ok - what about accusing a player of deliberately leaking the team to Palace
before the game, saying that player would never play for Leeds again and
then........................nothing?
I used the term misinforming and as things stand in this example it is
accurate.
Mike Newell of course disputes Wise's version of events - are you saying
Newell is a liar?
I personally wouldnt trust Wise as far as I could chuck him but you have
gathered that already.
From: "Mark Humphries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'Phill Shields'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
CC: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [LU] Revelations or Allegations (take your pick...)
Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 16:41:10 +0100
He may be a lot of things but Wise doesnt strike me as a liar.
Any rumours suggesting he is, therefore, I take with a huge pinch of salt.
Nicholls was dropped because he contacted Newell/Luton and said he wanted
to
go back there. Not because he insisted that Kelly played, which in itself
is frankly unbelievable - since when do captains think they can pick the
side? He may have suggested something to Wise on that front, although at
that time I believe Kelly was still injured, but Wise wouldnt get all
arsey
about it, he would simply tell Nicholls to get back to training, or even
explain that we cannot afford to pay an extra £4k per match. That would
have been the start and end of it.
Also the rumour about the rift with Cresswell is a load of bollox. "He
would have been dropped had Elliot been fully fit". Why not play 4-5-1?
Why
not play one of the other kids? Why put Elliot in the squad if not fully
fit? Why not sub Cresswell at the first opportunity?
Load of bollox the lot of it.
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Phill Shields
Sent: 08 May 2007 16:13
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [LU] Revelations or Allegations (take your pick...)
Andy
I have commented on the rumours because of Bates saying that Wise has
sorted
out the dressing room and IMHO it is not the case and IMHO that is clear.
We
know the are problems there and unfortunately when further rumours come out
about last Wednesday (soz but they appear pretty credible) I think that
there is something in them.
Neither Bates, Wise or LUFC need any help in shit-stirring. They have been
misinforming us for ages - what goes around comes around.
As for helping our detractors, FFS we havent a leg to stand on.
You can wait for the biographies and kiss & tell articles in the tabloids
to
get your "facts" - its just your semantics mate. I'm just watching Rome
burn.
Phill
>From: "Andy Clayton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: "Phill Shields" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>CC: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [LU] Revelations or Allegations (take your pick...)
>Date: Tue, 8 May 2007 14:03:47 +0100
>
>On 08/05/07, Phill Shields <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I can't believe this sh*te I really cant.
> >
> > Bates has said that Wise inherited an unfit side where there was
>backroom
> > unrest.
> >
> > I think ACAS would have a field ady with the fallouts that have gone
on
> > since Wise took over and its pretty clear there was a big falling out
on
> > Wednesdays before kells do.
>
>Why is it clear? Because the YEP (who are hardly on speaking terms
>with Bates) said so? Or because the allegations were on WACCOE? The
>same thread breaking this news also had a rebuttal from someone who
>equally knew someone connected and said that not all reported had
>happened and implied it may just have been shit stirring.
>
>I'd hardly say it's clear. What I think is clear is that nothing is
>clear - and until it becomes clear (whichever way the ground lays) the
>only benefit for this continued shit stirring &
>Bates/Wise/Kelly/Mole/Derry bashing is to add more grist to the mill
>for our detractors.
>
>_______________________________________________
>the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators
>accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors.
>Leedslist mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
>The Leeds List - "where never is heard a discouraging word..."
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk
_______________________________________________
the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators
accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors.
Leedslist mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
The Leeds List - "where never is heard a discouraging word..."
_______________________________________________
the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators
accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors.
Leedslist mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
The Leeds List - "where never is heard a discouraging word..."
_________________________________________________________________
The next generation of Hotmail is here! http://www.newhotmail.co.uk/
_______________________________________________
the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators
accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors.
Leedslist mailing list
[email protected]
http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist
The Leeds List - "where never is heard a discouraging word..."
