Ken Bates Article

Yes we are cas, but we are not the owners, for us its not a choice, its in the blood!! Owners should be seen and not heard, thats the managers job but Uncle Ken has always been outspoken, so I suppose he is not going to change now!!

As 666 states, MM tends to keep in the background and appoints football people to do the day to day running of the club. This is what he has done with us by bringing in 3 or 4 board directors to run the club. Sure its his money and him making the ultimate decision but he rarely says anything in public.

So an owner who is a football fan should be quiet, just because he is an owner. Why? Surely he has the right to freedom of speach.

comment by CasWhite (U8740)

"All football owners have murky pasts if we dig deep enough"

With due respect that is a silly comment.

For Mr. Bates, one can use one's bare hands, no shovel needed.

Jonny and you say my comment is silly then say can use bare hands.

Good play on words J.L.A

I'm just wondering if Pappy Smurf will be getting any royalties from the new film.....and whether or not he'll declare them!

comment by CasWhite (U8740) posted 11 minutes ago

Jonny and you say my comment is silly then say can use bare hands.

So what's your point? I used a metaphor. Is that bad?

Would it be better for you if I said, "Indeed old chap, Cas, we all have done some things that may not be quite appropriate but what Mr. Bates is alleged/proven to have done is easier to find and is much more openly available than others?"

Thanks DRY.

This wasn't intended to provoke a 'our owner is worse than yours' debate. I genuinely feel sorry for Leeds fans that they have to tolerate this vile individual as their owner.

If I was a Leeds supporter, I think I'd only go to away games; have any Leeds fans considered boycotting them at home? They seem to get decent crowds.

Taking a step back from it all, the whole situation seems utterly ridiculous: a football club owned via a maze of holding companies, all registered in offshore tax havens. And all of a sudden, when the Premier League raise their eyebrows, Bates steps forward as the owner and they mystery is unravelled. What a coincidence. The only thing this geezer respects is money, shame his accumulation of it seems to always mean his investors losing their's.

U10727, well observed, Bates is not good for Leeds.

comment by CasWhite (U8740)

"So an owner who is a football fan should be quiet, just because he is an owner. Why? Surely he has the right to freedom of speach."

A certain standard of behaviour is expected, appropriately so, of all people. Chairmen, along with other leaders in the community have a higher standard that is expected in society. If one does not want to be part of society then I guess anything goes is quite alright.

As to freedom of speech - there are certain responsibilities that come along with freedoms. Freedom of speech does not equal the freedom to say anything one wants to say. At its most base level (and I suggest the intent of teh original concept), freedom of speech is about citizens being able to speak freely and critically about government and leadership - something the Bates defenders are very much opposed to.