Interestingly Sky state "Cellino revealed that he would pay the player's wages if and when his takeover of Leeds is given the green light by the Football League".
So it's the League who are the ones making ransom demands? "I won't pay the players unless you make me owner?".
Sounds to me like Leeds are considerably better off without Cellini.
Will be interesting to see how long before they enter Administration - doubtful it will be that long.
So some mad disruptive fecker with an interest in running the club not only calls for a season ticket boycott to smash up the cashflow and get himself heard... He actually blocks the new season ticket issue and it's promotion. Would you Adam n eve it?! (glad we don't have that kinda carry on at our place)
They would take the deduction but if they secure enough points to avoid relegation it will be rolled over to next season. This was one possible future for us if Duchatelet had not rolled up before Christmas.
The reason why we should take an interest is to make sure the FL deduct the correct number of points when they go into admin, and don't let them get away with it through spurious appeals to save their necks this season
Hasn't the deadline for having points deducted this season already passsed. Seen it in a few places that the deadline was yesterday. So if they go into admin now, points will come off next season.
Checked it yesterday with a club insider who believes otherwise, but if you have a link, please PM me and I will pass it on. Personally I have no clear understanding, but it is potentially very interesting.
12.3.3 Subject to the provisions of Regulation 12.3.4 below, where the Club becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, or the Board impose a deduction in accordance with Regulation 12.3.2: (a) during the Normal Playing Season but prior to 5.00pm on the fourth Thursday in March, the points deduction shall apply immediately; (b) during the Normal Playing Season but after 5.00pm on the fourth Thursday in March, Regulation 12.3.4 shall apply; and (c) outside the Normal Playing Season, the points deduction shall apply in respect of the following Season such that the Club starts that Season on minus 10 points (including in the Football Conference if appropriate). 12.3.4 Where the circumstances set out in Regulation 12.3.3(b) apply and at the end of that Season, having regard to the number of championship points awarded (ignoring any potential deduction): (a) the Club would be relegated in accordance with Regulation 10.1.2(b) or 7.3, the points deduction will apply in the next following Season (including in the Football Conference if appropriate); or (b) the Club would not be relegated as aforesaid, the points deduction will apply in that Season and Regulation 10.1.2(b) or 7.3 will then apply (if appropriate) following imposition of the points deduction. 12.3.5 For the avoidance of doubt, where a Club and/or Group Undertaking is subject to more than one of the procedures in Regulation 12.3.1 above during a process of compromising creditors (for example Administration followed by a Company Voluntary Arrangement), the Club shall only be deducted one set of 10 points, such deduction to apply with effect from the first Insolvency Event.
So basically, if you'd be relegated anyway then the deduction applies next season, if not it applies this season - which could then result in relegation. Right?
A 10 point deduction puts them in danger. 15 points almost certain to be relegated. 20 points - relegated
There's a month of the season left, surely Leeds' owners would do whatever they could to avoid going into admin in the next few weeks and avoid a points deduction. What if they announce they're going into administration over the summer?
Didn't Palace once go into admin on the last game of the season? I don't know enough about this to understand how that may have proved beneficial or otherwise.
No RC, I really don't. It's more about the fans than the club itself. My first experience of football hooliganism was at Elland Road when as an eight year old I went with my mate and his dad to watch Leeds play Liverpool (81ish) and it was kicking off in the ground and out. Bit scary at that age. Then at 15 I was very nearly beaten up by a group of pissed up Leeds fans on a train just because I was reading a SWP paper. Lucky escape.
They're just scummy feckers who take pride in their ignorance and their reputation of being a 'hard' club. For a club that admittedly had some success years ago their arrogance and sense of entitlement now is baffling. They get decent crowds because they're one club in a very large catchment area so it's not really a surprise. During their flirtation with success and European adventures in the 90s their 'fans' were unbearable. Classless summed them up.
Justifiably known as 'the Millwall of the North'.
Fully understandable mate, I've never had any bother with them personally but I know where you are coming from because I had a similar experience as a teenager at the old Den although I wasn't reading the SWP but was wearing a red and white scarf! I've got a good track record results wise down the years on visits to Elland Rd so heres hoping we get something from the game next Tuesday. Last season's game was expunged from their fans memories almost immediately and we were referred to as 'that team' because we dared to take a point off them with a Dorian low driller just after half time whilst I was still in the bar, saw it on the TV monitor though ha ha. Wonder if Robbie Elliott will put in another appearance with us fans like he did then and at Bramall Lane the other week, we need everyone we can muster :-)
Elliot was at Elland Road last season as well. Nice guy.
No RC, I really don't. It's more about the fans than the club itself. My first experience of football hooliganism was at Elland Road when as an eight year old I went with my mate and his dad to watch Leeds play Liverpool (81ish) and it was kicking off in the ground and out. Bit scary at that age. Then at 15 I was very nearly beaten up by a group of pissed up Leeds fans on a train just because I was reading a SWP paper. Lucky escape.
They're just scummy feckers who take pride in their ignorance and their reputation of being a 'hard' club. For a club that admittedly had some success years ago their arrogance and sense of entitlement now is baffling. They get decent crowds because they're one club in a very large catchment area so it's not really a surprise. During their flirtation with success and European adventures in the 90s their 'fans' were unbearable. Classless summed them up.
Justifiably known as 'the Millwall of the North'.
Fully understandable mate, I've never had any bother with them personally but I know where you are coming from because I had a similar experience as a teenager at the old Den although I wasn't reading the SWP but was wearing a red and white scarf! I've got a good track record results wise down the years on visits to Elland Rd so heres hoping we get something from the game next Tuesday. Last season's game was expunged from their fans memories almost immediately and we were referred to as 'that team' because we dared to take a point off them with a Dorian low driller just after half time whilst I was still in the bar, saw it on the TV monitor though ha ha. Wonder if Robbie Elliott will put in another appearance with us fans like he did then and at Bramall Lane the other week, we need everyone we can muster :-)
Elliot was at Elland Road last season as well. Nice guy.
How the hell can Leeds be in debt? There always on Sky Sports Saturday lunch time kick off how many time they been on telly this season?
And guess what there on today Wigan vs Leeds
Although you don't get that much in the way of appearance fees (in the grand scheme of things) if you can boast 12 live TV appearances (which is how many they will have had by the end of April) to your sponsors, it certainly bumps up the value of that. Compare to our two appearances since 2011 - not counting the FA cup game, which they were contractually obliged to show - we are certainly at a disadvantage.
The Professional Footballers’ Association expects a ruling on Massimo Cellino’s takeover and payment of deferred wages to Leeds United’s squad before the end of this week after more talks with the club.
The PFA has been told that money which United’s players and backroom team agreed to delay last Friday will not be paid until an independent QC delivers a verdict on whether Cellino should be barred from buying a majority stake in Leeds. Playing staff at Thorp Arch accepted a 50 per cent deferral and were told that the remainder of their wages for March would be transferred on Tuesday, 24 hours after Cellino’s case was heard in London.
The second payment failed to arrive on time and United managing director David Haigh spoke with manager Brian McDermott and his squad in the home dressing room before Tuesday night’s defeat to Charlton Athletic, offering reassurances that the bill would be met but failing to specify a date.
The PFA, the players’ union, sought further guarantees yesterday and were informed that the remaining money would be transferred following the outcome of Cellino’s appeal against a Football League decision to disqualify him from becoming an owner or director of Leeds.
United also indicated that a written judgement from Tim Kerr QC would be forthcoming in the next 48 hours.
John Bramhall, the PFA’s deputy chief executive, told the YEP: “My understanding is that a decision on the appeal was expected by the club on Tuesday, which is why they set Tuesday as the date set for payment to the players.
“Clearly that decision didn’t come and payment wasn’t made but we’re assured that wages will be met after the appeal finishes and we’re told that a decision will be made before the end of the week.”
The dispute about wages arose after the Football League’s rejection of Cellino’s takeover sparked bitter arguments over who was responsible for funding wages and operating costs at Elland Road.
Gulf Finance House, the Bahraini bank which has been trying to sell Leeds to Cellino for two months, claims its deal with him included a clause which committed the Italian businessman to running United financially for six months from the end of January.
Cellino has injection a seven-figure sum into Leeds already but he refused to provide additional money last week with the wage bill for March looming and no guarantee about whether his takeover would succeed.
Leeds, who are losing around £1m, paid their general staff using cash from their accounts but were unable to fully fund wages owed to players and coaches.
Bramhall said: “No-one’s ever happy in these circumstances but I think the players understand the situation at Leeds and are mindful of it.”
Ten days ago, the Football League announced that Cellino had failed its Owners and Directors Test 10 days ago after receiving a convicted for tax evasion from a Sardinian judge last month.
The 57-year-old appealed the governing body’s decision rapidly and his legal team put his case to Kerr during a six-hour hearing on Monday.
Cellino is ready to fund the deferred wages owed to United’s players and backroom team provided he wins his appeal but that cost is likely to fall to existing owner GFH if Kerr upholds the Football League’s view.
Leeds have taken repeated loans from third parties this season, some used to pay wages and operating costs, and funding from GFH has dwindled amid its protracted attempt to sell a majority share in the club.
Comments
http://www1.skysports.com/football/news/11688/9245530/sky-bet-championship-massimo-cellino-says-football-league-are-hurting-leeds-united
Interestingly Sky state "Cellino revealed that he would pay the player's wages if and when his takeover of Leeds is given the green light by the Football League".
So it's the League who are the ones making ransom demands? "I won't pay the players unless you make me owner?".
Sounds to me like Leeds are considerably better off without Cellini.
Will be interesting to see how long before they enter Administration - doubtful it will be that long.
(glad we don't have that kinda carry on at our place)
This was one possible future for us if Duchatelet had not rolled up before Christmas.
But then on the radio it said only if they had enough points for safety by March 31 and the minus ten wouldn't affect t the standing that season
They also said Leeds could face minus 15 or 20 points due to their financial miss magmt before
12.3.3 Subject to the provisions of Regulation 12.3.4 below, where the Club becomes subject to or suffers an Insolvency Event, or the Board impose a deduction in accordance with Regulation 12.3.2:
(a) during the Normal Playing Season but prior to 5.00pm on the fourth Thursday in March, the points deduction shall apply immediately;
(b) during the Normal Playing Season but after 5.00pm on the fourth Thursday in March, Regulation 12.3.4 shall apply; and
(c) outside the Normal Playing Season, the points deduction shall apply in respect of the following Season such that the Club starts that Season on minus 10 points (including in the Football Conference if appropriate).
12.3.4 Where the circumstances set out in Regulation 12.3.3(b) apply and at the end of that Season, having regard to the number of championship points awarded (ignoring any potential deduction):
(a) the Club would be relegated in accordance with Regulation 10.1.2(b) or 7.3, the points deduction will apply in the next following Season (including in the Football Conference if appropriate); or
(b) the Club would not be relegated as aforesaid, the points deduction will apply in that Season and Regulation 10.1.2(b) or 7.3 will then apply (if appropriate) following imposition of the points deduction.
12.3.5 For the avoidance of doubt, where a Club and/or Group Undertaking is subject to more than one of the procedures in Regulation 12.3.1 above during a process of compromising creditors (for example Administration followed by a Company Voluntary Arrangement), the Club shall only be deducted one set of 10 points, such deduction to apply with effect from the first Insolvency Event.
I guess that this makes my explanation further up the thread inaccurate.
Sorry Gentlemen, and ladies.
15 points almost certain to be relegated.
20 points - relegated
There's a month of the season left, surely Leeds' owners would do whatever they could to avoid going into admin in the next few weeks and avoid a points deduction. What if they announce they're going into administration over the summer?
I don’t see why Cellino should be expected to pay the wages if he is not allowed to take the club over- Whatever he is, I presume he is not a charity!
And guess what there on today Wigan vs Leeds
The PFA has been told that money which United’s players and backroom team agreed to delay last Friday will not be paid until an independent QC delivers a verdict on whether Cellino should be barred from buying a majority stake in Leeds. Playing staff at Thorp Arch accepted a 50 per cent deferral and were told that the remainder of their wages for March would be transferred on Tuesday, 24 hours after Cellino’s case was heard in London.
The second payment failed to arrive on time and United managing director David Haigh spoke with manager Brian McDermott and his squad in the home dressing room before Tuesday night’s defeat to Charlton Athletic, offering reassurances that the bill would be met but failing to specify a date.
The PFA, the players’ union, sought further guarantees yesterday and were informed that the remaining money would be transferred following the outcome of Cellino’s appeal against a Football League decision to disqualify him from becoming an owner or director of Leeds.
United also indicated that a written judgement from Tim Kerr QC would be forthcoming in the next 48 hours.
John Bramhall, the PFA’s deputy chief executive, told the YEP: “My understanding is that a decision on the appeal was expected by the club on Tuesday, which is why they set Tuesday as the date set for payment to the players.
“Clearly that decision didn’t come and payment wasn’t made but we’re assured that wages will be met after the appeal finishes and we’re told that a decision will be made before the end of the week.”
The dispute about wages arose after the Football League’s rejection of Cellino’s takeover sparked bitter arguments over who was responsible for funding wages and operating costs at Elland Road.
Gulf Finance House, the Bahraini bank which has been trying to sell Leeds to Cellino for two months, claims its deal with him included a clause which committed the Italian businessman to running United financially for six months from the end of January.
Cellino has injection a seven-figure sum into Leeds already but he refused to provide additional money last week with the wage bill for March looming and no guarantee about whether his takeover would succeed.
Leeds, who are losing around £1m, paid their general staff using cash from their accounts but were unable to fully fund wages owed to players and coaches.
Bramhall said: “No-one’s ever happy in these circumstances but I think the players understand the situation at Leeds and are mindful of it.”
Ten days ago, the Football League announced that Cellino had failed its Owners and Directors Test 10 days ago after receiving a convicted for tax evasion from a Sardinian judge last month.
The 57-year-old appealed the governing body’s decision rapidly and his legal team put his case to Kerr during a six-hour hearing on Monday.
Cellino is ready to fund the deferred wages owed to United’s players and backroom team provided he wins his appeal but that cost is likely to fall to existing owner GFH if Kerr upholds the Football League’s view.
Leeds have taken repeated loans from third parties this season, some used to pay wages and operating costs, and funding from GFH has dwindled amid its protracted attempt to sell a majority share in the club.