jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
oh well, expect every football desicsion that a team doesnt like to end up in court now, football is fucked, also got to love the fact the other 2 teams that went down arent suing us ?
The judgment reads: 'On the totality of the evidence, we have no doubt that West Ham would have secured at least three fewer points over the 2006-07 season if Carlos Tevez had not been playing for the club.
'Indeed, we think it more likely than not on the evidence that we heard, that even over the final two games of the season, West Ham would have achieved at least three points less overall without Mr Tevez. He played outstandingly well in the two wins that West Ham secured in those last two games.'
why aren sheff utd suing liverpool, who played a massivly weekend team that meant fulham won to stay up, or suing unsworth for scoring that pen, or even better sheff utd themselves, who broke the same rule with nalis and kabba  CUNTS
[Edited on 23-09-2008 by jr]
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
west ham should have had points deducted at the time, teams playing a weakened team is nothing to do with it.
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
for what reason, be prepared to answer with fact, because im pretty up on this subject
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
well it was well reported they broke the rules and from what i read the punishment should have been points deducted as they played a player not correctly registered, seems they got let off lightly.
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
There is no preset punishment for a rule that:
1) had never been used before
2) was open to interpretation
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
other teams in lower leagues had points taken off, afc wimbledon and a couple of others, at the end of the day you cant argue that
A. they broke the rules
B. they got off lightly with a £5.5 million pound fine
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
how can your break a rule, when the FA themselves werent even sure if it was legal
like i said, the rule was open to so much interpretation, it has had to be massivly re written because of it
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
ok they didnt break a rule
thats why sheffield united have just won a tribunal against them, and why they were fined in the 1st place, how can you argue against it? tevez wasnt properly registered to play for west ham and he is the single biggest reason they stayed up.
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
tevez and mach fucked up out whole dressing room so much its the reason we were down there to start with
knowone complained about tevez playing when we were loosing, we lost 3-0 and sheff united, he played, no issues
Rule E22 was open for interpretation, the FA fined us, as in there view we had broken the rules, but we wernt docked points, as:
1) it would have certianly relegated us
2) there werent sure of the rule themsleves, so giving us the maxium penalty, when they dont really know what the deal is, is harsh dont you think ?
sheff united went down as they werent good enough, tevez helped us stay up, but he wasnt the sole reason, there were 10 other players out there who were brillaint as well
if this had been the other way round, and masch was the player that helped us stay up, there wouldnt be half the issues there are, as he's not as high profile
|
BigSte
Member
Registered: 27th Aug 02
Location: Sheffield
User status: Offline
|
Cheating fuckers Pay us the £30m now and fuck off whinging. Your still in the prem ffs.
Fact of the matter is, Tevez was illegitamtely playing. He was registered to the agent and not property of WHU. Fact proven even more so when Man U paid for him recently.
Just think yourself lucky the first hearing didn't rule in our favour or we would have been reinstated.
You cheated, your paying us a huge amount of money for doing so, get over it.
PS major thanks to Kevin McCabe and Sean Bean for seeing this one through!
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
get over yourselves, you pissed away a 10 point lead over us as you were shit
you failed to beat wigan (pre good wigan) on the last day of the season
the reason you went down was because your were/are a terrible football club, not because of us
|
BigSte
Member
Registered: 27th Aug 02
Location: Sheffield
User status: Offline
|
no excuse for not beating Wigan at home (although we beat them away). We went down on goal difference in the end.
Various factors could have kept us up, like Ste Gerrard not diving in the first game of the season to pull a draw, WHU not cheating, etc etc
We are in the Championship, football in this league is entertaining and I'm not too bothered. I'd like us to still be in PL but I don't mind being in this league.
I just like the fact that it is official now - you broke rules which ultimately resulted in you staying up, now you will have to pay us out
|
Conway563
Member
Registered: 7th Jun 06
Location: Yate, Bristol
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigSte
Various factors could have kept us up, like Ste Gerrard not diving in the first game of the season to pull a draw
So does this mean you'll now be taking Gerrard to court?
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
The main factor is your chairman has been moaning "its not about the money" when thats the only thing he is going to get
he has also made an annoncement to the stock exchange, telling them the result, before its offically been released, increasing share prices, so infact, when it comes down to it, it is all about the £££
its an indipendant tribunal btw, just so your aware the FA have no powers to make us do anything on this one, we also entered it out of choice, where we could have refused to, so maybe not as clear cut as you suggust
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conway563
quote:
Originally posted by BigSte
Various factors could have kept us up, like Ste Gerrard not diving in the first game of the season to pull a draw
So does this mean you'll now be taking Gerrard to court?
yep, and david unsworth, and neil warnock, as he is quite cleary shit, and couldnt keep them in the leage
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
Mick Dennis, DAILY EXPRESS on SSN talking absolute sense.
* Previous WHU regime lied, but only in order to get paperwork formalities through.
* New board took over and fessed up, and we were fined £5.5 as a result.
* There was no 3rd party influence exercised.
* The c***s poor performance was the reason they wen't down.
How does that equate to us paying them £30m?
|
BigSte
Member
Registered: 27th Aug 02
Location: Sheffield
User status: Offline
|
money is the most important thing in football these days so what's your point? The game is going down hill with scum like Chelsea and Man City ruining it with stupid amounts of money.
Gerard and Unsworth will get their commupence
Can't be bothered going over the same crap over and over again......WHU lied and cheated and you need to pay the mighty Sheffield United £30m 
End of story.
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
No you obviously have no idea about this
you have won the arbitration, there will now be a further arbitration later in the year to decide the amount
also, and intresting fact for you
This statement is bollocks
On the totality of the evidence, we have no doubt that West Ham would have secured at least three fewer points over the 2006/07 season if Carlos Tevez had not been playing for the club.
One could argue that the signing of Tevez and Macherano distabalised the club and lost us many points having finihsed 9th and got to the FA Cup Final the season before.
First 4 games without Tevez
Charlton Home Won 2-1
Watford Away Drew1-1
Liverpool Away Lost 1-2 (unlucky)
Aston Villa Home Drew 1-1
Total 5 points per 4 games ~ average 1.25 per game x 38 = 47.5 points
Actual points with Tevez 41 (or 36 points over the 33 games that he was available ~ Average 1.09 per game x 38 =41.42 points)
Which ever way you look at it with or without him we could have stayed up
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
right, end of ,west ham are fucking great, sheffield united are cheating motherfuckers and carlos tevez is shit and west ham would have been better off without him
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by BigSte
and fuck off whinging.
OMG.
OMG.
OMG.
POT KETTLE BLACK
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
what ?
youve missed the point, and are comming across much worse than ste does
Sheff utd have now moved on to there 3rd tribunal, after the first 2 ruled agaisnt them, do they just keep trying untill they get the answer they want ?
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Nath
quote:
Originally posted by BigSte
and fuck off whinging.
OMG.
OMG.
OMG.
POT KETTLE BLACK
|
eddiewhiteley
Member
Registered: 10th Mar 05
Location: down in albion
User status: Offline
|
im not really bothered about it, just you seem to have west ham tinted specs on, making out this is all unjust, and saying you'd have stayed up with or without tevez has got to be a joke
im a united fan, got bigger things to think about than this
|
jr
Member
Registered: 20th May 02
Location: Kent
User status: Offline
|
read the points thing, i didnt work it out, but in the games without tevez, we got more points per game, than the ones where he played, which makes the arbitration total bollocks
|
Nath
Member
Registered: 3rd Apr 02
Location: MK
User status: Offline
|
Who knows how WHU wouldve performed without Tevez? It's impossible to predict. What's to say any replacement in WHU's ranks wouldn't have faired just as well and grabbed a goal or two? It's impossible to work out.
|
