I wouldn't trust the FA to be able to fight it if a club and their sponsors were set on it.

For one thing Leeds United aren't even under the direct authority of the FA right now, they are a FL club. Now, if Leeds became Red Bulls Leeds and gained promotion to the PL, the FA might try and stop it, but personally I think the PL would step in and tell them to do one.

For me the power rests with the fans. If there's a genuine prospect of LUFC becoming LRB then they need telling that if it happened they'd refuse to support the club and there would be an active campaign against Red Bull.



I'm pretty certain the same thing happened after he left Chelsea. He was supposed to have an honoury presidents position, but within 5 minutes he was whining about how Abramovich was doing it wrong and he soon left.

I liked Ken Bates at CFC. At least he stood up for the club. But he was always too poor to be able to run a football club, even back in the 80's.

football league or premier league it doesn't matter. you can't have a trade name in your title

If Red Bull, Leeds United FC and the fans of Leeds United felt that becoming Leeds Red Bulls was going to help them become a PL club again, then they'd put up a challenge to the rules. And I think they'd win.

Austria Vienna did it back in the 90's. I remembered that from Chelsea playing Austria Memphis in the 90's. Just looking at Austria Vienna's wikipedia page I see there's also something on that about Red Bull Salzburg. There's also the New York Red Bulls.

The reason the FA can talk big and say they'll fight it is because they know the fans won't back it.

this is England not Austria. also in the states its all trade names.
I will keep repeating it won't happen here.
even if the fans kick off it won't happen.
simple as that

[url=http://www.thefa.com/~/media/Files/TheFAPortal/governance-docs/rules-of-the-association/rules-of-the-association.ashxFA Rule 3(l), p101[/url



What you keep repeating isn't the issue they are the rules.

Looking at the articles from David conn this morning just highlights the trouble the club is in.

Some press reports are reporting the club has finally severed bates connection with the club.
Allegedly due to costs for his private plane jetting in from his tax exile base of Monaco , if only we all had that sort of problem. I am not much of a football fan but with bates around there was never a dull moment.
Whilst at Chelsea addressing the journalists post match, he said right the meetings over you lot can p..ss off to your council houses whilst I go to my 300acre farm.

I would have loved a dull moment the last 8 years have been a p1ss take.

I have never really kept up with what went on at utd, one thing I know for certain is somebody I know very well with several other business associates of his tried to buyutd before bates took over. They were all Leeds supporter and successful businessmen.
They could not make any sense out of the accounts and people selling the club, it would have cost them a fortune to do a diligence exercise. They wanted to buy the club as supporters, not to asset strip it as various other parties have done.

The club was in trouble and needed stabilising if it had have been managed correctly it would have been back in the top flight withing 2-3 seasons. Sadly Bates got his claws in.

Though his legacy is being removed, with yorkshire radio now being shut down.

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/2 ... witterfeed

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/2 ... witterfeed

Can't wait for the new season now, no doubt it will yet again be a disappointing and humbling experience, but here's hoping we can pull something out of the bag.

Big crowd due as well, a win playing decent football should hopefully bring a few of the curious stay aways who are attending back.

There were rules preventing football clubs from paying directors. There were rules that directors weren't able to profit from clubs going bust.

Clubs just walked round these rules and the FA did FA about it.

The FA have rules about names of clubs. Hull City have recently come out and said they are no longer Hull City AFC and are now Hull City Tigers (locally) and Hull Tigers (nationally and internationally).

What have the FA done about Hull City changing their name and not abiding by their rules? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Have a quick google search of "chelsea fc" and you'll see their first game is against "Hull City Tigers". Hull City have effectively managed to change their name unofficially and it's been accepted by outsiders as a change of name. The FA have sat on their hands, because they are useless.

Now, the Hull City Tigers name change is just a pathetic marketing attempt by a div. It's an embarrassment to supporters of Hull City to have their history and identity thrown away in a foolish attempt to build a "brand". And the FA have sat silently by and done nothing about it. You want to believe that if Leeds United sell the naming rights of the club to Red Bull and they will suddenly rush in stop it? You probably still believe in the tooth fairy, father christmas and god as well.

You are preaching to the converted, but never mind. The governing bodies in this country are a joke. The fact so many lufc supporters were willing to accept Red bull scared me but didnt suprise me, too many brainwashed with the sky generation.

You'd prefer to stay Leeds United in the "Championship" for the next 5 years rather than seeing Leeds Red Bulls playing in the Premier League?

I can totally understand why a supporter would accept LU becoming LRB if it meant a return to the the club's rightful position. To those supporters Leeds will always be Leeds United. Just like I used Premier League when really it's the Barclays Premiership. A lino is still a linesman to me, screw that "referees assistant" BS. Just like Man United just won the Charity Shield on Sunday.

Why did you allow yourself to be brainwashed about RL but refuse to accept the brainwashing as part of football?

why can't people get it in there heads its avertising names that are banned. city,rovers,tigers are ok. its not hull city tesco is it ffs

A loaded question. There are no guarantees in football.

A true supporter of leeds united would want nothing to do with red bull especially given their record in football.

I didnt allow myself to be brainwashed by anything, i only really started watching leeds when they had changed already.

The rules say nothing about advertising.

Hull City have just shown that the rules don't even matter. Just like they've just announced that they are now Hull City Tigers to the press but actually done nothing official about it, so could Leeds United by announcing that they are the Leeds Red Bulls.

Your buddy "high up in the FA" who talks big about not allowing it. Why haven't the FA come out and said that Hull City have not followed official procedures for the name change so they are still Hull City as far as the FA are concerned. It's because the FA are gutless and foolish and won't go up against the clubs. If they won't point out that Hull City are still Hull City when it's just the divvy owner who wants it, why would they go up against Leeds United and Red Bull to stop a multi million pound deal?

The FA may not allow Leeds United to officially call themselves the Leeds Red Bulls. But that won't stop Leeds United replacing the signs at Elland Road so that everything says Leeds Red Bulls. It won't stop the players and managers constantly referring to themselves as the Leeds Red Bulls. It won't stop most of the press calling the team Leeds Red Bulls.

I think there are good reasons why the rename won't happen. The biggest is that many fans would hate the name change and refuse to accept it. There's also the damage to Leeds as a club. There's the fact that Leeds United could become the Leeds Red Bulls and still end up stuck in the Championship.

But the FA are not one of the reasons it might not happen. The FA are just a speed bump the club would just swerve round.

A true supporter of Leeds United would want what was best for Leeds United. If calling the club LRB for a decade meant that the club were able to become a top PL club again then I think most LU fans would accept it as a price worth paying.

Fair enough if you are a new supporter to RL since the summer move. But a great deal of people on here have supported RL for longer than that. Leeds were pretty poor at accepting the move to summer and the awful change of name to the Rhinos. But RL clearly needed to try something because of the problems throughout the game. Now Leeds RL are the Leeds Rhinos and have grown into the biggest club in British RL. That wouldn't have happened if the fans had continued to throw tantrums about the Rhinos name. I can understand a true supporter of LUFC accepting and supporting LRB, as horrible as that sounds at this moment.

We will just have to agree to disagree.

without getting into a pathetic having a dig thread he's not my buddy he's my boss as i have worked for the F.A. for 16 years!
hull asked for, and were given permission to change there name. i was told the F.A. are "totally 100% against" teams having sponsers in there names. the crunch, just in my view, is if a man utd or chelsea want to do it as i agree the big clubs run the game.

change the record, you are getting rather boring regarding the "true supporter" line

No i think i will stand up for what i believe in. football is about more than money and always will be to me.

OMG that`s all we need.
The chant of come on you Bulls and Bully Bully been heard in Leeds.
Whatever next?
Ryan Hall the worlds best winger

Being.

I attended the LUST meeting at Elland Road a historic event.