Woe for Bates is boost for Carlisle

May 2 2008 by Stuart Rayner, The Journal

CARLISLE United’s slim hopes of automatic promotion to the Championship remain alive after an independent tribunal rejected Leeds United’s appeal against a 15-point deduction.

The Whites failed to convince a three-man panel that the Football League had acted unfairly in imposing the punishment for breaking competition rules on insolvency. Had they been given all 15 points back, they would have been automatically promoted from League One.

As it stands, the Cumbrians can still achieve that feat, but only if they beat Bournemouth on Saturday and Doncaster Rovers and Nottingham Forest fail to beat Cheltenham Town and Yeovil Town respectively. Leeds are certain to feature in the play-offs, along with Southend United.

While relieved his team’s automatic promotion hopes remain alive, Carlisle boss John Ward was critical of the Football League for taking so long to resolve the matter.

But inevitably, his criticism was nothing compared to that of Leeds chairman Ken Bates, who has reluctantly accepted the decision.

“This has been hanging over us for far too long,” said Ward. “The Football League will have a lot of questions to ask about their procedures as a result of this case. I haven’t got a problem with Leeds, I’m just annoyed it’s taken until May for the situation to be resolved. We had the rules at the beginning of the season and they have suddenly been changed at the end. They have to ask themselves how this has been allowed to happen.”

Bates accused the League of having a vested interest in the decision, and called on its chairman Lord Mawhinney to resign.

“No matter how gentlemanly they put it, the tribunal has criticised the appeals procedures of the Football League,” was Bates’ verdict. “We had to appeal to the other clubs, all of whom had a vested interest and many of them have admitted they voted for the 15 points (deduction), not because it was right or wrong, but because it served their own selfish interests.

“I think in the circumstances and in view of the criticism of the bad flaws in the Football League’s procedures, the directors of the Football League board should consider their position and Lord Mawhinney should resign.

“We’ve got to win the play-offs and get back in the Championship, but to have ‘an exciting and thorough football family’ you have to have leaders you can trust and respect and I’m afraid that is no longer the case as far as Leeds and as far as many other clubs, who haven’t got the guts to say so.”

The tribunal criticised Leeds for taking so long to appeal a punishment levied in pre-season, something former Chelsea and Oldham chairman Bates rejected.

“We feel this finding is unjust as the club sought to oppose the imposition of the penalty from August 30, 2007, onwards,” read a Leeds statement. “We did accept the imposed condition of a 15-point penalty subject to an appeal to member clubs.

“As at August 3, 2007, we had no option but to do so. If we had not the club would have been lost forever, which was far too big a price for anyone to pay. It is galling therefore that we are criticised for the delay in bringing the appeal when it was delays by the Football League that effectively backed us into this corner in the first place. The matter is now closed and the focus can now return to the pitch.”

The deduction was imposed after Leeds failed to exit administration via a Company Voluntary Arrangement. Leeds went into administration 12 months ago with debts of around £35m.

A majority of more than 75% of fellow Football League clubs voted to uphold the sanction. The club agreed to arbitration after initially serving the Football League with a High Court writ.