Blades begin Arbitration
- Thread starter silverfox
- Start date
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
- Status
We'd be able to buy Tevez with that
Or have him signed on a 3rd party contract and only be fined £5.5 million, everyones a winner
shorehamview
Pink Sambuca drinking World Champion.
Fifty quid and half a packet of Jelly Babies.
Bladesman
The Great Grumbleduke
We will probably get fined for bringing the game into disrepute.
Thats about our luck really.
I'm afraid Sheffield United are just making themselves look stupid now . Everyone I know ,many supporting different clubs , Man City, Spurs, Arsenal, Charlton, Coventry , Chelsea , etc are fed up with your bleating now . So give it a rest and accept relegation with what dignity you have left
how are we making ourselves look stupid by trying to get some justice out of a big mistake made by the Premier League?
I think every sheffield united fan, and possibly even Kevin Mccabe realises that we will be playing Championship football next year but we shouldn't just 'give in' and let West Ham/Premier League get away with something without beng challenged at least.
what isnt cheating about signing a player illegally then opening the transfer window for them to change it and not deducting points "because of the feeling of the west ham fans"
manchest united fan? are you actually from manchester?
manchest united fan? are you actually from manchester?
Dear God . How many times. He wasn't illegal. A transfer window wasn't opened, he was still registered and they just amended his contract . If I can read the facts why can't you. and no i'm not from Manchester .
shorehamview
Pink Sambuca drinking World Champion.
I could do, but i won't if it's all the same to you
shorehamview
Pink Sambuca drinking World Champion.
So, you aren't denying being a cockney then?
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Not very mature of me, but I don't give a shit.
They have shown you evidence . Your case is based on the fact that you don't like the verdict. Perhaps if you hadn't fielded a weakened team against us you would have got a point instead of losing 2-0 .. You may even have stayed up then
So, you aren't denying being a cockney then?
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Cockney!
Not very mature of me, but I don't give a shit.
And, no, i'm not a cockney
feilded a weakened team? we played with what we had. we might have got a point but as a stone wall penalty was denied didnt help us
Nobody get penalties at o/t . Read Premier League rule 28b(1.1.1)
shorehamview
Pink Sambuca drinking World Champion.
But you said you were a Man U fan. No Man U fan comes from within a hundred miles of Manchester. Where are you from? Ireland? Australia? Outer Mongolia? Jupiter?
He's registration was legal , therefore he was eligible to play
Essex . That doesn't make me a Cockney, nor a Londoner
The Premier League have released details of a letter sent to all 20 member clubs expaining why West Ham United were not docked points.
The letter - sent from Richard Scudamore and Dave Richards to all existing Premier League clubs today - confirmed that Carlos Tevez's registration was eligible from the date he signed.
It also confirmed that the league were satisfied with the amendments to Tevez's contract made at the end of last month.
"At no point were West Ham United charged with playing an ineligible player," stated the missive. "Both Tevez and Mascherano were registered on 31 st August 2006. All the required documentation was received.
"At no time has Mr Tevez's registration been revoked or terminated and at all times he has been eligible to play for West Ham.
"Tevez has been properly registered to play for West Ham United since 31 August 2006. He continues to be registered with West Ham United."
And with regard to a string of stories appearing in the medie over the past few days, the letter added:
"The media, and of course those aggrieved by the decision, have analysed the seven reasons given by the Independent Commission for not deducting points and concentrated on those that to them seem the least convincing.
"However, there are others that have a less convenient truth, particularly the one that says 'had the club in time made disclosure of the third party contracts to the FAPL, then, in all probability, contracts could have been entered into which would not have offended the rules'."
"This is a case without precedent and certainly cannot be compared with Clubs who have played unregistered players or players ineligible through suspension.
"On 26 April, West Ham United admitted to breaches of Rules B13 and U18 - for which they have been fined in accordance with our Rules.
"The offending third party agreement has been terminated by West Ham United and therefore they are not continuing to be in breach."
"At no point were West Ham United charged with playing an ineligible player," stated the missive. "Both Tevez and Mascherano were registered on 31 st August 2006. All the required documentation was received.
why did they ask them to sign them again once they had fined them?
and have you ever been to old trafford?
why did they ask them to sign them again once they had fined them?
and have you ever been to old trafford?
how's this so when west ham were given "permission" (wrongfully might i add) for him to carry on playing in April.....If he was eligible, why did they need permission?
- Status
Similar threads
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?