Martin Samuel - again

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

PokerBlade said:
I like the idea that getting a ruling in your favour is "luck". And I particularly like the idea that it "opened the door to so many legal challenges". Can anyone name another such legal challenge in the past fourteen years? Anyone?
Click to expand...

www.bbc.co.uk

Sunderland fined over ineligible player

The Premier League fine Sunderland after it emerged they fielded an ineligible player in four league matches.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

www.theguardian.com

Sunderland face fight over 'lenient' punishment for ineligible player

Cardiff City, Norwich City and Fulham have joined forces to appeal against the Premier League's decision not to deduct points from Sunderland for fielding an ineligible player, Ji Dong-won
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 

Bladesman said:
Barely a mention on Sunday of that VAR incident on that show. It was if the entire thing never happened. They gave Wilder a quick pat on the back for the season we have had so far and quickly moved on.

They are struggling to get a decent presenter since Brian Woolnough. I didn't mind Neil Ashton that much but he was no where as good as Woolnough. Jacqui Oatley is meant to be presenting it now but during lockdown she hasn't been doing the show.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with big club bias with regards to refereeing etc, but it certainly exists within the media.

But that's to be expected, unfortunately and us arguably 'fair'.
 
Bladesman said:
www.bbc.co.uk

Sunderland fined over ineligible player

The Premier League fine Sunderland after it emerged they fielded an ineligible player in four league matches.
www.bbc.co.uk www.bbc.co.uk

www.theguardian.com

Sunderland face fight over 'lenient' punishment for ineligible player

Cardiff City, Norwich City and Fulham have joined forces to appeal against the Premier League's decision not to deduct points from Sunderland for fielding an ineligible player, Ji Dong-won
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
Click to expand...

Did another club take them to court over it and get a settlement? I'll grant this one arguendo anyway. So Samuel's fears are now up to once every seven years. Door's wide open.
 
PokerBlade said:
Did another club take them to court over it and get a settlement? I'll grant this one arguendo anyway. So Samuel's fears are now up to once every seven years. Door's wide open.
Click to expand...

Not sure anything came of it from the relegated clubs.
 
PokerBlade said:
Did another club take them to court over it and get a settlement? I'll grant this one arguendo anyway. So Samuel's fears are now up to once every seven years. Door's wide open.
Click to expand...

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/dec/29/droylsden-fa-cup

Droylsden weren't as lucky as West Ham.

The door's not wide open, but open enough in specific circumstances for certain action to be taken.

Dislike Samuel though not obsessively that he gets under my skin, but he is fair to interpret that our club are considering legal action.

I for one am glad that they appear to be.
 
FMBlade1 said:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2008/dec/29/droylsden-fa-cup

Droylsden weren't as lucky as West Ham.

The door's not wide open, but open enough in specific circumstances for certain action to be taken.

Dislike Samuel though not obsessively that he gets under my skin, but he is fair to interpret that our club are considering legal action.
Click to expand...

The Droylsden thing isn't the same at all though. The FA have always had power to expel clubs from the cup for ineligible players. Samuel's concern is that the door is wide open for clubs to start suing each other or the PL for their decisions. Which was always the case. I don't know what dreamland Samuel lived in where he thought that couldn't happen, and there hasn't been a case like us where two clubs settle for millions over a dispute since.

Our case changed nothing about the world except that maybe clubs might be more careful to not breach the rules over player contracts, which isn't even a bad thing.

Fourteen years without any of the problems Samuel is oh so worried about aren't enough to stop him repeating them as often and as loudly as he can.
 
CentralQuay said:
I have no agenda/bias towards the issue.

It's possible to think that Samuel's in a knob, and the line about the Judge's 'mind' is disgraceful.....
And still think that his point about Sheffield United's inability to pick up points across multiple games, not just the Wigan one, was as much of a factor in relegation, if not more so, than Carlos Tevez.

Just like the 3-0 defeat at Newcastle, where 3 potential points were lost, is more damaging than 2 potential points lost at Villa.
Click to expand...

Well of course it was a factor - we were relegated!

But that isn’t the point - we finished 3rd from bottom in the table because we only picked up 38 points - ok that’s worthy of relegation but West Ham would not have picked up 41 points without the contribution of a player that was signed in contravention of the rules.

Is that not blindingly obvious?
 
Gimli said:
Well of course it was a factor - we were relegated!

But that isn’t the point - we finished 3rd from bottom in the table because we only picked up 38 points - ok that’s worthy of relegation but West Ham would not have picked up 41 points without the contribution of a player that was signed in contravention of the rules.

Is that not blindingly obvious?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Tevez was the fifth bulkhead being flooded in our Titanic.
 
I might consider that we were "lucky" to dodge relegation if West Ham had been deducted points. But probably not, because precedents had already been set.
West Ham broke the rules. They lied about breaking them. Then they tried to cover it up. It's West Ham that were lucky - lucky the PL high-ups had no balls.
As for Martin Samuel - he can f*ck of to the remotest point on the planet. And then f*ck off some more.
 
JackSUFC said:
I’d be far more concerned about how bleak it’s looking for his own team right now, if I were the fat mess.

I wonder what he’d write up if Villa stayed up above West Ham by a point. My god, please happen.
Click to expand...
Please let it be goal difference. It would be even funnier if that point gained sent them down on just a goal difference.
 
I'm sure he's looked in hope for this thread being on here, he's probably read through feeling he's riled a few. Hopefully he's been back since to read me calling him a fat fat bastard.

Don't feed the beast, you're just pleasuring his fat ego.

:fattwat:
 
How much would that 25mill be now with inflation?
 

CentralQuay said:
I have no agenda/bias towards the issue.

It's possible to think that Samuel's in a knob, and the line about the Judge's 'mind' is disgraceful.....
And still think that his point about Sheffield United's inability to pick up points across multiple games, not just the Wigan one, was as much of a factor in relegation, if not more so, than Carlos Tevez.

Just like the 3-0 defeat at Newcastle, where 3 potential points were lost, is more damaging than 2 potential points lost at Villa.
Click to expand...

Yes, our performance levels were of course a factor.
But Tevez' integral role in West Ham accumulating more points than us was also a factor.

Without both factors, we aren't relegated.

The difference though is that whilst we lost our football games within the rules of the game, West Ham won theirs outside them.

Tevez should not have been playing for West Ham & that club knowingly cheated & gained a huge financial advantage by doing so - surviving at our considerable expense. The courts could see that & duly compensated us.

You're clever enough to know this, you're just picking arguments with everyone on here for the sake of it.
 
grafikhaus said:
Once again, our biased, West Ham supporting idiot pursues his own agenda.
Click to expand...
Just for clarity, us on kumb also dislike the fat cunt.
He's always on the side of the owners & not us fans.
As others on here have said, just ignore the cunt. The same as for Brady.
I hope you seek redress about the Villa 'goal' & are successful. I also don't care if Villa keep their point.
If we go down, we deserve to. 👍
 
Forget all this shit we spammers if warnock had grown a pair with 6 games to go we would never have needed a result home to wigan end of
 
CentralQuay said:
Is the article biased? Maybe.....


"Lord Griffiths also decided it was Tevez who was responsible for Sheffield United's defeat at home to Wigan on the final day of the season which sent them down"
"Yet to speak, as Chris Wilder did, of legal redress if Sheffield United missed out on Europe by the two points lost, ensured wider sympathy swiftly evaporated."


There are plenty of neutrals out there who agree with the above though.
Click to expand...
I remember Henry Winter spoke up for us at the trial. Someone whose writing I respect and enjoy.

Likes to rewrite history a bit doesn't he!
 
Last edited:
Roygbiv said:
He didn't mention Kabba. He's losing it.
Click to expand...

To be consistent with his Kabba argument he should be writing an article based upon 'who do Man Utd think they are by not allowing Dean Henderson to start tonight?'

As far as 'lucky' is concerned. 12 seasons out of the Premier league is hardly 'lucky'
 
Seeing as were talking about West Ham, do any of you feel sorry for them after what's happened under Gold and Sullivan?.

When we talk about the rent and Mcabe wanting a price for the ground, we just have to look at the state they're in, losing Upton park has taken the soul out of them, they're playing in a crater with seats, everything that made them special seems to be long gone, the football, the passion, the "properness" of the club, all gone.

If they go down, I can see the owners putting them up for sale once rice has gone because there's nothing of any value left then, so they'll be back to square one, selling off the assets trying to steady the ship as they all do, looking for new owners while the current owners keep their heads down and set off for Gatwick...

As for Samuels, when you're constantly looking outwards for injustice, you normally tend to ignore what's in front of your face..
 
Tezza1889 said:
Seeing as were talking about West Ham, do any of you feel sorry for them after what's happened under Gold and Sullivan?.

When we talk about the rent and Mcabe wanting a price for the ground, we just have to look at the state they're in, losing Upton park has taken the soul out of them, they're playing in a crater with seats, everything that made them special seems to be long gone, the football, the passion, the "properness" of the club, all gone.

If they go down, I can see the owners putting them up for sale once rice has gone because there's nothing of any value left then, so they'll be back to square one, selling off the assets trying to steady the ship as they all do, looking for new owners while the current owners keep their heads down and set off for Gatwick...

As for Samuels, when you're constantly looking outwards for injustice, you normally tend to ignore what's in front of your face..
Click to expand...

They were in a similar situation the last time they were relegated, they may have had Upton Park (Which from the figures i've just checked was sold for around £40 million), but the way they Gold and Sullivan operate, they will just be looking to get back to the Premier League, unless a crazy good offer comes in for the club.

It's a crime though, that 99 year lease at £2.5 million a year.
 
CentralQuay said:
They were in a similar situation the last time they were relegated, they may have had Upton Park (Which from the figures i've just checked was sold for around £40 million), but the way they Gold and Sullivan operate, they will just be looking to get back to the Premier League, unless a crazy good offer comes in for the club.

It's a crime though, that 99 year lease at £2.5 million a year.
Click to expand...


I don't see them that way now, it's a cut and run situation that I can see, unless they're making more out of it than I know .. but it's a ready to go business with a new stadium, they tend to sell, and come up for sale in the capitol, even less..

Time will tell.
 
I've no idea what the fat cunt is welching about anyway - if we did somehow get the result changed in any way (i'm not a fan of this action by the way) then that potential "extra point" could keep West Ham up.
 
trevorhockey said:
Forget all this shit we spammers if warnock had grown a pair with 6 games to go we would never have needed a result home to wigan end of
Click to expand...

CentralQuay said:
And still think that his point about Sheffield United's inability to pick up points across multiple games, not just the Wigan one, was as much of a factor in relegation, if not more so, than Carlos Tevez.

Just like the 3-0 defeat at Newcastle, where 3 potential points were lost, is more damaging than 2 potential points lost at Villa.
Click to expand...

So will West Ham, David Moyes, their fans and Samuel be preparing this as their 'defence' if they go down? By one point or more? Because they were shite in their remaining games? If so, the laws in football - like the laws on anything in this country - are a 'rich mans game' and will probably rule in Spams favour. Just ask South Shields:

Huge FA legal bill hits non-league South Shields who fronted appeal against expunging of lower divisions
  • The coronavirus pandemic caused the cancellation of the non-league season
  • Divisions were either declared null and void or decided by points-per-game
  • Several semi-professional clubs took legal action against the FA after the ruling
  • Northern Premier League leaders South Shields led the appeal but failed
South Shields face a crippling legal bill of £200,000 after being told they must pay the FA’s share of the costs from their failed appeal against a decision to expunge the season.

Full article
 
Aston villa also had 49 minutes to score which they did not hence it would have been 0-1 you fat titfortat
 
grafikhaus said:
So will West Ham, David Moyes, their fans and Samuel be preparing this as their 'defence' if they go down? By one point or more? Because they were shite in their remaining games? If so, the laws in football - like the laws on anything in this country - are a 'rich mans game' and will probably rule in Spams favour. Just ask South Shields:

Huge FA legal bill hits non-league South Shields who fronted appeal against expunging of lower divisions
  • The coronavirus pandemic caused the cancellation of the non-league season
  • Divisions were either declared null and void or decided by points-per-game
  • Several semi-professional clubs took legal action against the FA after the ruling
  • Northern Premier League leaders South Shields led the appeal but failed
South Shields face a crippling legal bill of £200,000 after being told they must pay the FA’s share of the costs from their failed appeal against a decision to expunge the season.

Full article
Click to expand...

You don't think these sides should be footing the bill for their failed appeal?

"The first lesson of economics is scarcity: There is never enough of anything to satisfy all those who want it. The first lesson of politics is to disregards the first lesson of economics."

No matter how the season was ended, whether by points per game, whether by teams remaining in their current positions, no relegation/promotion, etc etc etc.....The problem would remain, the only difference would be the clubs which were appealing.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom