[Archived] West Ham Fined £5.5m

[thenodrog]

wrong

[den]

Cap'n - Paul, I think I'm right when I say that the arbitration panel didn't have the power to change Wham's fine into a points deduction. What they did have was the ability to ask the FAPL to "think again".

That would have given the FAPL little scope other than to deduct points. Unfortunately, the arbitration panel, even though they said that they would have deducted points if they were in the FAPL's position, didn't ask the FAPL to "think again". They thought the correct procedures had been adhered to.

Hence, when I said that as long as the FAPL went through the motions, they could effectively do what the hell they liked. Sheff U will be looking to see whether the courts could force the FAPL to change their verdict.

That's how I understand it, might be wrong though.

[thenodrog]

This is a good if shaming summary of how West Ham/FAPL prevailed.

"The test in the High Court is likely to be even more stringent. A legal source explained that arbitration verdicts of this type can normally only be challenged if there has been a "manifest error in law" and that the issue is of "substantial public importance". On both these tests, a challenge would almost certainly fail."

What does substantial mean in this instance I wonder? I thought that the considerations of the whu supporters was key to the original skewed decision.

Anyway it seems to me that a straw poll of the supporters of the other 91 clubs would reveal a vast majority wishing to see WHU take the long drop.

[Paul]

"The test in the High Court is likely to be even more stringent. A legal source explained that arbitration verdicts of this type can normally only be challenged if there has been a "manifest error in law" and that the issue is of "substantial public importance". On both these tests, a challenge would almost certainly fail."

What does substantial mean in this instance I wonder? I thought that the considerations of the whu supporters was key to the original skewed decision.

Anyway it seems to me that a straw poll of the supporters of the other 91 clubs would reveal a vast majority wishing to see WHU take the long drop.

Call me a cynic but I think the FAPL gave up worrying about the customer many moons ago.

[den]

Cynic.

[philipl]

Sheff U have gone to the High Court seeking an emmergency ruling on a narrow point of law. Have to say that I was surprised the arbitration report which was so clearly written was pretty silent on those extraordinary reasons given in the original judgement for not deducting points from West Ham- the fans would be unhappy etc etc...

We all know that the Daily Mail gets everything wrong.

Well if they have for once got a story right, this really sets the cat amongst the pigeons. Have Man U really totally ignored West Ham and paid Joorbachian £20m for Tevez's signature?

It is a beautiful move if it is true. West Ham of course ripped up their contract with Joorbachian's companies so how can they now claim to have any contractual relationship with them?

I have long felt that Tevez's transfer would open the can of worms in the same way that Mascherano's move to Liverpool triggered the Premiership probe back in January. If the Daily Mail story is true, the third party has exercised the control over the player West Ham/FAPL asserted did not exist. Surely this throws a huge new question mark over West Ham's legitimacy in playing Tevez at the season end?

Also from the Daily Mail, Joorbachian's hidden papers again. Presumably he's going to fight to be sure of getting that £20m if that is what the deal really is.

Perhaps worth remembering that the big 4 will be ruthless in stopping any club from challenging them and Man U will not have enjoyed West Ham winning at OT to complete the double over them. The egghead is carrying on like he is intending to mount a CL challenge so this would scupper all that.

The likeliest outcome is of course that the Daily Mail is reporting complete rubbish again.

However, will the list of TV matches comes out on Friday or perhaps the broadcasters have an inside line on this one? If so, when do the FAPL start falling into breach on the terms of their deal with BSkyB and Setanta because they have botched this so badly?

[emerton]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1779&ct=5

The mail tends to think that Tevez has signed for Man U overnight.

[Alan75]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1779&ct=5

The mail tends to think that Tevez has signed for Man U overnight.

Well if true, along with Torres signing yesterday it would rule out two CL team option for Benni

[philipl]

Agreed Alan. I guess Chelsea going for Plato and Malouda and Arsenal grabbing Eduardo and reported to be triggering Obefami Martins' clause and Benni's options are right down.

The Times are suggesting Tevez is going to Man U on an initial one year loan- presumably loaned by Joorbachian.

If West Ham "rightfully" hold Tevez's registration and he was not loaned to them then surely they have to be the transferring party if the Prem rules are not breached? However, it seems that West Ham are not involved.

[Fife Rover]

Sheff U have gone to the High Court seeking an emmergency ruling on a narrow point of law. Have to say that I was surprised the arbitration report which was so clearly written was pretty silent on those extraordinary reasons given in the original judgement for not deducting points from West Ham- the fans would be unhappy etc etc...

We all know that the Daily Mail gets everything wrong.

Well if they have for once got a story right, this really sets the cat amongst the pigeons. Have Man U really totally ignored West Ham and paid Joorbachian £20m for Tevez's signature?

It is a beautiful move if it is true. West Ham of course ripped up their contract with Joorbachian's companies so how can they now claim to have any contractual relationship with them?

I have long felt that Tevez's transfer would open the can of worms in the same way that Mascherano's move to Liverpool triggered the Premiership probe back in January. If the Daily Mail story is true, the third party has exercised the control over the player West Ham/FAPL asserted did not exist. Surely this throws a huge new question mark over West Ham's legitimacy in playing Tevez at the season end?

Also from the Daily Mail, Joorbachian's hidden papers again. Presumably he's going to fight to be sure of getting that £20m if that is what the deal really is.

Perhaps worth remembering that the big 4 will be ruthless in stopping any club from challenging them and Man U will not have enjoyed West Ham winning at OT to complete the double over them. The egghead is carrying on like he is intending to mount a CL challenge so this would scupper all that.

The likeliest outcome is of course that the Daily Mail is reporting complete rubbish again.

However, will the list of TV matches comes out on Friday or perhaps the broadcasters have an inside line on this one? If so, when do the FAPL start falling into breach on the terms of their deal with BSkyB and Setanta because they have botched this so badly?

All good stuff and gives us all (not JUST sheff U.) a reason to hope.

Just one little point Phillip; the first link (highlighted) leads to the Times; not the Daily Mail.

Edit: Oops! Sorry Phil, I see now what you are saying. You could have laid it out better though. With the second link underlined as it is, it reads like a heading and can easily cause your first sentence wrt to that second section to look as though it belongs in the first section.

[philipl]

That's right- my tongue in cheek comment about the Mail applies to the two articles discussing the Tevez transfer and Sheff U trying to extract the compromising papers they believe Joorbachian holds.

In all fairness to the Mail, they seem to have consistently taken the strongest anti-FAPL/West Ham line throughout this episode.

[Dan Furness]

Tevez to Utd

[thenodrog]

Well if true, along with Torres signing yesterday it would rule out two CL team option for Benni

Also rules us out of signing them!

Still unless MU (and dont rule it out) are going to be allowed to field 12 players then maybe we should test their resolve with a bid for Rooney, Scholes and Giggs.

[philipl]

Something is going to have to give.

1) Sheff U have signalled that they might have halted arguing for reinstatement but have a date in the High Court on 13 July to put the case that the Arbitration Panel failed in law when it did not refer the West Ham ruling back to the FAPL disciplinary body and they suffered £50m in losses wrongly as a result.

It is in effect the FAPL members who cough up if Sheff U win compensation- why should Rovers be £2.5m worse off for letting West Ham off the hook when West Ham are just about to foul up the signing of Rovers' number 1 summer transfer target? Even if we sign Bellamy, you can be sure that more will be paid in wages and transfer fee because of the Eggman's intervention.

Bolton will be equally delighted to find out that West Ham are talking to Liverpool about Cisse as well.

Surely there is a case for a moritorium on West Ham's transfer dealings until the Tevez transfer and Sheff U case are sorted out?

2) Man U's deal with Joorbachian is being blocked by the FAPL (who allowed Liverpool's deal with the same owner for Mascherano to go through remember). FAPL are insisting that West Ham receive the Tevez transfer money and negotiate the deal. In order to maintain the stance/pretence that its rulings are/were correct, the FAPL had no option but to do this.

West Ham and Joorbachian might cobble something together behind the scenes but keeping that quiet would depend on Sheff U's case in the High Court failing utterly. Otherwise, Joorbachian is presumably going to have to disclose the hitherto hidden paperwork Sheff U claim exists and has legal enforcability or face losing control over Tevez, his prime asset. If Joorbachian were to prevail in law over the enforcability of the contracts, he will have proven either the current West Ham management/ownership mislead the FAPL as well and/or that West Ham/Tevez were always bound to him in law in contravention of FAPL rules including the games after 28 April when West Ham supposedly "regularised" the arrangements.

Joorbachian holds a trump card in merely threatening to go to law. The simple act of depositing in Court copies of documents which West Ham have not disclosed previously will immediately challenge the entire validity of everything that has gone before- the FAPL will have the choice of brasening it out and arguing the papers are immaterial at the risk of being proved wrong if Joorbachian wins or switching sides and hauling West Ham back before a disciplinary panel with all the complications and rumpus that would cause. West Ham would have to be deducted points (probably a lot more than 3) in the coming season. Sheff U's case in the High Court for compensation would of course be helped immeasurably and I would guess the FAPL would have the right to recoup the damages from West Ham.

The FAPL has already succeded in putting its founding CEO and current CEO of Liverpool into the witness box against it. Presumably Man U are less than delighted that their deal to buy Tevez is being over-turned/delayed. I cannot believe that Man U would have been in weeks of negotiations to secure Tevez' signature with Joorbachian if they are anything but pretty certain that they are negotiating with the man who can deliver the player to them.

By their actions, Man U have signalled that the FAPL stance and the disciplinary outcome was a complete load of hogwash.

Man U know other clubs would love to sign Tevez and could find the cash to buy him so they have no incentive to play this one gentlemanly. Joorbachian only needs to show Man U tickets for flights to Madrid if Man U's signing of Tevez is getting complicated and Man U will have to act to secure their man. Having got to yes with Joorbachian they might decide to call the bluff of the FAPL and seek to register Tevez anyway- Joorbachian will love having Man U on his side proving the validity of his papers. West Ham played the possession of the player's registration game effectively on 28 April and I am sure Man U noticed that.

This is getting to be an even higher risk game for increasingly uncertain stakes. Liverpool, Wigan and Fulham have very publicly signalled their disagreements with the FAPL over this. Add Man U to that camp and the FAPL management are looking very vulnerable indeed- which clubs would go rushing to support them at this stage?

This Telegraph article neatly summarises the conundrum that was always going to exist when Tevez moved on. It hints at asolution but whether the High Court on 13 July would take so kindly to such an artificial sweeping under the carpet is an interesting question. West Ham, of course would come out of it quids in which goes completely against all the rules of natural justice and High Court judges are usually very awake when natural justice seems to be compromised

...and all because an incompetent linesman at Ewood launched the West Ham end of season revival...

[OJRovers]

That sums up well what I thought having read that the FA might scrutinise the transfer funds. Joorbachian wouldn't care about WHAM's cause - i'm sure they will do everyting they can to get the money they are due and also get their client/asset (tevez) to play for the biggest club in the world.

The timing of it could be critial - Sheff Utd are booked in the High Court on 13th July I think, evidence of where the funds go might be the final part of evidence they need to win - although what would that do? New trial? Give SU £50m? I'd like to see wham sent down!

[philipl]

No hiding place now- its a straight fight over who gets the transfer fee.

[den]

What a load of cack.

Wham didn't pay a penny for Tevez, yet the FAPL insist that they are paid the transfer fee, simply to cover the FAPL's own backs? Then Wham are expected to give some of that money to Joorbachian for "compensation"?

It's patently bloody obvious that this deal between Tevez, Joorbachian and Wham was totally illegal and without doubt meritted fully a points deduction. How pathetic in the eyes of the world are Scudamore and his mates. They should resign ASAP.

Sheff U were stuffed by the FAPL, how more obvious could it be?

[Boz]

No surprise at all that in the week following The Blades's unsuccessful challenge, a transfer away from Wham follows. As I suggested weeks ago, it would ultimately be interesting where any resulting transfer monies ended up.

The FAPL have throughout all of this acted appallingly by compounding upon their initial inactivity and lack of action, followed by gutless enforcement of their own rules.

They have stood by and allowed Wham's old and new owners to lie to them and still take no action.

IT STINKS!

If the FAPL wish to come out of this with an ounce of integrity, they should insist that the transfer fee is paid directly from Manure to Wham and then strictly monitor any outgoings from Wham to Joorbachian, for compensation (his legal entitlement to the transfer monies from any sale of HIS player, NOT Wham's) etc... Yes I know that this would not stop Egghead or someone else to move some money independently to Joorbachian.

The FAPL have been made to look like fools throughout all of this. I might also add that Blackburn Rovers FC are shareholders in the FAPL Ltd. Are they happy about this?

Sincere condolences to Sheff Utd, they have been well and truly shafted. I would back any claim they bring against the FAPL for compensation and suggest they start with a £60million action, with a minimum being the £5.5million fine Wham received.

[CAPT KAYOS]

Cap'n - Paul, I think I'm right when I say that the arbitration panel didn't have the power to change Wham's fine into a points deduction. What they did have was the ability to ask the FAPL to "think again".

That would have given the FAPL little scope other than to deduct points. Unfortunately, the arbitration panel, even though they said that they would have deducted points if they were in the FAPL's position, didn't ask the FAPL to "think again". They thought the correct procedures had been adhered to.

Hence, when I said that as long as the FAPL went through the motions, they could effectively do what the hell they liked. Sheff U will be looking to see whether the courts could force the FAPL to change their verdict.

That's how I understand it, might be wrong though.

Exactly Den, which makes it all more mysterious as to why Sheff Utd proceeded with it as I am 100% sure their legal advisors would have been well aware with what you stated with the likely outcome being in favour that the FAPL would have been judged to have acted 'reasonably'.

This is being dragged out far too much - why? (guesses are its the FAPL because they know they are in the wrong and Sheff Utd just have to follow formalities)?

Whether Philipl is right with regard to Sheff Utd having 'evidence' of some kind with Joorbachian will surely reveal itself sooner or later but could cause havoc if not resolved before the new season kicks off - a reason maybe why I am sure the FAPL is trying to stall it for, as a sort of excuse to not being able to interrupt the season ie West Ham kick off and play x' games in the Premiership and vice versa Sheff U in the C'Ship.

[Paul]

From the BBC ~ One possible avenue would be for West Ham to be paid a transfer fee and then agree a compensation figure with Joorabchian for breaching contracts with his company, Media Sports Investments (MSI), when the Hammers terminated third-party agreements following their fine.

This is an absolute bloody farce. It is patently obvious the FAPL is utterly corrupt in the sense the officers and management are failing in their duty to the clubs, players and supporters. Yet again we read of a possible "solution" to the "problem." There should never have been a problem and there should be no need for a solution. West Ham United's management acted outside the rules of the FAPL and fielded for almost an entire season an illegal player. If such action did not deserve outright relegation nothing does. Technically he was registered but the moves behind his transfer were such that WHU did not really have a legitimate right to play him.

IF WHU are allowed to get away with paying compenstaion to Joorbachian it will be nothing more than a cover up. A legal technichality.

It's pretty obvious what is / has happened behind the scenes;

1. The Icelandic biscuit maker will have threatened the FAPL with legal action on the basis he didn't do the deal.

2. Presumably prior to his purchase of WHU there was a period of due dilegence. The firm of legal eagles who carried this out cocked-up totally in failing to realise WHU held a player on a basis that broke FAPL rules.

3. Presumably the biscuit maker is unable to get any redress from the legal people or from the previous owners of WHU

4. The FAPL think they can make SUFC the fall guys as no one is going to care too much about that club

The FAPL are stuffed on this one. Relegating WHU will result in legal action which could prevent the start of the season. Victory for SUFC will force the FAPL to re-instate them. Srewed, completely screwed............and these peope are supposed to be running the finest league in the world. Goodness knows how much the TV rights would be worth in the hands of a competent management etam.

[Boz]

Paul.....hear, hear.

People in Britain sneer at the Italians for their alleged corruption etc.. but at least the Italian FA had the balls to relegate "The Old Lady" when they were caught out cheating. Could you ever imagine the FAPL of doing the same to our equivalent team Manure? No way, they couldn't even manage a 3 point deduction for the media darlings.

Gold help us with football in the hands of these muppets. Heads must roll at the FAPL.

[Fife Rover]

Paul.....hear, hear.

People in Britain sneer at the Italians for their alleged corruption etc.. but at least the Italian FA had the balls to relegate "The Old Lady" when they were caught out cheating. Could you ever imagine the FAPL of doing the same to our equivalent team Manure? No way, they couldn't even manage a 3 point deduction for the media darlings.

Gold help us with football in the hands of these muppets. Heads must roll at the FAPL.

At last the penny seems to have dropped. Not getting at you Boz, but I have been banging this drum for a considerable time now. I don't care if some or even all of the clubs in EPL are inconvenienced or have to lose out a bit on their finances. What I DO care about is the cleansing and sanitisation of the EPL and the reputation of English football.

As I have said so many times before what must happen is a complete judicial enquiry into all that has happened and exactly who did what and when. Only when that has happened will the whole sorry story be revealed and maybe then justice will be done. How much more important is it that we the paying public can once again trust the game's ruling bodies, and can happily support our various clubs feeling that we are NOT being taken for complete and utter fools?

As far as the various "remedies" that are being bandied about are concerned, the only one that will have any validity is a FULL and INDEPENDANT ENQUIRY. I would not want to assume the outcome of that just now, but suffice it to say that some of the remedies being suggested such as giving Sheff Utd £50m in compensation are just ludicrous for various reasons. For a start, what "compensation" would that be in comparison to re-instating them in EPL? Supposing, as is likely, they don't get first time promotion from the Championship, what then? Also why should the rest of the EPL clubs have to pay for the EPL's mis-management?

No way! And I say again ----get it sorted! And if heads have to roll; so be it! We need to be free of the stench of corruption in our beloved game.

[Billy Castell]

Could the other Premiership clubs organise a vote of no confidence in the FAPL board and remove them and/or pass a motion stating they will not compete unless Wham are relegated and Sheffield Utd ar reinstated? I doubt such actions will happen, and I doubt we'll really find out where Man U's £20m will end up.

[den]

Official statement from Wham. I suppose that is in relation to the latest reports that Tevez is about to take a medical before his signing for Man U on loan for two years.

Talksport are saying that Joorbachian is about to release a statement saying that Tevez is his player and he will say where he goes. So who have Man U been negotiating with? Couldn't be the agent who has no influence over him, can it?

The **** is about to hit the fan, it seems.

[philipl]

£20m is £20m.

It can go from Man U to West Ham or to MIS or it can get split.

But if you think £20m is all your's as Joorbachian is presumably about to make clear and Man U believe that giving it to Joorbachian will get them Tevez, the eggman's statement ends up looking rather limp.

I wonder if Bellamy is rushing into that contract down there? - only if it has a well structured release clause no doubt.