19/06/2007 19:15
The following is an official Club statement in relation to the Premier
League arbitration hearing in London this week...
West Ham United are and remain a Barclays Premier League Football Club.
There is no scope for this to be changed by the Premier League's arbitration
panel and West Ham United's status cannot be called into question in
relation to next season. West Ham United were not and are not a party to the
arbitration and our standing as a Premier League Club is not in doubt as a
result of the panel's hearing. The Club are well advanced in preparing for
the new season and are taking further steps to strengthen the playing squad
over the summer. We will not be deflected from our goal of achieving success
in the Premier League next season.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades must wait on appeal ruling - BBC
Sheffield United have been told they must wait to hear if their appeal
against relegation from the Premier League has been successful. Blades plc
chairman Kevin McCabe says the arbitration panel hearing their challenge
will deliver a verdict: "by the end of the month, maybe sooner." United want
to be reinstated after West Ham breached player ownership rules. West Ham
said in a statment that there was no threat to their top-flight status from
the hearing. The Hammers avoided a points deduction over the signing of
Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano but were fined £5.5m. "West Ham United
are and remain a Premiership football club," said the Hammers in a
statement. "There is no scope for this to be changed by the Premier League's
arbitration panel and West Ham's status cannot be called into question in
relation to next season. "West Ham were not and are not a party to the
arbitration and our standing as a Premier League club is not in doubt as a
result of the panel's hearing."
The Blades want the panel to order a fresh disciplinary hearing against West
Ham. The independent arbitration panel can order a new hearing or rule that
some compensation be paid to Sheffield United. The three-man panel's main
role was to see whether the correct disciplinary procedures were followed.
Retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton chaired the hearing in Fleet
Street, with David Pannick QC representing the Blades and leading barrister
Nicholas Randall acting for the Premier League. After the panel finished
hearing the challenge, McCabe said: "It's been a very complicated case, and
the panel are going away to review the evidence and submissions. "All three
parties had the opportunity to present their cases clearly to the panel and
we look forward to the handing-down of the decision of the panel in due
course. "It would be inappropriate to comment further until a decision has
been made."
Liverpool chief executive Rick Parry appeared at the arbitration tribunal on
Monday. He first drew attention to the rule breaches when Liverpool signed
Mascherano from West Ham in the January transfer window. Questioned as to
whether Parry's appearance as a witness was because of Liverpool's signing
of Javier Mascherano from West Ham, McCabe added: "Not particularly. Rick is
an experienced football guy. He's a good witness."
McCabe also appeared as a witness, with Premier League chief executive
Richard Scudamore and general secretary Mike Foster appearing for the other
side.
McCabe has always been adamant the panel will rule in favour of his club
over a saga that started back in March. In that month, West Ham were found
guilty by an independent committee set up by the Premier League of acting
improperly and withholding vital documentation over the Argentine pair's
ownership but they escaped a points deduction and Tevez was allowed to
continue playing. He and Mascherano were part-owned by a third party but the
Hammers then ended that agreement, which satisfied the Premier League. Tevez
was one of the major factors in the club's late escape - scoring a goal on
the final day of last season at Manchester United to help the Hammers stay
up. The Blades finished on the same number of points as fourth-from-bottom
Wigan but were relegated on goal difference. "I think the Premier League
accept they wish the arbitration was not happening," McCabe said last week.
"But in the knowledge it is happening and it cannot be prevented, then if
the decision is overturned we should be reselected to the Premier League.
"Since we really looked into the whys and the wherefores of the Tevez affair
it became apparent that a wrong decision was made."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Hammers resolute over status - Sky
By Graeme Bailey - Created on 19 Jun 2007
West Ham have again insisted there are no doubts about their Premier League
status. Sheffield United are still awaiting the outcome of their Premier
League arbitration hearing, as they look to seek reinstatement following
their relegation. The Blades claim that West Ham should have been deducted
points as part of the Carlos Tevez/Javier Mascherano double transfer. It was
claimed that West Ham's own position in the Premier League could be called
into question, but The Hammers insist there is no threat to their status.
"West Ham United are and remain a Premiership football club," said a club
statement. "There is no scope for this to be changed by the Premier League's
arbitration panel and West Ham's status cannot be called into question in
relation to next season.
"West Ham were not and are not a party to the arbitration and our standing
as a Premier League club is not in doubt as a result of the panel's hearing.
"The club are well advanced in preparing for the new season and are taking
further steps to strengthen the playing squad over the summer. "We will not
be deflected from our goal of achieving success in the Premiership next
season."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
West Ham in defiant mood - Telegraph
By David Bond
Last Updated: 1:23am BST 20/06/2007
West Ham went on the offensive last night in an effort to dispel claims that
the latest inquiry into the Carlos Tevez affair could threaten their Premier
League status. As a two-day arbitration hearing into the League's handling
of the original investigation came to an end yesterday, West Ham took the
surprise step of issuing a statement making it clear that whatever decision
is taken by the panel it will not result in them being relegated.
Sheffield United could be kept waiting another 10 days before finding
whether they have won their appeal to have the Tevez case heard again.
Having spent the past two days considering evidence from witnesses including
former Premier League chief executive Rick Parry, the three-man panel,
headed by retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton, announced last night
that they would make their judgment public by the end of the month.
With less than two months until the start of the new season, that is seen as
a blow to Sheffield United's chances of victory as there is unlikely to be
sufficient time for a new commission to re-examine the Tevez case before the
campaign kicks off.
West Ham have so far remained silent on Sheffield United's bid to have their
£5.5 million fine for breaking third-party ownership rules overturned and
replaced by a points deduction. But they went on the attack last night after
growing increasingly irritated at what they believe to be United's
deliberately misleading claims that the current arbitration panel could
order West Ham to be relegated to the Football League and replaced by the
Yorkshire side.
"West Ham United are and remain a Premiership football club," a club
spokesman said. "There is no scope for this to be changed by the Premier
League's arbitration panel and West Ham's status cannot be called into
question in relation to next season. West Ham were not and are not a party
to the arbitration, and our standing as a Premier League club is not in
doubt as a result of the panel's hearing.
"The club are well advanced in preparing for the new season and are taking
further steps to strengthen the playing squad over the summer. We will not
be deflected from our goal of achieving success in the Premiership next
season."
Sheffield United and the League had hoped the three-man arbitration panel
would reach a quick verdict. But it is understood that they wanted to take
extra time to ensure they made the right decision.
Although the Premier League remain confident that they followed their
procedures to the letter of the law and have gone ahead and published
fixtures for the coming season, there will be some anxiety among officials
at Gloucester Place over the latest hold-up.
Meanwhile, Sheffield United could face their own disciplinary inquiry over
the transfer of Steve Kabba to Watford, after claims that United insisted on
the striker not playing against them in a Premiership fixture between the
two teams at Bramall Lane in April.
Such clauses are not permitted in transfers between Premier League clubs
and, although a similar situation occurred with Everton keeper Tim Howard
against his old club Manchester United, those clubs escaped disciplinary
action as there was no formal agreement between them.
The Premier League said yesterday they would be looking into the claims to
see if there is any evidence of a formal agreement having been in place.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Tevez hearing is just a farce - The Sun
By IAN McGARRY
June 20, 2007
ONE of Britain's top sports lawyers last night branded the Premier League's
enquiry into the Carlos Tevez affair an "embarrassment." An arbitration
tribunal could not come to a decision yesterday and left one of the
longest-running sagas in English football undecided. Now the nation will
have to wait at least a week and maybe twice that to discover if the
original punishment of a fine of £5.5million to West Ham was valid. But one
of the country's top legal minds reckons the Premier League has brought
ridicule on themselves because the argument is still going on. Simon Pentol
QC, has represented high-profile figures such as England and Chelsea captain
John Terry and insisted that if the original decision was correct then there
would be no delay. Pentol said: "It's embarrassing for the Premier League
that the disciplinary procedures they put in place can be challenged and
potentially overturned by their own arbitration protocol. One of the rules
of the Premier League is that all clubs are bound by their decisions. "In
every self-regulatory organisation there is a degree of self- governance.
"They have been debating one rule about the potential influence of a third
party but they should be looking at another which says that everyone agrees
to abide by the rulings of the league "The Premier League did not expect to
be challenged on this decision and yet here we are in the middle of a legal
battle. "And the fact is that there is the potential for more and possibly
more damaging litigation depending on the outcome of the hearing."
The arbitration panel promised a decision before the end of June but West
Ham have already vowed to contest any decision that would deduct them
points.
With relegated Sheffield United similarly committed to their case for
justice, this is a scenario which could plunge the Premier League into chaos
next season.
A senior Premier League source said last night: "No one wants this to get
messy but it's getting more and more likely. "There are no dates to
accommodate a return to the Premier League with Sheffield United and West
Ham in a 21-team league so something has to be done. "The last thing we need
now is a situation where the entire fabric of the league is undermined by
one ruling so that anyone and everyone has the chance to do the same in the
future."
That is unlikely, however, as the Premier League were satisfied last night
that the evidence they have presented supported the case that their rules
had been adhered to. The fact that the three-man commission could not arrive
at a verdict after two days of taking evidence suggested that the decision
of the original commission will be upheld.
i.mcgarry@the-sun.co.uk
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades hit by appeal blow - The Sun
June 20, 2007
SHEFFIELD UNITED'S hopes of being reinstated to the Premier League were
fading last night. The arbitration panel went into extra-time to decide on
the handling of the Carlos Tevez and Javier Mascherano affair. An outcome
was expected yesterday — but it has been delayed for at least another week.
The panel have already sat in judgment for two days over whether West Ham
should have been punished with a points deduction for breaking rules which
prevent potential third-party influence. The fact no decision was reached
has given heart to the Premier League, although chief executive Richard
Scudamore refused to comment last night. They are confident their original
decision to punish the Hammers with a £5.5million fine will be upheld.
Blades chief executive Kevin McCabe said: "It has been a very complicated
case. We have been told to expect a decision by the end of the month,
hopefully sooner. "All parties have been given the opportunity to present
their cases clearly." The three-man committee resume their deliberations
today in private before making their findings known as soon as possible. It
seems the best Sheffield United can hope for now is further compensation for
being relegated.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
So A Pay Off It is For Blades In West Ham Tevezgate Affair - West Ham
Fans.org
Submitted by Neville Nixon on 20 June, 2007 - 06:36.
First of all, top marks to the reporter who 'ear ached' cry baby McBabe as
he left the tribunal in fleet street yesterday by asking him about the Kabba
to Watford deal, investigations into the transfer could eventually see
Sheffield United charged with breaking the same rule U18 that saw West Ham
fined £5.5 Million for irregularities in the paperwork relating to the Tevez
and Mascherano deal. The great and the not so great of the Press were 'dug
in' awaiting what was eventually a damp squib statement read out by the less
than happy Blades chairman.
Interestingly one of the reasons for his discontent was that Fulham and
Wigan had consumed an enormous amount of the tribunal's time with their own
spurious claims for compensation, robbing McCabe of his finest hour. The
general consensus of the assembled press and media, especially those from
the Sheffield area, was that this whole protracted situation will end up
with an offer of financial compensation being made by the Premier League to
the Blades, exactly what figure is a matter of conjecture but the amount
seems likely to be in the region of £20 Million.
As many people are aware, the Blades chairman's actions are a source of
acute embarrassment to the club's loyal supporters who without exception
think that their club 'blew it' once they had moved to ten points clear of
the bottom of the Premiership, with both the players and particularly the
manager Neil Warnock adopting the "we're just happy to be here" attitude
that saw them take their 'foot off the gas', a course of action that saw
them relegated on the last day of the season following their defeat at home
by fellow strugglers Wigan Athletic (or pathetic if referring to their
chairman).
The Premier League cannot reverse their original decision, neither can they
increase the League to 21 teams, so their seems little option other than to
make a compensation pay off. The implications and repercussions of any other
course of action will send ripples through the 'calm water' negotiated by
the Premiership stake holders, they don't want to rock the boat, and they
don't want anyone else to rock it either! - Ed
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades face wait on panel verdict
Matt Scott
Wednesday June 20, 2007
The Guardian
Sheffield United face an anxious wait before learning if they have any hope
of playing in the Premiership next season. The arbitration panel considering
the South Yorkshire club's complaint about the league's handling of the
Carlos Tevez affair - the Blades contend that West Ham United should have
been docked points rather than fined £5.5m - yesterday deferred its verdict,
possibly until the end of the month.
That delay will present logistical difficulties for the Premier League if it
must reconvene the initial hearing, which is the most extreme verdict
available to the panellists if they find in United's favour.
If that is the outcome of the panel's deliberations it will leave the league
with only six weeks before the new season in which to hold a new tribunal
that would have the power effectively to relegate one of its member clubs.
However, that is not a result that can emerge from this week's hearing,
which is merely one legal step in Sheffield's quest for reinstatement to the
top division. "It's been a very complicated case, and the panel are going
away to review the evidence and submissions," said the Bramall Lane club's
plc chairman, Kevin McCabe, in a statement yesterday. "We have been told to
expect a decision by the end of the month, hopefully sooner."
The Premier League's chief executive, Richard Scudamore, would not comment,
but he is understood to be interpreting the delay as a positive sign. The
situation has become more complicated for Sheffield United, with the league
now investigating a potential breach by the club of rule U18 - the
regulation that was broken by West Ham in their registration of Tevez and
his compatriot Javier Mascherano.
As part of Steve Kabba's £500,000 move to Watford in January, Sheffield
United stipulated that the striker could not play in the match between the
clubs at Bramall Lane in April, which the home team won 1-0. "Former
Bladesman Steve Kabba was ineligible to play as part of the agreement that
saw him move to Vicarage Road in January," said a report on Watford's
official website.
The league will explore to what extent this accord might have been illegal,
and rules governing such gentlemen's agreements were clarified at its AGM
three weeks ago. However, charges are unlikely, since Manchester United and
Everton had a similar arrangement over Tim Howard's January move.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades made to wait over Tevez and face Kabba inquiry - The Independent
By Nick Harris
Published: 20 June 2007
As Sheffield United were yesterday told they face a wait of up to 10 days to
hear whether West Ham should be "retried" over the Carlos Tevez affair, they
were also told, somewhat ironically, that they face investigation themselves
for a potential breach of Premier League transfer rules.
The arbitration panel's job, after two days of hearing evidence, is to
decide whether an April decision to fine West Ham, rather than dock points,
was legally flawed. United claim West Ham should have been docked points,
and hence relegated instead of themselves. A decision is expected by the end
of the month, and perhaps within a few days.
Even if the panel says the April decision was flawed - not an outcome that
anyone at the Premier League expects -then a retrial of West Ham would
follow, not any immediate reprieve or compensation for United.
Against this backdrop, the Premier League confirmed yesterday that it is now
looking at whether United themselves transgressed the U18 rule - a
regulation that covers a broad range of offences, and which West Ham broke
over Tevez - over the sale of the striker Steve Kabba to Watford in January
this year.
United insisted that Watford, who paid £500,000 for the player, could not
field him against them at Bramall Lane in April, in a match that Watford
subsequently lost.
Such clauses are not permitted in transfers between Premier League clubs,
and while a similar situation occurred with Everton's goalkeeper Tim Howard
against his old club Manchester United, those clubs escaped disciplinary
action as there was no formal agreement between them.
If the League finds evidence of a rule breach in the Kabba case, theoretical
punishments include fines or a points deduction. The precedent of the West
Ham case could be used, another irony as United are calling for a points
penalty.
United's plc chairman, Kevin McCabe, made no comment on that but said after
the second day of the arbitration panel hearing: "It's been a very
complicated case, and the panel are going away to review the evidence and
submissions. We have been told to expect a decision by the end of the month,
hopefully sooner."
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Blades cling to hope as panel go to extra time - This Is London
19.06.07
West Ham and Sheffield United remained in limbo last night after the
arbitration panel who were expected to draw a line under the long-running
Carlos Tevez affair asked for more time. Officials at Upton Park insisted no
decision by the panel could affect their status as a Premier League club
next season. But Bramall Lane chiefs were clinging to the hope that they
could yet be re-instated as a top-flight club at West Ham's expense. The
three-man panel, who may not deliver a verdict until the end of this month,
has spent two months listening to evidence presented by Sheffield United and
the Premier League. The panel are attempting to establish if a new
independent disciplinary commission should be appointed to determine whether
West Ham should have been deducted points for fielding Tevez and Javier
Mascherano in the knowledge they were part-owned by a third party. They
will also decide if the Premier League acted unlawfully, on April 27, by not
de-registering Tevez. Last night a statement from Upton Park said: "West Ham
United are and remain a Barclays Premier League football club. There is no
scope for this to be changed by the Premier League's arbitration panel and
West Ham's status cannot be called into question in relation to next season.
"West Ham were not and are not a party to the arbitration and our standing
as a Premier League club is not in doubt as a result of the panel's
hearing." Little should be read into news yesterday that Sheffield United
could be the subject of a fresh investigation with regard to Steve Kabba.
Kabba moved from the Blades to Watford in January and, according to both
official club websites, the striker was then allegedly prevented from
playing against his old club at Bramall Lane in April. However, there is no
mention of an agreement that could be a clear breach of Premier League rules
in the contract and no separate written agreement. There may have been a
gentlemen's agreement, but there appeared to be one between Manchester
United and Everton last season with regard to Tim Howard and the Premier
League took no disciplinary action.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment