Informasjon: Lønnstak, rettssak, poengstraff

[berlin]

Ville rykter sider at beslutningen er tatt for en stund siden, men at det jobbes med løsninger for å minimere skadene.  En av modellene skal være å la fire lag rykke opp i CCC...

Litt surt for det ekstra laget som da rykker ned fra CCC for å opprettholde samme antall lag 
Blir uansett ulidelig spennende å se hva som skjer på torsdag.

Jeg har også lest (rykter, selvfølgelig) at datoen 1.mai er valgt som offentliggjøring av beslutningen,
av  taktiske årsaker (mindre tid for "oppstuss"/bråk).

4 lag opp i CCC, har jeg også lest rykter om, antar at folk/forståsegpåere vrir hodet sitt for
å tenke om det finnes løsninger, som Erik M skriver, ikke forårsaker en hel masse styr og mulige "legal actions". 0 poeng gir jo minst skadevirkninger, men panelet er nok ikke farget av dette, det ville svekke troverdigheten.

At 4 lag rykker opp, betyr ikke at 4 lag må rykke ned denne sesongen, men neste.
Det vil gjøre de 25 lagene neste sesong klar over det, og slik sett ikke "skade" noen.

Sånn rett før 1.mai, er jeg fortsatt pessimistisk med tanke på at vi får poeng tilbake,
og blir heller ikke skuffet om så skulle skje. Jeg har i grunnen hele tiden vært inneforstått med poengtrekket, rettferdig eller ikke.

Alle som har satt seg nogenlunde inn i saken, vet at de 10 poengene fra forrige sesong ikke hadde noe med saken å gjøre. Hvis man legger lover og regler til side (hvilket FL ikke hadde/har) for å begrunne -15 trekket, så kan man nok objektivt sett hevde - at - det burde vært noe der som regulerer hvordan en klubb skal gå ut av administrasjon og ikke bare inn i administrasjon, og slik sett si at en straff var på sin plass (men kanskje ikke så mye som -15? )

Som noen har nevnt, rykker vi opp likevel vi play-off, så kan vi virkelig være stolte!

[4ever arcticwhite]

Man skal nok ikke se bort fra at det forholdsvis umiddelbart etter høringen ble bestemt at Leeds skulle få så mange poeng tilbake at det kunne eller ville påvirke playoff / direkte opprykk med alt det bråket det ville medføre.

Ligaen ber da om tid for å vurdere konsekvensene av dette, og får tiden fram til 1. mai til å foreta vurderingene. Det er ikke urimelig at de trenger en god uke til å gjøre vurderingen, samtidig vet ligaen at langt mer vil være avklart med tanke på konsekvensene den 1. mai enn de var ved høringens slutt. Det har vært spilt en ekstra serierunde, slik at alt blir klarere. Hadde Leeds tapt i denne runden ville kanskje ikke f.eks. 8 poeng tilbake gjort annet utslag enn at det påvirker hvem som møter hvem i playoff. Men siden Leeds vant, er det slik at 8 poeng tilbake gjør at Leeds har grepet om andreplassen.

Men tenk hvor moro det blir dersom det bestemmes at tre lag rykker direkte opp, og lagene fra 4-7 spiller playoff, og så tar Leeds den tredjeplassen....

Nei, de tenker nok så det knaker nå i ligaen......

[kjelvi]

Hendrie: time to end this farce


John Hendrie

Former Leeds United winger John Hendrie today hit out at the "farcical" delay in ruling on the club's 15-point deduction.
Hendrie â€" a consultant with West Yorkshire solicitors Last Cawthra Feather â€" claimed the Football League were guilty of failing to treat the case with enough urgency as the fight over United's points penalty neared a conclusion.

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/leedsunited/Hendrie-time-to-end-this.4033738.jp

[SOL]

John Hendrie sier også at han ikke tror Leeds vil få poeng tilbake . Jeg tror det ikke selv heller, men gud hjelpe som jeg håper. Dette er jo poeng vi har spilt oss til på banen!

[kjelvi]

Macca's tunnel vision key for United


John Hendrie

Gary McAllister's refusal to involve himself in Leeds United's 15-point argument will be a defining factor of this season should the club win promotion through the play-offs, according to John Hendrie.
The former Leeds midfielder, pictured inset, paid tribute to McAllister's "tunnel vision" as the Elland Road club awaited the outcome of the independent review of their 15-point deduction.

http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/leedsunited/Macca39s-tunnel-vision-key-for.4033760.jp

[Roy]

Hadde jeg hatt negler så hadde jeg sittet og tygget nå

[Promotion 2010]

Berlin:
Alle som har satt seg nogenlunde inn i saken, vet at de 10 poengene fra forrige sesong ikke hadde noe med saken å gjøre. Hvis man legger lover og regler til side (hvilket FL ikke hadde/har) for å begrunne -15 trekket, så kan man nok objektivt sett hevde - at - det burde vært noe der som regulerer hvordan en klubb skal gå ut av administrasjon og ikke bare inn i administrasjon, og slik sett si at en straff var på sin plass (men kanskje ikke så mye som -15? )

Jeg begynner å tvile på om det første er rett også jeg. Ligaens strengeste straff er -15.
Det som skjedde med Leeds United er at de ble straffet med -10 for å gå inn i administrasjon og -15 for å gå feil ut igjen. Hvis en klubb hadde gjort dette i løpet av en sesong, så ville straffen bli på -25.
Men hva hvis den strengeste straffen er -15. Det kan gå en vanvittig inflasjon i poengtrekk hvis man kan risikere et kvart hundre poeng i fratrekk hver gang skattevesenet bruser med fjærene.

Nå heller jeg mot at Leeds kun får -5 i fratrekk fordi totalrammen for forseelsen (inn- og ut av admin) er faktisk -15. Og av de har Leeds allerede blitt trukket -10.

Med ti poeng tilbake er vi fortsatt på sikker opprykksplass. 

[Wannabe]

Ville rykter sider at beslutningen er tatt for en stund siden, men at det jobbes med løsninger for å minimere skadene.  En av modellene skal være å la fire lag rykke opp i CCC...

Interessant...

Vi har litt av en dag foran oss i morgen. Rart det er så mye mer realistisk å angripe idrettens egne avgjørelser på øyriket enn her, i Norge ville alt man oppnådde ha vært omkostningene ved saksbehandlingen, under sammenliknbare forhold.

Nå betyr ikke dette at jeg selger skinnet før bjørnen er skutt her, men det kan være grunn til reell forventning om hva som offentliggjøres i morgen.

For oss som husker følelsen helt i begynnelsen av august, har 2007/2008 vært sesongen hvor det snudde uansett! Først senere vet vi om vi har godt av opprykk neste sesong. Når det er sagt, er det jo litt av en miserabel situasjon vi er i ved å spille i gamle 3. div., jeg har slett ikke glemt det.

Jeg håper inderlig at mai vil bringe en bitte liten flik av høytid også til Leeds United, hva jeg våger å tro, er ikke så interessant.

MOT

[Papi]

Ville rykter sider at beslutningen er tatt for en stund siden, men at det jobbes med løsninger for å minimere skadene.  En av modellene skal være å la fire lag rykke opp i CCC...

Dette høyrdes med første skumlesning som ein spennande idè, men så slår tanken  seg:
Gidder "styret" i Championship og gi FL ein hjelpande hand? EG TVILER.

Og dessuten vil det bli ramaskrik for det fjerde laget som evt rykker ned neste år, og Leeds vil bil den store stygge ulven. Sjølv om vi er "uskyldige" i dette rotet.

Så eg kan aldri tenke meg at 4 lag rykker opp, og at 4 rykker ned igjen neste år.

[Tom S]

APOLOGY: MR KEN BATES AND LEEDS UNITED
http://www.thisissouthwales.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=161367&command=displayContent&sourceNode=161360&contentPK=20516103&folderPk=88481&pNodeId=161383

Idioter!

[Promotion 2010]

Dette er kanskje også signaler om at Leeds faktisk HAR EN SAK!!!!

http://www.planetswans.co.uk/article.aspx?ArticleID=387

[Ove]

Hvis det er sånn at max straff er 15 poeng, ja da har jeg håp om at vi får 10 poeng tilbake. Skjer det, så er det overveiende sannsynlig at vi får direkte opprykk pga. vi har en suveren målforskjell. Og eneste taper da, er Doncaster. Jeg vil ikke tro at andre klubber gidder å gå til sak. Hvorfor skal f.eks. Swansea bry seg om hvem som blir nr. 2, og hvem som blir motstander i play off er vel hipp som happ?

Da blir ikke følgene så store. Ligaen må bare finne en eller annen kompensasjon for Doncaster. Ønsketenkning? Ja kanskje.

[kjelvi]

Millers to follow United example

ROTHERHAM United's proposed new owner Tony Stewart has revealed that the club is likely to be docked points next season after copying Leeds United's controversial exit from administration.
Stewart will acquire the cash-strapped League Two club tomorrow without completing a Company Voluntary Arrangement â€" the same move that led to Leeds being docked 15 points this season.
Stewart says it is the "right step to take" both "legally and ADVERTISEMENTfinancially" and will enable the Millers to move forward next season with a clean slate.
Leeds have been locked in a legal battle with the Football League since last summer; they will learn today whether their bid to overturn the 15-point penalty has been successful, when an arbitration panel announces its decision.
However, no matter what happens in the Leeds case, it is likely that the League will move to clarify the rules on insolvency policy this summer.
But Stewart said: "I think we will lose points at the start of next season, whatever happens, and I have been advised that both legally and financially, this is the right step to take.
"I am not a Roman Abramovich and I am a novice in the football market â€" but I am an experienced businessman who wants this club to go places."
With the Inland Revenue owed around £500,000 and unlikely to agree to a CVA, administrators have recommended selling the club to a newly-formed company owned by Stewart and his anonymous partners.
"I would love to have been able to pay off the creditors because they have been the fall guys," admitted Stewart. "But we would not have got the agreement (CVA) accepted."
Stewart, the chairman of a Rotherham-based lighting company, is set to become the fourth owner of the cash-strapped South Yorkshire club in the space of the last three years.
For nearly two decades, the Millers enjoyed relative financial stability under local scrap merchant Ken Booth but when he sold out in 2005, the problems began to mount.
Fans group Millers 05 took control but within a year, the club had entered administration with debts of £3.7m.
Local builder Denis Coleman and restaurant owner Dino Maccio were next to try their luck but Maccio quit seven months later and Coleman struggled on until two months ago. Work on the new main stand, which had begun under Millers 05, remains unfinished.
Significantly, Booth still owns the stadium and the club's Hooton Lodge training ground and demands nearly £200,000 a year in rent â€" a sum that Coleman challenged unsuccessfully in the High Court last year.
The Booth family are also threatening legal action unless their demands for on-going privileges, including FA Cup tickets and free use of the club's physiotherapist, are met.
Stewart said: "When you look at what has gone before, this club has been relying on fanatical fans who had the right intentions. But you have got to be more pragmatic and if expenditure is greater than income, you are going to be in trouble.
"I would not have signed that lease for the ground and that has now become a big problem. Negotiations with the Booth family are ongoing but so far they have been quite negative."
Stewart confirmed that he is seriously considering the viability of leaving Millmoor, and that a move to Don Valley Stadium in Sheffield is an option.
"We can't be talking about this problem for the next three months. Decisions have to be made soon," he said, adding that the issue of Booth's 'privileges' was being addressed by administrator Jeremy Bleazard.
Despite the prospect of starting next season with a 15-point penalty, Stewart believes that manager Mark Robins can still lead the club to the League Two play-offs.
"We are going for promotion next season," he stressed.
"Mark will have more funds this summer than he had last time around. If it had not been for administration, the club would have gone up automatically. He is a good manager who has assembled a good side. We have had two meetings and he is a bright guy who can do the job."
A Football League spokesman said they could not comment on the possible implications for the Millers until the plans had been put forward.

YP

[kjelvi]

Leeds and Doncaster nervously await today's tribunal verdict

FORGET which way the country votes in the local elections, the only verdict interesting supporters of Doncaster Rovers and Leeds United belongs to a three-man arbitration panel.
Almost nine months to the day since the start of a saga that has cast a shadow over League One every bit as large as the black cloud hovering over beleaguered Prime Minister Gordon Brown this morning, Leed's long fight to have their 15-point deductioADVERTISEMENTn overturned is finally set to reach a conclusion.
At 5pm today, the independent panel set up to rule on the dispute between the League and Leeds is expected to deliver its long-awaited decision.
United claim the League acted outside its jurisdiction by imposing the penalty for what it perceived to be a failure to follow insolvency policy â€" namely not agreeing a Company Voluntary Arrangement (CVA) before exiting administration.
Last summer, KPMG, the administrator then running the club, withdrew the CVA, which had been passed by the requisite 75 per cent majority at an earlier meeting of creditors, following a legal challenge to the vote by the Inland Revenue.
The administrator insisted sufficient funds were not available to keep the business going until the taxman's challenge could be heard in the High Court in September so, instead, they put the club up for sale. Ken Bates then fought off several rival bids to buy United in July.
However, this failure to agree a CVA â€" unlike, as Lord Mawhinney pointed out, all the other 41 clubs who had previously been in administration had managed â€" eventually led to the League citing "exceptional circumstances" as they hit Leeds with the sanction of a 15-point deduction to go with the 10 points the club originally lost in May.
Bates immediately signalled his intention to fight the penalty but it took until late February for the League to invite Leeds to arbitration.
A panel was then drawn up, headed by experienced football arbitrator Sir Philip Otton. His past judgments involved some of the most controversial in English football history, including Sheffield United's appeal over the Carlos Tevez affair, and he was joined by former Premier League chief executive Peter Leaver and Peter Cadman, a lawyer who has chaired Premier League disciplinary commissions in the past.
The three men spent four days last month listening to submissions from both Leeds and the League and their decision is expected today.
The stakes are clearly high, not only for Yorkshire rivals Leeds and Doncaster but also Carlisle United, Nottingham Forest and even Swansea City, with the outcome having far-reaching consequences for League One.
Should, for instance, the arbitration panel find in favour of the Elland Road club and the 15 points are returned, Gary McAllister's side would immediately jump from sixth to second place in the table and be promoted.
Doncaster, who this morning sit second in the table, seven points ahead of Leeds, would then slip out of the automatic promotion places and join Carlisle, Forest and Southend United in the play-offs.
Alternatively, if the League's original sanction against Leeds is upheld, then the table will stay the same and mean Rovers go into their final game at Cheltenham on Saturday knowing that a victory will end a 50-year absence from the top two tiers of English football.
A failure to win at Whaddon Road, however, would then hand Forest and Carlisle an opportunity to claim second spot behind a Swansea side who would belatedly be crowned champions if Leeds's punishment is upheld.
It all points towards an intriguing day ahead, not only for the political commentators as the country goes to the polls but also fans of clubs near the top of League One.
The potential loss of hundreds of council seats means the Prime Minister is bracing himself for a painful kick in the ballot box. Leeds and Doncaster fans will be hoping a similarly painful low blow is not their fate today.


How the table would be affected

League One as it stands today

P W D L F A Pts
Swansea 45 26 11 8 81 42 89
Doncaster 45 23 11 11 64 39 80
Nottm Forest 45 21 16 8 61 30 79
Carlisle 45 23 10 12 63 45 79
Southend 45 22 9 14 69 54 75
Leeds 45 26 10 9 70 37 73


League One As it could stand

P W D L F A Pts
Swansea 45 26 11 8 81 42 89
Leeds 45 26 10 9 70 37 88
Doncaster 45 23 11 11 64 39 80
Nottm Forest 45 21 16 8 61 30 79
Carlisle 45 23 10 12 63 45 79
Southend 45 22 9 14 69 54 75

For the very best and latest Leeds United news log back here throughout Thursday and don't miss our specialist Leeds United podcast available on Thursday evening.

YP

[Erik M]

[/quote]

Ville rykter sider at beslutningen er tatt for en stund siden, men at det jobbes med løsninger for å minimere skadene.  En av modellene skal være å la fire lag rykke opp i CCC...

Dette høyrdes med første skumlesning som ein spennande idè, men så slår tanken  seg:
Gidder "styret" i Championship og gi FL ein hjelpande hand? EG TVILER.
Og dessuten vil det bli ramaskrik for det fjerde laget som evt rykker ned neste år, og Leeds vil bil den store stygge ulven. Sjølv om vi er "uskyldige" i dette rotet.

Så eg kan aldri tenke meg at 4 lag rykker opp, og at 4 rykker ned igjen neste år.

Så vidt jeg forstår organiseres både CCC, L1 og L2 under FL mens FA tar seg av PL.  Så her er det FL som styrer og søker en minst mulig smertefull løsning.  Dersom fire rykker opp er ideen visstnok at fire rykker ned fra CCC neste sesong.

[kjelvi]

Last words from the Man himself!


Bates fearing the worst
Whites supremo planning for worst-case scenario.


Bates: Fears the worst

Leeds United chairman Ken Bates has admitted the club are fearing the worst but hoping for the best regarding their 15-point appeal.
The Whites will learn their fate on 5pm on Thursday when the three-man independent tribunal presiding over the club's points appeal give their verdict.
The tribunal were called in to mediate the Football League's decision to impose a 15-point deduction on Leeds at the start of the season after the club failed to agree a CVA with the club's creditors.
Should Leeds win their appeal then they would surge into second in the table and pip Doncaster, Nottingham Forest and Carlisle to the second automatic promotion place in League One.
Either way, Bates, who believes the matter should have been resolved in September, says the tribunal's ruling will ultimately be the end of the saga one way or another.
"We're fearing the worst but hoping for the best," Bates told Sky Sports News.
"They've been very professional, the tribunal. Normally you can get a leak from somewhere, but not with those three guys.
"I would have thought this is the end of the matter one way or another, having met the three people on the tribunal.
"One is a judge in the high court of appeal, so I would think whatever decision they come to I doubt they'll leave any room for any further movements.
"It's ends today. It should have ended in September and life will go on."

Sky

[kjelvi]

Bates prepared for Leeds decision

Leeds chairman Ken Bates has told Setanta Sports News that he feels the Yorkshire club have had a fair hearing in the independent tribunal to decide if the 15 points docked from them at the start of the season will be reinstated.
The League One side are awaiting the results of the independent hearing which are due at 5pm on Thursday, and there has been talk that the other teams in the division will apply for an injunction if the club’s points are restored.
However, Bates dismissed such speculation and called the rest of the teams in the league ‘prejudiced’ after they failed to object to the docking in the first place.
“It’s hot air,” bates told Setanta Sports News when asked about the reported plans for an injunction should Leeds be successful.
“Of course they are [bound to be upset].  But on the other hand they’re only upset if we get our points back because of the dirty tricks they played in the first place.
“They’re all prejudiced.  They all had a vested interest in us losing those 15 points, how can that be justice?”
Bates also said he placed the blame at the door of The FA and the Football League for the length of time it has taken to deal with the matter.
“Yes, and the Football Association because we wanted an independent review and The FA took four months to say no,” he said.  “The Football League said ‘let’s have an independent tribunal’, and they could have said that in September. 
“If you go to The Premier League, if there’s a dispute between them and a club they immediately put it [to an] independent [tribunal], and an example of that is West Ham. 
“We are proposing rule changes so no other club has to go through this again.”
And when asked if he felt the hearing had been fair, Bates was short and sweet with answer.
“Oh yes,” he replied

Sentana.com

[McMidjo]

På tide å gravlegge denne tråden nå, men for de som er interessert i å lese ’arbitrationdommen’ ligger den her â€" i kort og lang versjon:

http://www.football-league.premiumtv.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10794~1303579,00.html

Hovedkonklusjonen er at dommerpanelet har vektlagt den avtalen Leeds inngikk med The Football League i fjor sommer, hvor klubben formelt godtok å starte sesongen i League 1 med et poengtrekk på minus 15.

Det kommer i ’dommen’ fram en del interessant informasjon som ikke har vært framme tidligere:

• Minus 15 var (i juridiske termer) ikke en straff, det var en betingelse FL satte for å overdra the golden share til det nye eierselskapet i Leeds. Dommerpanelet vurderte poengfratrekket som del av en forretningsmessig avtale mellom FL og det nye eierselskapet i Leeds - og må på sett vis oppfattes som prisen det nye eierselskapet i Leeds måtte betale for å kunne overta klubben i L1. Alternativet til denne avtalen kunne ha vært å tvinge Leeds nye eierselskap til å søke opptak i ligaen som en helt ny klubb â€" og konsekvensene av dette ville ha vært å måtte starte sesongen i L2.
• Prosessen fra Leeds sin side ser ut til å ha vært langt mer rotete enn det vi har fått inntrykk av tidligere, og det er grunn til å stille mange spørsmål ved hvordan Leeds-direktøren Mark Taylor har håndtert denne saken….
• Det at Barnsley underveis i prosessen feilaktig plutselig 'dukket opp' som part i saken på Leeds sin side, ser ut til å være Taylor sitt verk, og dette bidro til å forsinke oppstart av arbitrationprosessen.
• Det understrekes at Leedssaken ikke vil skape presedens for andre klubber i samme situasjon, men at The FL kan gjøre en individuell vurdering i hver enkelt sak. (Dette indikerer ikke nødvendigvis at andre klubber vil slippe lettere unna enn Leeds framover, men det blir jo spennende å følge med på â€" og jeg ser jo for meg det helvete Bates kommer til å skape i media om vi ser den minste tendens til forskjellsbehandling framover).
• Det kom fram i saken at det pr i dag er minst 40 ( ) klubber som er â€" eller forventes å komme â€"  i så store økonomiproblemer at de må gå veien om admin/konkursforhandlinger.

[berlin]

Fokuset er flyttet, saken er over, men jeg tok meg tid til å lese respekterte Guardian sine kommentarer. Jeg synes dette er to bra artikler. Leeds sitt ankepunkt om at de ikke hadde noe annet valg enn å godta -15 poeng er ikke diskutert direkte, men indirekte. Mer essensielt er det at FL nå synes å ha en klarere håndtering av hvordan klubber skal gå ut av administrasjon, spesielt knyttet opp til en godkjent CVA. Det ser ut til -15 kan komme til å bli en standard for dette. Artiklene diskuterer forøvrig de samfunnsmessige konsekvensene fint, synes jeg, noe som ikke er blitt tonet veldig høyt i pressen (f.eks ikke fotball-relaterte kreditorer).
Egentlig hadde jeg fred i hjerte og sinn med en gang avgjørelsen var tatt, men den er nå stadfestet. Hadde vi ikke vært Leeds United, kunne det faktiskt gått værre (radert ut), tror jeg, selv om artiklene ikke antyder det.

A simple reason behind the defeat of Leeds' appeal
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/may/07/leedsappeal?gusrc=rss&feed=football

League sets 25-point penalty benchmark for insolvency
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/may/07/championship.leagueonefootball?gusrc=rss&feed=football

[Wannabe]

Alternativet til denne avtalen kunne ha vært å tvinge Leeds nye eierselskap til å søke opptak i ligaen som en helt ny klubb â€" og konsekvensene av dette ville ha vært å måtte starte sesongen i L2.

Faktisk raust at det i det hele tatt var L2 det i tilfelle var snakk om...

Vi fryktet jo faktisk muligheten til "å søke opptak" som en helt ny klubb utenfor hele ligaen og i bunnen av seriesystemet også. (Med andre ord for de fleste praktiske formål nedleggelse.)

Slik det lå an for oss 1. august, visste vi jo ikke om det kanskje hadde vært bedre å starte (med null) i L2, på grunn av faren for nedrykk med -15.

Uansett, det går bedre nå: Nå tar vi play-off'en, dere!

MOT

[kjelvi]

Peter Risdale: Leeds sniping must stop

Cardiff chairman Peter Ridsdale last night poured scorn on suggestions that he was in any way responsible for Leeds United's 15-point deduction and said the time had come to bury personal vendettas against him as he prepares for Saturday's FA Cup final, Cardiff's greatest day for 81 years.
Few figures in the game have taken as much flak as Ridsdale, who even wrote a book about his time at Leeds. But he insists he has learned the lessons of the past and denounced those who believe he no longer deserves a place in football.
"It amuses me when I hear that I was someone responsible for Leeds' 15-point deduction," said Ridsdale. "Five years after I left and with successive managements in between, it's somehow apparently still my fault. I cannot believe that. Some people want to drive you out of the business because you've made mistakes instead of allowing you to learn from them. I'd like to think Cardiff are now benefiting."
Describing debt-ridden Cardiff as the greatest challenge of his life, Ridsdale said reaching the Cup final was the culmination of a gigantic team effort.
"Every morning I wake up in a cold sweat because we never have the luxury of spare cash at this club. I have not spent more than £250,000 on a player. The challenge is to work smarter than your competitors. I'm just the head of a team of unsung heroes. We've put a team together on very little money and have achieved the unthinkable."
Although the club are moving to a new 25,000-seater stadium in just over a year, Ridsdale's toughest task will be to hold on to manager Dave Jones, whose stock has risen rapidly. Jones, like Ridsdale, has also suffered personal abuse, a fact the chairman believes has created a vital bond between them. "We both had a lot to prove to a lot people. If I have a manager and player everyone wants, it means I've got the right people."
Ridsdale's over-spending at Leeds built up debts of around £78?million, but Ridsdale has long refused to accept sole responsibility for the club's plight, and also refutes the idea that he left Barnsley in the lurch. "They were in administration at the time with no obvious sign of getting out of it. I walked away having lost money. I know for a fact that without me going in there, they would never have been able to play on."
Meanwhile, he revealed just how close Cardiff came to financial ruin after becoming embroiled in a seven-month dispute with former chairman Sam Hammam over debt repayment. "Had we lost the case, we'd have had no obvious means of paying the money," Ridsdale said. "I would have had no legal alternative but to call in the administrator and resign. We were hanging by a thread. That's what makes going to Wembley all the sweeter."

The Guardian

[lojosang]

Hvis målet med gjeldsoppbyggelsen i Leeds var "læring" skulle jeg ønske noen hadde spandert et AMO-kurs på mannen heller. 

[Annesj]

Ser at Luton har mottatt samme straff som oss. De vil starte i league 2 med 15 minuspoeng.