Rick Today's half page article in the Guardian featured I think 20 questions the writers would like to see Ken Bates answer - some of them valid, some of them not, all of them aired on this list ad infinitum over the last month. Plus a close up photo of a scrawled message on the 'shrine' purporting to represent the fans anti-Bates protest.
Not exactly balanced journalism Also when the club was sold to Bates, the Guardian reported it as being sold to 'the consortium backing Ken Bates'. So I don't think this is news. Chris Wright ----- Original Message ----- From: "RickD" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "leedslist" <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 12:34 AM Subject: [LU] Spin or incompetence ? > Mr Harvey is reported as saying - > "It is important that we receive everybody's support behind getting the > share back which is why I am dismayed that there seems to be a resurgence, > fuelled by certain sections of the media, against the consortium led by > Ken > Bates. This is time to unite not divide." > > I think we can all understand why Mr Harvey would be calling for unity but > does this all make sense ? > I may not have been paying close enough attention but which are these > "certain sections of the media" who are fuelling a resurgence against the > Bates consortium. I'm serious. Does anyone think that the media are > fuelling anti Bates sentiment ? > If it a resurgence then it must have been there previously and again, is > this > the case ? Is this anti Bates feeling coming back having been away for a > while ? Is this an accurate portrayel of events as we are currently > experiencing them or is this a bit of throw-away nonsense in order to > blame > parts of the media for any anti Bates feeling. Were the media responsible > for any such feeling before it went away or was something else to blame > for > it originally ? Maybe I'm wrong but I really don't see the media as being > to > blame here. This might change of course but my feeling is that the media > would be lead rather than be leading on this. > Who or what is this Bates consortium ? Again, maybe I have missed > something > but aren't all the shares in the club owned by a single entity ? Are they > telling us that FSF is in fact a consortium and has this been mentioned > anywhere previously ? There is no reason why FSF could not be a consortium > but I'm wondering if this is new information or not. Genuine question. > This could easily be poor reporting or poor drafting but of more concern > is > the > suggestion that the regaining of the golden share might be adversely > affected by any anti-Bates sentiment which may be displayed. Is this a > serious suggestion that regaining the golden share somehow depends upon > Bates' popularity with the fans ? > If that is true then we are on very dangerous ground and things > must be much worse then I thought. In any case whilst the fans may hold a > whole range of opinions about Bates they are almost certainly already > completely united in wanting the golden share to be regained. > Their unity in this respect is NOT in question and I don't take very > kindly > to > any implications to the contrary. > Is this just an attempt at spin which has been poorly thought out or is > this > a genuine window into the parlous state of negotiations. I see this as an > attempt to blame the Media for something that I really don't see as being > their fault and secondly to be another example of that hoary old chestnut > that anything anti-Bates is anti Leeds United. I really don't think that > that line will wash any more either. > Some will see this as nit-picking but that was also said the last time I > challenged > Mr Harveys statements. Some may remember that this took place live on BBC > Radio when I took Mr Harvey to task on his comments and claims about the > contents and true meaning of the clubs published accounts. > Given the subsequent financial events at our football club the biggest > criticism of > myself might be that maybe I didn't challenge Mr Harvey hard enough on the > subject. > Do those reassurances given to the fans in response to my questions still > provide any reassurance ? If I was wrong back then, how do we come to be > here now ? > Can we still accept that the fans are not really interested and that it > was > all only a > matter of fine detail ? The devil is in that sort of detail. > The fans have had years of this now, as we are constantly reminded by > those > same media, and with those painful years comes bitter experience. That's > how > you learn, and we HAVE learned. > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > ---------------------------------------------------- > This message has been processed by Firetrust Benign. _______________________________________________ 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
