Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
FIFA investigating WH punishment - Possible points docking
SantaClaus
Posts: 7,658
Just coming up on SSN.
lol....this is going to run and run
lol....this is going to run and run
0
Comments
-
Are the Premier League par of Fifa? I thought they were seperate from the FA, and that Fifa was made up of Football Associations from around the world.0
-
[cite]Posted By: cunningstunt87[/cite]Are the Premier League par of Fifa? I thought they were seperate from the FA, and that Fifa was made up of Football Associations from around the world.
Blatter making more pointless ramblings to the media, thats a big surprise.0 -
But FIFA has control of everything football.[cite]Posted By: cunningstunt87[/cite]Are the Premier League par of Fifa? I thought they were seperate from the FA, and that Fifa was made up of Football Associations from around the world.
If the Premier League wants to be seperate then they will have to have a breakaway league which i really can't see happening0 -
All football including the league and premier league is affiliated to FA and therefore Fifa, and accepts it rules and governance.0
-
The sort of arrangements West Ham had are allowed in some countries so not contrary to FIFA rules etc. However West Ham were found guilty of lying and cheating over the registration of a player.0
-
[cite]Posted By: SantaClaus[/cite]Just coming up on SSN.
lol....this is going to run and run
and ultimately come to nothing....0 -
We dont want West Ham relegated. The board is after the compo.0
-
FIFA relegated a Spanish team for not paying a transfer fee to Brazil - they can do it and will.[cite]Posted By: Barn Door Lisbie[/cite][cite]Posted By: SantaClaus[/cite]Just coming up on SSN.
lol....this is going to run and run
and ultimately come to nothing....
Sepp Blatter loves the attention and this would be the ultimate accolade.
TAKE BLAT!
Sepp Blatter relegates West Ham by saying that the Hammerettes were not wearing skimpy enough outfits0 -
As a lawyer on the BBC pointed out yesterday, the PL is a self governed corporate entity and therefore any outside body will find it difficult to alter the outcome, due to this being classed as an internal matter by corporate law0
-
I don't want to see West Ham in the Championship, because with their money they will return immediately and therefore occupy one of our possible promotion places.
But good to see them sweating during the summer though....0 - Sponsored links:
-
Could FIFA say then.[cite]Posted By: CharltonDan[/cite]As a lawyer on the BBC pointed out yesterday, the PL is a self governed corporate entity and therefore any outside body will find it difficult to alter the outcome, due to this being classed as an internal matter by corporate law
"If you're a seperate entity, bugger off and we'll have the top four teams of the CCC in the Champions League"
We're all going on a European Tour0 -
FIFA=GOD (well, in football then). They could just threaten to punish the England national team if they don't get what they want.0
-
[cite]Posted By: Dutch Addick[/cite]FIFA=GOD (well, in football then). They could just threaten to punish the England national team if they don't get what they want.
What by forcing us to keep Steve McClaren in charge?0 -
[cite]Posted By: Dutch Addick[/cite]I don't want to see West Ham in the Championship, because with their money they will return immediately and therefore occupy one of our possible promotion places.
But good to see them sweating during the summer though....
You arent one of our celebrity fans.. Bjorn Borg are you by any chance??0 -
No cos Borg is Swedish and Dutch Addick is, well, have a guess. :-)0
-
Good job Im on the ball...........0
-
he's Ruud0
-
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]he's Ruud
I thought he was quite polite actually0 -
[cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite]
Could FIFA say then.[cite]Posted By: CharltonDan[/cite]As a lawyer on the BBC pointed out yesterday, the PL is a self governed corporate entity and therefore any outside body will find it difficult to alter the outcome, due to this being classed as an internal matter by corporate law
"If you're a seperate entity, bugger off and we'll have the top four teams of the CCC in the Champions League"
We're all going on a European Tour
That would be unlikely as Uefa control the Champions League. Even if it succeeded then I daresay the G14 clubs would say you do that and none of our other members will play in the competition either. The TV companies would go a bit mental and stop showing the games. the sponsors would pull out. Governments would fall. World war three would start and we would all end up being ruled by dolphins.0 -
You had me hoping it won't happen - until the dolphins bit!
Bring them on :-)
Eeeeeek eek rrrrrrrrrrr eeeek rrrrrrrrrrrrr rrrrreeek eekrrr rrrrrrrrrrrrr eeeek ulrrrrrrreeekakaka0 - Sponsored links:
-
FIFA just want/need to be seen to be investigating so they can rubber stamp the decision in an attempt to defuse the legal proceedings, innit?0
-
FIFA and UEFA would love to interfere! Contrary to the (justified) cynical view of the outcome they might just want to be seen to doing the right thing - and at least shine light on what changes were made (if any). This is actually the FA s job but they can't/won't get stuck in.0
-
Platini said that UEFA aren't willing to investigate.0
-
[quote][cite]Posted By: kigelia[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: WSS[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: CharltonDan[/cite]As a lawyer on the BBC pointed out yesterday, the PL is a self governed corporate entity and therefore any outside body will find it difficult to alter the outcome, due to this being classed as an internal matter by corporate law[/quote]
Could FIFA say then.
"If you're a seperate entity, bugger off and we'll have the top four teams of the CCC in the Champions League"
We're all going on a European Tour[/quote]
That would be unlikely as Uefa control the Champions League. Even if it succeeded then I daresay the G14 clubs would say you do that and none of our other members will play in the competition either. The TV companies would go a bit mental and stop showing the games. the sponsors would pull out. Governments would fall. World war three would start and we would all end up being ruled by dolphins.[/quote]
Would that mean a re-run of flipper?0 -
The question is points could be docked if tevez was re-signed as a west ham player outside of the transfer window, this is illegal. Also it seems a bit odd that it was resolved in 12 hours, that other geezer who went to Liverpool took longer for his registration to sort out. Also tevez is not owned by west ham but by a private company, west ham will not get any money if he moves to another club, the whole thing is a mess.0
-
Tevez registration as a west ham player has never been in question.
He has always been eligable to play for west ham. Therefore has never played "illegally".
The rule that was broken was the third party influence rule.
This was a clause in both tevez & mascherano's contracts with west ham saying their owners could sell either player in the january transfer window without consulting west ham, paying £2m compensation to west ham if tevez was sold and a smaller fee if mascherano was sold. This was dramatically decreased if either was sold in a subsquent transfer window.
This is all the 3rd party influence was. (i.e. they can control our selection policy by simply selling them on, which we could do sod all about).
The contract wasn't ripped up with their owners after the hearing, just amended removing this clause, as a player signing a contract extension would do.
As the january transfer window had passed, this clause become somewhat pointless anyway as the fees were much less, so didn't really affect any parties involved by removing it.
So all this has been over the owners of both players having an influence on our team selection, which they haven't actually influenced all season.0 -
I think what it has been about is ...
a football club (well the people representing it at the time) cheated and lied to the authorities - this is not in dispute, they pleaed guilty in the end
failing to dock the team points is a smack in the face for all the clubs who go about things in an honest manner and amounts to a charter for cheats0 -
[cite]Posted By: Mortain[/cite]Tevez registration as a west ham player has never been in question.
He has always been eligable to play for west ham. Therefore has never played "illegally".
The rule that was broken was the third party influence rule.
This was a clause in both tevez & mascherano's contracts with west ham saying their owners could sell either player in the january transfer window without consulting west ham, paying £2m compensation to west ham if tevez was sold and a smaller fee if mascherano was sold. This was dramatically decreased if either was sold in a subsquent transfer window.
This is all the 3rd party influence was. (i.e. they can control our selection policy by simply selling them on, which we could do sod all about).
The contract wasn't ripped up with their owners after the hearing, just amended removing this clause, as a player signing a contract extension would do.
As the january transfer window had passed, this clause become somewhat pointless anyway as the fees were much less, so didn't really affect any parties involved by removing it.
So all this has been over the owners of both players having an influence on our team selection, which they haven't actually influenced all season.
The thing that is muddying the waters for me is that the papers are full of talk about Tevez moving for big money this summer. Now if I remember correctly he signed a four year deal. West Ham now say that they have 'torn up' the third party bit, so presumably he can't be touted around without their permission and since they stand to gain nothing from the transfer fee why the hell would they agree to offload what has been their star player in their recent run? Therefore in my (somewhat confused I'll admit) mind if Tevez does go elsewhere in the summer that is an admission that the third party agreement that was 'torn up' was still in effect.0 -
If that was the case Mortain then why did West Ham plead and were found guilty? There is no doubt that they knowingly broke the rules to gain an advantage or that the same staff ie Duxbury are still with the club.
West Ham's guilt in this matter is not in doubt. The arguement is 1. over the unreasonable punishment. 2. whether the illegal agreement was still in place when WHU played WAFC and after that date.
The issue of whether the third party had influenced team selection has not been tested to my knowledge as the person who would know now works for Charlton not West Ham0 -
[cite]Posted By: Henry Irving[/cite]If that was the case Mortain then why did West Ham plead and were found guilty? There is no doubt that they knowingly broke the rules to gain an advantage or that the same staff ie Duxbury are still with the club.
West Ham's guilt in this matter is not in doubt. The arguement is 1. over the unreasonable punishment. 2. whether the illegal agreement was still in place when WHU played WAFC and after that date.
The issue of whether the third party had influenced team selection has not been tested to my knowledge as the person who would know now works for Charlton not West Ham
West ham were found quilty of dishonesty and deceit as they withheld the paperwork showing this clause in the contracts. I've never once argued against our guilt being in doubt, we were bang to rights.
As for your points above:
1) What would have been a fair punishment? Say we were deducted 2 points, would that be fair? Everyone has an opinion on the severity of the punishment. As it was, we were issued a record fine.
2) http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/6648101.stm0
