Arsène Wenger, Gareth Bale and the cheating legacy of Don Revie’s Leeds

(Image: Timothy Boyd)

When Salut! Sunderland
hammers on about cheating in football, and declares that any diving and feigning of injury is beyond the pale and not just when committed by opponents, the world is silent. When Arsène Wenger says something similar, everyone sits up and pays attention.

That is naturally as it should be. Not only is Wenger a top voice in football, deserving of a serious hearing when he makes a serious point; his call, reported with big headlines today, for an end to the conning of referees also sounds a little like a Damascene conversion.

As is reasonably well known around these parts, I am a Wenger admirer. That probably makes me a rarity among Sunderland supporters and perhaps the body of non-Arsenal fans generally. But I like the way he tries, with some success, to get his teams to play, the way he runs his club and his ability to express himself so eloquently in our language as well as his own.

But it is scarcely a matter for controversy to add one qualification: Wenger has also, through selective myopia or gamesmanship, been incapable of identifying malpractice on the part of his own players. Robert Pires was a great player but went down with outrageous ease in the penalty area. Eduardo’s dive against Celtic was long commemorated in the cheating question in our own “Who are You?” questionnaire to opposing supporters.

Chamakh made falling down an essential part of his game on arriving in the Premier; Walcott felt so embarrassed about a dive of his own (which failed to win the desired penalty) that he issued a public apology while also indicating that many players considered such conduct normal and acceptable.

This is not the same as saying Wenger or any other identifiable individual coaches the art of cheating, as if it were as desirable an asset for any player as the ability to control the ball with one touch or split a defence with a devastating pass. But I am sure many managers, and not just those in charge of foreign clubs or foreigner in charge of ours, do.

And it is nothing new. Remember Peter Lorimer’s words about the team talk that preceded a penalty winner Leeds United scored against Sunderland back in 1967:

Don said out of the blue: ‘If anybody gets anywhere near the box, get down.’ Jimmy Greenhoff, who was quick when he was in full flight, set off on one of his jinking runs and was fully five yards outside the penalty area when he was brought down. By the time he had stumbled, fallen and rolled over a couple of times he was inside the box, and the referee, Ken Stokes, pointed to the spot so quickly that it was almost embarrassing.

This is not being anti-Leeds (though I can see the wry grin forming on certain faces); after all, they would have been the victims had the Walcott ruse worked.

Join the Salut! Sunderland Facebook group – click anywhere along this line

And follow us on Twitter: @salutsunderland … click along this line

Click anywhere on this sentence for a glance at the home page – and highlights of all the most recent articles …

The issue cropped up again at the weekend – it does most weekends – with a delicious biter-bit morality tale. Leon Osman accused Tottenham’s Gareth Bale of taking a deliberate fall under his challenge. Forget that this is the second recent allegation of diving against Bale; remember instead that his supposed victim is the same Leon Osman who fell over, demonstrably without the least contact, in the Sunderland penalty box and then appealed for a penalty, hoodwinking Howard Webb. The resulting penalty saved the game for Everton.

And before anyone cries hypocrite, let me add that while Seb Larsson is one of the undoubted stars of Sunderland’s season, Salut! Sunderland and some of its readers were quick to criticise his extravangant dive at Wolves. Bent often went down easily, so did Gyan and so, occasionally, does Sessegnon. It is a sickness afflicting football and no club seems immune.

Salut! Sunderland can also claim to have risen in defence of unlikely characters. When Brighton’s Adam El-Abd pushed and pulled at Andy Carroll at every Liverpool set piece in a recent FA Cup tie, we roundly condemned Andre Marriner for ignoring his blatant cheating; there might have been three or more first-half penalties.

So let us hear out Wenger (from today’s Mail but, I assume, elsewhere too):

It annoys me. For example, Suarez got the penalty last week. It was no penalty. Nobody touched him but he goes overboard. I can understand if they push the ball too far but when no-one touches him…

But then when they roll down the sock, take the shin- pad out like he has been kicked like mad, it’s a bit overboard. Everyone who has played football can understand they try to win the penalty but what he does afterwards to get a bit more, we don’t need that.

Bravo. I really, really hope he means it, and means specifically that he wants this new spirit of fairness to descend on his own squad and not just others.

Monsieur Salut

58 thoughts on “Arsène Wenger, Gareth Bale and the cheating legacy of Don Revie’s Leeds”

  1. PHIL JOHNSON – only thing sunderland are famous for is shocking the Mighty Leeds in the ’73 Cup Final !

  2. From my recollection too Leeds in the 60/70s were a not so much a diving team more a “hard” team….or as some would have it dirty. They certainly were not as bad as the kidology we see today with players like Suarez throwing themsleves to the ground in freeze frame and even the likes of Tiote last week with the faux broken chin.But I don/t think I have ever seen such a cynical team as Leeds of old.The motto was “Give nowt to the enemy”,and football was conducted as a state of war rather than a sport.

    Maybe they indulged in a spot of diving where they thought necessary but it wasn’t their recognised game.We also saw that destructive side of the game in the 73 cup final when Ritchie Pitt was intructed by Stokoe to clatter a Leeds player in the first minute….which was quite similar to Cattermole’s last week against the Mags too.

  3. So Leeds United invented diving? I really have heard it all now. We will add that to the long list of other invented slights against the beautiful game that Leeds United alone have committed.

    But it obvious to me that getting a rise out of Leeds supporters is all this title aimed to do, and getting hits on your blog is more important than writing well, or having a proper point.

    As for Phil Johnson, he must have an INCREDIBLE memory to claim that his recollections of a match in the 1960’s outweighs printed match reports from the time. His bitterness towards Leeds and Don Revie is as misguided and embarrassing as his assertion that Don Revie is surely guilty of something despite no concrete evidence to suggest otherwise.

    It’s certainly a good thing that Sunderland players never dive isn’t it, or you would all look very hypocritical…..

    • More evidence of a Leeds supporter who refuses to read beyond a headline he dislikes.

      Nowhere does the article say Leeds invented diving. Reference to a shocking instance, from 1967 and involving Sunderland as the disadvantaged side, was made to illustrate that the problem is not new. I make it clear that Sunderland players can expect no thanks from me if, as in an example given, they also dive. And I cite other cases from different clubs, with Leeds one of the intended victims. If you have failed to see the “proper point”, Sam, that may well reflect a problem with your own powers of comprehension.

      But it is good to know that even if you cannot reach beyond a headline in order to trash all that follows, you are an arbiter of good writing to whom those of us less talented may turn for inspiration.

      For the record, I did – unlike most of the hyper-sensitive souls from Leeds we have seen in the past 24 hours – see the Leeds of the period in question and just before. I was not, as a kid, aware of the concept of diving and remember instead a team of high football ability marred by a willingness to engage in thuggery, even by the standards of the day. It took the memoirs of one of your own heroes to alert me to Revie’s instruction that any player finding himself in or near our penalty area should go down. Said hero, Peter Lorimer, then gives the example of instruction put into practice with telling effect.

  4. Coming in a bit late here I know.This anti cheating drive is all very noble but I am afraid a bit futile and if I am honest I am getting a little tired of it.

    All teams do it, so there hardly seems any point picking out individual cases at the exclusion of others.We all see this happening on a weekly basis.Trouble is we are so desperate for our own team to win, we often overlook our own teams “sins”.So let us not get all too pious about the cheating thing.

    It also gets us talking about the game, warts and all,and lets face it we love our villains as much as our heros.For everyone drooling over Pele,Cruyff,Maradonna, or Messi, we enjoy a good old moan about the hated players like Vinnie Jones,Ronaldo the winker,Mardonna and the Hand of God(he makes both catagories) and the ultimate king of the penalty high dive……Jurgen Klinsman.

    Yeah we dont like it, but it is part of the game,it always has been an likely always will be.And what would we complain about if we did not have all these pantomime villains we enjoy bating so much?

    The refs just need to get a “grip”,but we enjoy a good moan about them too.Football is about opinions……let us embrace it.

    And before anyone thinks I have a bias on Sunderland vs Leeds, I grew up in Yorkshire as a boy and was a Leeds Utd fan when they played under Revie……..which turned out to be their Halycon days.

    Though I have long since “seen the light” and converted to the true faith that follows the red and white stripes.

  5. “I actually included a critical reference to a Newcastle player but removed it because I felt it did not fit the argument I was making”.

    I would have thought a reference to “Mr” Taylor would have made your point perfectly!

  6. Slightly surprised that in a long debate that has hardly been ill-natured, so few of my critics have managed to get far past a few words in the headline or a distortion of one or two points beneath.

    Articles are written in the hope that they will be read, just as insurance policies are written, cars are made and solicitors or plumbers’ services are offered to be sold. I make no apology for avoiding a drab headline, designed to attract no readers at all, and stand by every word I then wrote.

    Points of record:

    * the reports of Wenger cited Bale

    * Wenger cited Suarez

    * my references to Walcott’s gesture have never been hostiile

    * Revie’s instruction to dive was reported not by a Sunderland supporter but a former Leeds hero

    * at a guess, the vast majority of non-Arsenal supporters seeing the `Eduardo incident (or the Ngog one in Liverpool v Birmingham, McAlister in Liverpool v SAC and, yes, Larsson in Wolves v SAFC ) would believe they were watching dives whatever, in Eduardo’s case, Uefa later made of it in a verdict that attracted much criticism.

    * I actually included a critical reference to a Newcastle player but removed it because I felt it did not fit the argument I was making

    And I look forward still to seeing rather more intelligent discussion of the issues than has so far been seen in most obviously Leeds (though “bigger club” did make me chuckle, Dylan) or Arsenal responses

  7. “oldlufc March 12, 2012 at 2:28 pm ” said:

    “I have the match programme and Yorkshire Post match report in front of me as I type – that is how I know Greenhoff was fouled and Sunderland HAD 2 players sent off – not Leeds!”

    Big deal!

    You were not there and (somehow) believe that spouting a YP match report allows you to express an “objective” opinion?

    I, for one, don’t think so!

    As an aside, you use the name of “oldlufc” but just how old are you?

    I’m not ashamed to admit to being 64 but I believe that you are a LOT younger than I am!

  8. We can argue all we want. Afterall you are a Sunderland Fan. You are not an Arsenal, Tottenham or Leeds fan. So we understand.

    Don’t say something and then try to hide. Its not necessary. Its cheating. Lol

  9. Totally agree with Arselicked- this is a shameless grab for the attention of fans who support bigger clubs. Pathetic really.

  10. Its deliberate ‘legend killing’ my friend, regardless of how you try to find a better way around it. Its not about cheating. Its about Wenger, Bale and Leeds.

    You don’t have to hide behind ‘i’m a Wenger fan’. If you demonise Walcott for coming out with the truth, making the Eduardo situation your point of proof and reserving one sentence for sunderland players, you can’t blame others for seeing you for what you are. A Sunderland fan looking for bigger audience from Arsenal, Tottenham and Leeds fans.

    Just come out with it, we will understand. Its allowed.

    • Just to show precisely how wrong you are Mr A: this appeared immediately after the Walcott apology, Salut! Sunderland – which has every right to comment on footballing issues beyond those directly or ,as here, chiefly affecting SAFC – and led to the cheating question being named for a while after him, as a mark of respect for his honesty:

      It was while I was away on holiday and we were being dumped out of the FA Cup by mighty Notts County that Theo Walcott made a statement I have since been unable to shake from my mind.

      Arsenal nearly had their own cup day stinker, leaving it desperately late to snatch a draw at home to Leeds. This proved crucial as the Gunners went on to win the Elland Road replay comfortably.

      But what made a real impact on me was the subsequent statement from Walcott, posted to the official Arsenal site.

      In it, he offered fulsome apology to both managers, Arsène Wenger and Simon Grayson, for what he admitted was a blatant dive intended to gain a penalty. I am unaware of any doubt – or was, until tonight’s comment from a Leeds fan (see below)! – about the spot kick he did win a little later and which brought the equaliser.

      This is what young Theo said:

      “I want to apologise to the managers because I actually dived. I was trying to win the penalty. I said to one of their players ‘would you have done it?’ and he said he probably would have.

      I am not the sort of player to do it, but I own up to it and apologise. It is something I don’t want to see in my game. I have heard some players say ‘if there is a slight touch, go down’ and it can work both ways.

      It was one of those things. I am not happy with myself for doing that, but I am happy that we got the draw.

      I had a little joke with the referee afterwards saying ‘that was my first dive, can you tell?’

      I don’t have to own up to it and I can’t speak for other players, but I have just expressed how I feel. I hope people respect that.”

      And respect him I most certainly do.

      Salut! Sunderland has laboured long and hard in the cause of stamping out the cheating that pollutes the modern game.

      Arsenal are not especially in our sights as targets. Some clubs, some players are more guilty than others but the scourge of cheating – diving, feigning injury, badgering referees to show yellow or red cards to opponents – is rife at all levels of football.

      But we managed to appal Gooners last season by posing the Eduardo Question in each of our regular “Who are you?” features in which a fan of our next opponents talks about the forthcoming game, his or her club and football in general.

      The question ran something like:

      “Last second of the last game of the season. It’s goalless but only a win assures you of the title/a European place/staying up. One of your players goes down and gets a penalty even though everyone in the ground except the ref knows he dived. You score and win. You take it gladly, you take it guiltily or you’re so ashamed you almost wish you’d only drawn and missed out?”

      Now that Eduardo has gone, Arsenal fans presumably accept that the theatrical gesture that inspired the question, at home to Celtic, was a dreadful dive after all. And they can hardly complain if I now name a related question – essentially, is it time to stop caring about fair play and accept cheating as the norm? – in honour of one of theirs.

      I would love Walcott’s statement to lead to a new mood throughout football. It won’t, at least in the short term.

      But it has changed the debate. To my knowledge, he is the first player at such a high level to make such a confession. His own actions clearly embarrassed him. He is contrite, and wants cheating to play no part in his game.

      So far, so good. But then we learn – yes, I suppose we knew but now all doubt has been removed – that other players tell him to go down at the least contact in the hope of deceiving referees. Meaning, presumably, that they do so, too.

      We are not told what proportion these cheats represent, but can assume it is widespread. And they do it so automatically that they don’t even take the trouble to conceal their dishonesty. And we can also assume that in most cases, they are behaving under direct or implicit instructions from their managers.

      It is no good telling ourselves it is worse abroad, or that it wouldn’t be so bad here were it not for all those Johnny Foreigner imports. In what is otherwise a glowing display of decency and candour, Walcott’s disclosure of the cynical attitude of fellow professionals gets close to challenging the will to go on enjoying football.

      Or as the wording of my Theo Walcott question suggests may be the case, have I simply got it wrong? Am I old-fashioned, naive and unrealistic in wanting to rid the game of the cheats?

      I shall go on asking the question each week and I’d be interested to see a range of view expressed here.

      But I’ll end for now with the way in which my Tottenham Hotspur previewer, Jim Duggan, the founder of, deals with the issue in this week’s Who are You? (due to appear here on Thursday) …

      Q This was the Eduardo question and is now the Walcott question. Theo publicly admitted to a blatant dive in an (unsuccessful) attempt to win a penalty and said players had told him to go down at the least contact. Commendable honesty, or a sign that it is time to abandon high-minded principles about cheating and accept it as part of the modern game?

      A Cheating goes on and it spoils the game, but then again it reflects the society in which the game is played.

    • Surely, my friend, you must realise/appreciate that a Sunderland Blog is written by a Sunderland fan?

      However (IMHO) the views expressed, in the articles (and most of the replies) are designed not to be insulting to supporters of other teams but to encourage the type of “banter”/debate that someone is prepared to have “face to face”.

      Maybe, though, some fail to appreciate that?

  11. This article would appear to being “trashed” by idiotic LUFC supporters who were unknown to their father’s b*ll sacks during the period in question.

    Maybe, Monsieur Salute should impose an age limit on certain topics.

    I can, fully, understand supporters of any club wishing to defend their club.

    However, I could not attempt (nor would I try) to defend the actions of SAFC board members in 1957 (?).

    I was alive, yes, but had no interest in SAFC so had NO knowledge (or interest) of the happenings at that time.

    It would appear that some of the LUFC posters think that a lack of “first hand” knowledge should allow their opinions to be viewed seriously.

    I would, vehemently, disagee!!

  12. Can’t have it both ways: on the one hand Bogdan banging on for ever about the headline, saying it does not reflect the article (which he has yet to discuss), and on the other, Arselicked arguing – without much depth but on any interpretation of the accusation of legend killing – that the article DOES reflect the headline. for the record, it is about cheating in football. Wenger’s comments provide a starting point. Revie’s instructions give historical perspective. All sides are treated objectively – whatever you believe, Bogdan – if you should take the trouble to read the whole piece,

  13. This article has the ring of “legend killer!!!!!!!!!!’ written all over it. News are hard to comeby, hey?

  14. I have given a thumbs up to oldlufc’s comment because although he fails to deal at all with the Lorimer quotes, which offer us an insight into a very early recorded instance of high-profile cheating (therefore justifying the headline), but because he at least makes his case patiently and with detail instead of just ignoring a longish article to dwell solely on a few words at the top.

    • A title should represent the article. This title doesn’t, and fails to do so whilst needlessly tarnishing a club’s name completely out of context. Simple as.

    • The Lorimer quotes can be taken with a pinch of salt bearing in mind that Lorimer had a book to to sell!

      He must have a bloody good memory if he can remember what Revie said at HT in a game from 1967!

      How many biographies have you read where you believe every word written?

      • No I was not at that particular game which was a 2nd Replay but I well remember the 1st game at Roker Park, played I almost gale conditions and a very young Booby Kerr breaking his leg in a tackle with Norman Hunter. The replay at Elland Road set the Record Gate for Leeds at 57,892 with thousands locked out.

        As for the game at Hull, where Sunderland had 2 players sent off!, Leeds won by a Giles penalty (87th Minute) after Greenhoff had been fouled by Irwin. Sunderland initially claimed for offside and also that Greenhoff had dived. Some 40 Sunderland fans invaded the pitch and Ian McColl said the club would protest to the FA about the penalty – but never did.

        Now if that had been Leeds fans invading the pitch – Leeds would have been hung drawn and quartered by the FA.

        There was a lot of rivalry between Leeds and Sunderland at that time having been promoted together from Div 2 in 1964.

        I agree Sunderland lost that particular game in controversial circumstances but how a single game can support “dirty” Leeds and “bought” points comments is beyond me.

        Tell me a team that has not lost a game when they have felt “cheated” and thought they deserved better. It you ample “revenge” in the 1973 Final.

      • Thank you for having admitted that your knowledge, of the 2nd replay was hearsay.

        Given that you can admit to that, how can you then state “after Greenhoff had been fouled by Irwin. Sunderland initially claimed for offside and also that Greenhoff had dived”

        Leeds cheated that night.

        Anyone that was there knew it and Lorimer’s comments, merely, confirmed it.

        End of story!

      • Phil,

        I have the match programme and Yorkshire Post match report in front of me as I type – that is how I know Greenhoff was fouled and Sunderland HAD 2 players sent off – not Leeds!

      • Try, also, to remember that Bobby Kerr had his leg broken, not once but twice, playing against Revie’s thugs.

        The same Bobby Kerr that lifted the F>A> Cup in 1973!

  15. Clearly the passage of time has done little to ease the pain or start the healing, football was a different game in those days and many of the so called hard men were practising the dark arts, Our own George Kinnell or even at times King Charlie were not shrinking violets, but the modern game has moved on football is no longer a game of working class lads getting a little bit more pay than a welder. We now have super rich palyers and a critical media watching every move they make and expecting moral behaviour. Its a pipe dream, there will always be a player looking to take an unfair advantage, it is after all human nature. I respect your campaign to attempt to illiminate this from football by expecting fans to reject the gains achieved through cheating and hope you are successful but humans will never be perfect

  16. It always amazes me just how often the “Dirty Leeds” story surfaces 35 years after Revie left Leeds Utd. I also find it strange that the majority of those who appear keen to perpetuate the story never actually saw the Leeds team of the 1960s early 1970s actually play, preferring to rely on hearsay, like the infamous Cloughie quote. It does makes you wonder why Cloughie even took the Leeds job!

    Just a few facts – Revie, the arch “villain”, was voted Manager of the Year in 1969, 1970 and 1972, awarded an OBE and became England manager. As for those “thugs” who made up the team, Charlton, Bremner and Collins all won Footballer of the Year awards (1965.1968 and 1970) seven of the players were in England’s 1970 World Cup squad, the whole team were internationals.

    Perhaps the most surprising fact is that Norman Hunter, he of “Bites Yer Legs” fame was voted the inaugural PFA Player of the Year in 1974, by his fellow professionals. How was all this possible?

    Pick up any away match programme from a game involving Leeds from that era and you will get a totally different perspective respected sports journalists from, like Tony Pullein and Bob Baldwin.

    Why is it no one ever mentions the antics of Franny Lee, the “penalty king” when he played for Derby or for Sunderland fans, good ole Roy Keane, who deliberately set out to maim an opponent but was feted by Sunderland fans as a hero when he was manager?

    If you really want to know the inside story of of Don Revie’s Leeds Utd I suggest you read “The Unforgiven” (Bagchi & Rogerson)

    • I can fully understand why a LUFC supporter would attempt to defend what Revie did.

      However, it was only after he left the England job (in his normal, unethical, manner) that the truth about his behaviour at Leeds became public knowledge.

      As I commented earlier, if he believed that the stories printed, about that, were libellous he could have taken action through the courts.

      The fact that he chose not to do that is tantamount to an admission that they were true!

      Regarding the players that you named, I think ALL were brilliant and deserving of all the plaudits that came their way (based upon their PLAYING ability).

      Some, though, (IMHO) debased their status by virtue of other actions which were contemptable and they MUST have been acting (seemed like a good choice of word) under the instructions of Revie!

      The one who seems to receive most stick is Hunter and I must say that I think that it is, totally, undeserved (his mistake against Poland is not relevant to this debate) because he was a hard man who would happily take what he dished out – unlike some of his team mates!!

      IMHO the “Dirty Leeds” tag was earned and well merited, to the degree that Revie has ensured that a hatred for your club has been passed from father to son.

      It will take something special for that to change and having KB, as a chairman, isn’t going to help in that direction.

      • A p.s.

        YES I saw LUFC play from 1962 onwards, so my memories are based upon what I witnessed, not upon what I might have read.

      • Phil Johnson

        If you saw Leeds play from 1962 tell us just what you did WITNESS!

        How many Sending Offs did you witness at these games?

        Were you a regular at Elland Road then? Or are you going from Match of The day highlights which I do not recall being particularly bias against Leeds Utd in highlighting Leeds as a dirty team.

        You sum it up when you say “Hatred passed from father to son” = hearsay!

      • I’m a Sunderland supporter who attended all home matches, from the end of ’62 (I was then 14 y.o.) and a fair proportion of away games as well.

        I was a spectator, in Hull, at the match that Lorimer referred to – yet another that Revie “bought”.

        Regarding your “questions about bookings/sending offs I think that you need to lookm no further than the reasons Revie is hated (buying points).

        “Hatred passed from father to son” = hearsay!”


        The same is true of Coventry City, because of the actions of Jimmy Hill – Check it out!

  17. That the phrase ‘winning a penalty’ or ‘winning a free-kick’ is so widely accepted implicitly condones cheating. Commentators and pundits – not to mention managers – should stop saying this. I’d be in favour of refs reviewing matches and issuing cards for simulation.

  18. The so called cheating came from Europe…not Leeds’s Don Revie.
    So the Title should be “The cheating Legacy of European football’s influence on the English game”

    • Sorry, I think that you are mistaken, if we are talking about English football.

      I’m old enough to remember the way that we used to slate some of the European players for the way that they dived/rolled around when they had not been touched.

      However, (IIRC) that really started in the ’70’s when there was an influx of South American players into the strongest European league, at that time, which was the Italian, and their players seemed very happy to surpass their antics.

      In England, during the ’60’s, this just did not happen – UNTIL Revie’s Leeds!

      OK, Revie was a trendsetter and we should all join hands and have a candlelit vigil in his honour.

      Does that sound ok with you?

  19. Cloughie summed up Revie when he told Bremner, Giles and all the other thugs who made up that awful team to throw their medals in the bin, because they got them by cheating. As in most things, Brian Howard was absolutely right.

  20. As an Arsenal fan I wholeheartedly agree with your stance on the diving thing. This needs to be kicked out of football in any form, for any team. I would also like to point out that I accept that Arsenal players themselves might ‘go down’ easily at times, and that is also to be condemned.
    However, on a point of fact; Eduardo was accused by UEFA of ‘deceiving the referee’, and …ummm… found NOT guilty. People seem to forget that…

  21. please leave the great DON REVIE,alone,there will never be another one as good as him.If LEEDS UNITED,would of had the luck of other clubs,they would of WON A LOT MORE TROPHY’S.CHEERS MICK.

    • Let’s clear one thing up, once and for all, the Leeds United team of Don Revie cheated!

      He bribed (or attempted to) opposing managers and match officials – When the accusations.appeared in print, during his lifetime he could have sued, if he thought that he could win in court.

      He chose not to and was, forever, damned by his cowardice.

      Speaking of cowardice, that is exactly what his teams displayed!

      In those days there were not banks of cameras filming everything that happened on the pitch and Collins, followed by Giles used to kidney punch opponents and rake their studs down the back of their calves when the referee was looking elsewhere.

      At least Bremner, Hunter etc. were men enough to go in hard when the opposition could see them coming, although Bremner was the Suarez of his day in so much as someone only had to look at him for him to start writhing in apparent agony.

      Cowards and cheats, no more no less!

      • I think you maybe a trifle confused re the bribery story, which did appear in certain tabloids after Revie had quit the England job in 1977. The lead accuser was none other than Bob Stokoe, citing a game against Bury in 1962, why he chose to reveal all so long after the event (15 years after) is rather strange? Maybe it was because he got a nice little earner from the paper concerned. (The Daily Mirror) In fact the Sunday Times ran an alternative story ridiculing the Mirror story.

        For the record, Billy Bremner did take legal action and was awarded £100k in damages against the Sun..

        Where is your evidence that Leeds “cheated” were you present at all these games?

        Finally, here is a little snippet you may enjoy – in 1988 when Liverpool were at their strongest and had equalled Leeds unbeaten run of 29 games before losing at Everton David Miller (Daily Mirror), who had long been a detractor of Leeds Utd, was asked which was the better team, Leeds of 1974 or Liverpool of 1988? He chose Leeds!!!

      • The facts are the facts.

        Revie attempted/succeeded in bribing opponents & match officials.

        If he did not, why did he not take court action?

        What do your snippets about Billy Bremner and David Miller have to do with the price of fish?

  22. What’s your next article going to be? “Martin O’Neill, Alan Pardew and dock Leeds 15 points”

    As the others have said, you have sullied your own article with your ridicolous mirror-esque title.

    • Mirror-esque as in in reflective? If you were not appalled by what was done in your name on that night – unless you can find an innocent interpretation of Lorimer’s damning words – then you sully your team’s reputation. You’ll also be aware that I have not quoted the worst of what PL had to say about that game in his autobiog.

      Odd that so far all we have had is bickering about the headline. Twelve words, not 14, in that heading and several hundred follow. Discuss.

      • The fact is there are 14 words in the title, 8 of them are about Leeds and quite unequivocally set the club up to shoulder a “legacy” of cheating. You have a thing or two to learn about objective writing.

        But hey, it’s the internet. Mention Leeds, get on NewsNow, and people will flock to your website. Nowt else matters, plus it’s all done in the name of fair play, isn’t it?

  23. I think that the subject of cheating unites supporters of all clubs, as no other, in the wish to see it eliminated.

    Surely, if The F.A. were to issue the following directive, it would be all that it would take for the practice to, very swiftly, disappear.

    “If, following a challenge or attempted challenge, in the opinion of the referee, a player does not make sufficient attempt to stay on his feet OR appears to overreact to any contact made/not made then the referee must view this as simulation and the player responsible will be cautioned.”

  24. Sorry boys but what is it with you lot and Leeds United you never leave us alone ! Every week you have aago about Leeds present,past or 1973 or is it that your all secret Leeds fans ??

  25. How about you change the title then, to something less worthy of a tabloid? “the cheating legacy of Don Revie’s Leeds” has very little to do with what the article is about and is only a pathetic attempt to play into the country-wide embraced tag of dirty Leeds.

    • … because Bogdan, that quote – from Lorimer, one of your heroes, and spotted on a Leeds history site – – goes right to the heart of what Wenger is saying and what I have been saying. It also draws Leeds supporters into the discussion and that is healthy. I make it perfectly clear it is a piece about football in general but it is hugely relevant that such an instruction was given 45 years ago.

      • Considering our “reputation” and all the unjustified labels that team has got ever since, this is hardly a relevant wording in the context. Legacy makes it sound as if Revie was the first to ever suggest something like that, and like I say, it only plays into the path of all the Leeds-hating mob (roughly everyone not supporting Leeds) looking for yet another reason to fuel their ill sentiment.

        It is also severely misleading as to the actual quote of Mr Revie and for everyone not actually going past the title, the effect is nothing more than what I mention above – another passenger on the Leeds-hate bandwagon.

  26. legacy of Don Revie’s Leeds being cheated, try the Jeff Astle offside goal that cost us the league in 1971, or the referee who was banned for life following us being cheated out of the ’73 Cup Winners’ Cup Final, or after Don left,. the diabolical decisions to cheat us out of victory in the European Cup Final in ’75 v Munich.

    • As I say, Aaron, it was not an anti-Leeds thing on my part. I saw that Lorimer quote only recently and was frankly astonished. But it is rife throughout the game and I don’t doubt that Leeds will have been victims as well as perpetrators.

Comments are closed.

Next Post