Leeds' 15-point deduction upheld

[Row Z Royal]

Ken Bates is a legend.

Source?

[PieEater]

Even more so, as a condition of not being relegated to League 2 Leedsa agreed to the 15 point deduction - except Bates somehow decided not to make that public.

I haven't heard that one before, where did you get that from?

Can't the FA take yet more points off them for a frivilous appeal, a bit like the appeals for match bans? Another 5 points should do it.

See that paragraph 36 I posted above. The bit about Bates came from a Leeds Supporters Trust insider.

There's no mention of league 2 there, it just says accept the 15 pt deduction on condition there is no contention to it?

[PEARCEY]

Why couldn't this appeal have been done earlier in the season?

I imagine that they're not going to get the points back.

Totally agree. Absolutely ridiculous that it has taken until the end of the season for this to be sorted out. Should have been done and dusted pre Christmas. You have to wonder whether the delay in reaching a decision was pre-meditated to afford Leeds no time to appeal before the end of the season

[rg6royal]

Ken Bates is a legend.

Source?

Horseradish

[Dirk Gently]

Even more so, as a condition of not being relegated to League 2 Leedsa agreed to the 15 point deduction - except Bates somehow decided not to make that public.

There's no mention of league 2 there, it just says accept the 15 pt deduction on condition there is no contention to it?

Sorry - here you go :

14. Normally Regulation 11 requires that a new Member (i.e. Leeds NewCo) should start the following season in a lower League (here L2). Leeds NewCo wanted to avoid this ‘relegation’ and to ensure Leeds stayed in L1 it was prepared to pay a price to achieve this. The Football League was receptive to the idea and indicated that it might be prepared to exercise its discretion to permit this to happen.

....

32. As already described Leeds NewCo (and in particular Mr Bates and Mr Mark Taylor) were well aware that in order to secure this indulgence the Board was stipulating that in order to remain in L1 the Club would have to start the new season with a 15 point deficit. This had been agreed by Mr Bates on behalf of the consortium, as the price which had to be paid for the indulgence and they were prepared to pay it – subject only to an Appeal to the League.

33. We are satisfied that Mr Taylor, in his capacity of Director of Leeds NewCo and their solicitor, was fully aware of the content and effect of what he was signing. Earlier that day he had received a letter from Mr Craig in which he had stated there was to be ‘a legally binding agreement’ in which the Claimants would undertake to observe and perform each of the conditions set out, and “waive any and all claims against the League regarding the sanction of matters arising out of the administration generally.” Mr Craig told us that it was not standard practice for him to include release and waiver clauses in agreements between the League and insolvent Member Clubs. He consulted the League Solicitors, and included Clauses 4.1 and 4.2 because the Board had made it clear in its 27 July meeting that the terms of the agreement with Leeds NewCo had to “obviate anyone taking legal action once the process had been completed,” and the Board re-affirmed at its 3 August meeting that they required “an assurance by the club that it would accept the decision of the meeting as final.” As he put it: “it was a crucial part of the deal that Leeds NewCo accept the points deduction and not seek to challenge it or have it overturned other than by means of the appeal to its fellow Member Clubs, as permitted by Clause 3.”