struck between the Administrators and Ken Bates Consortium to sell the club back to him. One of the leading creditors had in excess of 25% of the debt, so could effectively block any other bids for the club, and publicly declared that they would support only Bates - making any other process pointless. In due course, the Creditors voted and Bates secured 75.1% approval for his bid, despite this only amounting to a return of 1p in the £ for non Footballing debts.There were claims of protests at the fact Bates had managed to effectively buy his own club back for a pittance, it was legal and above board, albeit questionable morally. Some Creditors tried to look into the entire process, especially around the 'Connected Creditors'. trying to prove the major creditors with over 25% of the debt that were backing Bates were financially linked and therefore should not have had the voting power that they did - but no link has ever been proved.

So Leeds had a 75% approved CVA in place and the return of the Golden Share should have been a formality at the next scheduled monthly meeting of the Football league.

Court Action

Up step 'Her Majesties Revenue and Customs' (HMRC) that were one of the creditors owed money by Leeds. Until recently, HMRC were protected under UK law as a 'preferential Creditor', meaning they enjoyed the same privileges that the Football league rules dictate of the Footballing debts. They would be paid first and other creditors would share anything that was left. This was changed recently and HMRC are known to be unhappy that the Football League have the clause protecting Football related debts.HMRC raised an issue with two of the Creditors that voted in favour of the CVA. One of which was Yorkshire Radio.

HMRC felt they should not have been allowed to vote but the Administrators (KPMG) (it was not Leeds Utd being taken to Court but the Administrators) were more than happy to defend the issue in court having previously taken advice from Counsel on the matter (Counsel are Court appointed Barristers that advise on legal issues in advance of an item going to Court so that you can understand how a Court is likely to view such matters.)

The matter could have been dealt with relatively quickly and was expected to be scheduled before the next Football League meeting. HMRC then added the issue of the Footballing debts being given priority to the issue to be discussed. In effect, the HMRC were taking KPMG to Court to dispute Football League rules! Leeds Utd (Bates and Co.) were not under scrutiny but these matters meant the club were not able to exit administration.

The additional 'issues' meant that the Court hearing was extended to five days, and the court schedule meant this could not be heard until September 2007, some four months after thethe CVA was approved and two months beyond the start of the season. The Administrators were now forced to either find the running costs to keep the club going, or take alternative action (wind the club up or sell the club outright).

Penalty

Running costs could not be found (other interested parties did offer to meet running costs but this was conditional and those conditions were not practical) so KPMG decided the only way forward was to sell the club outright, securing the best possible price for the creditors. A closed bidding process followed that Ken Bates and Co. won outright. He had now bought the club but there was no '75% approved CVA' in place - he now had to apply for the clubs League share back under the yet untested 'Exceptional Circumstances' clause.What followed was a Football League Announcement that Leeds Utd would be allowed to re-enter the League as they had 'Exceptional Circumstances' but would be docked 15 points for the 2007-08 season. Leeds appealed and the Football League agreed to put the matter before the other members (teams0 in the Football league - a vote followed which the Football League unsurprisingly won. Leeds requested an independent review which was repeatedly turned down by the Football league and have since appealed to the FA who distanced themselves from the whole process and in failing to get anyone to revue the case, then decided to issue a High Court Writ against the Football League. The League eventually responded on the final day they had to respond with an offer of Arbitration - which is all Leeds asked for in the first place.

Arbitration

Arbitration is a way to resolve disputes without the formality (and costs) associated with a Courtroom. Rather than a judge presiding over matters, an Arbitration panels formed consisting of three men - one independent and one selected by each of the parties in dispute. Leeds Utd's hearing will be chaired by retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton, with the other two members being former Premier League chief executive Peter Leaver and Peter Cadman, a lawyer who has chaired Premier League disciplinary commissions in the past. The Hearing will take place behind closed doors and an undisclosed location and whilst less formal than Court, each side will be allowed to present any evidence and respond to any allegations in the normal manner. Arbitration is sometimes used to find a compromise between disputing parties although this in not belied to be the case here as Leeds are stating that the Football League acted incorrectly in deducting points, not that the penalty was too harsh.

The full details of Leeds dispute is not known however it is expected the following will be raised;

--Leeds united have still not been informed what rule has been broken despite repeated requests. Leeds complied with the rules in so much as the League agreed they had exceptional circumstances which was required. The argument could be that if Leeds did not have a CVA and did not have exceptional circumstances, then they could be let back into the League with a penalty - but this was not the case.

-Leeds DID have an approved CVA, and the final offer to buy the club outright was higher than the CVA offer. The League were aware the only reason the CVA could not progress in the timescale was because HMRC were disputing the Leagues own rules?

-Why did the League vote against the CVA when they were guaranteed a 100% return of their debt due to their own rules? How have the League voted in the past?-Why did the Football League cite one of the reasons for the point deduction which was actually relating to the action of KPMG, not Leeds Utd?

-Why were other League 1 clubs asked to vote when the outcome directly benefited themselves - Conflict of Interest?

-Leeds United feel strongly they have complied with the laws of the land, the question will arise whether the Football League have done the same. Any club or association can introduce it’s own rules, but they must comply with the laws of the land.

The decision by the panel is due to be made public before the Millwall game on April 19th.

Whislt there is nothing legally binding to stop further action from either party following the decision by the panel, both sides have agreed to comply with the result, and further action is only likely if one party feel that the Arbitration has not followed the correct procedures.

http://www.thefootballnetwork.net/main/s277/st127940.htm

Cheers

[miniwai]

Thats a good read, thanks Percy.

Latest: according to the BBC. Arbitration is going into a forth day and will not be concluded untill monday...... But the results will not be given for another 4 weeks! After the season is finished. This is outrageous, how can they do that?

The implications are endless, playoffs, automatic spots the whole thing would be a farce and could well have to be replayed...... Or is it safe to say we're not getting anything back and its not going to matter? Thoughts guys.

[miniwai]

Result now to be announced on the 1st May before the season ends, thank god. Oh well let's just hammer Millwall with the style and class we have shown all season. MOT.

[MSingh]

Good luck against the Millwally's this afternoon..

[Jockstar]

Good result yesterday for Leeds. Report below.

Millwall 0-2 LeedsScoring Summary

Millwall Leeds

David Prutton (70)

Andy Hughes (79)

Match Stats

Millwall Leeds

Shots (on Goal) 13(5) 9(6)

Fouls 16 14

Corner Kicks 8 3

Offsides 0 1

Time of Possession 50% 50%

Yellow Cards 2 3

Red Cards 0 0

Saves 4 5

Match Information

Stadium: The Den, England

Attendance: 13,395

Match Time: 15:00 UK

Referee(s):

L Mason (Referee)

Teams

Millwall Leeds

24 Rhys Evans 1 Casper Ankergren

5 Paul Robinson 2 Frazer Richardson

2 Danny Senda 32 Alan Sheehan

42 Tony Craig 3 Paul Huntington

3 Andy Frampton 33 Lubomir Michalik

25 Ahmet Brkovic 7 David Prutton

26 Marc Laird 37 Neil Kilkenny

22 Ali Fuseini 16 Bradley Johnson

19 Jay Simpson 14 Jonathan Howson

41 Jem Karacan 38 Dougie Freedman

17 Bas Savage 39 Anthony Elding

Substitutes

23 Preston Edwards David Lucas 25

30 Marcus Bignot Rui Marques 5

18 David Martin Andy Hughes 22

9 Neil Harris Peter Sweeney 24

10 Lewis Grabban Tresor Kandol 20

Substitutions

Lewis Grabban for Ahmet Brkovic (66) Andy Hughes for Anthony Elding (73)

David Martin for Ali Fuseini (75) Tresor Kandol for Dougie Freedman (89)

Marcus Bignot for Danny Senda (80) Peter Sweeney for Bradley Johnson (89)

Yellow Cards

Ahmet Brkovic (15) Lubomir Michalik (13)

Lewis Grabban (90) David Prutton (52)

Peter Sweeney (90)

· Club Squads: Millwall | Leeds

Updated: April 19, 2008, 1:04 PM ET

Leeds midfielder David Prutton helped all but confirm United's spot in the play-offs as Millwall were beaten 2-0 to cruelly send the home side crashing back into the relegation dogfight.

The Lions thought last weekend's victory over Hartlepool would confirm their League One status but they were dealt a brutal blow when ex-Nottingham Forest man Prutton volleyed home after 70 minutes.

And Andy Hughes added to the Lions' misery eight minutes later to seal the deal as Millwall slumped to within four points of the drop zone.

The Lions flew out of the blocks and nearly took an early lead when Ahmet Brkovic curled a free-kick narrowly wide after ex-Newcastle defender Paul Huntington brought down Paul Robinson.

Millwall pressed but Crystal Palace loanee Tony Craig could only blaze over after latching on to Jem Karacan's clever through ball before heading over again minutes later.

And 22-year-old Craig's misery continued after the break when his poor clearance allowed Prutton to open the scoring with a superb 25-yard volley.

Things went from bad to worse for Kenny Jackett's men when substitute Hughes lashed home Bradley Johnson's cross as Leeds won their fourth game in five.

[percy2]

I'd say the reason for the delay is pretty obvious.

They don't want outraged fans misbehaving during the final games of the season.

Being ever the optimist I read this as a good sign.

I think as Leeds fans we half expect to get the shitty end of the stick and nil point , so we probably wouldn't go on the rampage.

If Donny and Carlisle fans were to find out we had got the full 15 points back I think they would be supremely pissed off and cause havoc on then last day of the season when the they find out they will not get automatic promotion.

Cheers

[bendix]

The Doncaster manager was quoted as saying that he wishes the fight for promotion was settled on the football pitch, not in confidential arbitration hearings.

Well . . duhhhhhhh. OK, if you want it settled on the football pitch, how about not complaining should we get back the points that we earned on the football pitch by scoring more goals than our opposition.

[miniwai]

it's amazing how when we're deducted points we're told to shut up and get on with it, yet when thing might turn and effect them its uproar. Pot calling the kettle....

Excellent result on sat playoff secured I reckon.

I head back to blighty in a month or so. Upside least I can go watch my beloved team again. (in div 1 :-))

Downside, back to work (LGI) :-(

Personal question chaps, where you from (back home)? Pudsey myself.

[bendix]

If Brighton hadnt scored an 89th minute winner on Saturday, we would have already secured the playoff place. As it is, we're all but there.

Not from Leeds myself. I'm from Norwich (or near to it). My dad bought me a Leeds strip for my fourth birthday (40 years ago) and I've been a fan ever since. As a teenager, I used to hitchhike from Norwich to Leeds to see 10-15 home games a season, taking a backpack and tent and camping at a farm at Aberford, right outside Leeds on the A1. Ahhhh. those were the days. Later in life I worked for a few years in Manchester and made the trek over the M62 every other Saturday. Happy times :-)

[taxexile]

Personal question chaps, where you from (back home)? Pudsey myself.

born in leeds , and although i havent lived there for many years , still consider leeds my home town. visit family and friends there every year.

first went to elland rd. with my dad during the revie years , travelled up and down the country to see them over many years , but havent been to a game for a long time now.

usually glued to the net at match times these days.

it looks like they are a 99% cert for the playoffs , but the tension during the playoffs will be unbearable. they have a habit of falling at the final hurdle. macallister seems to be doing a good job , he was a solid player and he is turning into a solid manager . if they get promoted then i am confident they can hold their own in the championship. the team have confidence and motivation. they will need some cash though.

nail biting times , yet again , for leeds fans.

[miniwai]

From the BBC:

"Swansea City will not be presented with the League One trophy after Saturday's final home league game of the season.

The Swans were crowned champions last weekend but Leeds United's arbitration hearing over a 15 point deduction has held up the process.

Should they win, they could still be in the running for the title"

Full article here

Don't count your chickens yet Swansea!

My first attended game at Elland Road was in the Wilkinson era been a fan since Bremner though. Got to see some amazing players too, Cantona (shame he'll be remembered for his scum days) Yaboah and Vinny to name a few and yes I had the V cut too

[percy2]

How do you embed a YouTube clip?

I'm from Ponte.

Spent my formative years watching Leeds in the old 2nd Div.

Just about remember watching Eddie Gray one or maybe 2 matches.

Cheers

[Jockstar]

Have a look HERE!

[Jockstar]

How do you embed a YouTube clip?

I'm from Ponte.

Spent my formative years watching Leeds in the old 2nd Div.

Just about remember watching Eddie Gray one or maybe 2 matches.

Cheers

Working now. It was a problem at my end.

[taxexile]

Leeds letter may incur judge's reprisal

The Guardian

last updated at 00:37 on April 23 2008.

Leeds United's chief executive, Shaun Harvey, sent a letter to Football League clubs last month setting out the grounds for the club's challenge to the 15-point penalty imposed, in apparent breach of rules governing football arbitrations.

The club and the League undertook to adhere to the Football Association's regulations in the arbitration that concluded on Monday, meaning they were bound by the confidentiality clauses underlined under FA rule K6: "The parties shall preserve and respect the confidentiality of the arbitration proceedings, including the issues in the dispute and the evidence and arguments presented by the parties."

Yet by the end of Harvey's five-page letter, sent out on March 20, Leeds had put everybody on notice about the eight points they would argue. He asserted a belief the club would prove a lack of independence in the League's attempts to legitimise its 15-point penalty through a club vote, adding that in voting on the issue all of Leeds's League One competitors would have "a vested interest". Sir Philip Otton, who chaired the FA's independent arbitration panel, is believed to be considering the letter's implications. He is known to hold the confidentiality of his proceedings paramount, giving all parties what one source referred to as "a big talking to" and threatening reprisals for breaches.

The League took this so seriously that they were even refusing to confirm the existence of the arbitration the night before it began.

....... i dont think Warriors had any idea how apt his title to this thread , started all those months ago , would turn out to be. it should be the lufc motto , "will they or wont they "

Edited April 23, 2008 by taxexile

[taxexile]

From The Times

April 26, 2008

Victory gives Leeds United a place in the play-offs

Leeds United clinched a place in the Coca-Cola League One play-offs at Huish Park last night after Dougie Freedman scored his fifth goal since joining them on loan from Crystal Palace last month.

The 33-year-old former Scotland forward struck in the fourth minute but Leeds made life difficult for themselves with the dismissal of Alan Sheehan in the 64th minute after a lunging challenge on Lee Peltier.

The incident provoked a 20-man brawl while Leeds, who had been in control for long periods, were forced to defend for the remainder of the match. Jonathan Douglas made a crucial intervention by heading an inswinging corner off the line and Casper Ankergren, the club's Danish goalkeeper, produced an impressive save low down to deny Aidan Downes as Yeovil pressed in search of an equalising goal.

The victory for Leeds was their sixth in their past eight matches and a play-offs place represents a fine achievement after the club started the season with a 15-point deduction imposed for a breach of league rules.

Their strong finish to the season also brings respite for Gary McAllister, the manager, who took over after the departures of Dennis Wise to Newcastle United and his assistant, Gustavo Poyet, to Tottenham Hotspur.

The Leeds goal last night, against a Yeovil side who had staved off any lingering relegation fears last Saturday with an impressive victory over Swansea City, the champions, stemmed from a cross by Fraser Richardson. Bradley Johnson's initial attempt eluded Steve Mildenhall, the Yeovil goalkeeper, before an alert Freedman stole in to apply the finishing touch.

With their play-offs place assured, Leeds can enjoy their concluding game of the season, at home to Gillingham next weekend, which has already sold out.

Edited April 25, 2008 by taxexile

[funfun]

Get IN!!!

[bendix]

Irrespective of the results of the arbitration panel (and the ruling is expected any day before Thursday, and I half suspect it will be tonight or tomorrow), it's been an amazing season. Who could have dreamt we would make the playoffs at the start of the season. Only days before the season started, we had the points deduction and only a handful of players signed to contracts. We didnt even have a shirt sponsor, because no sponsor could be sure there would be football at Elland Road this season.

The players are to be commended, particular those like Hughes and Prutton who wanted to join the club, even though we couldnt pay them. Hughes joined the day the deduction was announced; his response was "I dont care, I'm up for it."

For the first time in years, we have a side that wants to play for the shirt, and that's a great feeling.

Even more amazing, is that Macca has got us playing football and the fans are loving it.

Nearly 39,000 tickets have been sold for the final home game of the season, against Gillingham of all teams.

Hats off to everyone at ER, even Bates who has kept barking at the FL when other chairman would have accepted the injustice.

[percy2]

Regardless of whether the Team gets the 88 points they have(n't) garnered so far this season , surely the players themselves should be recognized for having earned those points in an outstanding season.

With that in mind how come there is only one Leeds player in the League one team of the year?

PFA League One Team of the Year: Kieren Westwood (Carlisle); Angel Rangel (Swansea), Garry Monk (Swansea), Danny Livesey (Carlisle), Julian Bennett (Nottm Forest); Andy Robinson (Swansea), Ferrie Bodde (Swansea), Kris Commons (Nottm Forest), Richie Wellens (Doncaster); Jermaine Beckford (Leeds), Jason Scotland (Swansea)

Something stinks with those selections.

I am beginning to believe "We are Leeds , and everybody hates us"

Cheers

[warriors]

Well this tread has been more that I would have ever expected and I thank you all for your contributions well not all (Sunderland)

I was born in Leeds near the University and from my bed room could see its big clock so always knew the time, but sadly my home along with my school had to make way for a Ring Road.

But I still know the time and I say to you the time is right for LEEDS to show that we are back and look out.

Bates open your sticky wallet and lets get this job really done. Or sell your stake and let the money flow so we once again can fight it out with the big boys.

By the way now I reside in Bangkok Thailand and yes I hope it will be on TV here the playoff.

Good Luck this weekend.

MOT

Edited April 29, 2008 by warriors

[bendix]

Well this tread has been more that I would have ever expected and I thank you all for your contributions well not all (Sunderland)

I was born in Leeds near the University and from my bed room could see its big clock so always knew the time, but sadly my home along with my school had to make way for a Ring Road.

But I still know the time and I say to you the time is right for LEEDS to show that we are back and look out.

Bates open your sticky wallet and lets get this job really done. Or sell your stake and let the money flow so we once again can fight it out with the big boys.

By the way now I reside in Bangkok Thailand and yes I hope it will be on TV here the playoff.

Good Luck this weekend.

MOT

I doubt the FL1 playoffs will be on TV, although I could be wrong. The Championship playoff of two years ago (when Leeds lost to Watford) was shown in some bars, but only on those South African satellite channels. It might be worth checking to see what the situation is this year.

But maybe it won't be necessary. It's been announced that the decision of the arbitration will be announced at 5pm UK time tomorrow (Thursday). It's gonna be nail-biting. There is speculation that the delay is good news for Leeds, but who can say?

Either way . fantastic achievement this season.

[taxexile]

the bbc have reported that leeds have lost their appeal to have their points re-instated , and the case is now considered closed.

reaction to ruling

from lufc website

Edited May 1, 2008 by taxexile

[miniwai]

Yeah, just heard it on the radio. Half expected still feel hard done by but thats life. Just have to settle our differences on the pitch. MOT to wembly!!!

[funfun]

yep true foking tossors

here's 10 for bieng a bad boy

next year here's 15 more for bieng a bad boy last year

ok now wait all season and we can't do owt cos neighbours might complain

I hope bendix right, get there on us own & fock em!

[percy2]

I think this is about the only reasoned article I have read in support of the sanctions.

Why the Leeds verdict was fair to football

It is right and proper that Leeds failed to reclaim their 15 points

* Barney Ronay

* guardian.co.uk,

* Thursday May 1 2008

About this article

Close

This article was first published on guardian.co.uk on Thursday May 01 2008. It was last updated at 18:01 on May 01 2008.

And so after a year of acrimony, arbitration and appeal, Leeds United have failed to reclaim their missing 15 points. The arbitration panel has spoken: there will be no recourse to the high court, no giddy ascent to the European justice system. It all stops here.

The reinstatement of the docked points would have lifted Leeds above Doncaster and into an automatic promotion place. Instead, Gary McAllister's men will submit to the rigours of the play-offs.

And quite right, too. The decision of the panel to uphold the Football League's censure of the club's financial management should be heartily applauded. Not just by the chairmen of the other 71 Football League clubs who have already voted overwhelmingly to sanction Leeds and then again to uphold the original punishment. But also by anybody concerned with how football is conducted in the leagues below the Premier, where financial management is as much a part of success on the field as tactics and training.

First, a recap. For anybody confused by the labyrinthine legal process, here's how we arrived at today's verdict:

On May 4 last year Leeds called in the administrators and announced that the club would be sold to a group of companies headed by Ken Bates. They were immediately docked 10 points, ensuring relegation to League One, where they were headed in any case.

After a summer of financial turmoil, the Football League granted Leeds permission to play in League One this season, but only with an additional 15-point deduction. The penalty was a result of the club operating other than under the Football League's well-established rules on insolvency while a transfer of League membership was made to the legal entity (owner: Ken Bates) to which the club now belonged.

Leeds immediately appealed. They lost. They appealed again, requesting the high court arbitrate rather than the Football League. The basis of the appeal was that a 15-point penalty was disproportionate to the offence.

In February this year they forced the issue by serving a high court writ on the League. The League duly gave in to the request for an arbitration panel, which would be composed of a representative from each side plus one independent.

In April the panel confirmed it would make its decision by May 1, in order to avoid complications with the League One play-offs. The issue at stake was whether the club stood to gain unfairly from the way its administration was managed; and also whether any divergence, however minor, from the League's rules should be worthy of such heavy punishment. By inference, the answer is yes on both accounts.

Still, some will conclude that this is all a rather shaggy legal issue: bound up with due process and insolvency rules; and possibly with punishing an occasionally unpopular club and a consistently unpopular owner.

This is far from the case. Above all this is a football issue. The rules on going into administration are strict for a reason. This is much more than just a balls-up by the bean counters. To clubs operating in the same league going into administration amounts to a kind of betrayal, a queering of the pitch, almost an act of sabotage.

On the morning that League Two Rotherham went into administration in March this year, Brentford manager Andy Scott voiced the feelings of many when he called for the club to be banned outright from promotion this season. "The punishment for going into administration should be much more severe than just 10 points," Scott said. "We drew 1-1 with Rotherham earlier in the season and dropped two points against a team paying higher wages than they can afford."

It's not just the points dropped either: it's what might have been in terms of playing personnel in a division where budgets are worked out minutely. Scott added: "They've signed players in the last year that we were after by paying them higher wages - wages they couldn't actually afford. Those players might be worth a lot more than 10 points. And they might have been worth more to us. But they've still got them. It's the fault of the people in charge, not Mark Robins and he'll be feeling just as cheated."

Leeds may have been a special case in some ways, what with the club's extraordinary levels of debt, but the rules must be the same for all. Competing in the Football League is as much about balancing a budget as picking the right team and booting the ball into the net. And going into administration is as much cheating - or incompetence - at an institutional level as a handball or a foul are on the pitch.

Leeds may still go up this season. It's to their credit - and to the relief of football as a whole - that if they do it will be through endeavour on the field, not argument off it.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/ma...p;feed=football

Cheers

[warriors]

MOT to Wembly

[mrtoad]

League sets 25-point penalty benchmark for insolvency

David Conn The Guardian,

Wednesday May 7 2008

Article historyAbout this articleClose This article appeared in the Guardian on Wednesday May 07 2008 on p1 of the Sport news & features section. It was last updated at 00:03 on May 07 2008.

Football League clubs which fall into insolvency and then fail to exit via a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) can now expect to be deducted 25 points in total, following the upholding last week of a similar sanction imposed on Leeds United. Clubs are expected to encounter this problem increasingly because Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs, always a substantial creditor where football clubs go into administration, is routinely voting against CVAs.

The Football League requires clubs coming out of insolvency to agree a CVA, a settlement which requires acceptance by 75% of creditors. HMRC has long refused to agree to be paid only a proportion of the tax and VAT it is owed while under the League's "football creditors' rule" players' wages, and any money owed to other clubs, are being paid in full.

Leeds incurred the automatic 10-point penalty when the club went into administration last May, then accepted a further 15-point deduction in League One when they failed to achieve a CVA. Having promised in writing not to take legal action, Leeds then initiated proceedings in the high court, seeking to have the 15 points reinstated, and the action was referred to arbitration.

Last week a three-man arbitration panel upheld the 15-point penalty as "reasonable and proportionate" in the circumstances, because Leeds had been seeking to join League One without complying with the rule that they had to achieve a CVA after going into administration.

Lord Mawhinney, the Football League's chairman, said of the ruling that he was very satisfied that the League's authority and rules had been upheld, and that the insolvency policy would continue to apply to the League's clubs.

Mawhinney added that while the League did not want to be bound strictly by the precedent of 25 points having been deducted from Leeds, that sanction is now "an established fact".

Each case will be judged on its merits, but Leeds' 15-point deduction on top the automatic 10-point penalty sets the bar for clubs which go into insolvency and fail to agree a CVA.

Looks a little bit clearer now and for the future.