-----Original Message----- From: Mark Humphries [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, July 13, 2007 4:56 AM To: 'Nigel Holcroft'; [email protected] Subject: RE: [LU] LU:Today's lesson
>For god's sake man get real. What is the point in blustering at bates at the moment? Will that get us the golden share back? [Nigel Holcroft] Real? Whose perception of reality are we supposed to be playing this game in? Who is blustering at Bates? I've even gone as far as to try to point just how his offer might well have been seen to be the best; however, I believe that, if subsequent leaked figures prove to be accurate, I was being overly generous to him... >Bates won (again), deal with it. [Nigel Holcroft] Did he?.. it depends what your definition of won is. The club was certainly put back into his hands, by KPMG; though, apparently to some concerned parties the circumstances look far from spotless, whether ethically or legally. Again as I said in, his defence it seems a done deal and like it or not I have to accept it and move on as it is out of my control. Either way, I'm content to see what comes out of the further investigations by the League and the courts, (if HMRC pursue the original complaint, or any other bidder takes up action against the process). Do I want to see the club condemned to more months of limbo or dragged through the judicial system? Absolutely not. My wish was for a clean end to the situation where everyone could walk away, feeling that justice was done and seen to be done and that we could get on with a "clean" pre-season and assault on the title. Even though I accept the fact that the club is in Bates' hands again, and am looking forward to the season, I do not deny nor will I point fingers of blame at any one of the connected parties who feel they have a right to mount a challenge, just as I would have accepted bates' right to challenge, in court any other decision much as I believe that would never have happened. >What is holding us back as a team at the moment, and who does have the power to give us the golden share? [Nigel Holcroft] As has been pointed out several times and from several sources. No one is holding us back... We are and have been, all along free to trade (albeit with League approval of each individual trade, so why did we not seek approval?). though bates insisted we weren't. We are and have been, all along, free to play and maintain our league position (albeit in the absence of the GS guarantee) much as Bates insisted we weren't.. The club announced late yesterday that they had sent the required documents to the League, "in response to the League statement" and I believe KPMG announced today that they did not need to provide any documents, because "the club had already done so." I guess that the "cancellation and re-instatement of the meeting is going to be a "he said, she said" situation, though surely KPMG should be able to produce some kind of written notification, of cancellation, such things would rarely, if ever be done by phone... So answer your own question. Who IS holding us back, as a team at the moment? Yes the League have the power to grant the new owner the golden share, if they are seen to be entitled to it, but it is far from automatic and so it is beholden upon the new owners to comply with any necessary process. Till then they can happily play and move forward as a team for, at least the next 18 months. Is all that "real" enough for you? _______________________________________________ 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
