Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Discussion on LUFC and absolutely anything... welcome to the Dark Side
Clacton white
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 8:19 am

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Clacton white » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:32 am

thestraw wrote:
Yeboah wrote:Legalities aside, just because you can do something doesn't mean you should..... competitively.

You – and the other 11 EFL clubs - are implying that Bielsa is doing something totally out of the norm. You don’t honestly think that we are the only club doing this, do you? If its not against the rules, then the rule makers need to make it so. Simple.

I think it would be very stupid and naïve to think LUFC are the only club here that has done this . Only one caught maybe , but almost certainly not the only club at it , guessing a lot of those complaining may be at it too , just complaining so no one thinks they are at it . Anyway , EFL should say nothing wrong with it and any club can do it as long as it isn't breaking in or criminal damage , but if a club trains in the open for all and sundry to see ( ie next to or near public ground in unenclosed area ) , then not a problem . I think mountains made out of molehills here . I don't have a problem with it and if clubs are stupid enough to train in the open , not behind closed doors etc ..... then its their own fault .

User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby eric olthwaite » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:33 am

dirty leeds wrote:So what do we think about, say, slipping a nearby householder a tenner or two to stand in his garden and watch?
What about slipping something to an employee of the club concerned to turn a blind eye?
Or pretending to be, say, filming it for the home team gaffer?

Not saying any of the above happened, just speculating as to what might be considered just about OK because there is no specific rule against, and what might be thought of us clearly beyond the bounds and deserving of sanction.
Like I said before, some people might see climbing a nearby tree for a better look kind of amusing rather than seriously wrong.


This is a completely speculative observation, but I would suggest that there is a fundamental contradiction between Bielsa’s apparently obsessive tell the truth / straight down the line manner we’ve seen in all things to date, and any kind of ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ skulduggery.

User avatar
Rambo the randy pig
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2008 10:24 am
Location: Makin bacon

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Rambo the randy pig » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:40 am

I actually have a massive problem with the inclusion of the term "Good faith" within the context of the FL rules (3.4).

I can understand the intent of the rule drafters to include a "Catch all" to prevent the sort of cheating that would undermine the entire spirit of the game but I tend to think that introducing the doctrine of good faith was likely to cause, as it is now causing, more trouble in the event of an alleged breach than the wrong to was seeking to prevent.

I have to say that my experience with good faith is in a contractual sense. It is written into contracts as an expression that the parties will act in an honest and forthright manner within the performance of the contract. Of course a properly worded contract shouldn't need this however a "catch all" clause is always useful for either party to claim a breach of the contact but in many cases is left to interpretation as to what a breach of good faith could be. It is somewhat easy in a contractual sense as interpretation can be assisted by the specifics of the contract.

It could be said that the FL rules form part of the contract under which clubs play within their competition. All clubs subscribe to those rules so is there anything else within those rules that would assist in the interpretation of good faith.

The FL have referred to 21.2.1 whereby clubs undertake not to bring the League or any club into disrepute. Not much help there in interpretation as again what would bring the League or any Club into disrepute is open to interpretation. I believe the FL is looking at whether we have contravened 21.2.1, I think that we could be said to have brought the League into disrepute by the amount of press coverage but that charge, in my opinion, hangs on whether we have breached the good faith principle. If we've done nothing wrong then no amount of negative press coverage of the FL can be laid at our door. It's merely the desire for sensationalism within the media. I believe, therefore, that any breach on 21.2.1 hangs on any breach of 3.4

Regulation 3 deals with membership of the League. I won't repeat any of it here suffice to say that nothing within that regulation assists in the interpretation of good faith. There is a specific rule against belittling other clubs or disclosing financial information about other clubs. If I were looking at regulation 3.4 outside of the current situation I would tend to interpret it as not dealing with other clubs in a genuine manner to the belittlement or detriment of the game or to take a deliberate action tot he detriment of another club.

So we are back to a definition of good faith. Generally dealing with another party in an honest, fair and forthright manner. How do we interpret good faith in a sporting situation. Is it easier to look at examples of bad faith. Turning off the heating/hot water in the opposition dressing room is the one that immediately springs to mind but almost every action by a team or manager before and during the course of a game that seeks to take advantage of a situation to the detriment of the opponent would be a breach of good faith. All gamesmanship by a manager who seeks a tactical advantage is dishonest at it's heart. Signalling to a player to pretend he's injured to waste time or carry instructions on to the pitch - clearly a breach of good faith if we applying this definition.

I agree with Yeboah that the FL can't define each and every wrong that a club could do hence a catch all clause but a catch all with such a wide definition? Is a breach of good faith the same as cheating? Cheating would certainly be an example of a breach of good faith but probably not the only one. As such every club probably breaches 3.4 every game.

Have we overstepped the boundary of the doctrine of good faith. I think not. If it's correct that an club employee has watched training session from public land have the club been dishonest. No. Is it unfair. No. Anyone else could have done it. Any club could seek to do the same if possible. The fact that some clubs have more secure facilities doesn't equate to fairness. Have we sought an advantage. Yes. If such an advantage was sought by underhand means then I would say it was a breach of good faith. Infiltrating the training ground would be such a breach. There is no suggestion this has been done although the other clubs' letter to the FL suggests this is what they are looking for evidence of.

Our actions were not to the detriment of any other club save as a means to assist in winning a football match.

I would submit we have sought an advantage but not through any unfair or underhand means and therefore have not failed to act in good faith to other club and have breached regulation 3.4. Accordingly for the reasons stated before we have not breached regulation 21.2.1 either.

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:41 am

eric olthwaite wrote:This is a completely speculative observation, but I would suggest that there is a fundamental contradiction between Bielsa’s apparently obsessive tell the truth / straight down the line manner we’ve seen in all things to date, and any kind of ‘nudge nudge wink wink’ skulduggery.



Yeah, I say so too. It would seem out of character, which is why it would surprise me if anything like that came out.

Be nice if someone picked up Lampard for his 'pliers' stuff, if it is also came out that this was just made up by some Derby staffer and simply repeated by the manager. [My guess is it'll be glossed over.]

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Thu Jan 24, 2019 11:53 am

Pre-Rotherham press conference today, at 1pm

User avatar
metalsmurf
Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2008 10:08 am
Location: Littleborough, Gtr Scumland

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby metalsmurf » Thu Jan 24, 2019 12:07 pm

Yeboah wrote:
Blackwhite wrote:Are you sure you're Leeds? :mrgreen:


Yep, unlike most Leeds fans I can appreciate other clubs/players/managers that have had massively successful careers.

So I'm Leeds, just not 'typical knobhead' Leeds.

Have you seen this shit FFS!
https://fanbanter.co.uk/police-aware-of ... 7Ld398wMI4
Because a thing seems difficult for you, do not think it impossible for anyone to accomplish.

User avatar
Oheddieeddie
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Location: Tacky with sweat and poisonous particulates.

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Oheddieeddie » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:03 am

Shaun Harvey coming on talksport soon on spygate

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:24 am

Oheddieeddie wrote:Shaun Harvey coming on talksport soon on spygate



He shouldn't really be doing this.

User avatar
Mustafaster
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:02 am
Location: PC Brigade House.

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Mustafaster » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:29 am

Oheddieeddie wrote:Shaun Harvey coming on talksport soon on spygate

Da Fuck!??!!! :shock:
Mirrors and copulation are abominable, since they both multiply the numbers of men.

User avatar
thestraw
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby thestraw » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:29 am

What is he saying?
#MOT #GAWA

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:31 am

From midday.

User avatar
thestraw
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby thestraw » Fri Jan 25, 2019 11:36 am

ah, i'll get my wireless ready
#MOT #GAWA

User avatar
kennyb41
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2017 7:10 am

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby kennyb41 » Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:10 pm

Talksport.

Nothing here Guvnor,find the right balance by talking to the clubs.

No rule,just naughty.
Just coz you're paranoid doesn't mean people aren't after you....Show me a good loser and i'll show you a fcking loser...I owe I owe it's off to work I go.

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:16 pm

Highlights...

Jim White introduced the Spygate discussion by saying our Derby watcher was not committing any offence.

Harvey just said the EFL have acknowledged the clubs' letter and still await a response from Leeds.
"Ultimately the rules of the EFL are decided by the clubs," and so if they want to change the rules, that could work, if supported.
"There is no specific rule that you cannot view another club's training session," but have Leeds broken the 'good faith' section, he asks?
He is sitting on the fence at the moment, he says, and looking into it.
Says he's against putting up an eight-foot fence round all the training pitches - that isn't a good idea.

Jim White trying to raise it a notch by claiming our watcher was skulking around in the bushes and "he shouldn't have been there."

Harvey: "The matter will be determined [on the evidence]."

White doing his best to get Harvey to say something exciting but he's batting it back with 'we'll let matters progress' comments. [There's nowt else he can say, is there?. White is coming over as a massive cunt.]
Harvey just saying they'll do it all as quickly as poss.

Nowt to see here, basically...

User avatar
thestraw
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby thestraw » Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:23 pm

Jim White looking a headline - he can get fucked.

This sums it up in a nutshell for me:
There is no specific rule that you cannot view another club's training session
Ultimately the rules of the EFL are decided by the clubs and so if they want to change the rules, that could work, if supported
#MOT #GAWA

User avatar
dirty leeds
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 12:13 pm
Location: London

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby dirty leeds » Fri Jan 25, 2019 12:26 pm

Amusingly, White tried to make out that Spygate was a bigger deal than the FFP stuff with Wolves last year. [On grounds that 11 clubs had written a letter.]
So something that doesn't even have a specific rule against it is more important in the 'breach' than the whole FFP regulations.
So desperate, that bloke.

User avatar
Oheddieeddie
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Location: Tacky with sweat and poisonous particulates.

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Oheddieeddie » Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:50 pm

Yeah listened. Dare I say it Harvey was actually quite encouraging...

saying some people thought it was an outrage where others thought good on you for doing everything you could to win.

Bob Mills and the other one (Ray Parlour?) were chipping away saying there's no rule broken so you can't do anything, whilst Jim White was being a massive wanker trying to sensationaliseit.

Bearing in mind That this is the sort of behaviour that Harvey (and Bates) would be proud of I think we're ok here

Take that to the bank

User avatar
Oheddieeddie
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:35 pm
Location: Tacky with sweat and poisonous particulates.

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Oheddieeddie » Fri Jan 25, 2019 4:52 pm

To add

That Bristol City wanker chairman was on talksport AGAIN today demanding points deduction

User avatar
eric olthwaite
Joined: Mon Feb 11, 2008 10:14 pm
Location: Over there, behind that bush

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby eric olthwaite » Fri Jan 25, 2019 6:33 pm

Your tweet of the day:


Mr Reality
Joined: Mon Apr 02, 2012 2:17 pm

Re: Watchers In The Woods v Cunty Frank's Derby Lampstands CK

Postby Mr Reality » Fri Jan 25, 2019 7:19 pm

Oheddieeddie wrote:To add

That Bristol City wanker chairman was on talksport AGAIN today demanding points deduction


Probably just enjoying the publicity. As nobody knows him.


Return to “The Square Ball”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: JimbobMaloney, Tycipa, Yeboah and 16 guests