I thought the Southstand was condemned. So whats suddenly made it safe again. If it falls down during the season will we get a refund on our season ticket ?

The safety of the south stand is relative to whatever agenda applies within any particular space time continuum. A few weeks ago it wasn't safe and something had to be done NOW. However, nothing was done but it's now miraculously safe again.

meh, apart from the manufacturers of fake Burberry, would the rest of us really be that upset if a few of the resident chavs got tent pegged by a 1920's girder?

Nice tarring there squire.

No, really.

Do people actually still wear Burberry?

Thought it was all Henley's now.

The South Stand is as safe now as it's ever been. I've been going to Headingley for over 40 years and it hasn't fallen down once ..... not once. That's how safe it is.

Let's hope if it falls down it's not on a match day cos then you'd probably be in it a refund wouldn't be much use to you then!!!

Aye, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
A Green Flag bloke man once told me that he reckoned that 50% of his callouts were to cars that had been serviced the day before.

as nithing has to be done NOW with the stand can they NOW do something about recruitment?

Whats the point if the SS is going to be further restricted or even completely restricted, the last thing you need under those circumstances is a load more bandwaggoners turning up (oh the irony of me saying that) and if you can still finish in the top six and reach a challenge cup final without having to spend any additional money, and with a possibly restricted cash flow next year, then why would you look to increase salary costs ?

Do you and other posters genuinely believe Leeds are significantly below the salary cap?

I haven't a clue.

I can see the obvious advantage to not having to spend significant amounts of overhead on salary in order to attract additional customers who you can't comfortably accommodate when in fact you can achieve the same end of season results by not spending any extra money at all, season after several season - speaks more for the quality of the opposition than the quality of the Leeds team.

I believe Leeds operate below (possibly well below) the permitted salary cap and that's significant to me.

I have nothing in particular to base this on other than the regular statements from the CEO implying Leeds have (historically and by design) left room available to enter the market to react to changing needs during the season or the sudden availability of an unexpected quality addition to the squad.

I also think he's earned a reputation for being as tight as a nat's chuff.

Quote ="tvoc"I believe Leeds operate below (possibly well below) the permitted salary cap and that's significant to me. I have nothing in particular to base this on other than the regular statements from the CEO implying Leeds have (historically and by design) left room available to enter the market to react to changing needs during the season or the sudden availability of an unexpected quality addition to the squad. I also think he's earned a reputation for being as tight as a nat's chuff.'" And yet just two weeks ago... www.superleaguefans.com/leeds-rh ... eting.html Notice the wording, it doesn't say the club will spend as much as it can afford, but that it will be operating up to the full salary cap - again.

Quote ="tvoc"I believe Leeds operate below (possibly well below) the permitted salary cap and that's significant to me. I have nothing in particular to base this on other than the regular statements from the CEO implying Leeds have (historically and by design) left room available to enter the market to react to changing needs during the season or the sudden availability of an unexpected quality addition to the squad. I also think he's earned a reputation for being as tight as a nat's chuff.'" And yet just two weeks ago... www.superleaguefans.com/leeds-rh ... eting.html Notice the wording, it doesn't say the club will spend as much as it can afford, but that it will be operating up to the full salary cap - again.

I seem to recall the true meaning of those particular words was discussed at length on here just recently: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=506876&p=16425362

I seem to recall the true meaning of those particular words was discussed at length on here just recently: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=506876&p=16425362

Quote ="tvoc"I seem to recall the true meaning of those particular words was discussed at length on here just recently: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=506876&p=16425362'" I can see two people debating legal semantics (only one of which has a background in the dark arts), but nothing to suggest it's not a true statement when taken at face value.

Quote ="tvoc"I seem to recall the true meaning of those particular words was discussed at length on here just recently: viewtopic.php?f=17&t=506876&p=16425362'" I can see two people debating legal semantics (only one of which has a background in the dark arts), but nothing to suggest it's not a true statement when taken at face value.

Taking the Leeds CEO at face value is not something I've ever been inclined to do.

I never claimed GH wasn't telling the truth. I just pointed out his statement wasn't a commitment to do anything.

It's a subtle but important difference beyond the likes of Batley and Bywater.

[url=http://imageshack.us/photo/my-images/38/marathonmanlaurenceolivk.jpg/[/url



Is it safe?

That's a pretty low thing to say.

With an attitude like that you are no better than the very people you despise.

Oh Behave yourself Mary Poppins.

We're not talking about vast swathes of the Southstand being culled, just a few of the more annoying little bellends who infest the place.

And if the other end of said girder went through that soddin' drum.....

Quote ="McLaren_Field"I haven't a clue. I can see the obvious advantage to not having to spend significant amounts of overhead on salary in order to attract additional customers who you can't comfortably accommodate when in fact you can achieve the same end of season results by not spending any extra money at all, season after several season - speaks more for the quality of the opposition than the quality of the Leeds team.'" Some interesting comments from Adeybull and Angry Anteater following the Bulls forum last night: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=505671&start=135 But in reference to spending up to full cap... Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"On the salary cap, we are the same as 11 of the SL clubs in spending almost up to the whole of the salary cap, leaving just enough room for an emergency signing if we had to make one. There are only three clubs who don't spend the whole of the cap, and Hood said one proposal being bandied about was that all clubs might HAVE to spend up to the cap as a means of evening up competition. '"

Quote ="McLaren_Field"I haven't a clue. I can see the obvious advantage to not having to spend significant amounts of overhead on salary in order to attract additional customers who you can't comfortably accommodate when in fact you can achieve the same end of season results by not spending any extra money at all, season after several season - speaks more for the quality of the opposition than the quality of the Leeds team.'" Some interesting comments from Adeybull and Angry Anteater following the Bulls forum last night: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=505671&start=135 But in reference to spending up to full cap... Quote ="Ferocious Aardvark"On the salary cap, we are the same as 11 of the SL clubs in spending almost up to the whole of the salary cap, leaving just enough room for an emergency signing if we had to make one. There are only three clubs who don't spend the whole of the cap, and Hood said one proposal being bandied about was that all clubs might HAVE to spend up to the cap as a means of evening up competition. '"

Quote ="MjM"Some interesting comments from Adeybull and Angry Anteater following the Bulls forum last night: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=505671&start=135 But in reference to spending up to full cap... '" I agree, thanks for posting that. It further reinforces my thoughts about Warrington & their "management" of the salary cap.

Quote ="MjM"Some interesting comments from Adeybull and Angry Anteater following the Bulls forum last night: viewtopic.php?f=19&t=505671&start=135 But in reference to spending up to full cap... '" I agree, thanks for posting that. It further reinforces my thoughts about Warrington & their "management" of the salary cap.

Boll0cks - Gareth is in a minority of one one this - there was nothing in the statement "We will once again be spending to the cap" that suggest that is not a commitment by the Leeds CEO to spend to the cap - however you look at it and Gareth still hasn't justified/explained his interpretation.

I personally think if the current squad is what we are going with we will be 400/500k under the cap.

Sal ,whilst i totally agree that we must be under the cap if we stick with the squad as is do you really think it would by so much?
I think it will be much less when you consider the new upgraded deals for Hall ,Bjb ,Watkins ,Mcshane(yet to be announced) plus the imminent arrivals of Moore and Griffin.
I do however hope we spend the cap and add at least 2 more players with the quality required for a return to challenging at the top.