Leek v Lincoln

[RobYeltz]

I agree that it is totally unjust that the League sees fit, under their rules of course, that the two matters are considered as one. Raiden is entitled to his views and, as has been pointed out, he is not alone.
It is very convenient to hide behind a rule book to justify what, to most other interested parties, is blatantly unfair.
I accept that no appeal or continued complaining will make one iota of difference, but I wish to support the views of those who think that the decision stinks.
I fail to see how any questioning over the decision defines Yeltz supporters as "whingers" when we are not alone in our views.

Respectfully

A pi**ed of Lutters

And if the boot was on the other foot I know exactly what you and the other "whingers" would be saying.

You said it yourself, above, the league dealt with it according to their rules. How else would you expect it to be dealt with!!!?

What a bunch of sour grapes.

I've read somewhere that the Chairman (or someone in authority at Leek) is also on the board of the league. I'm not sure of how accurate that information is, but it might explain why they certainly might not have been made an example of if true.

[Colin Bobble]

But, the boot isn't on the other foot, is it?
I feel that an injustice has been done and that's it - stuff what you presume to know!

And while you squabble over the spoils, don't forget the real losers, will you?

Is Lord Lutley and his subjects' definition of an injustice - Anything that doesn't suit them and their selfish interests.

[Colin Bobble]

I've read somewhere that the Chairman (or someone in authority at Leek) is also on the board of the league. I'm not sure of how accurate that information is, but it might explain why they certainly might not have been made an example of if true.

Well you would have wouldn't you but if you hadn't you could just make it up.

It's so unfair boo hoo hoo

Get a life and grow up.

[RobYeltz]

I've read somewhere that the Chairman (or someone in authority at Leek) is also on the board of the league. I'm not sure of how accurate that information is, but it might explain why they certainly might not have been made an example of if true.

Well you would have wouldn't you but if you hadn't you could just make it up.

It's so unfair boo hoo hoo

Get a life and grow up.

This a discussion board, of which I'm contributing to. The comment I made was referring to what I read online, and was hoping others who know more than I might be able to confirm or deny it's accuracy. Once again though you feel the need to throw a childish comment around purely and simply because you don't agree with it or see my name and feel the need to respond. I would suggest that it is indeed you that needs to 'grow up'.

[Colin Bobble]

This a discussion board, of which I'm contributing to. The comment I made was referring to what I read online, and was hoping others who know more than I might be able to confirm or deny it's accuracy. Once again though you feel the need to throw a childish comment around purely and simply because you don't agree with it or see my name and feel the need to respond. I would suggest that it is indeed you that needs to 'grow up'.

Strange, I've read and re-read your post and it seems to me just an extension of the interminable whinging argument, trying to establish some credibility using the suggestion of some conspiracy theory now. Previous arguments seem to be based on 'it is really unfair because some other people think so too (especially those that would gain from it)'.

Well it's the leagues rules, they implement them, they seek to be fair to everybody by them and if you and your mates can't grasp that, then you need therapy.

Yours helpfully,

CB

[RobYeltz]

This a discussion board, of which I'm contributing to. The comment I made was referring to what I read online, and was hoping others who know more than I might be able to confirm or deny it's accuracy. Once again though you feel the need to throw a childish comment around purely and simply because you don't agree with it or see my name and feel the need to respond. I would suggest that it is indeed you that needs to 'grow up'.

Strange, I've read and re-read your post and it seems to me just an extension of the interminable whinging argument, trying to establish some credibility using the suggestion of some conspiracy theory now. Previous arguments seem to be based on 'it is really unfair because some other people think so too (especially those that would gain from it)'.

Well it's the leagues rules, they implement them, they seek to be fair to everybody by them and if you and your mates can't grasp that, then you need therapy.

Yours helpfully,

CB

I do grasp it. I do understand the league rules. I do understand nothing will change. I'm only whinging in your eyes. The 'conspiracy theory' was merely put out there as a discussion point.
Maybe the only time you feel comfortable discussing is when you feel the need once again to throw an insult around.
So now you suggest I need therapy, (insult number 2 in a thread where I need to 'get a life and grow up).

Keep typing away...

[andy]

Ding, ding. Round two.

[KenR]

As an aside and as a pause to old Bobble "ploughing" out insults, I seem to recall that we ourselves were denied an appearance in the Staffs Senior Cup Final , after we had played an unregistered player or one that had n't been registered on time or something (LLL will no doubt put me straight if he can breakaway from his birthday celebrations) , in the semi-final against Sutton Coldfield who after we had beaten them, appealed and went through to the final. Our reaction was to drop of the future Staffs Senior Cup competitions in protest.

Must be worth a 'George' , Westy, for the longest sentence ever on the forum.

[Stansby]

I personally think this is a good debate.

I also agree that, ALTHOUGH the league have followed the rules, it does seem that leek have gotten away with it.

However, I think, instead of focusing on leeks good fortune/luck, we should be concentrating on the reason why they can't have their 3 points deducted.

The reason being Eastwood Town have gone bust. Their fans of which are the real victims of this scenario.

[old git]

As an aside and as a pause to old Bobble "ploughing" out insults, I seem to recall that we ourselves were denied an appearance in the Staffs Senior Cup Final , after we had played an unregistered player or one that had n't been registered on time or something (LLL will no doubt put me straight if he can breakaway from his birthday celebrations) , in the semi-final against Sutton Coldfield who after we had beaten them, appealed and went through to the final. Our reaction was to drop of the future Staffs Senior Cup competitions in protest.

Must be worth a 'George' , Westy, for the longest sentence ever on the forum.

correct Kenneth...it was the keeper who had already played for Kiddy in a previous round and 'forgot' ... think it was Steadman....we resigned after that not so much out of protest but because it was a crap cup