Sorry, I apologise, I thought everybody knew about Revie's methods. Anyway, one example. Whenever the opposition were awarded a freekick, Clarke had the job of racing to the ball, to prevent a quick one being taken. A simple trick, but quite against the spirit of the game. To me that is cheating. You might want to enquire about revie's attempts to bribe other clubs to lose games, but perhaps that is a bit too much. suffice to say that, sadly for all the genuine supporters, LUFC come with more stained baggage than almost all other clubs, (Revie, Ridsdale, Bates ) so whingeing about Watford won't get much support.
What a prick! I can only presume the JT in your name means John Thomas. How apt! EVERY team prevents a quick free kick being taken these days. It's standard coaching & good sense. Tell me a team that doesn't do it. But cheating???? Do me a favour. Revie never attempted to bribe anyone. There is absolutely no proof of this, and you only have to look at the 1975 European Cup Final to see that we were actually on the wrong end of bribery. Now that has been proved!! Btw, you do realise that his estate could sue you for libel for making such an unfounded accusation, don't you? Bit of a chance doing it on a Leeds site too. Presume brain is on holiday.
Oh so things that are accepted as the norm nowadays and you wouldn't bat an eyelid at, and you'd expect your players to do, you deem as cheating because at the time it wasn't common practice? Get the **** out of here you cretin. As for his "attempts to bribe other clubs" - you mean all those accusations that were never proven? In a time when corruption was rife and people were getting done left right and centre for handing out and taking bribes, yet Revie was proved innocent... interesting that isn't it?
The above quote could so easily describe the goings on at Watford this season with all their loans, trying to cheat their way to promotion by masquerading as Udinese B. Quite against the spirit of the game old boy
Following the rather intemperate responses to my 2 posts above, I thought I'd better look up some history, to see why I had the wrong impression about Revie and the Leeds teams he created. Sadly, all the stuff I could find tended to reinforce my views. It depresses me, so I can understand why it might enrage LUFC supporters. I'll leave it at that, and hope that some day a likeable LUFC will emerge from the rubble of the past 40 years, excepting the superb league winning season 92, where everything about the club seemed to be good. Shame it all went wrong.
What in God's name are you babbling about. I supported Leeds throughout the Revie era. I doubt you were born. If there is something relevant to share fair enough but your attempts so far are childish at best
You can't have looked up any history, or the history would have told you quite conclusively that Don Revie never handed out any bribes to anyone, as ruled by a court of law. Your opinion is not higher than that of a court judge, so get down off your high horse and stop making judgements about something you weren't even around to see. As for the rest of the "cheating" you claim, these are things that are considered normal by today's standards, things you'd expect of your own team. So why are you harping on about it? Hypocrite.
Won't be long before he's sitting in front of a court judge though if he carries on with his slanderous accusations
Perhaps you should learn to read more carefully. I specifically said 'attempts to bribe'. I did not say that he succeeded. I attach a quote from a Published newspaper article which might help you (all of you defending Revie so vehemently) understand how a great many people not in love with LUFC see things. LOOK IT UP. ..... For the true situation we have to turn to the Daily Mirror cuttings library and the memoirs of the late Richard Stott, a former editor who, in 1977, was one the paper's senior reporters. With evidence from the former Leeds goalkeeper, Gary Sprake, he exposed Revie as a match-fixer. In fact, it was when Revie discovered that Sprake was about to spill the beans that he vanished to the UAE. It's all there in Stott's book, Dogs and Lampposts (memo to Henry: turn to pages 173-181). Once Revie had taken up his job with UAE for £340,000 a year (a colossal sum in those days), other witnesses came forward. One of them, a respected player and manager, Bob Stokoe, told how Revie tried to bribe him to lose a match. By the time Stott had completed his investigation he was able to present the FA with a 315-page dossier cataloguing Revie's long period of corruption. Revie sued the Mirror for libel, but he did not pursue his legal action. The FA simply swept it all under the carpet, though it did issue the ban on Revie. ... It's unfortunate for LUFC supporters that, because of the clubs' history (past and recent) LUFC are intensely disliked by so many other clubs supporters. That's how it is. You are stuck with the label for now. A dose of humility might improve things. BTW, slanderous accusations are SPOKEN. It's libellous if written.
Perhaps you should just do one! No one here cares what you think. Either stick to the topic of the thread or F&*% off!
I used the term libel in my post, btw. And I do believe you are preaching libellous accusations. Bribery means jail. Jail means criminal court. Criminal court means police. Police means arrest & charge when suitable evidence gathered. Didn't happen to Revie. He is an innocent man in the eyes of the law, and you are suggesting otherwise in a libellous manner. Beware!
Some people just won’t let it go. Some 24 years after his death, and 39 after he left his post as manager of Leeds United, the merest mention of Don Revie has some people reaching for the thesaurus in search of synonyms for the word “cheat”. From Fleet Street to FourFourTwo, the club’s decade of dominance in the late 60s and early 70s is still shrouded in accusations of on-field brutality and off-field bribery. Don Revie, they continue to argue, disgraced the game by fixing matches. For instance, former Mirror journalist Roy Greenslade chose to mark the 50th anniversary of his appointment as Leeds manager in March by warming over the accusations for the Guardian. He cited the existence of a 315-page dossier of Revie’s dodgy dealings compiled by former colleague Richard Stott and then rehashed claims that cash incentives were offered to the Wolves team before the final game of the 1971/72 season, when a point would have secured Leeds a League and Cup double. Despite the fact that such accusations have been repeatedly debunked, once in front of a judge, it is necessary for Leeds fans to keep debunking them. After all, the man who succumbed to motor neurone disease at the age of 61 is no longer able to do it himself. It was The Sunday People that first aired the charges in 1972, suggesting Wolves players had been offered £1,000 to back off a Leeds side still recovering from their FA Cup triumph over Arsenal just 48 hours earlier. The article prompted investigations by both the FA and the police, but neither found Revie had a case to answer. The fact that Wolves had actually won the game 2-1 – with key witness Frank Munro scoring the first goal – seemed to confirm the charges had little substance. Five years later, as Revie walked out on the England job and headed for Dubai, sister paper The Mirror repeated the claims, adding United’s goalkeeper Gary Sprake as a star witness and widening the charges to five matches going back to 1962. Frank Munro and Danny Hegen insisted they’d been offered money to give away penalties at Molineux, while Bob Stokoe said that Revie, at the very beginning of his managerial career, had offered him cash so his Bury side would “go easy” in a Second Division relegation scrap. Revie reportedly considered suing, but cushioned by his tax-free challenge in the sunshine he instead focused his legal efforts on overturning the FA’s 10-year ban. In early 1982, though, there would be a court case. When The Sunday People aired the accusations a third time, now claiming that Billy Bremner tried to tap up Hegen from his pre-match hotel, the pugnacious former Leeds skipper finally brought a libel suit. For those hoping for definitive proof of Revie’s corruption, the trial didn’t go well. During the Old Bailey battle, Bremner vs Oldhams Newspapers and Danny Hegen, the latter, an alcoholic, was deemed unfit to give evidence, Sprake declared he couldn’t remember his original claims, and Derek Dougan, Wolves widely respected captain, asserted that he never heard any mention of bribes. On February 3rd, the jury took just two hours to find in Bremner’s favour and award near-record damages of £100,000. Perhaps most importantly, though, Oldhams Newspapers never produced the famed dossier, supposedly authored by one of their senior employers, and nor was it mentioned when Revie successfully sued the FA to overturn his ban. The FA continues to deny that such a dossier ever actually existed. Indeed, a trial that was supposed to reveal Revie’s venality merely underlined the sleazy world of newspaper exclusives. It emerged that Frank Munro only agreed to give evidence after The People had forked out £4,000 to fly him and his family over from Australia, and that quotes from both Danny Hegen, by then scraping a living as a Butlin’s Redcoat in Coatbridge, and Gary Sprake had clearly been teased out by cash incentives – £7,500 in the case of the Leeds keeper. Despite the fact that such accusations have been repeatedly debunked, once in front of a judge, it is necessary for Leeds fans to keep debunking them. After all, the man who succumbed to motor neurone disease at the age of 61 is no longer able to do it himself. Sprake makes a particularly unreliable witness. Not only did his memory mysteriously desert him when under oath, his biography admits he was upset that that a testimonial promised when he was transferred to Birmingham in 1973 never happened– a costly breach of trust for any footballer in the 1970s. In the same book, he also asserts that any attempts at bribery were “doomed to fail” because it riled the opposition. Well, exactly. Leeds lost the notorious Wolves game, were hammered 4-1 by Southampton in another supposed fixed game in 1962, and drew twice against Stokoe’s fellow strugglers Bury in the same season. So, not only did the notorious match-fixer not actually fix any matches, Sprake is asking us to believe that the meticulous Revie would keep pursuing a tactic that never once succeeded. Indeed, considering Leeds kept coming second – five times in the league in eight seasons, three times in the FA Cup and twice in Europe – the club didn’t seem to have financially-induced fate on its side. And if the charges are true, two league titles, two European trophies, an FA Cup and League Cup would require bribing more than a solitary Black Country drunk. So why haven’t they appeared? The unending irony for Leeds fans, of course, is that amid the 40-year mud slinging, the one genuine case of bribery involving the club is always omitted – when AC Milan bought the ref in the 1973 European Cup Winners’ Cup final. Why don’t ****s like Richard Stott, and Roy Greenslade and their ilk ever write about that? Now **** off back to your tinpot won **** all club board you ****
I completely agree with the above post. However, back to Lorimer, I'm happy he's been given the title, the lads a club legend. Him and Dom deserve this, granted whether Lorimers decisions have always been correct, he has always had Leeds in his heart, and for me, that is good enough. 1962–1979 Leeds United 703 (238) 1971 → Cape Town City (loan) 6 (8) 1979 Toronto Blizzard 31 (9) 1979–1980 York City 29 (8) 1980 Toronto Blizzard 18 (2) 1981–1983 Vancouver Whitecaps 87 (23) 1983 → UCD (loan) 3 (0) 1984–1985 Leeds United 76 (17)
