bates frustrated?

corkwhite · Post by **corkwhite** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:22 am

the way results have gone lately i reckon deepdown bates very frustrated,
if he wants rid of grayson he prob cant do it while we still in touch of top 6,
watford game we were 1 down they missed late pen, we scored late pen,
burnley game we were 1 down they went down to 10 we somehow won with 2 lategoals,
palace were 1 up and in control but had man sent off which allowed us back in,
yesterday ipswich well in control but they imploded,
all of this suggests grayson has been very lucky,
reminds me of time venables was on verge of sack but
we went and beat bolton and went on good run,

Post by **YorkshireSquare** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:30 am

Bates is clearly fustrated and has been for some time, the messages from the club Bates, Yorkshire Radio and Lorimer have bbeen more anxious and critical over the past few months. As has been mentioned average attendances are down 3,000 on last year, the lowest attendance is 3,000 down on last year, the highest attendance is down 8,000 on last year. This all means less revenues and it means his lovely new boxes are not filling as he would like. As long as we keep playing poor fotbal, regardless of results, crowds will stagnate and his plan and budgets are under threat.

If we turn things around on the pitch, if we start playing nice footbball and look promising for the promotion places then crowds may inprove along with revenues. Then and only then will Bates feel less anxious. As much as he would like to get rid of Grayson he cant afford to, thats the only reason he is still here I beleive.

joluafc4eva · Post by **joluafc4eva** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:34 am

Good I hope is feeling frustrated - its his doing.

El Es Six · Post by **El Es Six** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:42 am

I don't see why he would want to sack Grayson?

Post by **YorkshireSquare** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:43 am

El Es Six wrote:I don't see why he would want to sack Grayson?

Because he hasnt been getting the results recently, he isn't playing a style of football that is getting the crowds in.

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 10:58 am

El Es Six wrote:I don't see why he would want to sack Grayson?

Have you seen us play lately?

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:20 am

Shields53 wrote:
Because he hasnt been getting the results recently, he isn't playing a style of football that is getting the crowds in.

Performances have been very poor but as for results, we have won 2 and drawn 1 of the last 3 games. Teams that are not playing for the manager do not come back to win games in the final stages.

Bates could have sacked Grayson over Christmas for poor results and didn't. He isn't going to do it now.

Post by **YorkshireSquare** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 11:24 am

Dr.Leeds wrote:
Performances have been very poor but as for results, we have won 2 and drawn 1 of the last 3 games. Teams that are not playing for the manager do not come back to win games in the final stages.

Bates could have sacked Grayson over Christmas for poor results and didn't. He isn't going to do it now.

You can give stats in any fway you like though.

Yes played 3 won 2, drawn 1 but... played 7, won 2, drawn 2, lost 3.

El Es Six · Post by **El Es Six** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:27 pm

white.riot wrote:

Have you seen us play lately?

Yep, gots me a season ticket and it's been a pretty shoddy display to say the least. But Grayson seems to be a yes-man (for whatever his reasons) and if he did sack Grayson (which I'm sure would give even more ammo to the anti-Bates brigade) he'd have to find a replacement prepared to work for him and all that entails. Grayson is Bates' man for the shitty job of managing LUFC whilst KB is chairman.

white.riot · Post by **white.riot** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 12:59 pm

El Es Six wrote:
Yep, gots me a season ticket and it's been a pretty shoddy display to say the least. But Grayson seems to be a yes-man (for whatever his reasons) and if he did sack Grayson (which I'm sure would give even more ammo to the anti-Bates brigade) he'd have to find a replacement prepared to work for him and all that entails. Grayson is Bates' man for the shitty job of managing LUFC whilst KB is chairman.

Funnily enough we appear to have developed the habit of champions. Playing poor and winning. Perhaps there's hope. Bates does give managers a fair chance.

Emsley · Post by **Emsley** » Sun Jan 22, 2012 1:10 pm

I rarely get in to the hole of the bates/grayson debate now as my official final statement is I don't think either of them are doing the club any favours. And I always end up repeating my self. :mrgreen:

In defence of bates: He has none. He is the reason we have lost attendances, he expects miracles on a very poor budget, but carrys on as if its anyones fault but his!

In defence of Grayson: I DO feel sorry for him.
The talent pool on a shoe string budget must be shocking for him, but I just cant forgive the "maulings" we have had over the past few years from some of the teams. Everyteam gets a kicking but ours came about pretty close together. The freebies and loans he tracks down are impressive in a sense. its like looking for a legit motorbike second hand that costs f**k all and will do a great job. (By the way if you happen to have a legit second hand motorbike that you want rid of Inbox me so I can pick it up from you! Don't tell anyone else its up for grabs)

At the moment we are getting exactly what we have paid for, mid table champ team (give or take a win) attendances dropping as there is no sense of hope at the moment. All this could of been avoided to a degree.

If bates expects Simon to pull out a miracle in what is a very tough division then he as far as I'm concerned is the problem, grayson is a good motivator but his tactics are suss....

I just think he could of got us out of this division with some real money, more than that I would not say.

Thats my grayson/bates post done for the month now.

mav · Post by **mav** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 11:45 am

why SG is pulling in some decent players for not much why would he get sacked?

Yes we sign older players on longer deals but I would be very surprised if SG has anything to do with contracts.

While I have issues with our manager I can't imagine anyone better coming in under the current regime.

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 12:07 pm

Shields53 wrote:
You can give stats in any fway you like though.

Yes played 3 won 2, drawn 1 but... played 7, won 2, drawn 2, lost 3.

Exactly. So, like I said Bates could have sacked Grayson on the basis of results before the New Year and didn't. With results improving and having allowed his manager to make signings he isn't going to sack him on results now.

Post by **YorkshireSquare** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:09 pm

Dr.Leeds wrote:
Exactly. So, like I said Bates could have sacked Grayson on the basis of results before the New Year and didn't. With results improving and having allowed his manager to make signings he isn't going to sack him on results now.

I never said he would, in fact I said he wouldn't.

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 1:17 pm

Shields53 wrote:
I never said he would, in fact I said he wouldn't.

I never said that you didn't say that he wouldn't...

Martyn · Post by **Martyn** » Mon Jan 23, 2012 2:12 pm

Dr.Leeds wrote:
I never said that you didn't say that he wouldn't...

Oh no you didn't

Crude · Post by **Crude** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 2:38 am

Ken been's at the helm for seven years. Driving away supporters due to his ticket prices, making off-color and disgusting comments about them, ill-conceived selling of top players and inability to sign players Simon needs, some really nice box suites (apparently) and the West stand. He's been masterful about deflecting blame away from himself and tons of supporters have been willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. But more and more are finally seeing through the smokes and mirrors of Ken Bates. Sucks to be Kenny, but really, he deserves all of it and more. Leeds United was here long before Ken Bates desecrated Elland Road, and the club will be here long after he has buggered off to whatever level of hell is reserved for him.

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 7:40 am

Guildford White wrote:
Oh no you didn't

He's behind you.

Martyn · Post by **Martyn** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 1:47 pm

Dr.Leeds wrote:
He's behind you.

Aren't you usually behind them?

Dr.Leeds · Post by **Dr.Leeds** » Tue Jan 24, 2012 4:32 pm

Guildford White wrote:
Aren't you usually behind them?

Yes. That's how I know he is behind you.