: Wed Jul 15, 2009 3:00 am  

tvoc wrote:

My comments on this thread query the recent effectiveness of the Academy structures in place at the club rather than saying anything about a player I know little about at this point.

So, you're dis-satisfied with the 1st team squad and the Academy structures...

Imagine how dis-satisfied if you supported a team that hadn't won 3 championships in 5 seasons (with a shout for an unprecedented 3rd in a row) with man of the match in all three of those Championship finals coming from the clubs Academy.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 4:54 am  

If you take a 'helicopter' view (dreadful business jargon I'm afraid )of Leeds' recruitment it's really hard to fault given actual results.

I don't know much about the Academy structure, but I'd bet that having had the lads come through that form the spine of the team, its very unlikely that the club decided to not try as hard to develop more quality youngsters. More likely is simply that for whatever reason the quality of players coming through simply isn't there or the scouting not as good or simply more competition from other clubs for the best juniors.

Given that, and the fact that Bluey obviously wants a bigger squad, the recruitment of these younger players is really good work IMO - and plenty of evidence of Leeds getting in early for next year.

I suspect they'll do the right thing by Eastwood in terms of letting him decide if he wants to play for Leeds (he finds out about his visa mid August), but I'd be shocked if they didn't have other irons in the fire if they really believe they need him or someone similar.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 6:54 am  

Mixed bag this strategy for mine,

Dissapointing we haven't got the lads in the academy system, but also pretty understandable,

Ambler, pitts and amour are all young forwards and over the next 3/4 years while thses guys mature we will likely lose peacock, kylie, Ali, kirke, along with losing ellis last year and him being replaced by ablett, so we do and will have a lot is space in the pack for any academy prospects to come through

The issue from my point of view is whilst I'm sure these lads could do a job in time, and I'm sure that they could replace kirke and kylie, are any of them going to get close to peacock or Ali?

It's the right way to go, and I'm happy we are giving these guys a shot rather than a winterstein, korkidas, lovegrove, fisher type player

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:30 am  

tvoc wrote:

You see, finally, even the esteemed CEO can acknowledge the true pack situation this season.

Gary Hetherington wrote: "Bringing in quality young players will boost our squad. There's no doubt we have been running light, particularly with our forward options this year."


Indeed. A point most forward looking posters on here have already noted Gawwy!

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:37 am  

G1 wrote:

So, you're dis-satisfied with the 1st team squad and the Academy structures...

Shouldn't you be asking the CEO who stated as much last night and has been actively recruiting work-in-progress future potential players to plug the gaps.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:40 am  

tvoc wrote:

Shouldn't you be asking the CEO who stated as much last night and has been actively recruiting work-in-progress future potential players to plug the gaps.

Think we've been there before on this one, with the Eastwood position rightly or wrongly dictating whether we coud recruit this year without affecting the overall salary cap for next year.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:45 am  

finglas wrote:

Think we've been there before on this one, with the Eastwood position rightly or wrongly dictating whether we coud recruit this year without affecting the overall salary cap for next year.

The moment Eastwood was refused a UK employment Visa was the moment Leeds needed to end the deal on the grounds of his non availability (something which must have been covered in the contract) to avoid any such effect occurring.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:47 am  

tvoc wrote:

The moment Eastwood was refused a UK employment Visa was the moment Leeds needed to end the deal on the grounds of his non availability (something which must have been covered in the contract) to avoid any such effect occurring.

I'd expect that the contract also had a "subject to appeal" clause in there.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:50 am  

finglas wrote:

I'd expect that the contract also had a "subject to appeal" clause in there.

Bradford were able to cancel Toupou's contract due to his inability to train with his teammates.

: Wed Jul 15, 2009 9:56 am  

tvoc wrote:

Bradford were able to cancel Toupou's contract due to his inability to train with his teammates.

But that's Bradford and that was on medical grounds as per his contract, which I understand tupou challenged and lost.

Anyway speaking of Bradford, GH has a high moral standing on contracts and players/clubs should renege on them. There may be a solicitor with a sports background only too willing to take on the case on behalf of a disgruntled player.