Justice

[bluestreak]

Sheffield United players are examining their own rights to take action against the Hammers for loss of individual earnings in dropping out of the Premier League. (Daily Mail)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

You threw it away boys. It was your fault more than it was ours, even if rosie's version of events was true and unblinkered, you threw it away. If you'd drawn ONE more game, scored ONE goal more in any one of nine (i think) games, you'd be in the PL instead of us that season. Better to curse the darkness though innit. Blame everyone but yourselves.

Next up, Jagielka sues us because he can't find a nice place to live near Liverpool...

Is the arbitration report up on line yet?

 

[tommers]

Well our one needs sacking. Kias lawyers evidence is circumstanual at best.

dave

indeed. now if our manager had said it, and details of it were on our website and, just for argument, watford's website - only for it to be hastily taken down when we realised we were guilty of exactly the same thing that we were moaning and bleating about... well then we might be in trouble...

justice indeed.

 

[kained&able]

steve kabba?

dave

 

[CyberRose]

Is the arbitration report up on line yet?

No and it never will be as it is a private matter between the two clubs, we only know the extracts we do because they were leaked to the press

 

[kained&able]

i wonder by who.

Leaked to the press meaning. Sheffield united divulged the verdict to the press, yeah?


dave

 

[CyberRose]

steve kabba?

dave

Is currently playing for Blackpool and is irrelevant to this case, not to mention the fact that the only reason Kabba is brought up at all is because Jabba Samuels keeps clutching at straws, and as the "top" sports journalist in the country, whoever his current employers happen to be allow him to write with impunity on Tevezgate despite the fact that every single other journalist says the exact opposite of the bullshit he comes out with. FYI, there were no clauses in Kabba's transfer to Watford that said he couldn't play

 

[CyberRose]

i wonder by who.

Leaked to the press meaning. Sheffield united divulged the verdict to the press, yeah?


dave

No idea. It's a distinct possibility and they have a lot to gain from leaking it as now people know what West Ham did and are quite rightly outraged by it

 

[bluestreak]

OK, so according to that telegraph report, the basic gist of the arbitration runs like this:

1. On the word of a lawyer of a man we're in legal dispute with, we were found to have agreed verbally to stick to a clause in a previous contract.

2. One player is more important a factor in the results than any team or player in the rest of the league.

Fair play to you Rosie, fair play.

 

[kained&able]

Is currently playing for Blackpool and is irrelevant to this case, not to mention the fact that the only reason Kabba is brought up at all is because Jabba Samuels keeps clutching at straws, and as the "top" sports journalist in the country, whoever his current employers happen to be allow him to write with impunity on Tevezgate despite the fact that every single other journalist says the exact opposite of the bullshit he comes out with. FYI, there were no clauses in Kabba's transfer to Watford that said he couldn't play

Just a gentlemans agreement between the two parties. Which was confirmed on watfords website.

dave

 

[CyberRose]

OK, so according to that telegraph report, the basic gist of the arbitration runs like this:

In very simple terms yes, however...

1. On the word of a lawyer of a man we're in legal dispute with, we were found to have agreed verbally to stick to a clause in a previous contract.

Dispute? I don't call giving employment to someone as being in dispute with them! In fact, the allegation (unsubstantiated of course), is that Kia was given a cushy job at West Ham precisely because they wanted to keep this particular information from being made public...

2. One player is more important a factor in the results than any team or player in the rest of the league.

Well this is only for the last three game of the season, remember that West Ham had already been (technically) "fairly" punished for their original offence. This tribunal was considering the impact of West Ham breaking further rules to ensure Tevez was able to play those last few games. Look at where we are now: West Ham face a possible £30m payout and a massive points deduction, that is how desperate they were to play Tevez

 

[CyberRose]

Just a gentlemans agreement between the two parties. Which was confirmed on watfords website.

dave

No what was on both team's website was that there was a written clause in the contracts, as there are in all similar contracts between Championship teams (the league both clubs were in the season before). As I understand it, it was pointed out this was not permitted in the PL and was therefore removed (in complete contrast to what West Ham did in a similar situation). However, the website editors (not exactly in the upper echelons of either clubs' hierarchy) assumed that the case was the same as in the Championship and gave that fat bastard something to write about for the next 16 months

 

[tommers]

FYI, there were no clauses in Kabba's transfer to Watford that said he couldn't play

No. It just happened that when watford (the team he was loaned to) played sheff utd (the team he was loaned from) he was dropped.

Despite playing in the previous 8 games, and 14 of the last 15.

Absolutely.

No agreements there. No sirree.

Honestly, the hiphoprisy is astonishing.

 

[CyberRose]

No. It just happened that when watford (the team he was loaned to) played sheff utd (the team he was loaned from) he was dropped.

Despite playing in the previous 8 games, and 14 of the last 15.

Absolutely.

No agreements there. No sirree.

Honestly, the hiphoprisy is astonishing.

Irrelevant to this case I'm afraid

 

[kained&able]

But not to sheffield uniteds blatent hypocracy.


dave

 

[tommers]

But not to sheffield uniteds blatent hypocracy.

you can't be hiphopcritical if you're fighting for justice dave. Come on.

 

[CyberRose]

But not to sheffield uniteds blatent hypocracy.


dave

you can't be hiphopcritical if you're fighting for justice dave. Come on.

Kabba didn't play in any of Watford's last three matches

 

[CyberRose]

Anyway, can I take by this attempt to turn the debate to "Kabbagate" (something made up by a West Ham supporting journalist) that we all agree West Ham broke the rules a second time and deserve to be punished?

 

[kained&able]

no.

dave

 

[CyberRose]

no.

dave

So you don't see anything wrong with West Ham lying to the PL a second because they were so desperate to play Tevez? Or are you saying, contrary to the evidence, that West Ham didn't lie to the PL?

 

[kained&able]

dont think we lied at this stage.

dave

 

[CyberRose]

dont think we lied at this stage.

dave

Ok so despite evidence to the contrary, you don't think West Ham lied about terminating the contract? And you're basing that on what? (Baring in mind a great deal of WH fans on Kumb have accepted the verdict of the tribunal and are rightly demanding the head of Duxberry)

 

[kained&able]

beacuse it seems to be based on a verbel conversation that kias lawyer had with duxberry rather then anything tangible.

So at this stage i dont see how this "evidence" can be used to proove anything. Therefore i dispute the findings of this tribunal.

dave

 

[tommers]

Ok so despite evidence to the contrary, you don't think West Ham lied about terminating the contract? And you're basing that on what? (Baring in mind a great deal of WH fans on Kumb have accepted the verdict of the tribunal and are rightly demanding the head of Duxberry)

oh right! well, if it says it on KUMB.... I'm looking forward to seeing Gudjohnsen, Appiah, Adriano and Robinho all lining up for us on Saturday.

I did have a quick look but all I could find was this

West Ham have hit back at the bizarre arbitration panel decision in favour of Sheffield United and have announced plans to bring matters before the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

A club statement condemned the decision - described by legal experts as "illogical and bizarre"- for "not taking into account the performances of the other 19 clubs in the competition".

One legal expert told us: "The intriguing possibility is raised that Chelsea, for example, might bring Sheffield United to arbitration over their apparent breach of Premier League rule E12" - Chelsea, it will be remembered, lost out for the Premiership Title to a Manchester United team that had gained three points from a victory over a deliberately weakened Sheffield United side.

Neither Neil Warnock, who has been quite voiciferous on the need to obey Premier League rules in recent days, nor Kevin McCabe have commented on this or any of the other apparent breaches of league rules that happened whilst they oversaw a side that scored 8 away goals all season in 2006/07 - a fact that we now know had absolutely nothing to do with Sheffield United's relegation.

 

[CyberRose]

So at this stage i dont see how this "evidence" can be used to proove anything

But it has been used to prove something! It was used to prove that Tevez should not have played the final three games!

 

[kained&able]

According to the judge. I'm fairly sure so and so said without any other proof cant be used in court.

If it can i say morrisey is responsible for multiple murders and should be in jail for life.


dave

 

[CyberRose]

Here's what some of the West Ham fans are saying over on Kumb:

Duxbury, Kenyon, Parry et al are all slimy, but it comes with the job I'm afraid. It takes someone of that ilk to do that kind of job and most of them are all the same. Being slimy is not a problem, incompetence at doing it is – oh and getting caught!

I think the ramifications of Tevez last few games for us being possibly played under an illegal agreement are actually pretty big aren't they? I've never previously considered that we might have had an ineligible player as the PL rubber stamped the whole thing but this recent testimony throws that into doubt. If you've got an ineligible player you're out of the competition aren't you? Or at least you get nothing from those games? If this is being taken seriously by anyone involved in the judgement and not just as a bit of hearsay then I don't see how there's much choice except to settle on a very heavy punishment.

Because with the revelations today the BBC, Sky and Sheffield were absolutely right. He was inelligible up until the point we were fined and now it appears this continued until the end of the season.

For f***s sake, people are arguing over semantics. Inelligible, not registered or whatever, it is absolute fact that the PL would not have allowed Tevez to play had we not said we had torn up the third party agreement. We said we had but it now appears we did not. Therefore he was not elligible to play in the eyes of the PL. We were fined for not revealing the full details of his contract. This is against PL rules and would have deemed him inelligible to play by the PL rules. This is what SU have been arguing all along and what I have been trying to counter for the last year. It now appears that i have been let down by a lying cheat from my own club.

 

[kained&able]

They all clearly know nothing and are being influenced by the blades propagnda machine.


dave

 

[CyberRose]

Yep, you all thought he was stupid didn't you!

 

[tommers]

Yep, you all thought he was stupid didn't you!

I dunno I quite liked him when he burst into the Sheffield changing room after the last match and blamed warnock for you being relegated. He showed a sensible streak right there.

Just think, if you hadn't played a weakened side against Man Utd then you might have won, or at least got a point, and then this would all be academic.

 

[CyberRose]

Yes this was my take on the situation:

I rock on Photoshop!