Tevez cash battle to come?

[LoughboroBlade]

The Mirror is today reporting that the new owners are going to look into a challenge against the settlement. How secure is this agreement we reached with West Ham? Is it:

absolutely-guaranteed-we-get-the-cash secure

or

oh-turns-out-we're-actually-going-to-have-to-sign-Geoff-Horsfield-I'm-afraid secure?

West Ham launch new legal action over Tevez affair

West Ham's new owners have launched a legal challenge to claw back cash after being unhappy with the handling of the Carlos Tevez affair.

Joint chairman David Sullivan and David Gold vowed to take drastic action after inheriting a £110million debt at Upton Park last month.

They have already introduced widespread cost-cutting by axing annual retainers to match-day ambassadors and ending club credit cards and mobile phones.

And now the Hammers’ hierarchy have issued formal legal proceedings against the club’s former solicitors and the FA.

Sullivan feels West Ham were badly advised by their old legal team during the Tevez saga.

And he is also trying to recoup funds from the FA after Dean Ashton broke his ankle on England duty in August 2006.

Hitman Ashton subsequently had to retire at 26 just 18 months into a five-year contract at Upton Park.

While the Tevez fiasco landed the club with a fine of £5.5million and compensation plus costs of around £19million to Sheffield United.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

The clue is in the sentence, "And now the Hammers’ hierarchy have issued formal legal proceedings against the club’s former solicitors and the FA."

No this isn't anything to worry about IMHO, although it will be interesting to bait the West Ham fans who now ironically claim we go to court to sort everything out we don't like.

 

[broomhillblade]

Clutching at straws? More easy money for the lawyers by the sound of it.

 

[Muttley]

I REALLY dont care anymore......with or without the Tevez cash, the team will not be invested in.

 

[Ladybladey]

"But the cash-strapped Fratton Park outfit have been offered a loan of £10m from West Ham co-owner David Gold offered to prevent them from going bust."

From BBC Sport today......

 

[Worksop II]

"But the cash-strapped Fratton Park outfit have been offered a loan of £10m from West Ham co-owner David Gold offered to prevent them from going bust."

From BBC Sport today......

That sounds like a 3rd Party wanting some influence in Pompey Football Club

 

[RIP Niftos]

I thought West Ham had no money, how can they be pumping 10m quid into a shit tip like Pompey?

 

[Robbie]

I thought West Ham had no money, how can they be pumping 10m quid into a shit tip like Pompey?

WHU don't, Gold and Sullivan are minted.

 

[Grecian2000]

SEB put this in the Pompey going under thread a couple of weeks back. Might explain West Ham wanting them to stay afloat.

"This is how the Premier League table would look if Portsmouth went out of business, with all their results expunged. The bottom of the table has nothing to do with this sudden desire to avoid them going under, of course!


Chelsea 24 39 55
Manchester United 23 33 50
Liverpool 24 19 44
Arsenal 23 24 43
Tottenham 24 19 40
Manchester City 22 12 38
Aston Villa 23 11 38
Birmingham 23 -1 34
Everton 23 -3 29
Fulham 24 -2 28
Stoke 23 -5 27
Blackburn 24 -20 25
Sunderland 23 -10 24
Wigan 23 -19 24
Burnley 24 -23 23
Hull 24 -25 23
Wolves 23 -21 21
Bolton 23 -18 19
West Ham 22 -12 17"

 

[Latters]

Thing is, they bought the club in the state it is in and probably at a price that reflected the financial position. How can they then go and try to welch on debts that were inherited as part of the deal?

 

[JohnDenver]

Thing is, they bought the club in the state it is in and probably at a price that reflected the financial position. How can they then go and try to welch on debts that were inherited as part of the deal?

Because they're shameless spivs with more money than morals?

Just a theory.

 

[HappyBlade]

They go together well Gold, Sullivan and West Ham.
Considering how they made their money and they club they now own.

 

[HappyBlade]

They are not suing us they are suing their solicitors. Its going to be difficult as the facts were placed on the table and they accepted, out of court, to settle. Its a PR scam to try to make the cheats look like not really being cheats at all, and then to try to offer a £10mil third party offer to stop losing the points they gained off Pompey. As Denver says Spivs.

 

[Vancouver]

Dirty, cheating cockernee scum. How on earth could ethically allow West Ham to loan money to a club where if that club went bust it would mean the cheating scum could be relegated. An utter bloody disgrace. Eff me this makes me sick

 

[Shirty Blade]

Unfortunately for West Ham the PL rules are clear that a club cannot directly or indirectly lend money or guarantee the debts of another club! I wonder if this precludes all of the PL clubs putting together a rescue package?

If the Premier League are going to put together a rescue bid to save Portmouth then it seems that they will have to change their rules. That should take about 10 minutes at the next AGM ..... or they could always ignore the rules as they have done in the past!

I see that Brian Laws has spoken out about allowing Portsmouth to sell players outside the transfer window as this would be unfair on other clubs! It seems that as Portsmouth face liquidation as opposed to administration, a whole can of worms is about to be opened!

 

[grafikhaus]

Unfortunately for West Ham the PL rules are clear that...

Yeah. OK, then.

 

[Vancouver]

Unfortunately for West Ham the PL rules are clear

Because we know how well that worked out last time.

 

[Shirty Blade]

Because we know how well that worked out last time.

It looks as though the PL are actually sticking to the rule book! They will not allow Portsmouth to sell players outside the transfer window!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/p/portsmouth/8522283.stm


Looks like they have another shifty plan to save Portsmouth this season and bugger up next years Championship fixtures!

UTB

 

[MobileBlade]

I'm suprised no ones picked up on Wolves being fined this week for fielding an understrength side at Man U. What were Liverpool fined for doing the same thing at Fulham the year we were relegated?

 

[Highbury_Blade]

you mean like this?

http://www.sheff-utd.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=17427

 

[Shirty Blade]

The Premier League rules on this are quite clear. Rule E.20 states that clubs must field full-strength sides in every match, while B.13 states that each club must act in good faith towards one another.

What rankles with me is how the PL now choose to apply this rule to Wolves and didn't apply it to us, who played an under strength team vs Man Utd, Liverpool - who virtually played their reserves vs Fulham and Man Utd who 'rested' five players against West Ham!

Corruption! Favouritism! Injustice!

The PL simply should not be allowed to ignore their own rules or apply them in an arbitary manner as not to upset the big four! The PL are overseen by the FA who should be ensuring quality control and making sure that the rules are evenly applied!

That however assumes that the FA are impartial and have no agenda. The influential presence of a certain Mr Brooking at the FA makes this assumption highly questionable!

UTB