Filed: Thursday, 17th May 2007
By: Matthew O'Greel
West Ham United have been told they can buy Carlos Tevez outright - for a
fee in the region of £40m. That is according to the Daily Mail, who spoke
with Tevez's agent/owner Kia Joorabchian last night. Joorabchian - who lost
out in the race for United to Eggert Magnuson's Icelandic consortium last
November - also revealed that recent reports of bids for Tevez from one or
two European giants were false. "We haven't held talks with any club,
contrary to what you might have read," he said. "This morning it was Inter
Milan, the other day it was Real Madrid - but these stories are the work of
fiction. "West Ham's board have to decide what their intentions are. Maybe
they will think they want Carlos and build around him - or maybe they will
think that they can buy four or five great players for the money instead.
"[Carlos] has a great affection for the club — and the supporters. The
decision on his future is his. He has been very happy there."
Joorabchian also confirmed that Tevez's original contract had been torn up
as a result of the Premier League enquiry's initial findings; an issue at
the heart of Sheffield United's latest attack on the Premier League; today's
request for arbitration. "West Ham unilaterally terminated the agreement and
I have left it in the hands of my lawyer, Graham Shear, to deal with the
matter," Joorabchian declared. "But we did everything right. The proof is in
the pudding, because nobody at the Premier League asked for me to go there
and give evidence [at the hearing]. They knew that we had behaved correctly.
We used top lawyers, top accountants. "We made sure everything was done,
We've been involved in many other deals and didn't have a single problem. It
wasn't a shady transfer. It wasn't a controversial transfer. It wasn't a
strange transfer. "It has been said of the old administration at West Ham
that they had not presented the correct documents to the Premier League. I
don't know, but whatever happened I'm sure could have been repaired to
prevent all this controversy. "What I am very upset about — and sad about —
is that Carlos has been dragged into this affair, when he has nothing to do
with it."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades launch legal action - Sky
By Tom Adams - Created on 16 May 2007
Sheffield United have begun arbitration proceedings against the Premier
League as a result of the Carlos Tevez transfer controversy, with plc
chairman Kevin McCabe now proposing that England's top flight comprises 21
teams next season.
Sheffield United's legal complaint in full
Following relegation, The Blades are bitterly angry at the failure to
penalise West Ham with a points deduction despite being found guilty of
irregularities in the August signings of Tevez and former Hammer Javier
Mascherano.
A so-called 'Gang of Four' - comprising The Blades, Charlton, Wigan and
Fulham - have been canvassing support from their fellow clubs and The Blades
have also written to MPs in a bid to generate support for their cause.
McCabe served arbitration procedure notice on the Premier League on
Wednesday to continue the crusade against the perceived injustice, and has
again threatened further legal action if the league fails to accept his
letter.
However, the Blades plc chairman has also proposed a scenario whereby
Sheffield United would be reinstated to the league without West Ham being
demoted, resulting in the Premiership housing 21 teams next season.
"We are still working towards debating matters with the Premier League, we
want to undo the wrong and the injustice of the decision," McCabe told the
club's official website.
"The events off the field of play have culminated in our arbitration
procedures.
"We have written to every MP, explaining the background of the injustice and
that it needs to be satisfied for the good of the sport.
"First and foremost we're doing everything to protect the interests of
United.
"Will the Premier League accept our arbitration letters? Litigation can be
pursued and, if it has to be pursued, we'll do it.
"It is up to the FA Premier League to find a way round this exceptional
circumstance where a club which has played by the rules has been relegated
at the expense of one club who have fielded ineligible players.
"The simple answer is why not have 21 clubs in the Premiership next season
and relegate four of them at the end. It is not my decision to make but it
seems like a very simple solution."
Wigan chairman Dave Whelan has indicated that the disaffected clubs will
seek to prove that West Ham's re-registration of Tevez outside the transfer
window - and following the independent commission's findings - was illegal.
However, the Premier League looks unlikely to bow to McCabe's attempts to
establish an arbitration panel, with a spokesman underlining the league's
belief that no laws have been broken in the controversial row.
"We followed our processes to the letter and we ensured to our satisfaction
that the third party arrangements in relation to Carlos Tevez's contract
have been terminated," said a Premier League spokesman.
"We are more than happy to meet with officials of Sheffield United or any
other aggrieved club to offer clarification and explanation of this and we
have written to all 20 clubs with a forensic explanation of the ruling."
Fifa has already pledged to investigate the row which is threatening to drag
the relegation issue out over the summer.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Kia: Nothing shady in Tevez deal - Sky
By Mark Buckingham - Created on 17 May 2007
Kia Joorabchian insists there was nothing 'shady' about Carlos Tevez's
transfer to West Ham United. The Iranian businessman's MSI group took the
Argentine striker to Upton Park last August, but the deal has created a
storm in the Premiership. The Hammers were fined £5.5million regarding the
deal, while Sheffield United have launched legal action after Tevez's goals
kept the club in the top flight. But Joorabchian is at pains to stress there
was nothing underhand in the transfer and that it was simply the same as a
player moving between clubs on loan. "It was a situation similar to Alex
Song going to Charlton, or Tim Howard to Everton, or Glen Johnson to
Portsmouth," Joorabchian told the Daily Mail. "We did everything right. The
proof is in the pudding because nobody at the Premier League asked for me to
go there and give evidence. They knew that we had behaved correctly. "We
used top lawyers, top accountants. We made sure everything was done. We've
been involved in many other deals and didn't have a single problem. "It
wasn't a shady transfer. It wasn't a controversial transfer. It wasn't a
strange transfer. "It has been said of the old administration at West Ham
that they had not presented the correct documents to the Premier League. I
don't know, but whatever happened I'm sure could have been repaired to
prevent all this controversy."
Regarding Tevez's future at Upton Park, Joorabchian is adamant a decision
will be made by the club and the player, not MSI. He added: "West Ham's
board have to decide what their intentions are. Maybe they will think they
want Carlos and build around him. Or maybe they will think that, for the
money, they can buy four or five great players instead. "We haven't held
talks with any club, contrary to what you might have read. This morning it
was Inter Milan for £25m, the other day it was Real Madrid for £30m. These
stories are the work of fiction. "He has a great affection for the club and
the supporters. The decision on his future is his. He has been very happy
there."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
League chiefs told to resign - Telegraph
By David Bond
Last Updated: 3:35am BST 17/05/2007
Richard Scudamore and Sir David Richards, the chief executive and chairman
of the Premier League, last night faced calls to resign over their handling
of the Carlos Tevez controversy. As Sheffield United became the first member
of the 'gang of four' to file a legal claim against the League over the
decision not to dock West Ham points for breaking regulations on third-party
ownership, it emerged that Wigan chairman David Whelan has written to
Scudamore and Richards urging them to "consider their positions".
In an e-mail, sent to all 20 Premier League clubs yesterday, Whelan is
understood to have accused the League's two most senior figures of
neglecting their responsibilities over the decision to allow Tevez to
continue playing after the ruling by an independent commission on April 27.
The judgement gave the Premier League leave to cancel Tevez's registration
unless West Ham amended or cancelled their agreements with the Argentina
striker's offshore owners.
The League and West Ham maintain that the deals were "unilaterally
terminated" by the club, which allowed manager Alan Curbishley to continue
to use Tevez in his side's successful battle to avoid relegation.
But Whelan is believed to be "appalled" that the Premier League board
approved his registration following a phone call a few hours after the
commission delivered its verdict - the night before West Ham beat Wigan 3-0.
The latest twist in the increasingly fractious saga came as Sheffield United
called for the League to set up an arbitration panel aimed at overturning
the independent commission's original decision to fine West Ham £5.5
million.
United have hired law firm Denton Wilde Sapte to pursue the claim and
although no other clubs were named in a statement they issued last night, it
is understood the other clubs involved in the revolt, Charlton, Fulham and
Wigan, are backing the move.
As well as making a request for arbitration under the Premier League's rule
S4, United are questioning whether the independent commission acted
"lawfully, fairly and reasonably" and accuses the League of failing to
conduct "an adequate investigation into the continued fielding of Tevez
after the 27 April decision despite serious questions over his eligibility".
Demanding a new tribunal be established before the end of the week and to
deliver a final ruling within a month, United appealed to the League to put
preparations for next season on hold.
They said plans for the new campaign "wrongly assume that West Ham remains a
Premiership club and Sheffield United are relegated to the Championship".
The League acknowledged the legal claim from Sheffield United but refused to
comment on whether they would agree to set up an arbitration panel to
consider their claims. "We are in receipt of that request and it is under
consideration," said a spokesman.
However, in a six-page letter, sent to all clubs on Tuesday night and made
public yesterday, Richards and Scudamore say they will consider their rules
on third-party ownership again during the League's annual summer meeting in
two weeks' time.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
We want blood - Wigan demand Premiership chief quits - This Is London
17.05.07
The Premier League were plunged deeper into crisis last night after Wigan
chairman Dave Whelan called for their two top officials to resign. In a
letter to chief executive Richard Scudamore, Whelan claimed Scudamore and
chairman Dave Richards were guilty of a dereliction of duty' when they
allowed Carlos Tevez to represent West Ham in a crucial relegation match at
Wigan on April 28.
On a day when relegated Sheffield United filed arbitration proceedings
against the Premier League, Whelan said he was appalled' that Scudamore and
Richards did not follow the recommendation of an independent commission
chairman and cancel Tevez's registration.
Instead, claims Whelan, the Premier League held a telephone board meeting
and, having received assurances only from West Ham that the third-party
agreement with MSI/JSI, the player's offshore owners, had been terminated,
allowed Tevez to play the following day. He scored twice in a 3-0 win at the
JJB Stadium.
In the letter copied to the other 19 Premier League clubs, Whelan wrote: "I
would like to once again ask the question in my email of May 11, did you
actually receive a copy of the documentation from West Ham United which
showed that the original agreement between West Ham and MSI/JSI had been
cancelled?"
Whelan also asked about documentation from MSI/JSI giving permission to
cancel that agreement and whether the ownership of Tevez was then held by
West Ham. He added: "The judgment given by the independent panel ordered
that the registration of Tevez could be terminated by the Premier League.
You then proceeded to hold a board meeting by telephone between yourself,
the chairman and the secretary.
"I am appalled that the chairman would allow such an important decision to
be made on the basis of a telephone call.
"Surely a decision of this magnitude required an open and full discussion.
You had been ordered by the chairman of the commission to seriously consider
the termination of this contract. Your failure to do so in my mind is a
dereliction of the duties of both the chairman and yourself and the pair of
you should consider resigning."
Whelan's views were echoed by another senior club official, who said he was
staggered a £40million decision can be made over the telephone', while
referring to the original recommendations of the independent commission that
examined the Tevez case. "We order the registration of Carlos Tevez can be
terminated by the FA Premier League and we order that West Ham pay the cost
of those proceedings."
In an effort to satisfy the 20 Premier League clubs that they have acted
correctly, Scudamore and Richards sent out a six-page explanation earlier
this week.
Whelan has led the call for evidence that the third-party agreement between
West Ham and Tevez's owners had been terminated, and in Tuesday's letter the
Premier League said officials had received the following prior to the
deadline of noon on April 28:
A LETTER from West Ham United sent to Tevez, MSI and JSI terminating the
private agreement between them dated August 30, 2006, and notifying those
parties that the private agreement shall cease to have any further force or
effect.
A LETTER from the legal representatives of MSI and JSI acknowledging receipt
of the above letter.
A LETTER confirming that the above letter had been served on Tevez
personally.
In Whelan's opinion, however, the key question remains unanswered because at
no point do the Premier League say they received confirmation from MSI that
the agreement had been terminated.
It also amazes Wigan officials that it took less than 24 hours for West Ham
to satisfy the Premier League that selecting Tevez was no longer a breach of
their rules when it took Liverpool five weeks to gain the same clearance for
Javier Mascherano, who joined West Ham with Tevez last August.
In the meantime, the Premier League know they have a legal battle with
Sheffield United on their hands that is being monitored by FIFA. A statement
from Bramall Lane said: "Sheffield United is challenging the legality of the
League Commission's decision to hand West Ham a fine rather than (as had
been universally expected) docking West Ham points and cancelling the
registration of Mr Tevez.
Sheffield United also challenges the Premier League's conduct in failing to
conduct an adequate investigation into the continued fielding of Tevez after
the April 27 decision despite serious questions over his eligibility (which
remain unresolved), or to get sufficient evidence as to continuing
third-party influence over Tevez.
Sheffield United will argue that the League should have cancelled Mr Tevez's
registration in the absence of such evidence."
In addition, Sheffield United want to see "the setting up of a new
disciplinary hearing against West Ham, with the hearing to consider the
issue of the club's continued fielding of Tevez". At the same time, they
believe there should be "a hold on preparations for next season which
wrongly assume that West Ham remains a Premiership club and Sheffield United
is relegated to the Championship".
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Reo-Coker warns of the 107 steps to Cup heaven - This Is London
16.05.07
IF things had gone anywhere near to plan, Nigel Reo-Coker would have led out
a London Premiership club to play in the first ever FA Cup Final at the new
Wembley.
But, as the price of the new stadium went up roughly in proportion with
Brian Barwick's blood pressure, the West Ham captain knew fairly early on
last season that he had as much chance of being a Cup Final pioneer, as
Carlos Tevez has of being voted Sheffield United's player of the year.
There was, however, some consolation for Reo-Coker, who was the first
England captain to lead a team out at the new £800million stadium when the
builders finally departed. The 22-year-old midfielder was skipper of the
England Under-21 team which drew 2-2 with Italy.
He recalled: "It was a big shame we didn't play in the first Cup Final at
the new Wembley. It would somehow have been right since West Ham contested
the first Final back at the old place in 1923.
"It was one of the most disappointing things about last season for me."
Reo-Coker never made it to the twin towers so it's difficult to make a
comparison, but is he impressed by the new place?
He said: "It lived up to all my expectations and I will never forget playing
there. The first thing you notice, when you're still miles from the stadium,
is that arch. There is a sense of anticipation as soon as that comes into
view. Then to walk through that tunnel and be the first England captain to
cross that white line is an experience I will cherish for ever.
"To see all those seats, it's enormous and you could see why, if it was full
of England fans, it could be quite daunting for the opposition.
I can only imagine what it will be like with a 90,000 crowd and two sets of
passionate fans. It should be something special on Saturday."
The climb up to the Royal Box is also a little more challenging. "At the old
place it was 39 steps, but now you have to climb 107 steps," said Reo-Coker.
"You walk up close by the side of the fans and then you go back inside and
climb a few steel steps before emerging again.
"It's a long walk. If you win it won't be a problem but if you lose I can
imagine it will seem like it takes forever."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Premiership Rumour Mill: Sheringham at the centre of a tug-of-war - This Is
London
16.05.07
Teddy Sheringham will be involved in a summer tug-of-war between Charlton
and Millwall - if he doesn't join the rush to riches in the United States.
New York Red Bulls wants the former Tottenham, Manchester United and England
star to team up with ex-Aston Villa marksman Juan Pablo Angel. But Alan
Pardew wants Sheringham's vast experience at The Valley to help the Addicks
bounce straight back into the Premiership after their relegation to the
Championship.
Pardew took the skilful striker to Upton Park when he was West Ham boss but
Sheringham fell out of favour when Alan Curbishley took control and has been
released by the Hammers.
Millwall would love to take Sheringham full circle and take him back to The
Den, where he started his illustrious career but manager Willie Donachie
would have to offer him a coaching role on his staff to enjoy any success.
West Ham are preparing to replace Nigel Reo-Coker by signing Scott Parker
from Newcastle while Bolton are bracing themselves for a raid from new
Newcastle boss Sam Allardyce with Kevin Nolan his top target - a move which
would help to finally propel the abrasive midfielder into the England squad.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
West Ham 'not in rule breach' - The Sun
By JIM MUNRO
May 16, 2007
PREMIER LEAGUE officials have sent a six-page letter to all 20 club chairmen
outlining why West Ham were not docked points over the Carlos Tevez affair.
It also states that the Hammers have satisfactorily terminated the
"offending third party agreement" surrounding Tevez's move and are therefore
"not continuing to be in breach" of Premier League rules. Chief executive
Richard Scudamore and chairman Sir Dave Richards have put their name to the
document which states that the punishment meted out to West Ham, in the form
of a £5.5m fine, was "in accordance with our Rules".
The key extracts from that letter are as follows:
"At no point were West Ham United charged with playing an ineligible player
- both (Carlos) Tevez and (Javier) Mascherano were registered on August 31.
All the required documentation was received by the Premier League and the
usual confirmations received and sent. Registration is definitive as to the
status of the player. At no time has Mr Tevez's registration been revoked or
terminated and at all times he has been eligible to play for West Ham."
"The Independent Commission was...convened strictly in accordance with the
rules as agreed by all member clubs. Its chair, Simon Bourne-Arton QC, acted
very promptly and properly, laying out directions for the hearing in the
shortest possible timescale."
"The Independent Commission carried its work out fully in accordance with
our rules, having adopted practices entirely consistent with formal judicial
proceedings. In reaching their decision the Independent Commission clearly
considered the matter very carefully and did not deliver an irrational or
extreme judgement and delivered the sanction that only they (having
considered the matter fully and in light of copious evidence) deemed to be
proportionate and appropriate."
"The media, and of course those aggrieved by the decision, have analysed the
seven reasons given by the Independent Commission for not deducting points
and concentrated on those that to them seem the least convincing. However,
there are others that have a less convenient truth, particularly the one
that says, 'had the club in time made disclosure of the third party
contracts to the FAPL, then, in all probability, contracts could have been
entered into which would not
have offended the rules'."
"The League could not function if other clubs could effectively intervene in
an attempt to overturn decisions not to their liking."
"Given the complexities around this, we would ask you to step back from the
detail and consider the matter in more general terms:
1. Tevez has been properly registered to play for West Ham United since 31
August 2006. The Board, under our Rules, is charged with the authority to
determine this.
2. He continues to be registered with West Ham United.
3. This is a case without precedent and certainly cannot be compared with
Clubs who have played unregistered players or players ineligible through
suspension.
4. On 26 April West Ham United admitted to breaches of Rules B13 and U18 -
for which they have been fined in accordance with our Rules.
5. The offending third party agreement has been terminated by West Ham
United and therefore they are not continuing to be in breach."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Trial by television - KUMB
Filed: Wednesday, 16th May 2007
By: Peter Coombs
Imagine a situation last Sunday whereby Carlos Tevez had for whatever reason
not played for West Ham; instead Marlon Harewood had started the game.
Imagine also that during the game Harewood had been put through on goal and
been fouled by Wes Brown when clean through. Imagine that Wes Brown was only
booked for the challenge and with Tevez not on the pitch, the resulting free
kick was hit straight at the wall.
Imagine lastly that with the game at Old Trafford being nil-nil after 90
minutes and with Wigan winning at Sheffield United, Wes Brown had then
popped up with an injury time winner to send West Ham down. An imaginary
scenario yes, but not beyond the realms of possibility as we have seen with
certain decisions made this season in the Premiership (and those of us who
remember Ronald Koeman's free kick in the 1994 World Cup qualifiers).
Would West Ham have grounds to ask for the game to be replayed - or at the
very least have Wes Brown suspended for the Cup Final - if trial by
television had showed he was guilty of a red card offence? There would
certainly be people asking for this, but in our heart of hearts we would all
know that the answer to that would always be and to protect the integrity of
the game's officials, have to be no. Because the referee, the game's
official, had meted out the punishment he saw fit at the time the offence
was committed.
The rules are clear; if a player is punished for an offence on the field of
play, the punishment cannot be increased after the event unless the referee
has not seen the offence and has taken no action at the time of it. The
offence can be micro-analysed by the Sky cameras a million times, and from
every conceivable angle - but the result stands. This one incident would not
have relegated West Ham – our poor performance over the course of the
38-game season would have done.
So to West Ham and the Tevez, Mascherano affair. Having been punished for
our offence should we then be punished further because a team then finds
themselves in the Championship next season having been 10 points ahead of us
earlier in the campaign? The answer as above, is no; it goes against the
principles, spirit and laws of the game. The officials see the offence, they
punish the guilty party and the game moves on.
I do feel genuine sympathy for Sheffield United and their fans; the
Premiership needs clubs with large loyal following and a famous name (sorry
Wigan, that doesn't include you) and I do hope they come straight back up.
Relegation is never nice, but the knee jerk reaction to ask for West Ham to
take their place is clearly wrong. It's emotion rather than sense speaking.
The reasons Sheffield United got relegated are clear; they were not good
enough over 38 games – not the fault of West Ham United. Had Phil Jagielka
decided not to play basketball in his own area on Sunday they would have
stayed up - West Ham United cannot be blamed for this. Had the post been
half an inch thinner and Danny Webber's effort had not rebounded back off
the upright they would have stayed up – again, not West Ham's fault. We have
taken our punishment and got on with it, the other clubs should have done
the same.
In a case whereby punishment is meted and then successfully challenged by an
aggrieved third party we set a dangerous precedent. If West Ham had been
relegated could we have asked for our game against Newcastle in January to
be replayed because we had a perfectly good goal disallowed that would have
put us 3-1 up. Could we ask for Liverpool to be forced to replay their
recent game with Fulham and play a stronger side than they did? No because
it would be utter carnage. Challenge would follow counter challenge and the
game being played on the pitch would be replaced by it being played out in
the courtrooms and arbitration rooms up and down the country.
A lot of what is driving the current push to have West Ham further punished
is the media; we are now to an extent a victim of the so-called trial by
television, or newspaper. Why have the media given so many column inches to
this? Because it is a good story and it sells.
Look guys - the relegated clubs are aggrieved; they feel West Ham staying up
is because, being a bigger club, they were not punished the same way smaller
clubs would have been. Let's stoke the flame, let's make it a soap opera
that can fill the back pages over the summer when there is no football being
played. This sells papers so milk it for what is worth.
Football carries a lot of emotion, especially at the end of the season.
Relegation is the end of the world. Those who experience it will cling to
any faint hopes that by a technicality they can carry on in the Premiership
gravy train. And the media lap the story up – it's their job. Given the
column inches and television coverage, those who feel they have been on the
wrong end of an injustice suddenly begin to believe that their cause has the
backing of the football world and this gives them hope. But the media are
not on their side; they just love a story that sells.
The so-called 'gang of four' agreed to stick together no matter who went
down before matters were decided last Sunday. This is obviously an insurance
policy for all of those involved; one team may go so let's agree to stick
together before hand. For Wigan and Fulham this is now a case of
old-fashioned musketeer spirit – one for all and all for one and about an
agreement concocted before any of these teams were safe. Not about what they
feel is right or wrong. But I go back to my original point. We have faced
the panel, been found guilty of an offence and have received punishment.
As to the offence itself, third party ownership of a player. I believe this
now sets a precedent whereby loans between Premiership clubs should now be
made illegal. The case of Manchester United this season playing four of
their 38 games against reserve goalkeepers due to the loans and transfer
clauses of Ben Foster at Watford and Tim Howard at Manchester United shows
that Premiership games can be influenced by third party ownership. Had Tim
Howard played for Everton in the recent game at Goodison would he have
dropped the same ball that Iain Turner did to give Manchester United their
lifeline. Will Chelsea be suing over this?
West Ham made a technical error with regards to the player's contracts and
MSI. We held our hands up and bought the error to the attention of the
Premier League. The current administration at the club has acted fairly and
above board and a £5.5million fine was deemed to be fit punishment. There is
an argument that playing a player not owned by West Ham is reason enough to
have points deducted. Will Wigan dock themselves points for the games won
and drew when Chris Kirkland, on loan from Liverpool, played for them?
There is also an argument that by tearing up the original contract and
"re-signing Tevez" that we created our own transfer window to do this.
Middlesbrough signed Jonathan Woodgate permanently outside of the transfer
window thereby changing the contract they had with both Real Madrid and the
player. Will they dock themselves the last six points they gained this
season?
To make our game's rules watertight there should be no grey areas. The clubs
should own players that play for them in the Premier League and loans should
be for their original purpose, for young players to again experience in the
lower leagues.
The league need to look at this and draw up a clear set of rules governing
ownership of players and allow all clubs in the competition a set period to
get their houses in order. Set punishments should also be clearly written,
circulated and agreed on with regards to the future breaking of these rules
and as is already the case, all 20 clubs in the league need to agree to
abide by and agree with any punishment that is given out in future breaches
of the rule book.
One of the things I agree with Paul Jewell on, is the timing of the
commission, which probably did give West Ham a boost a day before the game
with Wigan. On the other side of the coin any points deduction would have
had the same positive effect for Wigan. One team was always going to lose in
this situation. These things need to be investigated but the timing needs to
be thought about and where possible avoided at the business end of the
season.
West Ham made a mistake during a previous regime, we were punished. It is
not up to us to decide when, where and how severely we are punished. This is
up to the Premier League and their independent commission. They have acted
and we all live by that decision. It's time the media and the "gang of four"
accept this and concentrate their efforts on next season, one that promises
to be one the toughest Premier League and Championship seasons ever.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Lies, damned lies and ... Kevin McCabe - KUMB
Filed: Wednesday, 16th May 2007
By: Gordon Thrower
With all the rubbish spoken by Wigan's Dave Whelan and, more recently
Sheffield United's Kevin McCabe we thought it was about time we had a rant
of our own. Gordon Thrower bravely fought off a streaming cold caught as a
result of his four day trek to Manchester to come up with this …
I've had enough. Firstly I'm getting lectured on morals by someone who has
been convicted of illegal price-fixing and who apparently thought nothing of
stocking his shops with stuff made by child slave labour. Well at least
Whelan seems to have shut up for the time being.
However, no sooner does one ignorant rent-a-quote idiot shut up then another
steps forward to replace him. Step forward Kevin "Hard Of Thinking" McCabe.
Like John Madejski before him here is another who is clearly of the opinion
that if you repeat a lie often enough everyone will believe it.
I read with disbelief the statement issued by him this afternoon on his
proposed "arbitration proceedings", amazed that any half-reputable law firm
could have put its name to something with more holes in it than Torquay's
defence.
"Sheffield United is challenging the legality of the League Commission's
decision to hand West Ham a fine rather than (as had been universally
expected) docking West Ham points and cancelling the registration of Mr
Tevez.
Universally expected? I think not. Indeed a random search of newspaper
articles in the period leading up to the decision would suggest quite the
opposite. Of course if McCabe were to replace the words "universally
expected" with "hoped for by me in case we didn't get enough points to stay
up" we'd be closer to the truth.
"Sheffield United will argue that the Commission's decisions must meet, and
in this case failed to meet, the same general obligations as those required
of public bodies, namely to act lawfully, fairly and reasonably. It falls to
the League's arbitration body to perform the same role as the High Court
would in reviewing decisions issued by the League's disciplinary
commission."
The decision was lawful, fair and reasonable. What it wasn't was what McCabe
wanted, which was a pre-judged, unlawful and unreasonable decision based on
his club's need to compensate for their inability to gain enough points to
stay up.
"Sheffield United also challenges the Premier League's conduct in failing to
conduct an adequate investigation into the continued fielding of Tevez after
the 27 April decision despite serious questions over his eligibility (which
still remain unresolved), or to get sufficient evidence as to continuing
third party influence over Tevez. Sheffield United will argue that the
League should have cancelled Mr Tevez's registration in the absence of such
evidence; and/or that further disciplinary proceedings should have been
instituted against West Ham for failing effectively to resolve their ongoing
breach of Premier League rules as regards Tevez's registration.
So many lies all in one place. The Premier League did conduct an adequate
investigation into Tevez's status and were furnished with documentary
evidence of his eligibility. His eligibility does not therefore "remain
unresolved". Since there were no breaches of Premier League rules there
could not have been an ongoing breach. This statement in itself contains a
number of wilful falsehoods and it contravenes a number of Premier League
rules concerning the conduct of clubs and officials.
"Sheffield United will seek:
a declaration that the original decision and subsequent failure to act were
unlawful, and that the decision should therefore be set aside;"
As we have seen the decision was lawful and there was no "subsequent failure
to act". Seeking a declaration that this was the case would be like me
seeking a declaration that black is in fact white.
"the setting up of a new disciplinary hearing against West Ham, with the
hearing to consider the issue of the club's continued fielding of Tevez;"
Or in other words "Oh let's keep going until we get the decision I want".
The original hearing was lawful. The club's continued fielding of Tevez was
done with the consent and full knowledge of the Premier League. End of.
"a hold on preparations for next season which wrongly assume that West Ham
remains a Premiership club and Sheffield United is relegated to the
Championship;"
The preparations for next season RIGHTLY assume that Sheffield United are
down. This would be because they gained 38 points and had an inferior
goal-difference to Wigan. Down. End Of.
and
"an assessment of the clubs' potential claim for damages.
I'll do that bit for you McCabe - it's £0.00.
Maybe if you sue Jagielka on his way out of the front door for his
inexplicable handball you might make a few more quid. That one moment of
madness had infinitely more to do with Sheffield United's relegation than
anything that happened in E13.
"In light of the significance and urgency of the issues in dispute,
Sheffield United has called for the new tribunal to be established by the
end of this week and to make its decision within four weeks".
How about this: in the light of the fact that your case is based on a tissue
of lies and inaccuracies, how about you disappear with "urgency" now before
someone discovers just how many Premier League rules you have broken by
issuing this travesty of a statement.
Goodbye McCabe, mind you don't choke on the traditional hearty breakfast on
your way out.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
FIFA have to stamp on this, says Ardiles - Daily Mail
by CHRIS WHEELER
Last updated at 07:32am on 17th May 2007
Ossie Ardiles has expressed his concern over the deal that took Carlos Tevez
and Javier Mascherano to West Ham last summer. Ardiles, a 1978 World
Cup-winner with Argentina and a Tottenham legend, said: "It's not good for
football and something FIFA must stamp out. These fines and the threat of
court action have hurt football's image and we must stop it happening again.
"It hasn't surprised people in Argentina because there is so much going on
with these third-party arrangements. You never know who the owner is until
you start doing business. "Because of the economic situation in Argentina
and Brazil, it is happening more and more. Some players are owned by big
international companies. "It isn't just happening in South America, but
Africa and elsewhere. I was coaching the top team in Jersusalem last year
and I was in Japan before that. Everywhere I go players have third-party
deals. FIFA have to look at it."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Plot thickens in Tévez wrangle as Whelan calls for heads to roll - Times
Gary Jacob and Peter Lansley
The FA Premier League came under renewed pressure last night from the "Gang
of Four" incensed by its handling of the Carlos Tévez affair. Wigan Athletic
called for the "resignation" of Sir Dave Richards, the Premier League
chairman, and Richard Scudamore, the chief executive, and Sheffield United
have taken the first steps in their legal challenge to have West Ham United
deducted points for breaching League rules in the transfer of the Argentina
forward.
In a letter shown to The Times, Dave Whelan, the Wigan chairman, questions
the conduct of the two League officials since the independent commission
imposed a fine of £5.5 million on West Ham last month. Whelan queries the
time it took to clear Tévez to play when the League had been given the power
by the independent commission to remove the forward's registration.
The Premier League board, made up of Scudamore, Richards and Mike Foster,
the company secretary, took that decision within hours of the judgment being
announced in the early afternoon of April 27. "It required full discussion
and was a dereliction of duties," Whelan said.
The Wigan chairman then asks for their resignation. He also reiterates that
the League has failed to provide the evidence that West Ham cancelled the
agreement with the companies that own the economic rights to Tévez. The
League has said that it has seen West Ham's termination of the contract with
Media Sports Investment and Just Sport, as well as a letter from the
companies acknowledging receipt.
However, the League claims that it cannot ask the companies if they have
terminated the agreement because they do not come under its jurisdiction.
The League has said that it is willing to debate third-party agreements at
the meeting of the Barclays Premiership clubs in two weeks. "The board will
be giving careful consideration to how we might learn lessons from this
situation to protect the future interests of the League and its member
clubs," the League said in a six-page letter to the clubs yesterday.
Last night, the League was considering its response to Sheffield United's
request for an arbitration panel. The club, relegated to the Coca-Cola
Championship on Sunday, want a three-man tribunal appointed to consider the
decision to fine West Ham rather than dock points. The League's rules for
deciding disputes this way say that arbitration is "binding".
United are seeking a "hold on preparations for next season which wrongly
assume that West Ham remains a Premiership club" and "an assessment of the
clubs' potential claim for damages".
Neil Warnock stepped down as manager after 7½ years yesterday, suggesting
that the Tévez affair had forced him out. But he said that he "would be on
the phone like a shot" to reapply for his job should the Yorkshire club be
reinstated.
"A number of issues over the past few weeks have left a bitter taste,"
Warnock said. "If things had worked out differently, I'd be sitting here
signing a new contract and talking about trying to get into Europe. I don't
feel as if we've been relegated, though the maths of the table say we have.
These experiences just drive me on to want to come back and try to put one
over on one or two people.
"The commissioner, when I read the report, said he felt sorry for West Ham
fans and if the inquiry had taken place earlier in the season it would have
been a points deduction. He should have been at Bramall Lane on Sunday with
me, having a chat with our fans."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Benayoun's departure could trigger exodus at West Ham - The Independent
By Jason Burt
Published: 17 May 2007
Yossi Benayoun will have a showdown meeting with West Ham United today in
which he is likely to ask for a transfer from the Premiership club. The
Israeli midfielder is unhappy at the way he has been treated by the manager
Alan Curbishley, who has endured a difficult relationship with several
players at the club.
Benayoun's discontent - the meeting is at his request - is likely to become
a test as to whether or not West Ham execute the wholesale clear-out that
was threatened earlier this season. However, since then they have maintained
their top-flight status and there is also a feeling from some within the
club that there should be an attempt to retain several of the unhappy
players such as Anton Ferdinand - whose move to Newcastle United has fallen
through - and Nigel Reo-Coker.
The meeting comes the day after Curbishley met with West Ham chairman Eggert
Magnusson to discuss the club's summer transfer targets. At the top of the
list will be Barcelona's Eidur Gudjohnsen, although he is not believed to be
keen on a move to Upton Park.
The 27-year-old Benayoun was close to leaving West Ham last summer when
there was interest from Liverpool and Arsenal but, in the end, no bid was
made. He was offered a new contract, which would have earned him about
£40,000 a week, but the deal was not signed.
It is believed that Curbishley was particularly unhappy that Benayoun was
able to play for Israel in their European Championship qualifier against
England at a time when he was apparently struggling for fitness.
Curbishley is thought to be have been so angry with Benayoun that, for a
time, he refused to speak to him. However, the midfielder was reinstated for
West Ham's run-in and played a crucial role in their survival.
Despite that, it is understood that he would prefer to leave the club. He
has also interested Portsmouth and, following Sam Allardyce taking over at
Newcastle United, they too could be a potential bidder.
Others who may depart include Marlon Harewood, who interests Spurs and
Wigan, and Paul Konchesky, who may move to Aston Villa. Hayden Mullins,
along with goalkeeper Jimmy Walker, could join Alan Pardew at Charlton.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Kia denies transfer talks over West Ham's Tevez
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
Kia Joorabchian insists no talks have been held over the future of West Ham
United striker Carlos Tevez. Joorabchian, who controls Tevez's affairs, told
the Daily Mail: "West Ham's board have to decide what their intentions are.
"Maybe they will think they want Carlos and build around him. Or maybe they
will think that, for the money, they can buy four or five great players
instead. "We haven't held talks with any club, contrary to what you might
have read. This morning it was Inter Milan for £25m, the other day it was
Real Madrid for £30m. These stories are the work of fiction. "He has a
great affection for the club - and the supporters. The decision on his
future is his. He has been very happy there. I have a great respect for
Eggert Magnusson, I believe they will be very successful in the future. Even
though I didn't buy the club, I have zero hard feelings towards them. "As
for Carlos, you must remember, he is only 23. He will get better and
better."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
West Ham in Newcastle talks for Parker
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
West Ham United have already made contact with Newcastle United over the
availability of midfielder Scott Parker. Hammers boss Alan Curbishley, who
knows Parker from their days together at Charlton, has made the Toon captain
a top target for the summer market. Curbishley is willing to offer £8
million for the England international, who has a frosty relationship with a
section of the Newcastle support.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Charlton move for West Ham pair
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
Charlton Athletic boss Alan Pardew is going back to old club West Ham for
two players. Midfielder Hayden Mullins and goalkeeper Jimmy Walker are both
wanted by Pardew for next season's Championship campaign.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
West Ham's Konchesky wanted by Villa
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
Aston Villa are eyeing West Ham fullback Paul Konchesky. Hammers boss Alan
Curbishley isn't expected to stand in Konchesky's way should he seek a move
this summer.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Benayoun to ask away from West Ham today
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
Yossi Benayoun is expected to demand a transfer in talks today at West Ham
United. The Independent says the Israeli midfielder is unhappy at the way he
has been treated by the manager Alan Curbishley, who has endured a difficult
relationship with several players at the club.
Benayoun was close to leaving West Ham last summer when there was interest
from Liverpool and Arsenal but, in the end, no bid was made. He was offered
a new contract, which would have earned him about £40,000 a week, but the
deal was not signed. He has also interested Portsmouth and, following Sam
Allardyce taking over at Newcastle United, they too could be a potential
bidder.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
West Ham's Noble: East End now happy
tribalfooball.com - May 16, 2007
West Ham midfielder Mark Noble says London's East End is now "a happy place"
after they clinched Premiership survival at Manchester United on Sunday.
The youngster told whufc.com: "It was a day of mixed emotions for me, I was
crying afterwards but that's how I showed my emotion. I wanted to win so
badly and it never happened. Obviously I scored early on and it was a
rollercoaster game. But it was all worth it and we can look back on it now
and say it was the catalyst for what we've done."
Premiership status secured, Mark admitted he could breathe a sigh of relief.
"We're not worrying about anyone else now and next season we can prove
ourselves," he said.
"We've got out of the sticky patch of the difficult second season in the
Premiership and we can push on a do well and hopefully do as well as we did
in the first season - or better.
"I was looking up to the fans, we had a bit of eye contact, me and my
friends. It was a fantastic day, they were as happy as me. But everyone
knows how important it is to this Club, being in the Premiership, and the
East End is a happy place to be now."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment