By the perfect season and Sheffield United style, I don’t mean poor.
In the light of a couple of horredus penalty decisions last week (one against Bolton and one against Man City), I thought it would be interesting to track every ‘dodgy’ or controversial refereeing decision across the entire season. Every penalty and every dubious offside, and see what would happen to the league standings had the officials made the correct decision at the time.
I will update it regualrly and at the end of the year post the standings as they should be.
This way, any relegated clubs can feel comfortable sueing the respective teams for their demise. It’s an opportunity for teams for ignore responsibility for their own fate and blame other people.
It gives them an excuse not to perform well in, say, their last 11 games. Or infact, even win the last game of the season to keep themselves up.
This is the future of football, how exciting.
Here also, is an interesting article giving the hard evidence that Tevez actually had a negative effect on our team performance: West Ham Weaker With Tevez. I did in fact argue this very point in an article titled What If Sheffield United Were Just A Better Team?
Thanks for reading, and thanks for everyone’s support in my post about us sueing Spurs!
COYI!
Sam
5 recent posts you may have missed
Wore these to every game this year. They may not be lucky, but they're comfy:
Interesting you should decide to do that. There is a site called http://www.youneedspecsref.com which did just this. It showed in the Tevez season you were 4 points better off than you should have been and should have finished in the bottom three on merit.
Happy to help
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
hahahaha what a pathetic write up! you cheated and didn’t get punished enough! stop banging on about it and pay up spammers!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
http://www.uneedspecsref.co.uk/
It’s already been done mate!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
no being funny, but if sheff utd played to their full potential then they would of stayed up….
that is what west ham after being allowed to compete, we competed well and stayed up…
just tough shit i am afraid and the only way you will get promoted is as if you win games in the championship. good result against watford but would you really wanna be bashed 6-0 again by the likes of man utd and arsenal every week? at least west ham can give man utd and arsenal a challenege.
you will get your dough, be lucky if its more than £10m and be lucky if you get it in one lump sum. you’ll get that £10m over 8 years. pittance
great spread Sammy boy!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good article, apart from the fact that none of it makes sense/ is factually correct?
Unfortunately I don’t think a team could win any such legal attempts due to the fact that it was down to refereeing decisions and not because the opposition were playing players that should have not been playing? (FACT).
Ignoring responsibility? What I really struggle with is… Yes we were poor at times but we gained our points in accordance to Premier League and F.A rules. West Ham however accumulated more points (than Sheffield United) by breaking Premier League and F.A rules (playing someone they should not have been), that’s cheating. (FACT).
West Ham then lied to everyone about this. (FACT).
Evidence that Tevez actually had a negative effect? so West Hams player-of-the-season (by a long way)… who was hailed not only by the media, but on their own website as ‘The reason’ West Ham survived had a negative effect? Hmmm… if you say so.
You don’t really put over a very good argument, do you?
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
agree with you there adam
and as a bonus we will keep picking up the big fat cash bonus from the prem every year whilst the blades blame bandwaggon picks up bugger all in the fizzy pops
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Good idea Sam. How about calling it the end of season “Sheffield Shuffle”
Marketing departments in Law Firms around the country will be eagerly awaiting your results.
Sheffield Utd have given a whole new meaning to the term “no win no fee” ( ie don’t win your games, don’t suffer the financial consequences )
It’ll soon catch on. In fact, it has allready started, with Wigan and Fulham planning to sue as they finished below us 2 seasons ago !!!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
What makes me sick is when we have to hear comments of no value from whinging nobodies like you Gareth. You’re club went down because you were a pile of old crap that couldn’t hack it in the premiership.When this is all over you will still be rotting in the fizzy pop league whatever payout you lot get. over
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Well with what the new evidence from the tribunal shows hammers have mis led a second time after being tol by the pl in a letter sent to all clubs that it would punish the hammers if they did deceive again.You might just find yourslves a big points deduction this time so yes relegation could be coming the Luton penalty could happen.
Remeber if Wigan or Fulham had gone down they would have sued as well.
Point being they played within the rules the hammers didn’t I am looking for the pl to make good on their promise to punish the Hammers.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Why was Mr.Carlos “So uninfluential on our season” Tevez, awarded, not just the “Signing of the season” award, but West Ham’s “Player of the Season”????? It’s not very often that somebody whose had so little bearing on a teams performance throughout the whole season would get such awards??, or is that the norm darrnnn sarrrffff??….You get awards that you really don’t deserve??? End of the day West Ham United stayed up purely off the back of those performances. And being totally honest, it’s wasn’t just the one “illegally signed” world class player, was it. WHU are a disgrace and if they try to get this decission overturned their gonna look even worse.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I see you Jellied Eels are still whingeing.
If you cheat, lie and hide the truth, then you get punished.
It’s a simple concept really!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
At Bianco, that is what I am West Ham fans have been saying ever since the arbitration decision. That they have not put forward any VALID evidence as to the effect of Tevez.
The decision was made based on unsubstantiated reasoning.
You have kind of failed to see the sarcasm of the post. It is ridiculous that a club should sue other clubs because of a refereeing decision. Maybe Scott Duxbury lied to the PL, but they are the ones who made the initial ruling of a fine of 5.5m. Therefore your beef is no longer with us, but with the PL.
Maybe if Tevez had never been signed, MArlon Harewood would have had a longer run of games (like the season before where he scored about 16 goals) and he would have been the one to score against Bolton and Man United.
Or maybe if you had not rolled over for a belly rub against united, you would have get a result against them.
The point I am trying to make is that it is ludicrous that a decision to the value of £30m can be made without hard evidence.
Imagine if the world worked like that.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here is some alternative “hard evidence” that Tevez had a very positive effect on West Ham’s performance.
Daily Telegraph (25th Sep 08)
“The key period was the final 10 matches of the season, when Tevez scored seven times. His goals could be argued to have changed the results in the 2-1 win against Blackburn, the 3-1 victory against Bolton and the 1-0 win against Manchester United.
Tevez scored 44 per cent of West Ham’s goals in the final five games of the season and was directly involved in 55 per cent of them.
During this period, Tevez attempted 30.4 per cent of their shots and created 16.3 per cent of their goalscoring chances.
Tevez spent every minute of West Ham’s final five games on the pitch and assisted one other goal, he completed 81 per cent of his passes compared to the 72 per cent mark of the overall team”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
the key word there is “could”
the key period in your relegation was your final 11 matches
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yeh and wat about all the rest of the games in the season when Tevez had little impact, no-one was concerned then?? Shit and if we disect evry little ref decision or something in results we may find tht Blackburn or something may be crowned champions!! Get a life , Sheff U are nothing and this McCabe is an embarrasment to tht club!!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
bit·ter /?b?t?r/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[bit-er] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, -er, -est, noun, verb, adverb
–adjective 1. having a harsh, disagreeably acrid taste, like that of aspirin, quinine, wormwood, or aloes.
2. producing one of the four basic taste sensations; not sour, sweet, or salt.
3. hard to bear; grievous; distressful: a bitter sorrow.
4. causing pain; piercing; stinging: a bitter chill.
5. characterized by intense antagonism or hostility: bitter hatred.
6. hard to admit or accept: a bitter lesson.
7. resentful or cynical: bitter words.
–noun 8. that which is bitter; bitterness: Learn to take the bitter with the sweet.
9. British. a very dry ale having a strong taste of hops.
–verb (used with object) 10. to make bitter: herbs employed to bitter vermouth.
–adverb 11. extremely; very; exceedingly: a bitter cold night.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I think you should keep a track of your clubs dodgy dealings first. you are without doubt the worst columnist in the whole of the world. without tevez you would have been relegated, FACT. You were not good enough to stay up without cheating FACT!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
All the West Ham fans saying that Utd were crap and couldn’t hack it in the premier league – there was only a point in at the end of the season, so where was the gulf between the clubs?
In fact they were very similar in terms of results over the whole season. There was just a tiny little difference though, that little bit extra you need to make a difference. That extra ounce of quality shining through to push your team on to its maximum capability, give you that slight competitive edge. It’s known as an ‘illegal player’.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
illegal player, bla bla blaaaa … same old same old. Tevez registration was legal ya muppets. just some of the documentation was not quite kosher :0)
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
will everyone stop going on about if sheffield united would have drawn to wigan they would have stayed up. Then wigan would be complaining and would have be claiming £30 million compensation… Idiots
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Here’s a conspiracy theory for you (just for fun) – These are all facts as I remember them – there may be some errors but the basics are right I believe.
1. Warnock is known to have rung Fergie before the final day seeking reassurances that Man Utd were going to field their strongest side against the Hammers.
2. In their own final match of the season they (Sheff Utd) fielded a weakened side! In the final match of the season with relegation in the balance! They lost. Lol.
3. If Man Utd had beaten WHU and Sheff Utd had lost to Wigan (at home) then WHU would have gone down, and both Sheff Utd and their visitors, Wigan, would have stayed up. (Remember Wigan, with Sheff Utd., were part of
the three that protested the original decision against WHU).
4. If Sheff. Utd had won and WHU lost then, WHU would still have stayed up at the expense of Wigan. Not the result Warnock wanted at all.
5. Towards the end of the game when WHU were winning 1-0 and he was losing, he threw on his better players, but it was too late. they lost. Lol.
6. Man Utd didn’t field their strongest side, resting several players that would normally be considered part of the strongest Utd side. (did the recent tribunal factor that in? How much was that, and how much Tevez? I digress)
7. Man Utd had already won the league and had other competitions still on the boil (FA Cup I think, and possibly Champs League).
8. After that last game of the season, Warnock was screaming that Fergie had ’stitched him up’.
9. As the fans were coming out of the game at Bramall lane they were blaming Warnock for fielding a weakened side. Warnock himself complained that their most high-profile supporter, Sean Bean (how sad is that), had barged into his house and sworn at his wife and kids, complaining that Warnock had got them relegated. Subsequently, the fans were dragged along in the hysteria whipped up by the chairman and all forgot about the team sheet. Much easier to blame WHU.
10. Warnock left Sheff. Utd ‘by mutual consent’ about three weeks later.
11. Something about a grassy knoll and a warehouse.
Whaddya think? I would love to believe that Warnock tried to fix the relegation battle and came a cropper. Lol. That’s worth £30 mill of anybody’s money!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Independent Arbitration (26th Sep 08):-
“It is beyond question that, even on his own account, Mr Duxbury was guilty of seriously misleading the Premier League”.
“Mr Duxbury told a deliberate falsehood citing in support his position as a solicitor and officer of the Court”.
“Mr Aldridge told the Chief Executive of the Premier League that there was no documentation relating to the transfer of the players other than what had already been disclosed to the Premier League. This was untrue”
“In evidence Mr Duxbury maintained that he had told Mr Foster of the Premier League that the amendment had not yet been executed and accordingly was not in force. We are unable to accept the accuracy of that evidence.”
“Mr Duxbury gave “words of comfort” and “oral cuddles” that West Ham would in fact honour the private agreement despite the notice of termination which West Ham had been unwillingly compelled to give by the Premier League”
“Mr Duxbury acknowledged that West Ham was most anxious to ensure that Mr Tevez did in fact play for West Ham in the last games of the season and did not want to upset the rights owners.”
“Despite the stance taken by West Ham about the private agreement being unenforceable in law, West Ham never seem to have raised such a point in the discussions with Mr Shear and Mr Joorabchian.”
“If the Premier League had known what Mr Duxbury for West Ham was saying to Mr Joorabchian’s solicitor following the Commission decision, we are confident that the Premier League would have suspended Mr Tevez’s registration as a West Ham player.”
“It is indisputable but that the breaches of the Rules caused Mr Tevez to be registered as a West Ham player. If West Ham had acted honestly towards the Premier League, Mr Tevez would not have been a West Ham player for the 2006-7 season”
“We do consider that West Ham was in breach of its duty to behave with the utmost good faith towards the Premier League”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
As West Ham fans said to us Blades in June, “JUST LET IT GO, WE’VE HAD ENOUGH”. Well now we are saying that are you going to leave it alone?
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I never knew you could say any old bollocks but as long as you write (FACT) after it it makes it true.
By the way Bianco, does it only work if you write it in capitals and put it in brackets?
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Bad decicions made by refs and other officials are human error that could be made by many over a season, but west ham cheated and the punishment they recieved wasnt fair, 5 million fine but you recieved 60million in tv revenue for being in the premiership in the season after! It would be unfair to sue based on human error but cheaters should be severly punished!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In the past and in lower leauges when a player has fielded a player who should not play they have lost ALL the points for that game he played in, this is what should have happend, it makes NO difference on how well he played, rules were broken plain and simple. If this happened in Gran Prix racing any infringment means a points deduction and a heavy fine, same should apply, the fact is the Hammers have powerful allies if it had been Luton Rotherham ect they would have been dealt with in a totally different way, it does not matter a frying duck that Sheff Utd were not many points away, if west ham had played by the rules there would be on argument PERIOD
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
SUFC have never cheated – yeah ‘right. What about Kabba? – just because it was ‘in the open’ (clear as daylight – yeah ‘right) doesn’t mean it wasn’t cheating. Let’s face it, every club cheats, in some capacity or other, including the holier than thou Blades. We got done one time and SUFC (much later) cried like Mcbabies until someone listened and gave them a big lollipop.
Well I for one am happy to know that SUFC are tucked away somewhere in the Chumpionship floundering around, having been deposited there by Wa*knock who is busying himself wrecking another club and by ‘it’s not about the money – no I won’t go to the CAS’ Mcabe. Long may they fester.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Cheating cockney scumbags should pay us £30m a year until we are promoted again! West SHAM fans are so blind to the fact that your club cheated!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Yep… (FACT)
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
you keep banging on about sheffield united..
BUT IT WAS YOUR TEAM WHO BROKE ALL THE RULES..LIED ABOUT FIXING THE CONTRACT ..THEN BROKE THE RULES AGAIN..
they should throw you out of the league
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
i should have known better than to sign for cheating, lying dirty scumbags! i hold my head in shame! They paid me with moisturiser to keep my ugly mouth shut! (hahahaha its dan really, not carlos tevez) (FACT)
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
bit·ter /?b?t?r/ Pronunciation Key – Show Spelled Pronunciation[bit-er] Pronunciation Key – Show IPA Pronunciation adjective, -er, -est, noun, verb, adverb
–adjective 1. having a harsh, disagreeably acrid taste, like that of aspirin, quinine, wormwood, or aloes.
2. producing one of the four basic taste sensations; not sour, sweet, or salt.
3. hard to bear; grievous; distressful: a bitter sorrow.
4. causing pain; piercing; stinging: a bitter chill.
5. characterized by intense antagonism or hostility: bitter hatred.
6. hard to admit or accept: a bitter lesson.
7. resentful or cynical: bitter words.
–noun 8. that which is bitter; bitterness: Learn to take the bitter with the sweet.
9. British. a very dry ale having a strong taste of hops.
–verb (used with object) 10. to make bitter: herbs employed to bitter vermouth.
–adverb 11. extremely; very; exceedingly: a bitter cold night.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Watford Football Club Spokesman:-
“We have yet to receive any notification or requests from the Premier League regarding the transfer of Steve Kabba to Watford Football Club from Sheffield United. We can confirm that there was no written clause in any documentation relating to Steve Kabba that stipulated he could not play against Sheffield United. All contracts are vetted and approved by the Premier League prior to the player’s registration”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
(FACT)
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Do blades fans suffer from parrot syndrome…yes
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
How amazing that some Sheff utd fans are saying we are still whinging, and this coming from a bunch that have not stopped whining since day one.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
It’s often said that Sheffield United made no protests about West Ham not being deducted points until AFTER their relegation. This is yet another myth as illustrated here:-
Guardian Newspaper – 4th May 07 – 7 days after the first tribunal. 9 days before the end of the season.
“Sheffield United have confirmed they are considering legal action against West Ham and the Premier League in the wake of the Hammers’ points deduction let-off last week.
Wigan chairman Dave Whelan, who argued West Ham should have suffered a 10-point penalty, had intimated that six clubs were ready to sue the league – ‘two or three’ of which were receiving legal advice. The Blades became the first club to publicly confirm this intent today, chairman Kevin McCabe revealing the club had lawyers assessing whether action could be taken within hours of the verdict being delivered.
‘There was no hanging around, no grass growing around our feet,” said McCabe. “We took this course of action independently of anyone else in an attempt to try and protect ourselves should we suffer as a consequence of this bizarre decision. We have some excellent and reputable lawyers who have already been looking at this matter for us for a week. Obviously we hope that we don’t suffer as a result, but we felt this needed to be done.’
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Polly want a cracker, like a effing broken record you Sheff lot. Fact is you can moan til your blue in the face, fact is you may get your 30 million, fact is we will get the money back through sky. So here’s what I’d say after it’s all done and dusted…sod off,take the money and may you rot in the lower leagues for years, and thank you for now having the tide turn and makes us less hated than you lot.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hahahahaha….incredible. Stop whining and pay up the 30m, you tool.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
HA HA HA, and you’ll still be rotting in the fizzy pop you muppet
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Quote from Times Journalist Martin Samuels who believes that WHU should have been relegated rather than fined unitl he discovered how SUFC also cheated :
‘…Samuels also has little time for the bleatings of Neil Warnock, asking why, if he is such a good manager, Crystal Palace are currently 22nd in the Coca-Cola Championship. Furthermore, Samuels asks why Warnock told a local paper two days before Sheffield United collected three points against Watford that “Steven (Kabba) can’t play. I actually checked myself yesterday to make sure – you can’t afford to take any chances.” Samuels believes that such a campaigner for justice as Neil Warnock will want to clear up that little case of third party influence.’
As for the guardian quote Mr Evidence. Why did Cry baby and the thieving shopkeeper Whelan NOT SUE THE PREMIERSHIP WHO DIDN’T DEDUCT THE DAMN POINTS IN THE FIRST PLACE. I’ll tell you why, because the Premiership inquiry that found us guilty (and fined us 5 million quid as there was no precedent for points deduction) was set up IN AGREEMENT with ALL prem clubs and that ALL Prem clubs would ABIDE BY ANY DECISION THEY CAME TO.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Oh, and by the way Trevor Brooking works for the FA not the Prem so any muppet that thought he had anything to do with the original ruling ie no points deduction and decided to put his face on a bank note (which was actually quite amusing although I think the Ashley Cole version was funnier) well, you’re just that – a muppet. He works for the FA . That’s the organisation (even bigger muppets) that thinks you were hard done by and is going to try and award you money to buy a few pies.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
At the moment, the team looking most vulnerable to the ‘Sheffield United shuffle’ at the end of this season, is Manure.
How many points more would Tottscum actually have racked up if Berbatov had not been tapped up by Manure?
How many less points would Manure have got if they hadn’t poached Berbatov?
So unless Manure win the title by so many points that lawyers for the side finishing second can’t argue that Berbatov was responsible for the difference, there might be some mileage for a complaint there. Also if Tottscum are relegated by a few points, I guess.
What a useful precedent has been set now.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
The punishment of £5.5M was for the original offences. Since then West Ham have continued to break the rules and deceive the Premier League. Only this allowed them to continue playing Tevez after the original arbitration.
If a crook breaks into a house and is punished by a fine, should the householder not have the right to compensation for their losses? If the crook then repeats the offence, should they be immune from further punishment?
Independent Arbitration:-
“In addition to the admitted breaches of the Rules in August and September 2006, we consider that West Ham’s conduct immediately after the Commission’s decision of 27 April 2007 and its non-disclosure of such conduct to the Premier League amounted to further breaches of the obligation under Rule B13 to behave with the utmost good faith towards the Premier League.”
“Given the robust attitude of the Premier League as regards the private agreement, it is in our view inconceivable that it would have been prepared to tolerate West Ham’s stance towards the rights owners. We are sure that, if the Premier League had known about that, it would have suspended Mr Tevez’s registration as a West Ham player.”
Letter from Richard Scudamore to all Premier League clubs:-
“The Board has secured written undertakings that West Ham United can only act in a way that is consistent with its having terminated the offending agreement. It is only because of these written undertakings that Tevez’s registration was not terminated. If the Board suspects or has evidence that these undertakings are false or have been breached, then it will take all necessary steps to enforce Premier League Rules.”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
dave did I say I was a blade? you seem so sure!
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Whatever you are Gareth it certainly isn’t for west ham is it.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
So who do you support Gareth,and if so whats this debate got to do with you or whatever team you support. Surely not a spurs fan
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“In addition to the admitted breaches of the Rules in August and September 2006, we consider that West Ham’s conduct immediately after the Commission’s decision of 27 April 2007 and its non-disclosure of such conduct to the Premier League amounted to further breaches of the obligation under Rule B13 to behave with the utmost good faith towards the Premier League.”
“Given the robust attitude of the Premier League as regards the private agreement, it is in our view inconceivable that it would have been prepared to tolerate West Ham’s stance towards the rights owners. We are sure that, if the Premier League had known about that, it would have suspended Mr Tevez’s registration as a West Ham player.”
Letter from Richard Scudamore to all Premier League clubs:-
“The Board has secured written undertakings that West Ham United can only act in a way that is consistent with its having terminated the offending agreement. It is only because of these written undertakings that Tevez’s registration was not terminated. If the Board suspects or has evidence that these undertakings are false or have been breached, then it will take all necessary steps to enforce Premier League Rules.”
The fact is that West Ham DID act in a way consistent with having terminated the (original) offending agreement, which was cancelled in writing, the PL being copied in. Subsequently, West Ham refused to transfer Tevez’s registration to Manchester United, causing MSI to initiate legal action for breach of contract, which was only finally settled on terms which had been ‘cleared’ by the PL’s lawyers.
The verbal remarks which Duxbury is alleged to have made to Shears, and Shears’s opinion of their intended meaning, is open to interpretation. The independent tribunal went as far as to say it could understand how Duxbury’s take on the matter could have been interpreted in the way Shears says he did, but they then took a very one sided view of the remarks, before deciding what they thought the PL would have thought of them, and what the PL would have done regarding Tevez’s registration.
However, which ‘private agreement’ was Duxbury referring to? The one which had been signed by Brown and Co, and which contained the offending clause (That MSI would determine when Tevez left the club)or the one which had been signed by Eggert Magnusson and which Joorbachian claimed to have signed, but which, seemingly, was never actually returned, and which the independent arbitration panel clearly stated did not offend the ‘third party influence’ rule, because it required MSI to seek to transfer Tevez in the close season, same as a 12 month loan?
And, is it surprising for Shears to have asked why West Ham had terminated the private agreement? Was it dishonest of Duxbury to have said they had done so because they had been required to do so by the PL? That was a simple matter of fact.
Further, is it surprising that, following the termination of the agreement, Shears would have needed to know what that meant in practical terms, and was it dishonest for Duxbury to have said the club had no intention of taking any practical action departing from the terms before the end of the season?
I don’t think so, and it seems to me that the independent tribunal is assuming too high a duty to the PL under rule B13 to deduce that transcripts of all verbal discussions between clubs and players and their agents or owners should be disclosed, and that their conclusion that the PL would have felt that Duxbury’s remarks negated the written cancellation and the subsequent litigation, is highly presumptious.
There really should be a right to appeal such matters, and since the FA acted to force West Ham to ‘consent’ to the arbitration, they should do the decent thing and facilitate the appeal to the CAS. Good Faith should cut both ways, after all.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Whether the clause was still in effect for the last three matches was really immaterial. Tevez couldn’t be passed on to another club by his ‘owners’ after the january deadline had passed anyway.
He was also legally registered to play all season and the problem was a clause in the ownership paperwork which could only have worked against west ham if applied. (after all we were due to give man u another spanking by that stage anyway:).
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
In reply to BAC:- West Ham DID NOT act in a way consistent with having terminated the (original) offending agreement The Third Party owners moved THEIR player to Man Utd as the secret private agreement said they could. The Premier League insisted that West Ham receive a fee. West Ham received £2M and then agreed to pay it back to the Third party owners when they were sued for it:-
Independent Tribunal:- “The rights owners paid West Ham £2 million against an understanding that Mr Joorabchian would recoup that sum, plus his costs, from acting as an agent for West Ham in future player transfer dealings. We note that Mr Joorabchian in fact sued West Ham for the money and those proceedings were compromised very shortly before the hearing of the arbitration. Under the compromise Mr Joorabchian is to receive a guaranteed amount for acting as consultant to West Ham in relation to player transfer activity.”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Further reply to BAC:-
You are wrong to suggest that verbal discussions and transcripts did not need to be disclosed to the Premier League. The written undertaking by West Ham to the Premier League explicitly states that:- “No settlement, resolution, DISCUSSIONS or NEGOTIATIONS will include any concession by West Ham that the Private Agreement was valid and enforceable”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Evidence Blade I admire your ‘rant – less’ answers and your tenacity. But it all, still says to me, that your ‘beef’ is with the Premiership. Whether we burgled your house, nicked your car or ate all the pies. You should take it up and seek compensation from, the Premiership. They ‘let us off’ with a 5 million pound fine (which I repeat again, a finding that all Prem clubs agreed to abide by when the inquiry opened) they didn’t make sure the correct documentation was in place and they mismanaged the whole saga. You should give back your parachute payment and sue them for your money. Of course they then may come after you for cheating over Steve Kabba precisely because there is nothing in his contract with Watford to say he can’t play (as you kindly pointed out) Reckon that’s got to be worth a 5.5 million pound fine at least.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Reply to supernumbersix:- Steve Kabba was only named as a substitute by Watford in the three matches before they played Sheffield United. The week before our match, he came on against Man City in the 31st minute before limping off injured in the 65th minute. He was therefore injured by the time of the Sheffield United match and didn’t feature again for the rest of the season. These FACTS are easily verified on Soccerbase or the Watford FC website, if West Ham fans (including Martin ‘Journalist of the Century’ Samuels) could be bothered to do the research.
So to summarise, you think that Sheffield United should be fined £5.5M for NOT stating in a contract that Watford couldn’t play an injured former player against us?
To continue the burglary analogy, I would say that West Ham are the thief and The Premier League are the judge who only fined them then gave them the keys to our house, so they could offend again.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
To continue the analogy further, compensation is not paid out by the thief, the judge is to blame, so take it up with the judge.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Criminal justice system website – Victim compensation:-
“If someone is caught and convicted the criminal court may order the offender to pay you compensation for any loss which you have suffered because of the offence. If the court decides to make an order against the offender he or she will be required to pay the money to the court which will pass it on to you. If the offender has enough money the compensation will normally be paid in a lump sum. It is the job of the court to make sure that the offender pays the compensation. Whether or not the offender is convicted in the criminal courts, you can sue him or her for damages in a civil court.”
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
This is an interesting read:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/mihirbose/2008/10/the_philosophical_argument_of.html
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Evidence, I ain’t shifting. The premiership are to blame for the whole fiasco. Your lot should be seeking compensation from them. And they should use your skills to get it!
I have enjoyed the banter.
Over and out.
Report This Comment
Like or Dislike:
0 
0