Wymsey Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Leeds appoint Jesse Marsch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Manini Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 (edited) Missed a trick not doing an announcement video of him dressed as The Road Dog Jesse James and Radriazzini as X-PAC in my humble opinion. Edited 28 February 2022 by Manini 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AKCJ Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 (edited) Edit; wrong thread. Edited 28 February 2022 by AKCJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orangecity23 Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 16 minutes ago, Manini said: Missed a trick not doing an announcement video of him dressed as The Road Dog Jesse James and Radriazzini as X-PAC in my humble opinion. Waiting for the summer when they sign Bad Ass Angus Gunn from Norwich and form Leeds-Generation X, 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
urban.spaceman Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Chelsea situation's getting tastier. Chelsea trustees consider resigning as Roman Abramovich's hand-over plan threatens to descend into chaos Exclusive: At least two trustees have raised conflict-of-interest worries - plus the legal view on Abramovich's plan for the club Tom Cary 28 February 2022 • 7:36pm Sources close to the Chelsea foundation believe current plans are inappropriate Credit: PA Roman Abramovich's hand-over of Chelsea to a foundation is already facing chaos with trustees considering quitting and the Charity Commission launching inquiries. On an extraordinary day in which it was claimed Abramovich was in Belarus helping with Ukraine peace talks, his plans to pass on the "stewardship and care" of Chelsea hit stumbling blocks. The Russian-Israeli billionaire announced on Saturday that control would be handed to a group of six trustees, but at least two of them are raising concerns privately of being compromised. With the foundation also drawing scrutiny from the charity regulator, Chelsea are aware they may need to be open to the prospect of a potential rethink around the plans. As it stands, some members of the foundation believe the organisation is an inappropriate vehicle to run a football business. More talks will take place this week, following a meeting on Sunday, and there is recognition within Chelsea that the six trustees asked to run the club in Abramovich’s absence may not remain in place. Options open to Chelsea that will be considered if trustees stand down are to replace them, go ahead with a smaller group or change the plan entirely and find a new model for the running of the club. In the meantime, chairman Bruce Buck, who is one of the trustees, and other department heads will be responsible for the day-to-day control of Chelsea. Individual issues of conflict of interest have been voiced as well as wider worries over whether running a football club as part of the foundation could be compatible with charity law. To add potential complications, the move has attracted the attention of the Charity Commission. “We have contacted the charity seeking information and, in line with our guidance, the charity has also made a report to the Commission," the regulator said. "We cannot comment further at this time.” There was a meeting of trustees on Sunday and lawyers are now working on proposals for a potential structure that could be put before them. There is a view that they would not want to act or be seen as a front for Abramovich, although that was not raised as a point of concern in the first meeting. The charitable foundation is headed by Buck. Other trustees include John Devine, a partner at the law firm Muckle LLP, club director of finance Paul Ramos, women's head coach Emma Hayes, the executive director of anti-discrimination group Fare, Piara Powar, and the chairman of the British Olympic Association, Sir Hugh Robertson. Chelsea are adamant that no hard feelings will be held against any trustees who decide to stand down and, as an example, Hayes would be able to remain as women’s head coach if she decided against having a say in the running of the Blues. Chelsea's charitable trust is traditionally focused on delivering schemes in grass-roots football or events such as the International Holocaust Memorial Day Workshop and there was considerable surprise on Saturday at the sudden suggestion that trustees could now be running the football club. Abramovich had announced he was handing "stewardship and care" of Chelsea to the foundation in a move aimed to protect the club in the midst of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. But despite calls for him to be sanctioned over his links to Vladimir Putin, which he denies, he is now said to have answered a plea from Ukraine to help with negotiations with Russia. The Jerusalem Post claimed he is currently in Belarus helping. Abramovich's spokesperson, meanwhile, said: "I can confirm that Roman Abramovich was contacted by the Ukrainian side for support in achieving a peaceful resolution, and that he has been trying to help ever since. Considering what is at stake, we would ask for your understanding as to why we have not commented on neither the situation as such nor his involvement." A source independent of Abramovich and Chelsea insisted to The Telegraph that it was not a public-relations stunt aimed at improving his damaged reputation and that it comes through his strong connections in the international Jewish communities. However, Chris Bryant, the Labour MP who told Parliament Abramovich "should no longer" be Chelsea owner, and Colonel Richard Kemp, a former Afghanistan commander, expressed scepticism. "I suspect this shows he is quite worried about the sanctions," Kemp claimed to The Telegraph. "I suspect it's probably more of a PR thing for his own interests." Ukrainian film director and producer Alexander Rodnyansky, who is Jewish and lived in Russia, also confirmed Abramovich's involvement, insisting the Chelsea owner was the only person to respond to calls for help. Head coach Thomas Tuchel insisted after Sunday's Carabao Cup final penalty shoot-out loss to Liverpool that nothing would change in his role on a daily basis at Chelsea. The legal view: can Abramovich’s plan work? By Tom Cary Would Abramovich's proposal have just been window dressing? Almost certainly, according to Stephen Taylor Heath, Head of Sports Law at JMW Solicitors, who thinks it unlikely Abramovich would have ceded any meaningful control of the club. “In a legal context ‘stewardship’ means no more than the job of supervising or taking care of something,” he says. “In other words the job of ‘caretaker’. If you were to give somebody ‘stewardship’ of your home because you were going abroad you would be somewhat affronted if on your return the caretaker sought to claim ownership of your home.” There would also have been an investigation into whether Abramovich had stepped back. “If the Government was considering sanctions against Abramovich they would be obtaining legal opinion on its true meaning to establish whether or not in fact it was merely a PR exercise,” he says. “In applying the owners and directors test (OADT) the Football Association and Premier League have always been anxious to establish who is in actual control of a football club when presented with a separate legal entity as the proposed owners. The most recent example of this is in relation to the takeover of Newcastle United when the Premier League sought to establish whether the Public Investment Fund of Saudi Arabia (PIF) were in actual control. “Should the Government decree that Abramovich should not be in control of the club the Premier League would immediately have had to analyse whether ownership of the club had in fact been transferred to the Trust.” Would it have protected Chelsea in the case that Abramovich’s assets are seized or he is forced to relinquish ownership? “As I say, I don’t know his exact financial arrangements,” Taylor Heath says. “But from a legal point of view, just simply saying somebody has stewardship wouldn't really change anything. From a Premier League point of view, as far as the OADT is concerned, and from the Government’s point of view, it wouldn't make any difference. If the government were to put him on the list of oligarchs whose assets are to be seized, I don't think that statement alone would make any difference.” Would it have put some of the trustees in a difficult position? “One of the definitions of a Trust is obviously that it's effectively not for profit, and it has to make altruistic decisions, rather than purely commercial decisions," says Taylor Heath. "And they might think that is at odds with somebody who's owning the club for a profit.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StanSP Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Leeds Marsching on Together? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fazzer 7 Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Leeds new manager bounce just in time for Saturday 🤦🏼♂️😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomek Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 (edited) I don’t think they need a manager bounce to beat us. Edited 28 February 2022 by Tomek 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CosbehFox Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 The EV’s situation about to get interesting too. EU have put Usmanov on their sanction list. UK likely to follow suit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_horns Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Fair to say this new guy at Leeds will have to make a quick start. Leeds fan just been on 5live saying the fans will be singing about Bielsa at games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, Cardiff_Fox said: The EV’s situation about to get interesting too. EU have put Usmanov on their sanction list. UK likely to follow suit Mashiri is the front man at Everton usmanov’s money is only officially in as company sponsorship of the club ….. Edited 28 February 2022 by st albans fox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashing-Pumpkin Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 45 minutes ago, Super_horns said: Fair to say this new guy at Leeds will have to make a quick start. Leeds fan just been on 5live saying the fans will be singing about Bielsa at games. Theyll soon get over it if they start to win games. And if they dont theyre most likely just thick anyway. Players are probably relieved they can go back to more "normal" tactics instead of being ran ragged every game 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HybridFox Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Too bad they can't sign Dani Rojas to save them from relegation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grebfromgrebland Posted 28 February 2022 Share Posted 28 February 2022 Hope Chelsea are made to suffer. They bought their success in dramatic style but I'd love to see this as an end of their time at the top end of the table. If Germany can refuse the gas line we can sanction Chelsea. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FoxesWalk Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 Points per game table for this season is no better reading for us despite having so many games in hand: 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 12 hours ago, Fazzer 7 said: Leeds new manager bounce just in time for Saturday 🤦🏼♂️😂 Wait, do you mean that "new manager bounce" myth? I see WBA lost again last night. "New manager bounce" going well there, Bruce hasn't even won a game yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 42 minutes ago, Fox92 said: Wait, do you mean that "new manager bounce" myth? I see WBA lost again last night. "New manager bounce" going well there; Bruce hasn't even won a game yet. I am still shocked they thought Bruce was a good idea. Terrible decision. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 Just now, coolhandfox said: I am still shocked they thought Bruce was a good idea. Terrible decision. So did I tbf. They found it hard to score goals before he joined anyway but just shows that a new manager hasn't changed anything Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coolhandfox Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 15 minutes ago, Fox92 said: So did I tbf. They found it hard to score goals before he joined anyway but just shows that a new manager hasn't changed anything When I think free flowing attacking football old Brucey always comes to mind 😂😂😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
st albans fox Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 PGMOL has apologised to Everton. where is our apology ffs ?? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 5 minutes ago, st albans fox said: PGMOL has apologised to Everton. where is our apology ffs ?? Shame they can’t give them a point they deserve. Joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super_horns Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 Be a lot of teams asking for the same but guess some are less high profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
filbertway Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 2 hours ago, Fox92 said: Wait, do you mean that "new manager bounce" myth? I see WBA lost again last night. "New manager bounce" going well there, Bruce hasn't even won a game yet. To be fair that's because it's Steve Bruce, one of the worst managers in football. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox92 Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 14 minutes ago, filbertway said: To be fair that's because it's Steve Bruce, one of the worst managers in football. See also Sunderland, Barnsley and plenty of other sides. "New manager bounce" is just a myth 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smashing-Pumpkin Posted 1 March 2022 Share Posted 1 March 2022 54 minutes ago, Fox92 said: See also Sunderland, Barnsley and plenty of other sides. "New manager bounce" is just a myth I think in a number of situations, a new manager coming in does inspire an upturn in fortunes. More situations than not, a new manager does lift things for a short period. Numerous examples even at our club. Pearson gone, Ranieri comes in, we bounce and improve. Ranieri leaves, Shakespeare comes in, we bounce and improve. Shakespeare leaves, Puel comes in, we bounce and improve. Even if the manager isnt qualified enough or cant capitalise on that initial period, new managers do usually get something out of the squad. It usually just comes from everyone giving a few percent more effort for a short period of time. Its something that never lasts and usually the team will revert back to type, they have to because theyre only so good as they are. Obviously the Ranieri bounce was a mega bounce, then that becomes more of a discussion about when does it stop being bounce and more about lasting improvement created by the manager. The fact that Ranieri couldnt sustain it shows its more of a bounce effect, whereas arguably until recently Rodgers has had a sustained level of improvement that goes beyond bounce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts