How can we get Sheffield United to STFU?

Soccerlens Forum » General Discussion » General Football Talk

How can we get Sheffield United to STFU?

12 posts - Started 2 years ago by Ahmed Bilal - Latest reply from ronaldo -

Tags:

Ahmed Bilal

admin
Joined: Mar '06
Posts: 1,868

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
This is getting extremely annoying and pointless - first Sheffield United wasted our time (through the media, who wouldn't talk about anything else) by going on and on about how West Ham illegally played Tevez, and now they're taking it to the high court.

I've discussed this issue before here on SL so I'll summarise the basic arguments:

1) Tevez deal was a loan deal, similar to other loan deals between clubs with the only difference being the ownership (company instead of club).

2) The Kabba contract, and hell, even the Howard deal (with a verbal agreement) had more 'real' controversy in it than the Tevez deal.

3) The media is a bunch of arseholes who can't be bothered to read the report or check the facts and just go around on soundbites pimping the hottest sounding news, which in this case was in the shape of bleating Sheffield United management.

4) High Court my fuckin arse, Sheffield United should be sued by the PL for making a circus out of this.

Feel free to rant, but trust me, I'm only getting started on this.
Tauren

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 23

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
This is getting extremely annoying and pointless - first Sheffield United wasted our time (through the media, who wouldn't talk about anything else) by going on and on about how West Ham illegally played Tevez, and now they're taking it to the high court.
I've discussed this issue before here on SL so I'll summarise the basic arguments:
1) Tevez deal was a loan deal, similar to other loan deals between clubs with the only difference being the ownership (company instead of club).
2) The Kabba contract, and hell, even the Howard deal (with a verbal agreement) had more 'real' controversy in it than the Tevez deal.
3) The media is a bunch of arseholes who can't be bothered to read the report or check the facts and just go around on soundbites pimping the hottest sounding news, which in this case was in the shape of bleating Sheffield United management.
4) High Court my fuckin arse, Sheffield United should be sued by the PL for making a circus out of this.
Feel free to rant, but trust me, I'm only getting started on this.

You are missing a big BIG piece of the puzzle on point 1. It was different to other loan moves, and not just cause it was from a company not a club. MSI retained the right to remove Tevez from the West Ham team at ANY time, for any reason they liked. This ment they could have exercised control over the team selection of West Ham. That is what the problem was, not just the link with MSI.
Ahmed Bilal

admin
Joined: Mar '06
Posts: 1,868

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
Tauren,

That's where you're wrong. Here's an article discussing the original Tevez and Mascherano contracts. This is from the original PL ruling, mind you, where the analysed the contracts and summarised their contents.

MSI could end the loan by making a short payment to West Ham during any transfer window. That's the same as two clubs signing a loan agreement with the option to take the player back in Jan or extending his loan for another 5 months.

Go ahead, read the contracts first. Then read this, and this, and this.
Ahmed Bilal

admin
Joined: Mar '06
Posts: 1,868

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
And as for controlling team selection, Steve Kabba's contract had a clause included that specifically controlled Watford's team selection in one game, and to top that off it was a relegation crunch game so it could be argued that this clause would have given Sheffield United an unfair advantage over their relegation rivals.
nortonlees

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 3

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
Can you post a link to Kabba's contract as you did with Tevez and Mascherano please.
Ahmed Bilal

admin
Joined: Mar '06
Posts: 1,868

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
norton - with Kabba's contract the clause was mentioned on both the Sheffield United official website and the Watford website. That's what I'm going on.
fakeirishblade

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 1

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
what you seem to be missing is the basic facts.

re: Kabba

both websites did state this. but when the contract was submitted to the FAPL this clause was omitted (i.e. taken out) therefore there was no actual clause in the contract. if there had of been the FAPL would of seen it and refused the transfer.

this is where it differs entirely from tevez.

re: tevez

when west ham signed him they had to agree a clause in his contract with MSI that they could sell him when they wanted without west ham having to agree to it. this is 3rd party influence. West Ham hid this from the FAPL when the deal went through. if you read the conscripts of the case then you would notice that had the FAPL had known about this the players registration would of been rejected as it is against FAPL rules.

the deal only came about when the icelanders took over at west ham and made the wrongdoings aware to the FAPL, how very noble of them.

what people are seriously annoyed about is the simple fact that Tevez was still allowed to continue playing despite this. and after the FAPL ordered west ham to cancel that part of the agreement, they took west hams word for it without requesting any evidence (bit suspicious to say the least) even though Kia Joorabchian hadnt also agreed (it takes 2 people to cancel a contract) and therefore still held this influence over tevez.

Everything will become clear once Tevez is moved on against the wishes of west ham to Man utd or another club. this will mean the 3rd party influence is still there.
nortonlees

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 3

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
Yes, but there are also more recent counter claims by both clubs that no such clause exists. With the contract being innvestigated I doubt that either club would make such counter claims without first checking. You never know though...:-)

BTW, I don't like these "gentlemen's agreements" either. I totally understand it when it's a loan, there's a clear conflict of interest. If you sell a player to a rival, though, then surely you should take the consequences of them playing against you.

As it happens, in Kabba's case, most Blades would have been delighted for him to have played for Watford against us, we may have got the extra couple of goals we needed to stay up with him running around headless-chicken style up front for Watford Just ask Watford fans, they would've welcomed him being contractual obliged to miss all their fixtures, by all accounts...
Ahmed Bilal

admin
Joined: Mar '06
Posts: 1,868

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
i don't agree with the gentlemen's agreements either mate, but united wanted a tactical advantage and squeezed it out of the rules.
nortonlees

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 3

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
That could be said for either United, both sides of the Pennines.
bluebeater

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 3

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
ok get back to the point of shutting sheff utds gob. enough of the winging and crying.
SU got RELEGATED because they LOST against wigan... end of. anybody would feel hard done by if they got relegated in the last match of the season, but just take it on the chin and focus for the grind of next season. get yourself back into the premiership and then you can talk. seriously ive had enough of this crap.
ronaldo

new member
Joined: Jul '07
Posts: 27

Login to Send PM

Posted 2 years ago #
nah its no chance of them returning. they're just getting as much attention they can get before they start their season in there

RSS feed for this topic

Reply

You must log in to post.