Mark, Not sure of your motive here but I am going to dismiss everything you have written due to lack of evidence.
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >>At the very least this is a re-writing of > history.<< > > > Not at all. > > > >>Batty's troubles started way back with the arrival > of Venables. > The press reported Venables as saying that Batty > would not play > in his team. A fact later confirmed by Ridsdale who > said he supported > Venables decision. > > At the time a story circulating was that Venables > had slagged Batty off > for an England performance. (remember Venables and > Hill on TV?) > Batty took exception to this and "something" > occurred that "upset" > Venables who carried on with a vendetta.<< > > Quite possibly. But Venables was not involved at the > time I'm talking about. > > Venables left Batty out but Reid brought him back > into the team. It was > Eddie Gray who then decided not to pick Batty, and > told him to stay at home. This > was early 2004, in the season we were relegated from > the Prem. > > I don't know why this happened - Eddie said it was > for "footballing > reasons". The only "footballing reason" not to pick > Batty at that time was fitness; > Batty claimed he was match fit. > > So was the "footballing reasons" line a cover-up for > a personal falling out? > A deinal was issued by Batty. However there were > also media reports that > Batty was furious with EG and intened to "drain" > Leeds for the £500k he was owed. > > Immediately a number of non-prem clubs inquired > about Batty. These included > (definitely) Huddersfield and Notts Forest. Reports > said seven clubs wanted > him. Batty refused to contemplate a move and said he > would see out his > contract at Leeds - even though the manager (rightly > or wrongly) had told him he > would not be picked again. > > Remember this is the time when the financial > meltdown is really starting - > Birch is running the club and has negotiated the > "standstill" agreement. > > The fact remains that Batty could have helped the > financial situation at > that time but chose instead to dig in his heels at > Leeds. He had every right to > do so under his contract terms, but surely if he'd > been truly "through and > through" he would have put that to one side and gone > off to Forest on loan, > saving us some money (say 25% of £500k = £125k). > Side before self? Hmm... > > Unless he was really not fit, and couldn't have done > a job in the > Championship - something he denied at the time. > > It was a sad end to a great career, and one that > left a sour taste. > > > >>I had hoped Batty's book would give us the > "inside" but I suspect > that the publishers lawyers may have blacked it > out.<< > > > Doubt it. Batty's book was published in 2001 - the > fallout with Venables was > in 2002 and with Gray in 2004. > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > 6 in a bloody row! > ___________________________________________________________ Want ideas for reducing your carbon footprint? Visit Yahoo! For Good http://uk.promotions.yahoo.com/forgood/environment.html _______________________________________________ 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 6 in a bloody row!
