Jorgobot wrote:I heard about this too, I've always wonder how good we're Leeds back in the day?
Mikhail Chigorin wrote: In the very early seventies, Leeds evolved into being a very, very good team but there was always the element of (for want of a better description) 'evil' about them and the 'dirty', win at all costs way they played the game. I had mixed feelings towards them because of Don Revie's time at City but, under his management, Leeds were never a side that elicited high regard and affection from ordinary football fans, because they inevitably exhibited and exuded a nastiness and a spitefulness on the pitch. They were a sort of Mourinho's Chelsea and the Scum all rolled into one - an efficient, grinding machine with occasional flair but with thoroughly distasteful attitudes. I think it's fair to say that, by and large, they were universally hated. It's highly ironic that 'Football' seems to have exacted a long and lasting revenge upon Leeds for the 'crimes' that Don Revie perpetrated with them.
Dronny wrote:Mikhail Chigorin wrote: In the very early seventies, Leeds evolved into being a very, very good team but there was always the element of (for want of a better description) 'evil' about them and the 'dirty', win at all costs way they played the game. I had mixed feelings towards them because of Don Revie's time at City but, under his management, Leeds were never a side that elicited high regard and affection from ordinary football fans, because they inevitably exhibited and exuded a nastiness and a spitefulness on the pitch. They were a sort of Mourinho's Chelsea and the Scum all rolled into one - an efficient, grinding machine with occasional flair but with thoroughly distasteful attitudes. I think it's fair to say that, by and large, they were universally hated. It's highly ironic that 'Football' seems to have exacted a long and lasting revenge upon Leeds for the 'crimes' that Don Revie perpetrated with them.
Spot on Mikhail, "dirty Leeds" was an often heard quote back in the day
Ted Hughes wrote:Dronny wrote:Mikhail Chigorin wrote: In the very early seventies, Leeds evolved into being a very, very good team but there was always the element of (for want of a better description) 'evil' about them and the 'dirty', win at all costs way they played the game. I had mixed feelings towards them because of Don Revie's time at City but, under his management, Leeds were never a side that elicited high regard and affection from ordinary football fans, because they inevitably exhibited and exuded a nastiness and a spitefulness on the pitch. They were a sort of Mourinho's Chelsea and the Scum all rolled into one - an efficient, grinding machine with occasional flair but with thoroughly distasteful attitudes. I think it's fair to say that, by and large, they were universally hated. It's highly ironic that 'Football' seems to have exacted a long and lasting revenge upon Leeds for the 'crimes' that Don Revie perpetrated with them.
Spot on Mikhail, "dirty Leeds" was an often heard quote back in the day
Leeds were kind of anti football but they were capable of brilliant, pass & move football themselves. First and foremost though, it was kick the living shit out of any kind of dangerous opponent, then play football if the situation allows.
awww I see thanks for explaining.Mikhail Chigorin wrote: In the very early seventies, Leeds evolved into being a very, very good team but there was always the element of (for want of a better description) 'evil' about them and the 'dirty', win at all costs way they played the game. I had mixed feelings towards them because of Don Revie's time at City but, under his management, Leeds were never a side that elicited high regard and affection from ordinary football fans, because they inevitably exhibited and exuded a nastiness and a spitefulness on the pitch. They were a sort of Mourinho's Chelsea and the Scum all rolled into one - an efficient, grinding machine with occasional flair but with thoroughly distasteful attitudes. I think it's fair to say that, by and large, they were universally hated. It's highly ironic that 'Football' seems to have exacted a long and lasting revenge upon Leeds for the 'crimes' that Don Revie perpetrated with them.
Jorgobot wrote:awww I see thanks for explaining.
Alioune DVToure wrote:Leeds had a cracking team between about 1999 and 2003 as well. Champions League regulars with loads of exciting attacking players. Too many, in fact, which is what proved unsustainable financially. Anyone care to list the strikers they had on their books at once for a time? I can think of...
Mark Viduka
Robbie Keane
Harry Kewell
Robbie Fowler
Alan Smith
I bet there were more. They also spaffed a lot of transfer and wage money on the likes of Seth Johnson.
Ted Hughes wrote:Alioune DVToure wrote:Leeds had a cracking team between about 1999 and 2003 as well. Champions League regulars with loads of exciting attacking players. Too many, in fact, which is what proved unsustainable financially. Anyone care to list the strikers they had on their books at once for a time? I can think of...
Mark Viduka
Robbie Keane
Harry Kewell
Robbie Fowler
Alan Smith
I bet there were more. They also spaffed a lot of transfer and wage money on the likes of Seth Johnson.
They had Yeboah & Hasslebank just before that, and er, Brian Deane.
Alex Sapphire wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:Alioune DVToure wrote:Leeds had a cracking team between about 1999 and 2003 as well. Champions League regulars with loads of exciting attacking players. Too many, in fact, which is what proved unsustainable financially. Anyone care to list the strikers they had on their books at once for a time? I can think of...
Mark Viduka
Robbie Keane
Harry Kewell
Robbie Fowler
Alan Smith
I bet there were more. They also spaffed a lot of transfer and wage money on the likes of Seth Johnson.
They had Yeboah & Hasslebank just before that, and er, Brian Deane.
Darren Huckerby anyone?
Alioune DVToure wrote:Alex Sapphire wrote:Ted Hughes wrote:Alioune DVToure wrote:Leeds had a cracking team between about 1999 and 2003 as well. Champions League regulars with loads of exciting attacking players. Too many, in fact, which is what proved unsustainable financially. Anyone care to list the strikers they had on their books at once for a time? I can think of...
Mark Viduka
Robbie Keane
Harry Kewell
Robbie Fowler
Alan Smith
I bet there were more. They also spaffed a lot of transfer and wage money on the likes of Seth Johnson.
They had Yeboah & Hasslebank just before that, and er, Brian Deane.
Darren Huckerby anyone?
Huckerby, yeah. What was the name of that other bloke whose career was plagued by injury (a la Matt Jansen)? Everyone thought he was going to be the next big thing but he ended up somewhere like Carlisle.
EDIT: Got it. Michael Bridges.
Alex Sapphire wrote:Jorgobot wrote:awww I see thanks for explaining.
it's not an explanation, it's a statement of opinion which while it may be shared, is not definitive.
It's like saying Ali was a cocky cunt who spoiled the sweet science of pugilism
Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Alex Sapphire wrote:Jorgobot wrote:awww I see thanks for explaining.
it's not an explanation, it's a statement of opinion which while it may be shared, is not definitive.
It's like saying Ali was a cocky cunt who spoiled the sweet science of pugilism
In all fairness, there were other 'hard' sides around in that era, each one containing their own quota of 'hard' men. It was even said that 'Buzzer' wrapped his skills in barbed-wire and, in those days, tackles were allowed which would be an automatic red card (or more) in the current climate.
It's just that Leeds took this approach too far in excess and greatly transcended what was perceived, at that time, to be "hard but fair". Although they had some flair players and were capable of producing good football, they were never respected or admired for that and were, as has been previously stated, virtually universally loathed and detested for the way they conducted themselves.
Alex Sapphire wrote:Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Alex Sapphire wrote:Jorgobot wrote:awww I see thanks for explaining.
it's not an explanation, it's a statement of opinion which while it may be shared, is not definitive.
It's like saying Ali was a cocky cunt who spoiled the sweet science of pugilism
In all fairness, there were other 'hard' sides around in that era, each one containing their own quota of 'hard' men. It was even said that 'Buzzer' wrapped his skills in barbed-wire and, in those days, tackles were allowed which would be an automatic red card (or more) in the current climate.
It's just that Leeds took this approach too far in excess and greatly transcended what was perceived, at that time, to be "hard but fair". Although they had some flair players and were capable of producing good football, they were never respected or admired for that and were, as has been previously stated, virtually universally loathed and detested for the way they conducted themselves.
and yet Alf Ramsey selected half a dozen of them (presumably the clean ones) for Mexico, and the FA appointed Revie as England manager :) And as I said above, big Mal (whose opinion I respect) liked how they played.
I think the issue is we're looking though sky blue glasses at the team which took over our mantel as the best in England. It's hard for us to be objective.
Ted Hughes wrote:
I'm sorry but that's absolute bollocks.
It's not City fans who have this opinion of Leeds it's almost everyone who saw them play. If you have a soft spot for them then fine, but suggesting that the rest of us are somehow biased against Leeds because they 'took over our mantel'. Everybody 'took over our mantel', we won one trophy in 40 odd years.
Two clubs stand out as the biggest bunch of cunts in some of our lifetimes: Leeds & Ferguson's Utd.
Only the Utd team with Ke**ne etc in it can truly compare to Leeds.
Return to The Maine Football forum
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot], salford city and 107 guests