Do You Want Cellino To Be Banned By The FL ?

[theleedsmango]

Signing the gamble players will always land us with the Sorsas and DaCostas though and we have to accept not all players will be good enough, collectively they may all not be good enough and yes relegation is a possibility but despite our league position I think the club is moving forward. Younger players are getting experience and we will see if they are good enough. What would we learn about Taylor if he spent the rest of the season on the bench while Warnock played? What would we learn about Cook is Tonge was in his place? And for those writing players of remember Rui Marques who was at the club for 2 years and was going nowhere when suddenly things clicked for him and he was suddenly a very competent defender for a year or 2. This happens in football so don't write all the signings off yet.

Should we have held on to Hunt then for the same reasoning? He might have been having a bad year with us and could well go on to have 2 years of great form. Look we all get players; youth, old, foreign, home grown, defenders, attackers, bearded, fresh shaven...need time to bed in. Some will hit off instantaneously, others will take a year or two to find form, some may never. This isn't unique to Leeds or English football. What most of us are arguing with regards to letting Warnock go, was that with him we had something that was working out. With all the gambles we've taken on, it's been a welcome surprise that players like Warnock, Cook and Mowatt have really pushed on this season. Swapping Warnock for Taylor has turned a known, confident position in the team into another gamble. It may well pay off and Taylor has a brilliant season, but preferrably i'd rather Taylor wrestled the position from Warnock; that's how I'd like the team to progress. Cook/Mowatt pushed themselves in the team. We didn't have to wait to release Green for that to happen.

Taylor being better than Warnock is not that farfetched and may well be proven in the coming months. The problem so far is we have never gotten anyone as good as Snodgrass, Gradel, as you've mentioned, and McCormack or Howson. The issue here is not about signing players as gambles, it's about letting known quantities continually leave without being able to build on anything. Given Pearce's position is under threat, Byram is now our only continuity over the past year or two. Perfectly reasonable to build a team with him in it, but we seem to be continually restarting the team, never building. How long will we hold on to Byram for, realistically? Especially if he turns out to be decent as a winger. If/when we lose one or two of our better players, and the loanees return to their club - what are we left with?

I don't pay regular attention to the team sheets for all clubs throughout the season but when I catch a Championship game on TV or when I'm at a Leeds game; I look at other teams and it's the same top players. I recognise the names and how so-and-so terrorised us a year or two ago. Other fans tuning in to a Leeds game see absolutely no consistency.

[rab_rant]

Two yeses? Not seen any arguement for that yet though!

I voted for a ban cos I don't believe he has ever had his butt kicked.
Then I would stand him in the corner with a dunces cap and taunt him.
I would get the rest of the class to throw garlic at him. That would teach
him a lesson coming over here with his rock and roll attitudes and slicked
back olive oil hair and Ray Bann specs. Get back to your Nellie with your
foreign ways of doing things, disrespecting our glorious traditions, and interfering
with our blood and guts football by trying to foist that namby-pamby, tippy-tappy
hoity-toity flippy-floppy footy on us.

A spot of detention for you my boy until you learn to sit up and sh%t straight.

[weasel]

Should we have held on to Hunt then for the same reasoning? He might have been having a bad year with us and could well go on to have 2 years of great form. Look we all get players; youth, old, foreign, home grown, defenders, attackers, bearded, fresh shaven...need time to bed in. Some will hit off instantaneously, others will take a year or two to find form, some may never. This isn't unique to Leeds or English football. What most of us are arguing with regards to letting Warnock go, was that with him we had something that was working out. With all the gambles we've taken on, it's been a welcome surprise that players like Warnock, Cook and Mowatt have really pushed on this season. Swapping Warnock for Taylor has turned a known, confident position in the team into another gamble. It may well pay off and Taylor has a brilliant season, but preferrably i'd rather Taylor wrestled the position from Warnock; that's how I'd like the team to progress. Cook/Mowatt pushed themselves in the team. We didn't have to wait to release Green for that to happen.

Taylor being better than Warnock is not that farfetched and may well be proven in the coming months. The problem so far is we have never gotten anyone as good as Snodgrass, Gradel, as you've mentioned, and McCormack or Howson. The issue here is not about signing players as gambles, it's about letting known quantities continually leave without being able to build on anything. Given Pearce's position is under threat, Byram is now our only continuity over the past year or two. Perfectly reasonable to build a team with him in it, but we seem to be continually restarting the team, never building. How long will we hold on to Byram for, realistically? Especially if he turns out to be decent as a winger. If/when we lose one or two of our better players, and the loanees return to their club - what are we left with?

I don't pay regular attention to the team sheets for all clubs throughout the season but when I catch a Championship game on TV or when I'm at a Leeds game; I look at other teams and it's the same top players. I recognise the names and how so-and-so terrorised us a year or two ago. Other fans tuning in to a Leeds game see absolutely no consistency.

Hunt may well come good, a lot of strikers go on bad runs and suddenly once they get a goal look a different player. However with him being well down the pecking order and on high wages, a target of the boo boys etc it would seem to be the best oprion that he was released. He may go on to have a great couple of years with Ipswich, he clearly isn't as bad as he was for us or he wouldn't have had the career he had.

I would take issue with your assertion that Mowatt and Cook forced their way into the team. Neither were in the picture under Hockaday but once Redfearn temporarily took charge he put them in. If Redfearn hadn't have been put in charge for those 4 games and a new manager had come straight in it is likely they would have still been on the fringes. Whilst Redfearn obviously rated Warnock (and despite people insisting Cellino hated Warnock and Cellino picks the team) and played him but Redfearn is also in a position to know how good Taylor is. There is certainly less doubt with Taylor due to the amount of games he has played so although he is unproven at this level he is 'experienced' in english football. Yes it is a risk but I'm sure Cellino would have been asking Redfearn's opinion of Taylor prior to selling Warnock. I'm not saying it is a good decision short term to get rid of Warnock as it is possibly weakening the side, however long term it is plusses all the way as it frees up Warnock's wages, removes a player who was likely on a much bigger wage than those around him and gives us half a season to really see whether Taylor is good enough.

I fail to see your point in regard to replacing the likes of Snodgrass etc. These were risk signings who we attempted to replace with other risk signings. Beckford went and we replaced him with RMC for £200k. In the club's position they will always risk losing players to the premiership if they do better than the team. If a gamble is a succes they will attract interest and unless we are in a position to get promoted they will be sold if an offer is too good and their contract is winding down. To keep the likes of Byram we need him to a) sign a long contract and b) get promoted to the prem before his contract enters the last 18 months.

Like you say we do need to stop rebuilding the team every summer. Like I put in a post elsewhere we are beginning to see a young nucleus of a side forming and hopefully the 5 or 6 that look good enough will progress to 8 or 9 (more would be great) and it will be 1 or 2 'first team' improvement signings that we make in the sumer not double figures.

[theleedsmango]

I would take issue with your assertion that Mowatt and Cook forced their way into the team. Neither were in the picture under Hockaday but once Redfearn temporarily took charge he put them in. If Redfearn hadn't have been put in charge for those 4 games and a new manager had come straight in it is likely they would have still been on the fringes. Whilst Redfearn obviously rated Warnock (and despite people insisting Cellino hated Warnock and Cellino picks the team) and played him but Redfearn is also in a position to know how good Taylor is. There is certainly less doubt with Taylor due to the amount of games he has played so although he is unproven at this level he is 'experienced' in english football. Yes it is a risk but I'm sure Cellino would have been asking Redfearn's opinion of Taylor prior to selling Warnock. I'm not saying it is a good decision short term to get rid of Warnock as it is possibly weakening the side, however long term it is plusses all the way as it frees up Warnock's wages, removes a player who was likely on a much bigger wage than those around him and gives us half a season to really see whether Taylor is good enough.

Good point regarding Mowatt and Cook. Nevertheless, the point of breaking in to the team still stands. Redfearn had seen Murphy, Austin, Tonge, Norris, Bianchi, Sloth, Adryan etc, and thought that both Mowatt and Cook, but not quite Dawson, were ready to offer the team something and deserved a chance. They broke into the team regardless of who brought them up. Taylor had the same chance. Redfearn preferred Warnock over Taylor, when no one (fans or Cellino) would have put up a fuss if Redfearn had have dropped Warnock. Mowatt aside (who got exposed to the first team under Brian), Taylor being 4 years older than the ridiculously young (in footballing terms) Cook, may well be expected to being closer to breaking in to the team.

I don't want to focus on Taylor too much as I don't want to sound overly critical of him, I've watched him play a few times and he does look like he could be a good player. And as I've said before, McCormack didn't get off to instant success with us and it took a few injuries etc for him to get his breakthrough, maybe an opportunity is all Taylor needs. The main point is about building a team, not about one or two specific players. The same people that are telling me we are building a team tell me we need to get a few players to build the spine of the team.

[weasel]

I think Taylor was injured either late pre-season or early into the season and may have still been injured when Redfearn took over. I don't think he was available for selection during Milanic's short reign as Cooper and Berardi were chosen as replacements for Warnock who was dropped after being heavily criticised for his performance v Brentford.

[1964white]

I think Taylor was injured either late pre-season or early into the season and may have still been injured when Redfearn took over. I don't think he was available for selection during Milanic's short reign as Cooper and Berardi were chosen as replacements for Warnock who was dropped after being heavily criticised for his performance v Brentford.

Correct Taylor was injured for the early part of the season

[YorkshireSquare]

Massimo Cellino's appeal against disqualification as owner of Leeds United has been rejected.

[joluafc4eva]

Confirmation by the Football League

http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/a ... 13203.aspx

[YorkshireSquare]

In its judgment, dismissing Mr Cellino’s appeal against the decision, the PCC states: “We consider that the judge’s findings of fact and her description of Mr. Cellino’s state of mind based on them, is of conduct which would reasonably be considered to be dishonest. We therefore conclude that Mr.Cellino has been convicted of an offence involving a ‘Dishonest Act’ within the meaning of the rules, and that he is accordingly subject to a ‘Disqualifying Condition’.
Read more at http://www.football-league.co.uk/news/a ... wQi7Hdo.99

[Martyn]

Not a surprise at all, and if we were to answer the question honestly, I think that most of us would say that tax evasion is a dishonest act.

So now the chaos recommences, not that it was ever far from the surface anyway.

[YorkshireSquare]

Phil Hay ‏@PhilHayYEP · 10 minutes ago
Quick bits from full judgement: #lufc director Andrew Umbers told the PCC there was "a real likelihood of insolvency" if Cellino was banned.

[1964white]

Oh well just another day in the LUFC's saga

[hibbi86]

Not a surprise at all, and if we were to answer the question honestly, I think that most of us would say that tax evasion is a dishonest act.

So now the chaos recommences, not that it was ever far from the surface anyway.

That may be the case but i wuold say money laundering is a much worse offense than tax evasion yet birmingham have had no such issues with the owner....

bent as a 9 bob note is the football league.

[Genghers]

That may be the case but i wuold say money laundering is a much worse offense than tax evasion yet birmingham have had no such issues with the owner....

bent as a 9 bob note is the football league.

Yep. If they're not taken to the cleaners in the near future then the FL ought to have a serious fight on their hands from LUFC - absolute blatant double standards.

[drsdadsotherson]

Next at LUFC...

"Leeds United have been docked 15 points by the Football League for insolvency issues caused by the Football League."

[Martyn]

That may be the case but i wuold say money laundering is a much worse offense than tax evasion yet birmingham have had no such issues with the owner....

bent as a 9 bob note is the football league.

Of course. But the fact that Carson Yeung is dishonest has no bearing on whether Cellino is dishonest.

[YorkshireSquare]

Of course. But the fact that Carson Yeung is dishonest has no bearing on whether Cellino is dishonest.

But he was disqualified, and the Football League have raised questions about his continued involvement;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30825135

[Martyn]

But he was disqualified, and the Football League have raised questions about his continued involvement;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/30825135

Fair enough then.

[Martyn]

Statement on the OS is rather disingenuous

Surprised and disappointed

Disappointed yes, but surely not surprised? The QC said in the appeal last year that the ban would have stood if Cellino was found to have acted dishonestly, and to claim that tax evasion is honest really is stretching a point.

[andywatson]

This is an absolute travesty.

Now I know I am not Cellinos biggest fan- but that shouldn't cloud the fact that this process is a fiasco. It completely misses the point of the test in the first place. Yes, there was no question he was guilty and had to fail as the rules stand. But the rules are there to supposedly protect football.

Would the FL rather see a petulant Cellino bring down Leeds united? He has intimated that this is possible- although we all know he does tend to speak first and think later. However I did think the Chief operating officer of the club was considerably less bullish than is usually the case when bad news breaks. Would they rather we flounder on in a succession of bankruptcies and administrations?

I am one of the first to hold Cellino up to account for his actions. However even I accept that he has the best interests of the club at heart. He might be working in ways that sometimes make that more difficult than it should be, but competence isn't a criteria here. We finally have an owner that has delivered financial security to us. We finally have an owner that seems to want to build something. And the football league suddenly feel the need to "protect" us from him. Maybe they all think we will go off and copy him- perhaps I will scour the American equivalent of exchange and mart for a Yacht?

Yet at the same time Rapist Oysten still holds the majority of shares in Blackpool. His son, who is chairman, disparages fans as "retards" and "special needs". No controlling interest? Your not telling me Karl isn't on the phone to his rapist dad every time he needs his arse wiping? Luckily this sordid saga might spell Cellinos way round this- appoint a family member for a couple of months, and go to Miami with golf clubs and a mobile. Maybe the football leagues ineptitude will save us- despite their best efforts.

Ched Evans- where's the fit and proper test for players? I can't think of any incident potentially more damaging to footballs image than the return of that disgusting young man to the game. So where was the strong leadership there? Where were the guardians of morality protecting the weak willed? Ched Evans return to football potentially does much to "normalise" rape in the minds of young men. I suggest this is a far more serious issue than tax evasion. However the football league would have sanctioned him being signed to play. They still might if any chairman decided Ched Evans was a suitable representative of their club- which in my mind should immediately make them fail the fit and proper persons test.

If there's one group of people that should be seriously grateful they are not subject to a fit and proper persons test, then it is the football league. Incompetent doesn't begin to describe them.