It was sooo always going to end up like that. I am really glad we would have gone down whether West Ham had gone down or not, and that we didn't start court cases, because it has just been such a waste of their time and effort for SheffU, and they can't have got too many fans from it. Life isn't fair, especially when W Ham are involved, but to keep fighting it has just been a little OTT.
[cite]Posted By: Charltonchick[/cite]It was sooo always going to end up like that. I am really glad we would have gone down whether West Ham had gone down or not, and that we didn't start court cases, because it has just been such a waste of their time and effort for SheffU, and they can't have got too many fans from it. Life isn't fair, especially when W Ham are involved, but to keep fighting it has just been a little OTT.
I don't think its over, the following quote comes from BBC Sport
'The Yorkshire club's solicitor Paul Stothard said: "We now have to go and think about what we can do.
"As chairman Kevin McCabe said recently we have a long agenda of things we can do with regard to this, we are still on the first page."
And McCabe told BBC Radio Sheffield: "I have other avenues that I think may be worth persuing, but will consult with my advisors over the weekend before making that decision.'
I suspect their next course of action will be either
[cite]Posted By: Charltonchick[/cite]It was sooo always going to end up like that. I am really glad we would have gone down whether West Ham had gone down or not, and that we didn't start court cases, because it has just been such a waste of their time and effort for SheffU, and they can't have got too many fans from it. Life isn't fair, especially when W Ham are involved, but to keep fighting it has just been a little OTT.
We are talking about their fight for justice.
If you believe you are right, why should you give up - just
because some people are bored of reading about it?
The whole world knows that there is either a massive cover-up and corruption involved - or best case scenario, the Premier League has been woefully negligent and guilty of maladministration.
Sheffield United's fight is specifically against the PL body and not West Ham.
If they do expose corruption at the PL, then Sheff Utd have done the whole game a massive favour.
You are right Oggy...frankly the entire Premiership should be behind Sheff Utd (well excepting West Ham obviously, although they have admitted guilt). The inaction of the other teams even if not publically to force the Premiership in to taking the right action has been disgusting.
Just imagine (excluding we would assume West Ham), the 19 clubs of the Division taking action against the Premier League body - with the result that the entire issue in every detail would have been publicly examined.
And in particular, legal examination of the 'tearing up' of the Third Party Agreement - where Tevez after being forbidden to play was suddenly allowed to play against Wigan and subsequent matches.
The 'euphoria factor' that West Ham gained from this little 'PL co-operation' certainly emotionally lifted them and majorly contributed to their belief that they could avoid relegation. That in itself was an unfair advantage that worked against the other clubs in the relegation pack.
Not to mention the effect of Tevez actually playing and scoring in those subsequent matches.
Unfortunately, we live in an age where people just don't want others to "cause trouble", even if they're trying to right a wrong which is what Sheffield United are doing.
The trouble is, in law, if a Premier League member sues the PL, it is, in effect, suing itself because it consented to the rules and regulations, including the panel which cocked-up the original decision back in May. It's very hard to see a way out of this.
The best thing that can happen is for the Premier League's chief executive, Richard Scudamore to resign - he's overseen a terrible decision which has all kinds of unsavoury whiffs about it, and has brought his organisation into disrepute. And for Terence Brown and (ex-WHU chief exec) Paul Aldridge to be banned from football for life.
I'm sure Scudamore spoke to most Premiership clubs - I think he spoke to those around West Ham at the bottom of the league including Charlton, but there should have been some concerted action by a group of teams, if not the whole league, just to tell Scudamore what they would and wouldn't accept. Scudamore should have been told from the top down that West Ham should be docked points, if not automatically relegated. I guess most teams took the view that it didn't affect them and as they weren't involved that was it either that or just as likely they looked at one or two dodgy transfers that they have been caught up in and preferred to keep quiet before allegations of hypocrisy kick in.
Now we have the farce of Tevez going to Man U for £30m with no-one knowing to who the money is really going, West Ham having told the Premiership that they owned his full rights and cancelled the contract with MSI are going to be caught lying if they can't show the money in their bank account if he does get transfered, plus the Premiership are going to look a load of naive fools for accepting their word so easily. This means that either Man U are guilty of illegally tapping up a player if WHU have no intention of selling him, or that WHU actually do not own his contract...the evidence is looking towards the latter. On top of that Kia Joorabchian and Boris Berezovsky are now wanted in Brazil on charges of money laundering, they are the people behind MSI.
...........
The 'euphoria factor' that West Ham gained from this little 'PL co-operation' certainly emotionally lifted them and majorly contributed to their belief that they could avoid relegation. That in itself was an unfair advantage that worked against the other clubs in the relegation pack. ..........
Whether WHU won or lost those games is irrelevant, they clearly played a player illegally signed in those games and that is the offense.
All that is happening now is that the Premiership is digging itself into a deeper hole, the original fine and finding of guilt was one thing and failing to punish West Ham adequately was bad enough, now it seems that they did so because they accepted WHU's explanation without actually checking the relevant documents or even questioning the Third party in this, as I say above it makes them look like fools, and if not then complicit in this in some way.
"....... they accepted WHU's explanation without actually checking the relevant documents or even questioning the Third party in this, as I say above it makes them look like fools, and if not then complicit in this in some way."
Just for now, let's try not to make any assumption that the PL are 'complicit in this in some way'..........(!).
The PL commission forbade the playing of Tevez in West Ham's remaining matches - unless the 'Third Party Agreement' was terminated.
If the agreement wasn't legally terminated then absolutely Tevez's subsequent appearances are in further conflict with the ruling of the Commission findings.
If this was found to be the case, surely West Ham should face further charges of deceit and potentially should face penalty of points docked for EACH of those games that Tevez subsequently played?
The PL commission forbade the playing of Tevez in West Ham's remaining matches - unless the 'Third Party Agreement' was terminated.
If the agreement wasn't legally terminated then absolutely Tevez's subsequent appearances are in further conflict with the ruling of the Commission findings.
If this was found to be the case, surely West Ham should face further charges of deceit and potentially should face penalty of points docked for EACH of those games that Tevez subsequently played?
.......................
My main interpretation is that the Premiership having dug themselves into a hole by not investigating this early enough, then not docking WHU any points are now fumbling around looking for reasons to justify their cack-handedness.
They allowed Tevez to finish playing the season having taken WHU's assurance that they had terminated the contract with MSI (and seemingly unilaterally) and accepted that Tevez is now a WHU contracted player outside the control of any Third Party. So, yes if Tevez's contract wasn't annulled properly then he was playing illegally, but here it should be upon the Premiership to check with WHU and MSI to ensure that this is the case. From what I can see they again took WHU's word for it and if the contract hasn't been terminated (or not properly) then both WHU and the Premiership itself are at fault, WHU for deceit etc and the Premiership for being a bunch of incompetent fools. The other explanation is that the Premiership have made a decision and are going to stick with it regardless.
Grounds for a bunch of teams to declare a lack of confidence motion in Scudamore who has looked hapless and out of his depth in all of this.
Comments
I don't think its over, the following quote comes from BBC Sport
'The Yorkshire club's solicitor Paul Stothard said: "We now have to go and think about what we can do.
"As chairman Kevin McCabe said recently we have a long agenda of things we can do with regard to this, we are still on the first page."
And McCabe told BBC Radio Sheffield: "I have other avenues that I think may be worth persuing, but will consult with my advisors over the weekend before making that decision.'
I suspect their next course of action will be either
a) sue FAPL
b) sue West Ham
c) sue both
We are talking about their fight for justice.
If you believe you are right, why should you give up - just
because some people are bored of reading about it?
The whole world knows that there is either a massive cover-up and corruption involved - or best case scenario, the Premier League has been woefully negligent and guilty of maladministration.
Sheffield United's fight is specifically against the PL body and not West Ham.
If they do expose corruption at the PL, then Sheff Utd have done the whole game a massive favour.
Just imagine (excluding we would assume West Ham), the 19 clubs of the Division taking action against the Premier League body - with the result that the entire issue in every detail would have been publicly examined.
And in particular, legal examination of the 'tearing up' of the Third Party Agreement - where Tevez after being forbidden to play was suddenly allowed to play against Wigan and subsequent matches.
The 'euphoria factor' that West Ham gained from this little 'PL co-operation' certainly emotionally lifted them and majorly contributed to their belief that they could avoid relegation. That in itself was an unfair advantage that worked against the other clubs in the relegation pack.
Not to mention the effect of Tevez actually playing and scoring in those subsequent matches.
The trouble is, in law, if a Premier League member sues the PL, it is, in effect, suing itself because it consented to the rules and regulations, including the panel which cocked-up the original decision back in May. It's very hard to see a way out of this.
The best thing that can happen is for the Premier League's chief executive, Richard Scudamore to resign - he's overseen a terrible decision which has all kinds of unsavoury whiffs about it, and has brought his organisation into disrepute. And for Terence Brown and (ex-WHU chief exec) Paul Aldridge to be banned from football for life.
Now we have the farce of Tevez going to Man U for £30m with no-one knowing to who the money is really going, West Ham having told the Premiership that they owned his full rights and cancelled the contract with MSI are going to be caught lying if they can't show the money in their bank account if he does get transfered, plus the Premiership are going to look a load of naive fools for accepting their word so easily. This means that either Man U are guilty of illegally tapping up a player if WHU have no intention of selling him, or that WHU actually do not own his contract...the evidence is looking towards the latter. On top of that Kia Joorabchian and Boris Berezovsky are now wanted in Brazil on charges of money laundering, they are the people behind MSI.
...........
The 'euphoria factor' that West Ham gained from this little 'PL co-operation' certainly emotionally lifted them and majorly contributed to their belief that they could avoid relegation. That in itself was an unfair advantage that worked against the other clubs in the relegation pack.
..........
Whether WHU won or lost those games is irrelevant, they clearly played a player illegally signed in those games and that is the offense.
All that is happening now is that the Premiership is digging itself into a deeper hole, the original fine and finding of guilt was one thing and failing to punish West Ham adequately was bad enough, now it seems that they did so because they accepted WHU's explanation without actually checking the relevant documents or even questioning the Third party in this, as I say above it makes them look like fools, and if not then complicit in this in some way.
Just for now, let's try not to make any assumption that the PL are 'complicit in this in some way'..........(!).
The PL commission forbade the playing of Tevez in West Ham's remaining matches - unless the 'Third Party Agreement' was terminated.
If the agreement wasn't legally terminated then absolutely Tevez's subsequent appearances are in further conflict with the ruling of the Commission findings.
If this was found to be the case, surely West Ham should face further charges of deceit and potentially should face penalty of points docked for EACH of those games that Tevez subsequently played?
If the agreement wasn't legally terminated then absolutely Tevez's subsequent appearances are in further conflict with the ruling of the Commission findings.
If this was found to be the case, surely West Ham should face further charges of deceit and potentially should face penalty of points docked for EACH of those games that Tevez subsequently played?
.......................
My main interpretation is that the Premiership having dug themselves into a hole by not investigating this early enough, then not docking WHU any points are now fumbling around looking for reasons to justify their cack-handedness.
They allowed Tevez to finish playing the season having taken WHU's assurance that they had terminated the contract with MSI (and seemingly unilaterally) and accepted that Tevez is now a WHU contracted player outside the control of any Third Party. So, yes if Tevez's contract wasn't annulled properly then he was playing illegally, but here it should be upon the Premiership to check with WHU and MSI to ensure that this is the case. From what I can see they again took WHU's word for it and if the contract hasn't been terminated (or not properly) then both WHU and the Premiership itself are at fault, WHU for deceit etc and the Premiership for being a bunch of incompetent fools. The other explanation is that the Premiership have made a decision and are going to stick with it regardless.
Grounds for a bunch of teams to declare a lack of confidence motion in Scudamore who has looked hapless and out of his depth in all of this.