readingstockport
New member
Apparently Sky sports are reporting that Sheff U are to sue west ammmmm for 30 million.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Sheff U v West Ham
- Thread starter readingstockport
- Start date
jonny.rainbow
Well-known member
- Oct 29, 2005
- 6,848
Here's an idea.
The money they are spending on these continual court cases and legal battles, could instead be invested in the team to try and win promotion back to the Premiership.
They may even leapfrog West Ham on the way.
The money they are spending on these continual court cases and legal battles, could instead be invested in the team to try and win promotion back to the Premiership.
They may even leapfrog West Ham on the way.
Braders
Abi Fletchers Gimpboy
exactly , doubt after the FA ruling they will stand much chance of winning it anyways.
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
Tevez saga part 127.
This will be an interesting case, seems to me to be in two parts. That the playing of Tevez while an illicit player during ther season helped West Ham survive (true, but hard to prove for £30m).
And then that for the final three games of the season, when West Ham assured the Premier League they had ripped up the third-party deal and signed a new one, that he was allowed to play.
Subsequent events have shown this almost certainly wasn't true, if it was there is no way West Ham would have accepted an 'ex gratia' payment from Joorabchian of £2m for a player that, if truly theirs, was worth more than £20m on the open market.
It is clear to me that Tevez should not have played those last three games, and that will be a lot easier to prove.
This will be an interesting case, seems to me to be in two parts. That the playing of Tevez while an illicit player during ther season helped West Ham survive (true, but hard to prove for £30m).
And then that for the final three games of the season, when West Ham assured the Premier League they had ripped up the third-party deal and signed a new one, that he was allowed to play.
Subsequent events have shown this almost certainly wasn't true, if it was there is no way West Ham would have accepted an 'ex gratia' payment from Joorabchian of £2m for a player that, if truly theirs, was worth more than £20m on the open market.
It is clear to me that Tevez should not have played those last three games, and that will be a lot easier to prove.
sten_super
Brain Surgeon
But allegedly Sheffield Utd also broke a 3rd party agreement rule; they stopped a player that Watford signed from them in playing in the fixture between the two clubs, which isn't allowed.
While I understand that they are peeved at the decision that was reached, it was clear from day 1 that they weren't going to get the Premier League (or the FA, or UEFA, or FIFA, or the High Court) to reverse the decision. Instead of just saying 'well we've been screwed, let's get on with it' they have continued to shout and moan from the rooftops. As someone points out, surely all these legal fees could have been spent on the playing side?
They have completely ignored the fact that the reason, ultimately, that they went down was because they were shit poor for the last half of the season. They also took the hilarious decision to appoint Bryan Robson as manager.
That said, I don't really hate them. At least not now that Neil Warnock has left.
readingstockport
New member
- Thread starter
- #7
As someone on our list has pointed out Sheff U did employ Warnock and that deserves something
Totally agree with you, the fact west sham and the greedy league are being allowed to get away with this shows quite how corrupt the game has become at the higher levels imho.
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,973
BUt they were only three points poorer than a team that cheated and should have lost it's points for the last 3 games of the season. If Albion were in the position of Sheffield Utd we'd all be furious. Why should they let it lie?
They now know they can't get back in the premiership so they want financial compensation which is the minimum they should recieve
The Large One
Who's Next?
As someone pointed out on the BBC, why aren't Sheffield United taking the Premier League to court?
West Ham cheated, were found guilty and got penalised. We know that the PL is fundamentally spineless, but the fact that the penalty was not satisfactory - alright, was a big pile of shit - to many isn't actually West Ham's doing. So, if they feel so aggrieved, why are Sheffield United not turning their guns on the Premier League? Is it because they perceive West Ham to be an easier target?
It would be interesting to see what new evidence Sheffield United have come up with in order to overturn what the High Court has already dismissed, although as it's going through a civil court, perhaps the burden of proof isn't so high.
West Ham cheated, were found guilty and got penalised. We know that the PL is fundamentally spineless, but the fact that the penalty was not satisfactory - alright, was a big pile of shit - to many isn't actually West Ham's doing. So, if they feel so aggrieved, why are Sheffield United not turning their guns on the Premier League? Is it because they perceive West Ham to be an easier target?
It would be interesting to see what new evidence Sheffield United have come up with in order to overturn what the High Court has already dismissed, although as it's going through a civil court, perhaps the burden of proof isn't so high.
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
Excellent point. Sheffield United are so principled that they, err, aren't going to sue correct target the Premier League because they would trample over their proverbial grandmother to get back into it next season. And then they'd have to be nice to them again. Surely they would win a civil case against the PL, at least for a few million compensation.
Yoda
English & European
Do those Numpties at Sheffield United know, that there's a rule UEFA could enforce that will result in English clubs being SUSPENDED and THROWN from European competitions for this season, if they continue their dispute?
keaton
Big heart, hot blood and balls. Big balls
- Nov 18, 2004
- 9,973
So your saying if they carry on they'll really really piss off Man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea and Spurs and cost them loads of money? Go the blades!
Tooting Gull
Well-known member
- Jul 5, 2003
- 11,033
Jesus, talk about turning up the heat. There is so much pressure being heaped on the Blades to drop this, you start to think they have really got them worried and must have a case. I'm beginning to want them to get a result.
Perhaps those Champions League teams could have a whip-round for them, if they're so worried about their £20million each.
Yoda
English & European
Oh! It would also inclued ENGLAND from internationals.
Think it's along the lines of, If two clubs are in legal dispute, no clubs from that country can partake in UEFA competitions.
Think it's along the lines of, If two clubs are in legal dispute, no clubs from that country can partake in UEFA competitions.
readingstockport
New member
- Thread starter
- #15
Out of court settlement for almost the full amount immenent then.
withdeanwombat
Well-known member
Said it before,but:
West Ham,£5.5m fine,less £2m "backhander"from Tevez's real owner = -£3.5m.
Sheff Utd,blameless,relegated,-£30m lowest est.
But after all,Falmer going ahead = frabjous joy!
West Ham,£5.5m fine,less £2m "backhander"from Tevez's real owner = -£3.5m.
Sheff Utd,blameless,relegated,-£30m lowest est.
But after all,Falmer going ahead = frabjous joy!
Doesnt affect the team i support.
Wardy
NSC's Benefits Guru
Haven't Sheffield United been told that before they can sue the PL they need to sue West Ham first? I think the case against West Ham is just the warm-up for the main event.
But then do they forfeit their parachute payments?