Considering context and approvals
It seems I need to assume some defaults about my workspace settings, like having network access and asking for approval if something is important and I run into limitations. I should clarify with the user if they want specific information regarding Daniel Farke and Leeds, like match details against Chelsea or Liverpool, possibly in cup competitions. However, since the current date is beyond my last knowledge cut-off, I should verify any details with reliable sources before proceeding.Clarifying user needs
I think I should avoid heavy formatting, so simple bullet points work for this response. First, I’ll clarify what the user wants—if they need a fact-check, I can search. I should mention that Daniel Farke is working with Leeds for the 2023-24 promotion push, but I don’t have updates for 2024-25. I need to provide a neutral commentary, mentioning that general media claims often don’t reflect club decisions.
I can also offer to check if Leeds will play Chelsea or Liverpool soon and suggest several options for follow-up, while keeping everything concise.
看起来像一条“生死战”类的转会/执教流言。像这种“赢其一否则下课”的说法，通常需要核对权威信源（俱乐部官宣、The Athletic/Phil Hay、BBC、Ornstein 等）。俱乐部很少公开设定单场赛果的硬性指标，更多看整体走势与更衣室氛围。
你想怎么跟进？
- 我现在帮你查证最新权威报道与具体赛程，给出结论和来源链接。
- 需要一段社媒点评/解读文案（中立版或情绪版都行）。
- 想看法尔克在利兹的阶段性数据与走势分析，再判断这条消息的可信度。