Sorry about this .... (sounds rather like an I don't want a long debate, or I'm not sexist., apology) but......
Saw this in defence of Mr Bates: "But Mr Taylor said the only reason Leeds had originally survived winding-up threats from HM Revenue and Customs over unpaid tax was Mr Bates's takeover in January 2005. He told Mr Willis that Mr Bates had subsequently introduced the investment from the offshore companies adding: "Let me make it clear, without that investment the people of the city of Leeds would not have a football club in Division One or anywhere else. The club would have ceased to exist."" http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/leeds?articleid=2959797 Does anyone here know any different? I was under the impression that (at least) one other option was available or was about to be available. Otherwise. I generally think people shouldn't break (reasonable) rules and if they do they shouldn't get away with it. More importantly, after NEVER watching Leeds during this spell in the second division, (first seasons I've missed since Bilbao won the double) I'm double thrilled to be coming back for the Hartlepool away match, double cos my boy is coming for the first time and has finally started wearing his kits with pride. Anyone (Roger?) know if the supporters bus from Bradford still leaves from the same pub? On On Rocky _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist Join The Leeds United Supporters Trust at www.lufctrust.org
