Cluffy

When Leeds City FC broke the rules against paying players during World War 1, the club were deleted out of existence. When #LUFC overspent in the late 1990s/early 2000s, Leeds had to sell their best players for peanuts and were docked 25 point on their way to League One. Today, according to the independent commission, Manchester City have been found to have artificially inflated their revenue by approximately £900 million, all while conspiring to cover their tracks and stop the investigation. This sort of financial obfuscation implies that they knew the rules down to the penny, conspiring to break those rules with mathematical precision. How do you find a punishment fit for that level of financial cheating? The legal repercussions are serious too. When Burnley sued Everton and won a £35.1 million payout - that set a legal precedent. Manchester City and their rivals for the years between 2009-2018, will likely be locked in legal battles for years to come. Or City’s rivals may choose to join together in a group litigation order. Should Manchester City’s appeal fail, we will likely see one of the largest punishments ever issued to a football club in the modern era. But it will undoubtedly stop short of the archaic measure employed by the English Football League in 1919, of expunging Leeds City Football Club out of existence. And the punishment may not even keep Manchester City out of the Premier League for as long as #LUFC were absent during the early 2000s. But it is difficult to imagine how Manchester City’s honours won during those years be allowed to stand, given the extent of the financial cheating found by the commission. And given their conduct during the investigation, expulsion from the League would be extremely likely, as a points deduction may not be seen to be enough. The details of the crimes as laid out by the commission are staggering. The punishment should be just as staggering.

I’ve been impressed by Sebastian Bornauw this preseason when he has played in the central role of the back three. But as Daniel Farke intimated - Bornauw wants to go. Now reported by Florian Plettenberg, #LUFC have agreed personal terms with Bornauw’s replacement - Swiss 29-year-old centre-back Nico Elvedi. Elvedi impressed at the World Cup this summer and if a deal can be struck with Borussia Mönchengladbach then he will bring a wealth of experience and quality in depth at the heart of Leeds’ defence. Bornauw is a target for Hamburger SV who are hoping to secure a loan with a buy option for the Belgian who never seemed settled at Leeds (until ironically this preseason). Elvedi is an improvement on Bornauw albeit with a shorter shelf life. Nico is a very reliable performer and will be stronger competition for #LUFC’s starters. This would be another move that raises the floor of the group. Elvedi will add real quality and experience to the squad. But it is a shame that at the moment Bornauw has begun to shine in a Leeds shirt, he is set to depart.

Tarik Muharemovic is a big upgrade in defence for #LUFC. An extremely solid defender with the potential to improve. Muharemovic was one of the outstanding defensive contributors in Serie A last season. A product of Wolfsberger AC and Juve’s Next Gen reserves, the Bosnian is a left-footed centre-back and the ideal replacement for Pascal Struijk. Leeds will pay Sassuoulo around £34m, making him the 2nd most expensive player in #LUFC’s history. The defender was playing in the newly promoted Italian side last season and had his work cut out for him but made the step up impressively well. He reads the game excellently and is great at anticipating plays and making interceptions and tackles. Tarik is very strong in the air and with aerial duels, he is also solid on the ball. At 23 he is younger than the profile Leeds stuck to last summer, but his potential is reflected in his price tag. A really exciting and excellent replacement for Pascal Struijk. Great business for #LUFC. Below you can see some stats from his season as well as one of his better performances in the run in - a 2-0 win over AC Milan where he had the most defensive contributions of the game - a key feature of his season too.

When an #LUFC employee was found on a public footpath outside Derby’s training ground, the ‘spygate’ scandal was the main football story for weeks. Leeds’ manager at the time - Marcelo Bielsa - was accused of not respecting English customs and culture. One after another, pundits came out against Marcelo, from TalkSport to Sky to the papers. Aware of the enormous backlash, Bielsa called an impromptu press conference. Some people thought he might be resigning, or that he was sacked - such was the furore in the media that had been whipped up against him. Instead, he admitted that Leeds had spied on every opponent that season; and then went on to give a PowerPoint presentation on all the information he had gathered on Frank Lampard’s Derby County. There was no specific rule Leeds broke so the EFL fined Leeds £200,000 for a crime against the spirit of the game. The spirit of football can be found - in case you’re wondering - tucked neatly under the layers of agents, betting sponsorships, state-funded sports-washing and dynamic priced tourist tickets. Bielsa payed the fine himself. The EFL subsequently brought in an ‘anti-espionage’ rule to stop clubs watching opponents train 72 hours before games. Now that Middlesbrough have reportedly contacted the EFL after finding a Southampton spy watching them train ahead of the playoff semi-final, I look forward to the backlash. I wonder if Southampton will face the same scrutiny and criticism that #LUFC and Bielsa did? I wonder if Southampton will be fined, and if they are fined, I wonder if their manager Tonda Eckert would pay it himself? The spygate scandal is unique no longer, but I doubt it will be the same.

I’m rewatching the #LUFC game. Kilman’s foul on Stach is ridiculous. The ‘he got his shot away’ so the defender is at liberty to hit him (in this case with such reckless force that it causes ligament damage) - is one of the worst myths in football. VAR deemed it a ‘natural coming together’. Ally McCoist said: “I’m happy that’s not been given a foul”. Literally 5 minutes later, Lukas Nmecha dives in to try and tackle Disasi. Disasi ‘got his pass away.’ Nmecha didn’t actually touch him unlike the foul on Stach. Ally McCoist: “He’s definitely late, I wasn’t sure he caught him.. no he doesn’t catch him, but that’s not to say he doesn’t fall awkwardly or land awkwardly.” VAR called it a reckless challenge. Result Nmecha got a yellow card - Disasi totally fine obviously because he wasn’t actually touched, and didn’t fall awkwardly. So - if it’s in the outfield and a pass and you get your pass away - then get tackled - even if it’s not actually bad - it’s a yellow card. But if it’s in the penalty box - and you get your shot away - then it’s a ‘natural coming together’ - even if you get injured by your opponent. That is the very definition of inconsistent. And it doesn’t help when the analyst is parroting a myth that has permeated football. Stach’s ankle was caught in between Kilman’s legs - that’s how Struijk broke Harvey Elliot’s ankle a couple of seasons back. Kilman slid in with excessive speed and force with a disregard for the safety of Stach - the very description of a reckless challenge - endangering an opponent. It should not matter whether a shot or pass had been completed. It should not matter whether it is outside the box or in the box. It absolutely should matter if there was any actual contact or not. In one case a guy has ligament damage the extent of which we do not know but it could be season ending - you can’t tell without a scan. In another case the player was not touched at all - but gets an Oscar nomination for exceptional acting in a supporting role. This is why 75% of fans hate VAR. It’s not because referees don’t need more help - they do. It’s because consistent rationale and logic isn’t being applied, while myths are being perpetuated- and it doesn’t help when respected media figures with massive platforms are helping to spread the myth (VAR have the broadcast feed as well as their own footage).

In 2019 #LUFC’s then manager Marcelo Bielsa sent a scout to watch Derby train ahead of their upcoming fixture. The scout stood on a public footpath and took a few notes. The modern equivalent of a dark ages witch hunt followed, spurred on by hyperbolic pundits. Keith Andrews accused Bielsa of not giving a damn and not adapting to the culture of England. In fact, Bielsa explained in a 45 minute impromptu press conference that he cared too much. In the extraordinary presser, Bielsa broke down a tactical analysis of Derby - showing that he had amassed such an unprecedented amount of information and statistics on them - that the training session the scout watched could give him no extra information that he didn’t already have. Bielsa explained that he sent the scout anyway because if he didn’t do everything he possibly could - within the rules - to help Leeds win, then he would feel irreconcilable guilt. And after spy gate had been investigated by the EFL - and Leeds were found to be in breach of the “spirit of the game” and fined £250,000 - Bielsa refused to let #LUFC pay and instead paid it out of his own pocket. What was that Keith Andrews said about Bielsa not giving a damn and lacking respect? Today, the ‘spirit of the game’ has never felt less vague. Was it in ‘the spirit of the game’ to drag Bielsa’s name through dirt on every show throughout the spy gate scandal? And where is the ‘spirit of the game’ now, with football club-owners-cum-charlatans taking fans for a ride on their get-rich-quick schemes of stripping a community’s cherished possession of its assets and selling to the highest bidder? Where is the spirit of the game in agent payments and state-funded sports-washing? Or in the ceaseless betting advertisements that ruin lives? Or Man City’s 115 charges and the PSR hypocrisy that fails to create a level playing field - PSRs sole reason for existence? Is VAR in the spirit of the game? Is making away supporters travel 100s of miles at midnight in the spirit of the game? I’m not sure I have ever seen, I’m not sure I’ll ever likely see, a more erroneous use of the term and law being applied to punish a club. Those few weeks in 2019 were bizarre. The media made an avalanche out of a snowflake and pundits and wannabe coaches got paid to lambast Bielsa from the rafters. And after hearing about how Marcelo has revolutionised the game wherever he went and was idolised by the world’s best coaches. And after seeing Leeds United become “everyone’s second team (for the first time in the club’s existence)”- these pundits and analysts finally had a reason to tear Bielsa down off that pedestal and they did so with relish. They talked of Bielsa in the scathing tones usually only reserved for war criminals. Yet his only crime was that he sent someone to stand on a public footpath and watch a football team train because if he didn’t he’d feel guilty. It was a ridiculous moment for the culture and the irony was compounded when Leeds and Bielsa won the FIFA Fair Play Award for letting Aston Villa score a goal in another bizarre story for another time. If anyone embodies ‘the spirit of the game’ it is Marcelo Bielsa - or at least, football would be lucky to embody his spirit. The Argentine will be back in the country this month as his Uruguay side play England. Tonight, Keith Andrews returns to Elland Road as manager of Brentford. A timely reminder of what Andrews’ said about Bielsa during spy gate ⤵️

When the break for Ramadan was apparently booed by #LUFC fans during their game against Man City last Saturday evening - there were some very prominent voices who were asserting that, essentially, Leeds’ fans were all racist. When a few people tried to explain that the booing was not necessarily about Ramadan; and was likely due to: Pep’s tactical team talks, the lack of communication about why the game was stopped, the lack of visibility of the messaging on the board etc - Leeds fans were accused of making excuses. There was a break for Ramadan in the game today. Of the thousands of people standing around me there were perhaps a handful who tried to boo and quietened when there was no one joining in. Instead Leeds fans were singing: “We are the champions, Champions of Europe” - a song sung regularly since the 1975 European Cup Final injustice in Paris. I don’t imagine there will be many - or any - prominent voices that will now correct the narrative. It is much more interesting for some people to call fans of a club they (presumably) hate - racist, than it is to listen, and to express nuance - characteristics incidentally, which can cure people of racist ideologies. #LUFC and the city of Leeds has a proud history of anti-racism. 30,000 Leeds residents met Oswald Mosley on Holbeck Moor and kicked the British Union of Fascists out of the city in the 1930s. When Albert Johannasson was verbally abused by opponents in the 1960s, Billy Bremner would take retribution with his studs by very literally kicking racism out of football. And in the 1980s the National Front were expelled from Elland Road by a campaign led by #LUFC fan groups and fanzines. Leeds United does not have a racist fan base, there are racists everywhere. But it certainly is popular to call them so, while ignoring the nuance, circumstances and history.