[Archived] West Ham Fined £5.5m

[philipl]

Different story on the BBC web site:

West Ham have told Carlos Tevez's agent he can have him for £6m - the minimum the Premier League will allow the club to be paid for his registration. But Joorabchian looks set to go ahead with his High Court action. That could wreck Manchester United's chances of signing the striker before the transfer window shuts on 31 August. (The Sun)

So let's see if I understand this correctly-

Man U and Real Madrid are both willing to pay £20m for Tevez but the Prem deem him to be worth £6m (why, on what basis??).

West Ham get fined £5.5m being the estimated value of the transfer fee they should have paid for Tevez and Mascerano. So Tevez is worth £6m and Mascerano is worth minus £0.5m. I am sure Liverpool were delighted to be paid by MSI for signing him....

[trueblue]

This farce is just dragging on now.. the Premier League lost the plot (and any credibility) when they didn't dock Wham points for cheating. They have now lost even more credibility (if they have any left) by trying to sweep the issue under the carpet.

It really does make me sick to the stomach because every one knows exactly what the outcome would have been had it happened to one of the less favourable clubs !!

[den]

Everyone looking for a way out now. The FAPL obviously didn't check out Wham's claims that their contract with joorbachian had been nullified -or they wouldn't still be involved, directing Wham's position. The FAPL are IMO, more guilty of the current state of affairs than either of the other parties.Hopefully Sheff Utd will sue the arse off them.

[American]

Hardly a surprising outcome and one which was being discussed in this thread at least two or three weeks ago. This was an opportunity for the FA and / or the PL to show if it really has teeth. The opportunity has gone; West Ham have lied and cheated their way out of certain relegation, Manchester United have been allowed to publically tap up a player without a murmur and third party ownership and it's potential influence on the outcome of a season or game has become a reality.

It should come as no surprise all the major players in this corrupt affair are foreign investors. Almost 50% of the PL clubs have foreign owners, who collectively have, and will continue to, spend millions to secure a place at the table. This little furore is just a taster of what is to come. If you just spent £100m plus to buy a football club would you tolerate relegation?? No chance. The Football Association missed the opportunity to stamp any sort of authority on the game with the Tevez affair, probably the last chance it will have. It will not be many years before we see the PL run by foreign investors with little knowledge, understanding or sentiment for football as a whole; greed and wealth creation will be the only driving force.

Chelsea - Abramovich's finances still unlikely to stand up to real scrutiny

Portsmouth - Gaydamak's father still subject to an international arrest warrant

Derby Co - Gadsby's consortium being investigated over alleged financial irregularities

West Ham - Gudmundsson received a 12 month suspended sentence in 1991 for embezzlement

Man City - Shinawatra is under investigation in Thalinad for corruption, albeit by a military coup

So it's good to see 25% of club owners should have no difficulty in passing a fit and proper test. Might have been better off with Robert Maxwell in some cases!

Arsenal - soon to be American owned

Aston Villa - American owned

Liverpool - American owned

Man Utd - American owned

Rovers - both rumoured bidders are US based

Everton - 23% US ownership

Do they know it's football?

Currently there are enough foreign players in the PL for an entire league programme (i.e one set of ten games) without the use of an English player, potentially a whole season. World Cup 2018 anyone?

Wow Paul - that's anti-foreigner sentiment that even Gordon would be proud of!

[thenodrog]

Oi! Don't knock him american! It's the best post he's ever made.

[Paul]

Wow Paul - that's anti-foreigner sentiment that even Gordon would be proud of!

Don't be silly! it's just a statement of facts, the same could be said about UK banks, water or power supply companies. I don't give a monkey's about where these people come from but the lack of understanding of our footballing culture and heritage disturbs me. This comes from the fact these investors are not, at the least, European. I know my view is not popular but look at the position:

PL clubs generally are not in a healthy financial state

Suddenly the new TV deal sparks a wave of takeover interest

Existing owners see the chance to get out, perhaps even make a profit

The new owners don't see football fans, they see brands, TV deals and huge far East markets

I don't dislike Johnny Foreigner persay I'm simply deeply suspicious of the motivation behind the current wave of foreign investment. I see nothing being done to protect our national game, I see many of our sports events are only available to Sky subscribers, I see American sports which involve no competition (I believe the big US sports don't have relegation, but could be wrong). I see Man Utd with 25% ST increases in two years, enforced purchase of cup tickets, their club saddled with £660m of debt, the summer signings bought on the never-never. Till someone shows me a convincing benefit to the avergae fan in the street I shall remain deeply sceptical about these foreign investors. What good has come of it to date?

With the exception of Rovers, £1m support for low cost STs, all the new TV money has gone to the players and their agents, mainly John Terry I wish peole would wake up to what is happening.

[Fife Rover]

Paul: You and I can see it and have consistently railed against it on these threads for some time now. A FEW others have made slightly sympathetic noises, but nothing concrete, and as far as I am aware no one else other than the two of us has actually threatenened to withdraw our attendance at PL matches. I am not sure where you stand on this at this moment in time. It really is quite simply a matter of choice for each one of us, and I made my choice some years ago when it became clear to me which way the wind was blowing.

I realise that most of the viewers on here are going to say that it is very easy for me to stay away as I live so far away, and of course there is no way I can convince them that I would have done exactly the same if I lived in Blackburn. But suffice it to say that I have reluctantlly taken the same stand against the SPL and I have not been inside East End Park the home of Dunfermline Athletic for two full seasons now and with the 3rd about to start. I have been a season ticket ticket holder for many years at "dear old Dunf" prior to that, and a supporter since 1980. I know it is hard for some of you to understand how a life-long Rovers fan could become a supporter of another team, but if you are a Football Junkie as I am and you live over 200 miles away from your favourite team and have work commitments that ensure you can only decide whether you will make it to a footie match at a very late hour on any given Saturday, you would probably do the same. In any case if you guys had actually spent a little time at East End Park you would soon realise that there was an indescribable feeling of belonging and homeliness about the place that you just dont get at other grounds.

Anyway, I digress, and I can't expect you people to understand any of this, so I will just re-iterate what I have already said many time before on this subject:

1. It has been clear for a very long time that football as we knew it (the people's game) has been going down the road of becoming a business instead of a sport for almost 50 years, and FAR more so since the PL was formed. At that point it abandoned all pretence of being a sport and became a business driven rat-race.

2. The whole game of football is now 100% in the hands of big money chasers, and the rules that once applied to the governing of the game to prevent football clubs being run for profit as a first concern (and now the ONLY concern) are long gone. Quite how this was allowed to happen is unclear, because as I understand it, there is (or was) a set of protective rules written into the constitution of the F.A. specifically to prevent this situation ever arising, but happen it certainly has. Kind of reminiscent of Italy to me for some reason; can't think why!

3. With the game we all loved so dearly now firmly in the hands of big money chasers, and everyone in the game filling their pockets as fast and as full as they possibly can, as quickly as they can, it just leaves US the paying fans to wake up one day and ask ourselves "hang on a minute, WHO is ultimately paying for ALL of this?" And " am I going to keep on paying for THIS PARTICULAR situation to continue?"

4. It then becomes a simple decision that each one of us has to make for themselves. I made mine 2 years ago.

If you can't live without your weekly "fix" of footie (as I can't) you can always find a small team that has not yet been contaminated to support. You may actually find as I have done that it is a most enjoyable and very refreshing experience.

[den]

Strange post Fife.

You're basically telling the rovers fans on here to stay away from Ewood? Why bother posting?

[dave birch]

Frustration, Den, nothing more.

I can understand where Fife is coming from.

I flatly refuse to buy paytv because Murdoch is involved. I don't want to see any of my money going into his profit. His grab for cash with worldwide sport is taking it away from the average Joe.

At least Fife is putting something back into the game he loves at a level closer to the roots of the game.

[Damage]

Fife, whilst I would argue that you arent totally credible (seem to recall you railing against my opposition to US-takeover at ewood) I feel the general gist of what you are saying is correct. However, I will disgaree that the way for BRFC supporters and season ticket holders to respond is by abondoning the club! All that will result is harm to BRFC and the corporate PL juggernaut will rumble on as strong as ever!

The only way to change things is for people to abandon their TV subscriptions - that is the source of real money in the game - and let the broadcasters know why you are cancelling. I stopped my sports subscriptions years ago partly because the distribution of revenues setup a catch22 situation where the rich get richer.

SO in summary Fife - No you are wrong! Dont abandon BRFC because the rest of sport is "wrong" - the cause of this isnt BRFC but is TV money. IF you want to do something kick sky into touch and dont even bother watching in the pub (tell the landlor why) ........ unless maybe rovers are away at spuds then I may forgive you a few pints!

[Cocker]

I can see what Fife is saying but I wouldnt change what is going on in the Prem. Its so exciting with all the transfers and what not. Its the best league in the world and yes - its because of the money.

Roll on the new season

[pleasure]

I can see what Fife is saying but I wouldnt change what is going on in the Prem. Its so exciting with all the transfers and what not. Its the best league in the world and yes - its because of the money.

Roll on the new season

agreed, cocker - BRING ON THE NEW SEASON! i cannot wait!

i can see both sides of the argument. the money in the game is spiralling out of control.

clubs are getting more and more sponsorship/ tv money but the game is being taken away from the majority of the ordinary men in the street, through high ticket prices.

luckily, i'm not affected by the price hikes, but i sympathise with those who are.

i'd never stop watching rovers, over a media magnet though. if the majority of fans decided to strike for an odd game, then i'd support it - but cant see it ever happening.

the minority will never succeed, sadly.

a few figures to illustrate how football has changed,

from the observer sport monthly, article.......

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/osm/story/0,,2134268,00.html

The revolution in numbers :

11

Number of players from outside the UK and Ireland who started the opening matches in the first weekend of the Premier League in 1992

340

Players from outside the UK and Ireland in the Premier League at the end of last season

75,000

Average annual salary in pounds at the start of the Premier League in 1992. Scott Parker is to earn that amount in a week at West Ham

191

Millions of pounds paid by Sky in 1992 for live broadcasting rights contract, for five years

1.7

Billions of pounds paid by Sky and Setanta for live broadcasting rights over the next three years

625

Millions of pounds generated by the sale of overseas TV rights in a three-year deal that will see the Premier League shown in 208 countries

5

Number of foreign managers. There were none in 1992

40

Percentage by which the combined revenue of Premier League clubs outperformed that of the sides in Italy's Serie A in 2005-06

9

Number of Premier League clubs with foreign owners. In 2003, there was just one, Fulham, whose owner had lived in the UK for 30 years

295

Thousands of pounds paid by David Dein in 1983 for his stake in Arsenal. Described by club chairman Peter Hill-Wood as 'dead money', his shares are now worth around £60m

[AggyBlue]

clubs are getting more and more sponsorship/ tv money but the game is being taken away from the majority of the ordinary men in the street, through high ticket prices.

This is what gets peoples backs up.

All the extra revenue from sponsorship/TV etc should result in the capability to offer rock bottom ticket prices.

[Cocker]

This is what gets peoples backs up.

All the extra revenue from sponsorship/TV etc should result in the capability to offer rock bottom ticket prices.

Which Rovers are doing already to be fair however, the club must spend the money on players too to keep up with everyone else.

[only2garners]

Tevez case will go to the High Court on 22nd August. Given it will be a 3 day hearing and then time for a decision and then probably appeals it looks highly unlikely that this will be settled before the transfer window shuts. West Ham are keen to reach a settlement before the case gets to court - what a surprise. Joorabchian has offered £100K which was what was in the original contract but West Ham want some more. Don't know why - Tevez has already made them £44.5m (£50m for staying up less the £5.5m fine).

[Cocker]

. Joorabchian has offered £100K which was what was in the original contract but West Ham want some more. Don't know why

Joorabchian owns the player. West Ham own his registration. I heard the other night that he can buy them off for something like 6m but is only offering 100k because he reckons that he will win in the courts anyway which is why all this is taking so long.

I remember coming home and watching Sky News when they signed Tevez and tother bloke. They where going to win the league and now look at them

[pleasure]

looks like the 'icelandic biscuit mafia' have got to eidur's dad.

http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=4...p;channel=&

[American]

I see many of our sports events are only available to Sky subscribers, I see American sports which involve no competition (I believe the big US sports don't have relegation, but could be wrong).

We might not have relegation, but we also don't have a sport with only 3 different clubs winning championships over the past 15 years.

As for the other, like it or not, the Premiership (the Premier League, the BPL, the EPL, the Old First Division....) is a business. The owners you are seeing coming from the US have experience in running successful sports franchises. Things change and evolve. Did you complain when the phone took over from the telegraph? If you want to watch "pure" football like you did in your youth, I'm sure Stanley or Morecambe would like the business.

[dave birch]

There are aspects of American sport that make up for relegation; draft, salary caps etc, and they do make for a more even competition, however, it will be interesting to see what happens when a team owned by some mega billionaire gets relegated.

I'd love to see drafts and caps in place in the EPL, boy would there be some bitching, especially over the drafts.

[philipl]

Now a scrap over the authenticity of a signature

The document in question is dated 1 December and has Eggert's signature on it. Doesn't that even further invalidate all the guff about the new management at West Ham not being to blame? The validity of the document is being challenged over Tevez' signature but surely the crunch is Eggert signed a document handing back Tevez to MSI at the end of last season? Or am I misreading it?

[dave birch]

Contracts and agreements have meant little in the football world in the past. Why should this one be any different?

[Alan75]

Paul: You and I can see it and have consistently railed against it on these threads for some time now. A FEW others have made slightly sympathetic noises, but nothing concrete, and as far as I am aware no one else other than the two of us has actually threatenened to withdraw our attendance at PL matches. I am not sure where you stand on this at this moment in time. It really is quite simply a matter of choice for each one of us, and I made my choice some years ago when it became clear to me which way the wind was blowing.

Whilst I havent shouted it from the roof top, friends which include a number of people here and family are aware that I have become dissillusioned with the Premier League.

It was touch and go whether I renewed my season ticket, going to games was more of a habit that enjoyment.

[philipl]

This is probably totally over the top but any out of court settlement regarding Tevez has got to mindful of not conspiring to defraud Sheff U. Or at the very least, making sure Sheff U do not have grounds for taking out injunctions.

The shopping list for each party:

Man U:

1) get Tevez NOW without paying any more

2) increase leverage over FAPL

West Ham:

1) survive without any more damage/disciplinary/ law cases

2) get a windfall of cash from Man U

MSI:

1) do the Man U deal

2) pay as little as poss to West Ham U

3) live to do another deal

Scudamore/FAPL:

1) smooth it over so there is a skeen that the rule book has been observed

2) keep Man U happy

3) don't give Sheff U/Fulham a chance to bite back

[Rovermatt]

If Joorabchian is found to own Tevez, then surely that breaches the Premier League's earlier assertion that the deal must be done between United and West Ham?

[thenodrog]

Frustration, Den, nothing more.

I can understand where Fife is coming from.

I flatly refuse to buy paytv because Murdoch is involved. I don't want to see any of my money going into his profit. His grab for cash with worldwide sport is taking it away from the average Joe.

At least Fife is putting something back into the game he loves at a level closer to the roots of the game.

Nah.... my guess is he's just run out of Werthers originals.