I'm not suggesting that the following is the accurate insight into the present situation that we all are waiting for but it is an entirely plausible analysis. Trying to work out what is going on may require things to be turned on their heads and lateral thinking.
The FL have made it quite clear that for whatever reason the paperwork to explain what has happened at LU has not been put before the decision making board. Until that paperwork reaches them then no decisions about the GS can be taken. We don't know if the paperwork has not been sent, if it was sent to the wrong FL office, or even if somebody has declined to open the envelope for diplomatic reasons. Nor do we know why KPMG decided on Wednesday tea-time to advise the FL that KPMG would not be attending the FL meeting on the following day. Perhaps KPMG didn't itself want to present any paperwork at this time which may have had consequences if they did, and for which they may later have been blamed by those with an axe to grind. What the FL also make clear is that as far as they are concerned, LU are currently in administration, that we can trade players to a limited extent, and that the club CAN start its fixtures so long as the club remains in administration. There is therefore no IMMEDIATE problem in terms of the GS. It is also clear that when such paperwork does find its way in front of the decision making board that there will only be an immediate problem if that paperwork says that the club is no longer in administration. The difference between being in and not being in the CVA is, as I understand it, merely the self-issuing of an item of paperwork which states that the CVA has failed. I think it is called non-compliance. It seems to me that much depends upon what the paperwork which is eventually put before the FL actually says that the situation is. If the CVA remains in progress then there is no decision to make at this time and we trade some players and begin the league fixtures. If the paperwork says that we are longer in a CVA then this will cause a problem because the FL rules will have to be applied and a decision will need to be made. This very neatly throws the problem back from the football league and into the laps of Bates and KPMG. It is almost like an "invitation" to re-consider what paperwork to put before the FL. As KPMG also appear to have thrown the problem out of their offices and into Bates' lap then it might appear that everyone understands Bates' blame-game and they are not going to fall into line with it. The fact that the FL meeting instructed their chairman to seek legal advice on the situation would also fit quite neatly into this scenario. The big question is - is everyone giving Bates time to reconsider and to perhaps modify his position. If the CVA continues in place then of course the HMRC challenge remains in place and we are set for a date in court. Will Bates wish to go to court ? Will Bates risk advising the FL that we are no longer in a CVA ? Who will get evicted from the big brother house ? _______________________________________________ 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
