Blades to sue West Ham

[MAQ]

Its on!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

LINK

go on kev, give em hell!!!!!!!!

 

[60Williams]

United to sue West Ham

Bloomin eck £30,000,000 just see on SSN.

 

[Foxy]

you both posted at the same time, so i've merged threads

 

[60Williams]

great minds think alike

 

[MAQ]

thanks foxy, was gonna tell you but thought you probably know already.

Aye great minds and all that

 

[dingledog]

And so it goes on and on and on.

I would much rather we did our talking on the football pitch .

Whats the odds on drawing West Ham in the next round of the cup, or are we seeded to keep us apart?

 

[MAQ]

just been lookling at the KUMB forum, quite funny reading TBH

Apparently we live in the most unsuccessful part of the country

As fans we should be completely embarassed

We are looking for an out of court settlement

We are only looking to "Drag the GOOD name of WHU through the mud"

Their lawyers have bigger knobs than ours

We are going to get laughed out of court

McCabe is just stapming his feet again

This is a popular one "I reckon the Kabba transfer inquiery might happen some time soon. I know that's what I'd do if I was running the prem"

This is interesting "Might explain why our net spend has only been about £2 million.... " to which the response was "first thing i thought,i wonder if eggy knew this was coming..."

hmmmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[MAQ]

And so it goes on and on and on.

I would much rather we did our talking on the football pitch .

Whats the odds on drawing West Ham in the next round of the cup, or are we seeded to keep us apart?

i think that if the FA have any sense tey will do something to make sure that we are kept apart

 

[Foxy]

"West Ham have admitted to lying to the Premier League in order to secure the registration of Javier Mascherano and Carlos Tevez, which is also a breach of West Ham's contract with all members of the Premier League, including Sheffield United."

 

[derrywan]

http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/2e/6d/0,,12306~93486,00.pdf

rule 13 & 17 of the premier league rules would apply here (page 91) - both of us were company members & shareholders at the time of the actions in question, WHU had a clear good faith obligation to all members which was transparently flouted in respect of all fellow members and in particular to SUFC's direct financial detriment

 

[MAQ]

http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/2e/6d/0,,12306~93486,00.pdf

rule 13 & 17 of the premier league rules would apply here (page 91) - both of us were company members & shareholders at the time of the actions in question, WHU had a clear good faith obligation to all members which was transparently flouted in respect of all fellow members and in particular to SUFC's direct financial detriment

Does this mean that ALL the premier league members could infact sue west ham?

 

[Foxy]

Does this mean that ALL the premier league members could infact sue west ham?

I would have thought so yes, although their cases me not be as strong based upon the concequences (we got relegated as a direct result, the others didn't; the other two might have a go though!). However with the difference in monetry value of places a few clubs might join in.

 

[MAQ]

thought so

 

[derrywan]

all who were company members at the time could, although there wouldn't be anything in the way of damages to be awarded to anyone else so they wouldn't bother (you'd have to show a loss as a direct consequence of the action in question).
If they wanted to, then 16 of the current members could join up and push for WHU expulsion for actions likely to cause disrepute etc under 2.4, but that's not going to happen either.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

I smell an out of court settlement, prompted behind the scenes by Scudamore et al, just to keep the PL from looking the set of corrupt, underhand set of tossers they really are!!

 

[MAQ]

details now on OS

LINK

 

[Bladesman]

The PL seem to change the rules as the go along I wouldn't be surprised to see rule 13 & 17 suddenly disappear. So West Ham once again get away with it. I am surprised we are going to have a go at taking them to court when they have spent most of the money they won.

 

[matth]

If we can get them into administration there's a 10 point deduction for them Justice!

 

[derrywan]

details now on OS

LINK

so it is the good faith argument then. which is an entirely different rule breach from the orignal 3rd party matter and therefore not settled legal ground at all. A new question with a new answer.

 

[derrywan]

http://www.premierleague.com/staticFiles/42/63/0,,12306~90946,00.pdf

I bet the premier league aren't so pleased with themselves and the "good relationship [they] have always enjoyed with West Ham" this morning... or the first panel's "thourough and professional consideration" of the matter.

 

[Bladesman]

Well I now hope that West Ham don't just go and settle so that they can get on with things. I hope Egghead takes it all the way. Seriously, this is beyond a joke now. Sue somebody because in retrospect the punishment they received wasn't sufficient? Give me a break. And they have the audacity to claim that they are doing this to bring some integrity back into the game. What a joke. They're doing this because they are still incredibly bitter about throwing their ten point gap away, and want somebody other than themselves to be blamed for it.

A spammers view for you there.

 

[Foxy]

West ham have responded,,, some parts of the 5live interview include...

"desperate action"

"fundamental misunderstanding"

"won't tolerate slurs"

Slurs? slurs? they admitted to cheating, how is taking action against them cheating a slur?

 

[Foxy]

West Ham have described Sheffield United's intention to sue them for the cost of relegation as "desperate".


The Blades have started legal action in order to gain compensation from West Ham after failing in their High Court bid to force a new Premier League action over the Carlos Tevez affair.

The Bramall Lane outfit have estimated the cost of their relegation at between £30million and £50million.

West Ham were fined £5.5million by the Premier League over the Tevez affair in April.

Sheffield United believe they should have been docked points for such a serious breach of rules but failed in their attempts to have the original punishment changed or the hearing reconvened.

The Blades are suing over a breach of contract and claim to have evidence which proves West Ham "misled" the original arbitration independent panel by failing to disclose vital information relating to their arrangement with Tevez's adviser Kia Joorabchian.

West Ham have responded to United's action and they are unhappy with the Yorkshire club's stance.

"We are extremely disappointed that Sheffield United have seen fit to embark on this latest desperate action," read a West Ham statement.

"Not only does Sheffield United's claim lack legal merit, but it is also based on their incorrect belief that West Ham withheld an agreement from the Premier League and the April disciplinary commission.

"In fact, long before the disciplinary hearing, West Ham United made the Premier League fully aware of the existence and status of the agreement in question.

"This agreement was then included in the documentation produced for the disciplinary commission, who were therefore also aware of its existence throughout the proceedings.

"Sheffield United's latest assertions clearly demonstrate a fundamental misunderstanding of the situation, and any proceedings brought by them will be vigorously defended by West Ham.

"In the meantime, West Ham and the new owners will not permit these repeated slurs to go unchallenged and are in discussions with their legal advisers in relation to the action they might take."

 

[happyhippy]

A spammers view for you there.

What annoys me more about all this is that bloody ten point gap. We all knew the fixture list and knew it couldn't be maintained. Short of the Newcastle game, we did as much as we could that month I reckon. Nobody thought we'd be 10 points clear after that run at the end of the month.

Though I'm bored senseless of it all now, whichever way I look at it, they cheated, and weren't punished accordingly.

 

[bladeswench]

Well this is what has happened. They got away with it. The PL let them get away with it. So now they feel vindicated. Even though they admitted to cheating. West ham did not act in good faith as they held back documentation and admitted to doing so.

However, if there is indeed a non-disclosure clause in the deal for Tevez (which in itself should not be allowed by the PL) they will be hard pressed to prove much more than what we already know.

Since Westham was penalised (albeit sparingly) this will be a hard one to win.

 

[Bladesman]

Slurs :lol:

 

[chrisyb99]

im glad we havent let this drop, we stand a great chance of getting somehting from this, its so blatant that they have done wrong, u just need to look how lomng it took for the tevez man u to go through and from that fergy n the f.a's comments! big kev is a clever man and would not do this for no reason! would love to get them in the cup at our place, that would be some game!!!

 

[S64 Blade]

I agree, im glad the club are continuing to pursue the matter. This is more encouraging as it is through the High Court, and all documentation has to be shown

 

[S64 Blade]

Just noticed, someone called Colin Wanker has registered, West Ham or Pig fan by any chance??

 

[happyhippy]

Slurs :lol:

Don't they play at Whiter Than White Hart Lane?