onenorthernsoul wrote:But that's assuming he has the nerve and the arrogance to take the club to court. If he loses, and come on, he would lose, then he would have to pay it all out of his own pocket rather than use/abuse the club's finances. They've got him out and by legal means. I haven't listened to the interview so if anyone wants to say what any of the four charges are, please go ahead. Things that we KNOW he's guilty of are - insulting customers (as above), contravening Data Protection laws, libelling/slandering certain individuals, and claiming expenses such as the private jet... he ain't going to win any unfair dismissal case unless he has some dirty incriminating info on GFH.
Not wanting to be seen pro Bates at all (so please don't throw that at me again) but just on that point we need to be careful. It is entirely possible that what Bates said in the interview is correct ie that GFH picked it up in their due dilligence and knew he was claiming it. If so and if it was explicitly agreed he could do that in the Sale Agreement (which Bates also implied it was in the interview) then there is at least a case for trying to claim GFH had agreed it could continue into the future. I'm just trying to suggest that that particular "guilt" as you put it is not so clear cut as might first be thought. That does not mean I I think he should have gone and renewed the contract without obtaining board approval - that in my book is wholly unacceptabe. And I also believe it totally unjustifiable. I'm Just putting the case that if Bates went legal on that aspect alone it is not clear cut.
Incidentally, I do agree that this is one of the worst things he has been involved in and does suggest he doesn't give two hoots about the club - but that still doesn't make me agree that everything he did was to the disadvantage of the club. I still feel that some of what he brought about in terms of improvement in the ground was both necessary and useful. As a human being he does himself no favours at all though. Just remember he is a cagey businessman though who has a habit of coming out on top more often than not.
Morphoolu wrote:Mmm - just listened to the radio interview - cheers to +15 as ever.
I wonder whether my "witch is dead" comment may prove to be a little premature. I think this particular individual will have a very long sting in a very long tail - we could end up being mired in legal nonsense that undermines the ability of our club to get on with the future more than ever...
You have to wonder whether GFH handled this very well but regardless of that, we are where we are... it's still better to support the players and the club and let the power mongers get on with their games and petty BS.
Can't argue with that sentiment at all. My heart sank when this latest thing broke - i had thought like you on Friday night we could all forget Bates and get on with the team and the football but now I too think we will still be hearing about this issue and whatever the other three things are for months if not years. And you do wonder if that will concern anyone out there who was considering coming in with GFH
In my opinion, It's not the flight expenses charge that is of interest. It's the other three charges which he isn't prepared to discuss! The misuse of his position as a director might be debated, but, as he has chosen not to reveal what the other "alleged misdemeanors" were, my gut instinct is that he is on sticky ground. Even if he were to win a court case and damages, the cost of that is small when compared with the benefit of additional fan support and the club and its fanbase marching on together for the first time in 10 years.
I am not worried over any extended legal wrangling as any potential investor worth their salt will have assessed any financial implications. If he never took a wage give him 3 years salary, 3 x £0 is ....
The outlook of the club is what will be looked at. If we do beat the 30K mark on Saturday and can increase our average attendance and continue to strengthen the squad to become a play-off regulars investors won't be put off as GFH seem to be wanting to keep the club finances transparent.
I can not see this been over and done with quickly Bates will drag it out and try to tarnish the clubs name in order to get a one up and cover his own rear, that been said Kenneth you are a very sneakret little man and i would be careful about running your business through the British courts we dont know what just might crop up
At the end of the road lets look at it this way, a lot of potential investers wouldnt even take a look at us whilst Bates was still in and about the club so personally i can only aplaud GFH for doing what i believe is the right thing to do and clear out all of the bates regime and get rid of this bitter tase that has been going around the club the past few seasons.
I do agree with some of the points dlw10 had to say especially in terms with the grounds imporvements etc but that cannot over take the lows that he has done within the club also.
Football is my religion and Elland Road is my church.
Yawn, ground improvements meaning lots of lovely and unfilled boxes and seats, all at the expense of the team quality. He always said that corporate gets the real money in - so how come there is the £17m 'hole' Ken? - but actually, I would argue with anyone that success on the pitch brings more in, long term too.
I hope I'm not wrong but I just cannot see Bates taking something to court when he will have to fund it himself.
Bates taking someone/body to court shocker... this is obviously all what this man lives for. I can't see it happening personally, not when (as ONS says) it will have to come out of his pocket.
I don't think you need to be a Leeds fan to appreciate the hypocrisy and unreliability of the things that Bates has been going to the media with since being sacked. Points the finger at Salem Patel for having power of decision, to deflect blame for things as far as last summer, claims GFH should invest massively ("they claim to have hundreds of millions" - no, they never have)m, says they couldn't pay wages, is all about how he'll get everything out in the open, but then doesn't want to name all the 4 charges. Pot, kettle, and delusion, and whenever you see someone to go such extremes and make exaggerated points, you have to think there isn't actually much substance behind it all.
I don't think it will come to anything, and I don't think GFH have gone about it on a whim and without legal advice. On the contrary, I think every step they've made so far has been considered and taken after looking at the bigger picture and taking advice in places. The dismissal of Bates has come not long after making Paul Hunt's position official, which might not be a coincidence. Bates will get bored eventually, and without any power people will be less interested in him and what he has to say.
