Blades begin Arbitration

[Foxy]

The 21 team thing originated from a legal professional stating it would be highly unlikely for the premier league to relegate West Ham and that we would perhaps have more luck in getting an additional place in the league.

 

[Bladesman]

Yep and FIFA would back that since they are wanting the prem reduced to 18 teams.

 

[Deleted member 954]

Here's a suggestion......

Why doesn't your chairman try to cling on to some dignity, get on with trying to take your club out of the championship and admit defeat in a futile case ?

I personally can't stand the spammers, but I also know they were relagated because they did what they had to do on the pitch, including beating us at the Emirates.

I'm afraid your club is in danger in becoming a laughing stock in english football, reminiscent of a child in Tescos, screaming and crying until it gets the jelly tots that it wants, but really shouldn't because it's a pain the arse.

Also, from my experience, you don't seem to have much support outside Wigan and Sheffield.

It really is embarrassing.

 

[Sensiblade]

Here's a suggestion......

Why doesn't your chairman try to cling on to some dignity, get on with trying to take your club out of the championship and admit defeat in a futile case ?

I personally can't stand the spammers, but I also know they were relagated because they did what they had to do on the pitch, including beating us at the Emirates.

I'm afraid your club is in danger in becoming a laughing stock in english football, reminiscent of a child in Tescos, screaming and crying until it gets the jelly tots that it wants, but really shouldn't because it's a pain the arse.

Also, from my experience, you don't seem to have much support outside Wigan and Sheffield.

It really is embarrassing.

So your suggestion is let the Cheats cheat and don't say anything about it?!
If it happened at the top of the table and the cheating team won the title at your expense I belive you'd be calling for mouch the same we are.
And that is Justice.

We know we won't get reinstated in the prem, we just want this never to happen again because it is blatant cheating.

 

[silverfox]

Here's a suggestion......

Why doesn't your chairman try to cling on to some dignity, get on with trying to take your club out of the championship and admit defeat in a futile case ?

I personally can't stand the spammers, but I also know they were relagated because they did what they had to do on the pitch, including beating us at the Emirates.

I'm afraid your club is in danger in becoming a laughing stock in english football, reminiscent of a child in Tescos, screaming and crying until it gets the jelly tots that it wants, but really shouldn't because it's a pain the arse.

Also, from my experience, you don't seem to have much support outside Wigan and Sheffield.

It really is embarrassing.

If it's so futile why have you bothered to come on here and post?

 

[Linz]

It really is embarrassing.

Tell the Premier League to produce the evidence they reportedly have and everything will go away.

Until then, it looks as though something is a little shady and we have every right to push our case.

£30 million might not mean much to an Arsenal fan, but to a Sheffield United fan, it means a lot.

 

[silverfox]

I think it's rather embarrassing that other clubs are not asking more questions.

Makes you wonder what they might have to hide.

No itegrity left in the Premiership at the moment.

 

[Deleted member 954]

Let's be honest, it really doesn't look like they cheated though, does it ?

Isn't it all over a minor clause in the contract, that was then changed to the acceptence of the Prem League ?

And what happens about all the other teams in the league ?
Why should it be just you who stand to profit ? Maybe Arsenal should get the 3 points back that we lost at home......

Your destiny was entirely in your own hands, you just had to beat a shit team at home.

It seems to be a quest for a payoff, not a quest for justice. I'd feel ashamed if it was my club behaving in such a spoilt way, draggin our name through the mud.

 

[Linz]

It seems to be a quest for a payoff, not a quest for justice. I'd feel ashamed if it was my club behaving in such a spoilt way, draggin our name through the mud.

Is that opposed to bribing your way into the Football League in the first place?

Have a read of David Conn's A Beautiful Game... there's a whole chapter attributed to Arsenal's shady dealings.

 

[keenzy]

lets face it guys... arsenal fan were talking to.... they invented cheating!!!

dosent look like they cheated? why did the prem fine them IF they didnt cheat and ask them to re sign him before a set date. they didnt. even if they did they broke the rules by allowing the transfere window to be opened for them.

so... it does look like they cheated.

 

[Deleted member 954]

Is that opposed to bribing your way into the Football League in the first place?

Have a read of David Conn's A Beautiful Game... there's a whole chapter attributed to Arsenal's shady dealings.

My club is obviously spotless

 

[silverfox]

My club is obviously spotless

Haha....George Graham!

Let's not mention Kanu.

 

[Linz]

My club is obviously spotless

Aye, alright then

Kevin McCabe is a businessman... he has to protect his own investment and that of his shareholders. He has obviously taken all kinds of legal advice and those advisers tell him there is a case worth pursuing... if only to merely force the issue. Neither you nor I have seen the evidence they have collated... so anything we say is purely conjecture... unless you're a Premier League lawyer in which case... sod off

Whether he is a whinging sod or a man of principles comes down to which side of the fence you fall on.

We don't dispute that the chance to stay up was purely in our own hands, but when there may be factors which added to the relegation, surely we have every right to explore the possibility of seeking some redress?

 

[Deleted member 954]

lets face it guys... arsenal fan were talking to.... they invented cheating!!!

dosent look like they cheated? why did the prem fine them IF they didnt cheat and ask them to re sign him before a set date. they didnt. even if they did they broke the rules by allowing the transfere window to be opened for them.

so... it does look like they cheated.

I live with a West Ham fan, he's done lots of reading up and obviously keeping me well informed along the way, bless him.

As it seems, West Ham were fined around 2.5 mil becuase the former administration hid a clause in Tevez' contract which allowed his 3rd party ownership to sell him on, when they wanted ( which i find amusing, considering it's a clause which would of harmed West Ham )

They were then fined a further 3 mill because the former administration lied about it.

The current administration admitted the dodgy dealings of the previous ownership, that's why the fine wasn't double.

The Prem League then gave West Ham a deadline to alter the offending agreement, which it then did, to the satisfaction of the Prem League themselves, West Ham and MSI.

I know more about this then some Spammers fans i know.

That's why i find it ridiculous on the part of Wigans chairman, and your own. Especially as it's all over a clause that West Ham didn't stand to benefit from what-so-ever.

 

[Linz]

That's why i find it ridiculous on the part of Wigans chairman, and your own. Especially as it's all over a clause that West Ham didn't stand to benefit from what-so-ever.

But the point is, it was against the rules and the quote along the lines of "had we looked into this in January, we might have deducted points" is of no consolation to United fans.

I follow your argument... I would argue that which administration it was shouldn't be relevant as any new owner incurs the liability of the former but that's by the by.

There is obviously still some question marks regarding this amended agreement which I find perplexing. If indeed like you say, the Premier League say and West Ham say there is no case to answer... why are they allowing the case to get to arbitration?

Why not just provide evidence of this new agreement?

Surely if it were all legal and above board, McCabe and Whelan wouldn't have a leg to stand on?

 

[Sensiblade]

I live with a West Ham fan, he's done lots of reading up and obviously keeping me well informed along the way, bless him.

As it seems, West Ham were fined around 2.5 mil becuase the former administration hid a clause in Tevez' contract which allowed his 3rd party ownership to sell him on, when they wanted ( which i find amusing, considering it's a clause which would of harmed West Ham )

They were then fined a further 3 mill because the former administration lied about it.

The current administration admitted the dodgy dealings of the previous ownership, that's why the fine wasn't double.

The Prem League then gave West Ham a deadline to alter the offending agreement, which it then did, to the satisfaction of the Prem League themselves, West Ham and MSI.

I know more about this then some Spammers fans i know.

That's why i find it ridiculous on the part of Wigans chairman, and your own. Especially as it's all over a clause that West Ham didn't stand to benefit from what-so-ever.

If you read the rules regarding 'Loans of Players' (See Thread 'Kia Speaks') the you will see that it is only allowed for a Club to loan a player to another Club. The Tevez situation 'In Kia's own words' is his Business loaning a player to a Club. Which means that no matter how anyone looks at the situation rules are still being broken.

This alone makes the case worth pursuing in my opinion.

 

[matth]

That's why i find it ridiculous on the part of Wigans chairman, and your own. Especially as it's all over a clause that West Ham didn't stand to benefit from what-so-ever.

Clearly they did, as without the clause they would never have been able sign either Tevez or Mascherano.

 

[Bladesman]

Its still worth pursueing for the good of football.

Couldnt give a toss what an arsenal fan thinks i mean for him its just another london club still in the premiership.

They may aswell do what they did with the confrence and make a north and south premier league.

 

[RIP Niftos]

arsenal....whiter than white.....pires, vieira, henry, van persie........all cheatin bastards i suppose that up until recently having david dein working for both arsenal and the FA has nothing to do with them getting away with murder a la trevor brooking who aided with this west ham decision.....despite having obvious connections with the afforementioned cheating club i think the blades have a good shout personally

 

[Deleted member 954]

But the point is, it was against the rules and the quote along the lines of "had we looked into this in January, we might have deducted points" is of no consolation to United fans.

I follow your argument... I would argue that which administration it was shouldn't be relevant as any new owner incurs the liability of the former but that's by the by.

There is obviously still some question marks regarding this amended agreement which I find perplexing. If indeed like you say, the Premier League say and West Ham say there is no case to answer... why are they allowing the case to get to arbitration?

Why not just provide evidence of this new agreement?

Surely if it were all legal and above board, McCabe and Whelan wouldn't have a leg to stand on?

I think Alan Sugar got a points dedcuction reversed, while chairman of the Yid scum, on the grounds that the offences took place under previous administration. Although it pains me to say it, I agree to an extent. I don't think a club should be damaged by a few bad apples. What kind of signal does that send out ? Break the rules at a football club, then get out before you get caught and everything is fine ?

@matth - West Ham were charged with that breach, so that's done and dusted now. Am I right in thinking that Wigan and yourselves are pinning your hopes on a further breach surrounding the removal of the original offending clause ? the altering of the contract ?

@Sensiblade - 3rd party ownership isn't illegal, just the level of involvment that the 3rd party has on a player. West Ham own his registration apparently, MSI own his image right and stuff.

@ bladesman - Where were you when Chelsea were found guilty of tapping up judas, I mean Ashley Cole ? Were you campaigning for the good of the game then ? I doubt it.

@ RIP Niftos - I really don't think you do have a good shout. No-one seems to care apart you & the Wigan chairman ( Who's a cheater himself ). Support of your cause seems to be cooling by the day, since everybody has actually started taking notice of the facts, rather than believing the sensationalists in the media shouting phrases like 'Illegal Registration' & 'Illegal 3rd party ownserhip' etc. You all seem to be pinning your hopes on the Prem League making a complete mess of the contract alteration, even though the implications would be so severe to the Premier League in general, and Scudamore etc. The Premier League must have a right soft spot for West Ham to risk that.

.....and day by day, compassion and support for your club is turning into ridicule.

 

[Linz]

.....and day by day, compassion and support for your club is turning into ridicule.

That's the downside of being a big club I'm afraid

As a fan, do you not think it is strange that the PL etc are not forthcoming with this evidence that will blow any case the Blades or Wigan hope to take?

The first thing that any lawyer should be taught, is to avoid court or other formal proceedings wherever possible - because information can come out that damages reputations irreparably.

If we haven't got a case, we expect to find this out before it gets to arbitration. If the Premier League do allow this to get to arbitration... maybe the case isn't as cut and dry as some would hope to believe?

 

[shorehamview]

I think Alan Sugar got a points dedcuction reversed, while chairman of the Yid scum,
.....and day by day, compassion and support for your club is turning into ridicule.

Eeeh, you big daft racist. Who's getting ridicule now?

 

[silverfox]

Embarrassing?

Very!

Yep he's a racist.....why bother with what else he has to say?

 

[keenzy]

i agree with linz. if it is all legal why dont they just come out with the evidence and put it to bed. not take it to court with fees etc.

something is wrong in the contract

 

[Bladesman]

Where were you when Chelsea were found guilty of tapping up judas, I mean Ashley Cole ? Were you campaigning for the good of the game then ? I doubt it.

I was surprised Chelsea didnt get punished more. Something was dodgy with all that aswell. Only difference there though was that cashley cole wanted to leave for the money anyway.

Although if there was a campaign by supporters against chelesea id gladly back it.

 

[Bladesman]

PL: No change in Tevez affair

The Premier League insists there has been no developments in the Carlos Tevez affair amid reports an arbitration panel will review the case.

West Ham were fined £5.5million by an independent commission for having third-part agreements connected with Argentina internationals Tevez and Javier Mascherano after signing them last summer.

Sheffield United, who were relegated on the last day of the Premiership season, are challenging the legality of an independent commission's decision to fine West Ham rather than dock the club points and cancel Tevez's registration.

The Blades lawyers have instituted "arbitration proceedings" against the Premier League, and want a three-man tribunal set up to rule on the dispute.

A report in the Mail on Sunday claims that request has now been agreed by the Premier League, and could be structured as early as next week.

The panel, though, would not hear the original case again, as Sheffield United want, but rather consider only the process of the independent commission, not the decision itself.

However, the report also claims should the arbitration panel find the original process faulty, then the matter could be referred back to the commission to review the punishment handed out to West Ham.

When contacted on Sunday morning, a spokesman for the Premier League maintained their position was unchanged from before the weekend.

The so-called 'Gang of Four' clubs, which also includes Wigan, have raised questions about whether Tevez should have been allowed to continue playing for the club once the third-party interest from Kia Joorabchian became apparent.

A six-page letter was sent to all 20 Premier League club chairmen from league chief executive Richard Scudamore and chairman Sir Dave Richards, saying there is no issue over whether Tevez was eligible or not to play for West Ham.

It adds that there has been no precedent set that the club should have been docked points for having a third-party agreement.

The Hammers, meanwhile, look set to step up their bid to keep Tevez at Upton Park.

Chairman Eggert Magnusson said: "We will try to convince him to stay. I am at least optimistic that he will stay. We will talk in two weeks' time as Carlos is in Argentina at the moment."

No change for now then.

I take it FIFA have pulled out looking into it ?

i take

 

[baggie-al]

hmmmm... dont like idea of 21 teams and 4 teams going down would inbalance it a fair bit....

 

[Linz]

hmmmm... dont like idea of 21 teams and 4 teams going down would inbalance it a fair bit....

I think we're all pretty much consigned to starting next season in this league... the only think we're likely to get is monetary compensation, which, when relegation has cost us so much, would go some way into helping build for a promotion push to spring straight back again.

 

[baggie-al]

I think we're all pretty much consigned to starting next season in this league... the only think we're likely to get is monetary compensation, which, when relegation has cost us so much, would go some way into helping build for a promotion push to spring straight back again.

How much you reckon you would get?

 

[jodman]

50 million should cover it...