Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Welcome to bcfcforum.co.uk. We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Should West Ham Be Sued ?
Topic Started: May 4 2007, 02:22 PM (387 Views)
keepthecityblue
Member Avatar
Frank Worthington
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
franscar
May 5 2007, 03:54 PM
With the restructuring of the TV deal West Ham are merely going to make slightly less than all the other clubs in the top flight next season. They've been allowed to buy their way into the Premiership and the laws, upheld for an honest mistake made by Altrincham, upheld for an honest mistake by AFC Wimbledon, upheld for an honest mistake by Bury, have been ignored. Put simply, West Ham have not been punished.

AFC Wimbledon were docked 18 points for not realising a player needed international clearance to transfer from Wales. That's an honest mistake in anyones book, but they were docked points. West Ham have covered up an illegal transfer for six months, only owned up to the problem after they'd been caught, and have gotten away with it. Yes the other clubs should sue, and I wouldn't be surprised to see those affected, probably Wigan, refusing to fulfill their last fixture in protest.

:applause:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Forward62
Member Avatar
Malcom Page
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Amazed to see Waste Spam out of the bottom three. They've certainly pulled it out of the hat in the last few weeks
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Have just read the Premier league report on this incident in full, i suggest a few others do the same it makes interesting reading.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Blacksmith
Member Avatar
Jeff Hall
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Do you have a link, please?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Blacksmith
May 5 2007, 09:45 PM
Do you have a link, please?

Im a plank when it comes to posting links tomatoes i dont know how to but it is on the following page:

www.premierleague.com/public/downloads/publications/pl270407finaltext-46k-

Failing that just type in premier league report on tevez and mascherano transfer into google and it will come up in the search results.

As i said it makes interesting reading.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Blacksmith
Member Avatar
Jeff Hall
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
That's fine, thanks. I'll have a read of it. **thumbup
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
elvis ok
Member Avatar
Malcom Page
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
bornblues, thanks for the link, sorta blows your argument out of the water.

Did you actually read it ?

:LMAO:

Quote:
 

Four, there has been a delay between the discovery
of these breaches and these proceedings. 
Whilst that delay is due to no party's fault,
the consequence is that a points deduction, say in January,
whilst unwelcome, would have been somewhat easier to bear than a points deduction today which would have consigned the club to certain relegation.

However, in this case, the fans and the players have been fighting against relegation.  They have been doing so from between
January and April. 
They have been so doing against the ever-present threat of a deduction of points.  Those efforts and that loyalty would be to no avail were we to now, on what might be termed the eve of the end of the
season, to deduct points.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but they have admitted that they (The Premier League) were in a position to deduct points in earlier in the year, BUT
and it is a BIG but............... because of the ever present threat of a deduction of points, and the fact that West Ham and their fans still turned up, week after week, they rewarded that loyalty by not taking points of them at such a late stage in the proceedings. i.e. last week.

This finding is a lawyer's bonanza. It is inept and shoots itself in the foot.

Bornblues, what you have been arguing against has been proven as incorrect by the very evidence that you gave us to read.

Incredible.

I say you are Eggbert Eggbert and claim my £5.

:D


Thanks for the link mate. **thumbup
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
elvis ok
May 5 2007, 10:23 PM
bornblues, thanks for the link, sorta blows your argument out of the water.

Did you actually read it ?

:LMAO:

Quote:
 

Four, there has been a delay between the discovery
of these breaches and these proceedings. 
Whilst that delay is due to no party's fault,
the consequence is that a points deduction, say in January,
whilst unwelcome, would have been somewhat easier to bear than a points deduction today which would have consigned the club to certain relegation.

However, in this case, the fans and the players have been fighting against relegation.  They have been doing so from between
January and April. 
They have been so doing against the ever-present threat of a deduction of points.  Those efforts and that loyalty would be to no avail were we to now, on what might be termed the eve of the end of the
season, to deduct points.



Correct me if I'm wrong, but they have admitted that they (The Premier League) were in a position to deduct points in earlier in the year, BUT
and it is a BIG but............... because of the ever present threat of a deduction of points, and the fact that West Ham and their fans still turned up, week after week, they rewarded that loyalty by not taking points of them at such a late stage in the proceedings. i.e. last week.

This finding is a lawyer's bonanza. It is inept and shoots itself in the foot.

Bornblues, what you have been arguing against has been proven as incorrect by the very evidence that you gave us to read.

Incredible.

I say you are Eggbert Eggbert and claim my £5.

:D


Thanks for the link mate. **thumbup

Why does it "blow my argument out of the water"??? if ever i had one, all i said is that sentence had been passed and that should be the end of it, read back through my posts.

and it wasnt West Hams fault the hearing was delayed was it??

Yours sincerely Eggbert Eggbert :P
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
midland red
Member Avatar
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
I think you may be playing the devil's advocate here bornblues, and fair play mate.
The way I read this thread, and responses in the press and other boards, is not anti-West Ham, but anti-Premier League. People are seeing a stitch-up and favouritism - and it has been caused by years of mythologising about the East End favourites. The cockney super heroes. People, I think, see this judgement as proof of favouritism.
But it has backfired.

The more the true fan gets disenchanted with football, and their place on what was once a terrace is now taken by a prawn sandwich big bottom on a padded seat, the less relevance football has to the ordinary bloke. This kind of judgement is almost medieval in its arrogance and ineptitude. and it will be accepted by the "new football" fan.

To the rest of us it stinks.

I don't care if it is West Ham or West Bristol. If that was Blues or Palace the FULL rule book would have been thrown at them.Because Blues and Palace are not the luvvies of the football establishment. West Ham are.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
The Concerned Potato Head
Member Avatar
Big Bawss
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
i'm sure Trevor Brooking's position at the FA was a key part of the outcome of the punishment

typical how Tevez gets the goals to save West Ham when he shouldnt be playing

if i was Sheff Utd, Charlton or Wigan, i'd go to FIFA/UEFA
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
midland red
Member Avatar
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
The Concerned Potato Head
May 6 2007, 12:58 AM
i'm sure Trevor Brooking's position at the FA was a key part of the outcome of the punishment

typical how Tevez gets the goals to save West Ham when he shouldnt be playing

if i was Sheff Utd, Charlton or Wigan, i'd go to FIFA/UEFA

Good point CPH. I'd forgotten about that connection.
Very much like Dein always being present and Arsenal never really coming a cropper.

I'm begining to see Ferguson as a Clough / Che figure :D
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
proserpine
Geoff Horsfield
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
midland red
May 6 2007, 01:00 AM


I'm begining to see Ferguson as a Clough / Che figure :D

:LMAO:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
keepthecityblue
Member Avatar
Frank Worthington
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
midland red
May 5 2007, 11:29 PM
I think you may be playing the devil's advocate here bornblues, and fair play mate.
The way I read this thread, and responses in the press and other boards, is not anti-West Ham, but anti-Premier League. People are seeing a stitch-up and favouritism - and it has been caused by years of mythologising about the East End favourites. The cockney super heroes. People, I think, see this judgement as proof of favouritism.
But it has backfired.

The more the true fan gets disenchanted with football, and their place on what was once a terrace is now taken by a prawn sandwich big bottom on a padded seat, the less relevance football has to the ordinary bloke. This kind of judgement is almost medieval in its arrogance and ineptitude. and it will be accepted by the "new football" fan.

To the rest of us it stinks.

I don't care if it is West Ham or West Bristol. If that was Blues or Palace the FULL rule book would have been thrown at them.Because Blues and Palace are not the luvvies of the football establishment. West Ham are.

:applause:

Absolutely. To most people, favouritism has no place in the punishments and decisions made by the FA, yet the media are all too happy to play along to the "cockney charm" of west ham.

Without wishin to open a whole new can of worms, this media favouritisms was easily noticeable at the West Ham vs Millwall fixtures in the past, where there was riots and trouble, Millwall felt the full force of media backlash, and painting as a low life thuggish team in the dark reaches of South London, whereas West ham retained their East london cockernee pride (after all, they did win the world cup).

Its sickening enough in the media, but when the FA do it aswell :crying:
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

elvis ok
May 5 2007, 10:23 PM
This finding is a lawyer's bonanza. It is inept and shoots itself in the foot.


Yep.

The gist of it being...

- they are guilty

- the correct penalty is a points deduction

- if they had been found guilty straight away (in January) then they would have had points docked

- but they won't dock them the same points now because it would be "harder to bear"

It's a nonsense. Whether they had been docked points in January, February, March or April the result would been the same : relegation.

A disgraceful fix by the Premier League & a shocking lack of backbone (again) from the FA.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
bornblues64
Mikael Forssell
[ *  *  *  *  * ]
Sam Tyler
May 7 2007, 02:44 PM
elvis ok
May 5 2007, 10:23 PM
This finding is a lawyer's bonanza. It is inept and shoots itself in the foot.


Yep.

The gist of it being...

- they are guilty

- the correct penalty is a points deduction

- if they had been found guilty straight away (in January) then they would have had points docked

- but they won't dock them the same points now because it would be "harder to bear"

It's a nonsense. Whether they had been docked points in January, February, March or April the result would been the same : relegation.

A disgraceful fix by the Premier League & a shocking lack of backbone (again) from the FA.

Maybe but it would also have been very harsh to punish the new owner of the club when he had nothing to do with it in the first place.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sam Tyler
Unregistered

bornblues64
May 7 2007, 02:58 PM
Maybe but it would also have been very harsh to punish the new owner of the club when he had nothing to do with it in the first place.

Debatable. In any case that wasn't the reason given for not deducting points.
Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · Non-Blues Chat · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Forum Design by Hirsty.