[Archived] West Ham Fined £5.5m

[OscarRaven]

I'm amazed this is going on, even more so that the club chairmen continue to remain silent.

"In the case of Tevez, West Ham opted to keep the player and unilaterally terminate the third-party clause in his contract following an independent disciplinary commission hearing"

So EPL asked West Ham if the contracts were now in order, West ham say yes, EPL say OK, Sheff U go down. So presumably there are two signatures on this modified 'contract' or do unilateral contracts only require one? My understanding is the EPL still has not asked to see the contract. Everyone knew it was dodgy in the beginning, felt is was dodgy after the ruling so its shocking to see that no-one at the premier leagues has asked to see the contract?

The premier league have been made to look like idiots, west ham are rich and low and behold the rules are bent every which way going.... its impossible to say its corruption without proof but the credibility of the EPL has to be seriously questioned.

[philipl]

Tevez case heading for the Courts. If this report is correct, Man U assert West Ham are owed nothing.

FA and FIFA intervention increasingly likely. "The lawyers all agree Manchester United and Joorabchian are within their rights to do a deal - but the Premier League are saying they can't. The Premier League seem to have a vested interest now. They are covering their own backs after allowing West Ham to continue playing Tevez last season. Their whole argument is built on the premise West Ham tore up Tevez's contract and claimed to control the player. But any court in the land will tell you they cannot do that." Admittedly this is coming from a paper in the Daily Mail group.

West Ham are the new Newcastle?

[Paul]

From The Guardian: If, say, the CAS were to assert MSI's rights to receive a fee for Tevez the Premier League would have little choice but to allow the deal to proceed, but would be seen to have defended the integrity of its regulations.

.....and there, lads and lasses, is the get out clause. All ready made and ready to swing into action. Stand by for headlines about the FAPL being toe to toe with Utd over the issue, and then meekly bending over to accept the CAS ruling. There will be no justice for SUFC, especially with MU are in the frame.

[philipl]

That approach solves the Tevez transfer to Man U issue. It enables MSI to be paid within the byzantine world of sports regulation. The operative word incidentally is "a" fee- Man U and MSI are effectively saying the transaction is "the" fee with nothing due to West Ham.

Sheff U's complaint is a different issue and were the CAS to rule in that way, it would in effect recognise and legitimise the fact that Tevez was under third party control at the season end- a situation the FAPL had specifically acted to avoid and failed to do so.

There are enough words in both the original judgement and the arbitration ajudication for Sheff U to use to make a very substantial claim.

A big crunch is going to come over whether Sheff U can persuade the High Court to get involved in the issue on Friday.

At some point, the FAPL may have to say they relied on West Ham's assurances in relation to Tevez playing beyond 28 April which turned out to be unreliable.

[CAPT KAYOS]

Another factor that does not appear to have been picked up upon is ... and its a big IF is if Sheff Utd are re-instated back to the P/L and the situation regarding them not being able to prepare properly as they did not know what league they would be in ie what type of players to target/transfer they could have looked at.

[Boz]

And while we still have this farce going on..........would anyone like to explain how Manure can make a bid for a player whose ownership is in dispute?

West ham deny any bid being received by them. Sounds like Man U have been tapping up a playing under contract with another club!

[stuwilky]

And while we still have this farce going on..........would anyone like to explain how Manure can make a bid for a player whose ownership is in dispute?

West ham deny any bid being received by them. Sounds like Man U have been tapping up a playing under contract with another club!

This is the confusing thing, his ownership isnt in dispute. Kia Joorabchian owns the economic rights to Tevez. No one has attempted to deny that. The PL appear to be attempting to cover their owns backs by imposing something contrary to contracts is existence.

And as for West Ham simply terminating the agreement - am I allowed to do that with my mortgage company?

[92er]

And as for West Ham simply terminating the agreement - am I allowed to do that with my mortgage company?

Yes. But don't expect them to agree.

[OscarRaven]

I thinks it clear that until this gets into a real court where rules, regulations and laws actually mean something that this will not be resolved.

Is this tapping up or not? The premier league has no credibilty to enforce its own rules anymore even if it were proven one way or the other.

[pleasure]

we should deal with corruption in the same way as the italian authorities.

name and shame.....

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=4...organisers'

[philipl]

At last, the FAPL are threatening West Ham if they fail to sustain their argument that they are 100% in control of their player Tevez.

[stuwilky]

Yes. But don't expect them to agree.

I think that might be my point.

West Ham claim to have just terminated it - not sought agreement.

[Ozz]

"Businessman Kia Joorabchian insists he owns the 22-year-old's economic rights"

What does this mean? I thought Slavery ws abolished? Sounds like Tevez does the graft and Kia gets the cash.

[Fife Rover]

At last, the FAPL are threatening West Ham if they fail to sustain their argument that they are 100% in control of their player Tevez.

How can the FA possibly be seen to "sort it out" with Sir Trev being so deeply interested in the outcome? Even if he stands aside, how can we believe that whoever deals with it from the FA has not been influenced by him? There is absolutely no way that either the FAPL or the FA can deal with this hugely important and completely cocked-up matter. FIFA or the Civil Courts HAVE to get involved. How else can public confidence be restored?

[philipl]

After aggressively saying to all and sundry they should "get over it" etc, one bunch of Hammers fans get that sinking feeling.

Shelling out £40m to buy Tevez from Joorbachian now surely means he was not legally owned by West Ham last season? Logic obviously not a Hammers strong point.

The paperwork filed in the High Court on Friday could be tasty. Why would Man U and Joorbachian go to court themselves when Sheff U will happily do their dirty work for them in the High Court? I am sure a formula can be found whereby they reluctantly surrender what Sheff U are asking for.

[92er]

I think that might be my point.

West Ham claim to have just terminated it - not sought agreement.

I totally agree with you.

[thenodrog]

Heard it suggested .... and I wouldn't be suprised by this' that WHU will prob end up with a points deduction....... for the coming season!

Cheating, scheming bstards all round if that happens! My original suggestion that Sheff utd and WHU go down with West Brom promoted is still the best option for the good of the game imo.

[philipl]

A wierd logic loop there 'drog.

Here it comes- all the papers to be handed over if the High Court order it- Joorbachian. How much closer can he get to saying "West Ham have hidden something?"

Man U and Joorbachian are doing everything they can to be "forced" to show West Ham continued to act illegally in order to expedite their transfer deal.

Given the Arbitration panel have clearly identified that Fulham (and by extension, Wigan) and Sheff U suffered loss as a result of the disciplinary ruling last year, any solution now HAS to recompence those three clubs.

We are in the territory that finding an excuse to relegate West Ham is the easiest way out for all concerned. Hence the instruction by the FAPL to force West Ham to receive a massive transfer fee for a player they have no economic rights to and the threat of further disciplinary action made to West Ham yesterday.

This Independent article says there would be no reinstatement but there would be compensation for Sheff U and a points deduction in 07/08 but this misses a number of follow-on questions.

Why should the Coca Cola be totally disrupted by Sheff U receiving £50m because of an FAPL cock-up? (How would Prem clubs react if there were a massive cock-up in the Champs League and Liverpool suddenly received £300m compensation from UEFA which is a proportionate equivalent?) Why should the other FAPL members shell out £50m to Sheff U and £500k each to Wigan and Fulham? What happens to the £1m placement money West Ham have received (effectively the fine of £5.5m is down to £4.5m already)? If West Ham should have been relegated last season, what is the correct points penalty this season- 3, 10, 18??? If it is 3, what's the point? If it is 18, why bother having West Ham in the FAPL as they are going down anyway? There is a precedent- Peterborogh were docked 20 points once at the start of a season making their relegation totally inevitable.

West Ham themselves chose to rip up the log book, sorry the contractual agreement with Joorbachian. The FAPL swallowed that with a stunning display of naivety but it is West Ham's solution/action which is on the verge of failing unless some breathtaking magic formula is found that manages to hoodwink the commercial courts and frustrating Sheff U.

The simple act of Joorbachian being "forced" to reveal documents West Ham have themselves failed to hand over to the FAPL will put West Ham back in the disciplinary process- remember the FAPL took assurances from West Ham of complete transparency in accepting what they did. Any hidden document now revealed will on its own enable Sheff U and Fulham to go back to the FAPL disciplinary process.

Wigan have also lost £500K placement money on this so don't be suprised if Dave Whelan does not become active at this late stage.

[Alan75]

Didnt Rovers also lose money by the goal that never was.

[HairwayToSteven]

Didnt Rovers also lose money by the goal that never was.

Tevez wan't the one who scored, he was the one in offside and the one who saved the "goal". However, I think that it was Tevez who got them the penalty for the first goal.

[philipl]

That was a sporting error.

Sheff U say watch this space. The chairman sounds upbeat.

[Billy Castell]

I hope that the High Court ask for these papers from Joorbachian, as it does sound like they are very important. In a strange way I'm getting very keen on a blistering result in favour of Sheffield United. Wham have obviously cheated, and Sir Trevor Boring has had a word behind the scenes with the FAPL people. Relegate the cockney tosspots!

[Flopsy]

Does anyone on here not think that West Ham deserved a points reduction?

As far as I can see they should be docked 3 points for every game that Tevez played before the FAPL allowed him to towards the end of the season.

As for relegation, West Ham should have gone down, Shef Utd should have stayed up. Simple as, and Im sure the blades would take the disruption to the preseason planning on the chin when the big bag of £30m ends up in the bank account at the end of the season

Im not going to say Sir Trev would attempt to influence the FAPL or FA to reduce any punishment, I just dont think he's that stupid, or devious.

[ffan]

source at tfi says west ham will start the season with minus ten points

[Billy Castell]

Is that the TFI Friday restaurant chain?, or the TFI Friday TV show? from a few years ago?

They should start with minus 15 points at least, just so there is a real risk of relegation.