West Ham - Will they get away with it? YES THEY WILL SAY PANEL!

[Archibald&Crooks]

but its something to celebrate surely. like when ganagsters do a bank job :beer:

:lol:

 

[TheChosenOne]

Throwin some jellied eels on the barbie dahn the East End
turnite as we speak

 

[Moore6]

Bottled. And bottled in a big way.

I remember Middlesbrough being docked three points in 1997 for failing to fulfill a fixture, a few more trivial 'offence' and those three points deducted effectively relegated them.

Perhaps Levy should have took the FA on when our players all went down ill when we played at Upton Park 2 seasons ago. However, considering the FA were all at Highbury, sitting next to David Dein when Levy rang and asked for the game to be delayed, perhaps it's best he didn't.

When origially making the decision the commission concluded that a deduction of points "would normally follow from such a breach of rules".

So why did the FAPL wait for so long to bring disciplinary proceedings?

"In my opinion, West Ham received favourable treatment"

Lawyer Mel Goldberg

Rotten, every last one of them.

Trouble is I cant see them ever getting tough with off-field issues, they have simply set too many precedents.

Tottenham were caught making illegal payments to players and got away with a piddly fine, Chelksi were caught tapping up Ashley Cole and got away with a piddly fine, West Ham's new owner made the PL aware that the previous owner had witheld transfer documents and was given a world record fine.

Theyve made it very difficult to ever deduct points in the future.

 

[ever]

damn spammers, i was hoping we would see scotty parker in the championship next year

kind of harsh on sheffield united but they knew what they had to do to stay up on the last game of the season and they couldnt do it, saying that i still dislike those dirty pikey bastards from the east

 

[TheChosenOne]

I blame the Premier League Champions, Man Utd the the remainder of the gang of four who were so complacent about next years CL positions and status therefore they couldn't be bothered to field a team on par with teams they
put out against the likes of us throughout the season.

I mean, ffs, Man U vs WHU = last game of the season, Man U need to win to nick the title, who would your money go on ? (and I'm sure no-one would be rested for a CF the following week)

There it is.

 

[StartingPrice]

Bottled. And bottled in a big way.

I remember Middlesbrough being docked three points in 1997 for failing to fulfill a fixture, a few more trivial 'offence' and those three points deducted effectively relegated them.

Perhaps Levy should have took the FA on when our players all went down ill when we played at Upton Park 2 seasons ago. However, considering the FA were all at Highbury, sitting next to David Dein when Levy rang and asked for the game to be delayed, perhaps it's best he didn't.

When origially making the decision the commission concluded that a deduction of points "would normally follow from such a breach of rules".

So why did the FAPL wait for so long to bring disciplinary proceedings?

"In my opinion, West Ham received favourable treatment"

Lawyer Mel Goldberg

Rotten, every last one of them.

What I find most shocking is that part of the justification offered by the FA for not docking points (if my memory serves me well) was something to do with how 'wonderful' the Spammers fans were. That is surely not the basis for a judicious decision with such rammifications.

This is my first ever post on this matter - and I am not motivated by any love for Sheff.U or Neil Gissajob MagWitch' Warnock, but the whole thing does kinds smell.

I suspect, however, that if this decision, or any potential future action, did go in favour of Sheff.U the first thing the Spammers would do would be to lodge an appeal - making any attempt to reinstate SU and relegate the Spammers unworkable.

A portion of justicwe, at least, will be served if all teams next year up their game for the Spammers, thrash them, and cause their timely relegation - at the same time every professional footballer in teh World refuses to take their blood money leaving them with te squad they have and a wad burning a hole in their pocket while this happens.

Wouldn't that be nice:grin:

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

Trouble is I cant see them ever getting tough with off-field issues, they have simply set too many precedents.

Tottenham were caught making illegal payments to players and got away with a piddly fine, Chelksi were caught tapping up Ashley Cole and got away with a piddly fine, West Ham's new owner made the PL aware that the previous owner had witheld transfer documents and was given a world record fine.

Theyve made it very difficult to ever deduct points in the future.

They've certainly made a rod for their own backs. I can't understand how Scudamore is still in charge :grin:

If anyone can be arsed to check, you'll find similar cases in the lower leagues littered with points deductions. And I bet they never took half a season to give either........Scudamore out.

The only justice that was given out in all of this was Liverpool and Man Utd losing their cup finals after resting players against Fulham & West Ham. :lol:

 

[SpurSince57]

Yes, if the title had gone to the wire the Soccerballs wouldn't have been in cruise control mode, that's for sure. But it always happens. People say we beat the Scum when the **** in the mac was in charge, forgetting that they'd wrapped up the title. That's the only derby I can remember where the Goons played less than 100%.

 

[Zapsta]

Justice, yeah?

 

[striebs]

The number of times I've seen that! If West Ham had gone to the PL and said "Can we sign two players and allow an outside organisation influence whether they stay or are sold?" the PL would have given them a flat "No".

So they concealed the nature of the deal to allow it to go through. I just don't see how that makes the players 'eligible'.

It's called the Van Persie approach - it's what happens when it is easier to apologise than to get permission .

 

[BoringOldFan]

I have now trawled through the 36 pages of the full report. Don't do it - it will make your blood boil.

The problem seems to me to be that it was done on the basis of judicial review. I'm sure stoof can bore for England on this, but let me tell you it is a very difficult basis on which to prove that a decision was 'unreasonable'.

Some key bits - this panel said that if they had made the original decision, they probably would have docked points.

Also, in order to show the PL that the original Tevez loan arrangement was cancelled, The Spammers just sent a letter to his 'owners' telling them that. Joorbachian's people never agreed to do this - and still haven't.

So to cover themsleves, the PL told West Ham that if they are sued over this they must defend themselves in court - thus allowing the PL to say "We were told the arrangement was cancelled".

But the panel does make my point - that no one expected West Ham to win their last three games and escape relegation.

So they lied and cheated to get Tevez, and then they lied and cheated to keep playing him. And as a reward they get to keep their Premier League place.

Sheffield United, who played by the rules and did nothing wrong, are relegated.

Conclusion: cheats prosper and the PL are a bunch of morally corrupt spineless pen-pushing eunuchs.

 

[Zapsta]

And that if you change ownership mid-crisis, you either won't have points deducted or you will, but the deduction will be rescinded later, like ours was.

 

[talkshowhost86]

It's called the Van Persie approach - it's what happens when it is easier to apologise than to get permission .

:grin:

 

[Stoof]

Well wasn't that very predictable. I've only just seen all this stuff.

I've had numerous email exchanges with West Ham mates on the subject, I even dissected the original report and they still wouldn't take it.

This hasn't surprised me and West Ham fans in general have convinced themselves they haven't done anything wrong, yet in the clear light of day it's patently obvious that they've pulled one over on the ol' Premier League in true East End style.

Fuming. But expectedly fuming.

And if they've judged it on a Judicial Review basis, as BOF said, then there was never any chance! Proportionality reigns supreme! :|

 

[talkshowhost86]

Well wasn't that very predictable. I've only just seen all this stuff.

I've had numerous email exchanges with West Ham mates on the subject, I even dissected the original report and they still wouldn't take it.

This hasn't surprised me and West Ham fans in general have convinced themselves they haven't done anything wrong, yet in the clear light of day it's patently obvious that they've pulled one over on the ol' Premier League in true East End style.

Fuming. But expectedly fuming.

And if they've judged it on a Judicial Review basis, as BOF said, then there was never any chance! Proportionality reigns supreme! :|

Surely it's Wednesbury unreasonable for West Ham to ever be allowed to play in the premiership again?

 

[Stoof]

Surely it's Wednesbury unreasonable for West Ham to ever be allowed to play in the premiership again?

It's unreasonable every day. :lol:

That's a joke I told in my first Con & Admin Workshop. It did not get any laughs.

 

[Zapsta]

But they changed ownership. You lot are so biased. Poor West Ham. I just want to give them a hug :-(

 

[Stoof]

But they changed ownership. You lot are so biased. Poor West Ham. I just want to give them a hug :-(

I think you'll find potential litigation transfers with any sort of acquisition young Zapsta.

This would have shown up in any due diligence that Eggy did. And would have expected something to come of it. Even a half-arsed DD attempt would show that up!

I can't honestly believe that the Premier League took it for granted when West Ham said "we've torn up the agreement". C'est ridiculous-uh.

 

[Zapsta]

I think we set a precedent in 1995 for litigation transfers, or rather, the lack of them.

 

[TheChosenOne]

It is not over yet ... read on....
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premiership/sheffield_united/article2023005.ece

The High Court is the next stop, after that maybe Brussels,
The Hague, crikey