Comments on: Why West Ham should NOT have points deducted over Tevez

By: Sheffield United to sue West Ham - apparently they like begging | Soccerlens - Football News Blog

Thu, 16 Aug 2007 10:10:05 +0000

[...] before you try to burn the site down…read this, this, this, this and this – at the very least you’ll have some context for this [...]

By: garywh

garywh — Sat, 21 Jul 2007 10:02:17 +0000

The Man Utd team that played that day against West Ham was practically the same line-up as the one that beat Roma 7-1 in the Champions League, give or take substitutions. Was that a reserve team??? Wow!!!

By: paul jenkinson

paul jenkinson — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 21:59:15 +0000

THE REAL REASON WEST HAM STAYED UP IS THAT MAN UTD FIELDED THEIR ‘RESERVE’ TEAM. LIVERPOOL ALSO FIELDED A ‘RESERVE’ TEAMS. BOTH OF THESE ACTIONS AFFECTED WHO WERE RELEGATED. I CAN SEE THE AREA OF TEAMS FIELDING WEAKENED TEAMS, ACTIONS WHICH AFFECT RELEGATION BEING A PROBLEM IN FUTURE YEARS.

By: Did Sheffield United violate Rule U18? | Soccerlens - Football News Blog

Did Sheffield United violate Rule U18? | Soccerlens - Football News Blog — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 10:44:37 +0000

[...] previous discussions on the subject, please read this and this – both articles discuss the initial Commission findings and the problems with those [...]

By: MKHAMMER

MKHAMMER — Sun, 10 Jun 2007 17:40:51 +0000

i dont usually lyk ma utd fans but i do like this one west ham should not be deducted points asnd never should be, its all legal and dave wheelan is just a misrable c***t

By: Smokey

Smokey — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 21:32:34 +0000

“However, I seem to recall that since the agreement for Tevez between MSI and West Ham was still illegal at the time. So basically only the Tevez – third party agreement changed, which was prepared ahead of time.”

Almost correct Ahmed. The third party agreement between MSI & West Ham was literally torn up.

There is no longer any agreement between MSI & West Ham.

West Ham have full control over Tevez future

Hope this helps

By: Mikef

Mikef — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 16:53:15 +0000

I notice no one has commented on why SU think they even have the right to argue a case against the ruling. All EPL clubs signed an agreement prior to the panel deliberating, approving the individuals selected and agreeing that their ruling was final and binding. The only club that had the right to appeal was WHU, the accused.

If the EPL want to put this to bed once and for all they should instruct the arbitration panel to fine the Hammers 2 points. What will McCabe say to that?

By: Corena

Corena — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 15:52:05 +0000

You say “That is, in my view, gross misconduct. Ignorance of the law is hardly an excuse.” We are talking about a rule which no-one knew about, a rule that the arbitration panel itself said many clubs still believe West Ham have in fact not broken.

In effect is was a little known law, the small print of which is open to interpretation. A law that no other league in the world has, a rule which the English FA do not have. A rule in fact that if West Ham broke would lead to them possibly having their best player taken away from them.

So no advantage would accrue to West Ham only a disadvantage. By no stretch of the imagination could that be called ‘gross misconduct’.

You say it is ‘bullshit’ that West Ham were unaware of the law. Is it ‘bullshit’ then that no other club were aware of this rule either?

You also claim that if the hearing had taken place earlier in the season you say West Ham would have had points deducted. I very much doubt this. West Ham did not field ineligible players – what they did was break a little known rule by which they gained no advantage.

It is therefore very unlikely they would have had points deducted and for which a Â£5 million fine seems far too harsh.

This is the last time I come to your blog – I am sick of this trolling of West Ham fans.

By: Keith Lewis

Keith Lewis — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:56:40 +0000

Good article and responses. Personally, I think Sheffield United are just clinging on to any possible chance they can see of either obtaining compensation or being reinstated.

One of the Sheffield United supporters internet sites ran a poll seven weeks before the end of the season and asked the question along the lines of “Can we get out of this relegation battle”. 62% of those who responded said that Sheffield United were not dependent upon any other club and that their destiny was in their own hands. They were seven points clear of a relegation place at that time.

They were relegated and now they seek to blame others.

The real argument that Sheffield United have – should be with Liverpool who fielded nine squad players against Fulham. If Liverpool had won that match – then Fulham would have been relegated.

By: Ahmed Bilal

Ahmed Bilal — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 14:16:29 +0000

You guys are right, of course – it’s ‘CAN’. Thanks for correcting me.

Changes things a bit, in terms to what happened afterwards, but everything else stays the same.

However, I seem to recall that since the agreement for Tevez between MSI and West Ham was still illegal at the time. So basically only the Tevez – third party agreement changed, which was prepared ahead of time.

And West Ham had a day to share those documents with FA Premier League.

Did I get that right guys?