Guest crazytrain Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 If the PL decided they wanted to bring in naked penalty shoot outs to decide games, Now if this involved the players wives, you could be on to a winner!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossi Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Now if this involved the players wives, you could be on to a winner!! Have you ever seen Ian Wright's wife?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
revdishydave Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 at what stage will SUFC give up? i firmly believe this is solely sour grapes, if it was fulham who had gone down they wouldnt have give rats ass... i cant believe they think they are being so hard done by becasue they are not a rich cock-er-nee club. the FA/PL/WI/whoever should've acted better at the time, they didnt, shit happens. as everyone else has said, the only thing the authorities can do is admit they got it wrong, and this is what will happen in the future. SUFC have got to get over it... they owe to their fans to come out of it stronger... i have heard they are not listening to any offers for players as they are so confident of a quick return... surely they would be best concentrating on winning the league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yossi Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 No decision til the end of the month Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HR Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 I imagine a 'NO' reply would have come straight away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted June 19, 2007 Moderators Share Posted June 19, 2007 I imagine a 'NO' reply would have come straight away? they've got to be seen to be giving it some thought, i guess no, will follow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ani Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 Financial penalties such as ours set a dangerous precedent I agree with that. If it had been say Watford for example instead of us, would they have been given a ?5.5m fine? If they had, they would probably have gone bankcrupt. Certainly been in serious financial problems. So have we been punished for being well off? Something else to have a chew on Yossi most of the time you are making good points, fact is as you are now a super rich club this offered the league a way out of the problem as the size of the fine might deflect comments that points should have been docked. The fact of this case that everyone is ignoring is that all the team sign up and agree that the league are the final judges, even if they get it wrong they are the final judges. sheff utd agreed to this it is a condition of being in the premier league. if the penalty is in some peoples minds unfair that is not the point. the leagues desicion is final. it is like 2 kids rowing, they agree to ask their mate who is right, he says one thing and the one that is wrong now saying i do not care what he said. by appealing against the desicion sheff utd are in fact breaking the rules. i think points should have beed deducted but that matters not a toss because no one has agreed to take my opnion on it, if the appeal now fails will sheff utd go to another court ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
george Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 The fact of this case that everyone is ignoring is that all the team sign up and agree that the league are the final judges, even if they get it wrong they are the final judges. sheff utd agreed to this it is a condition of being in the premier league. if the penalty is in some peoples minds unfair that is not the point. the leagues desicion is final. So even if the decision makers were taking back handers from West Ham to allow them to play anyone they felt like playing,it would be ok because the 20 Premier League clubs had agreed to let them be decision makers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ani Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 So even if the decision makers were taking back handers from West Ham to allow them to play anyone they felt like playing,it would be ok because the 20 Premier League clubs had agreed to let them be decision makers? has that been alleged ? that would be corruption. they are appealing against the desicion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SatanGreavsie Posted June 19, 2007 Share Posted June 19, 2007 by appealing against the desicion sheff utd are in fact breaking the rules. is this true? I find it hard to believe there's no concept of appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimmyRiddle Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 (edited) I think most of you are missing the point of an appeals process. In legal terms, an appeal can be made by the defendant if the sentance; when found guilty; is seen as harsh within the guidelines given to judges under a given set of circumstances. The flip side of this is that the Crown Prosecution Service can also appeal if they believe the judge has been much too lenient with an offender within the guidelines under a given set of circumstances, i.e. if Ian Huntley only got the minimum possible sentance from the judge the CPS would appeal, so it is a two way street. Now this is where it falls down, as the body who instigated the prosecution in the first place, and the keeper of the rules & regs, it is in fact the Premier League who should have instigated an appeal on the initial sentance from the independant panel as it clearly did not serve a sufficient punishment to the crime and justice was not seen to have been done. Just as the CPS would have appealed the example above if they had obtained a guilty decision but the sentance was weak. Instead they bottled it and let the victim i.e. Sheff Utd have to make a private prosecution to get justice. It is all a joke and if West Ham were in any other part of the country they would have been dead and buried. I am not a lawyer so I am sure one who reads this may pick holes, but in gerneral terms I am sure this is how the law in this land is meant to work. Cheers Jimmy Edited June 20, 2007 by JimmyRiddle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YATESY Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 Instead they bottled it and let the victim i.e. Sheff Utd have to make a private prosecution to get justice. Agree with most of that but are Sheff Utd the victim hear? They got relegated because they didn't finish with more points than WHU, so only became the victim after the punishment was handed down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ani Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 is this true? I find it hard to believe there's no concept of appeal. in any structure there is an ultimate body at the top of the pile. even if that is the european court of human rights. the idea of the rule is stop clubs getting involved in lengthy and costly legal challenges. sheff utd agreed to abide by these rules. the big issue is that the benefit of staying in the premiership is so much more than the legal cost of taking the issue to court these problem will just keep happening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YATESY Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 eh YOSSI here is another conspiracy theory for you: For next season Mitre (the official ball supplier) are making bespoke matchballs for each Football League side, each club having their badge on the balls used for their home games... ...yes you have guessed it - they have been told to make balls for Sheff Utd and WHU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exiledwhite2 Posted June 20, 2007 Share Posted June 20, 2007 You are all missing the main point here It would be funny as f?ck - beyond belief to be honest - if West Ham got sent down, it would be absolutely brill All the money grabbers like Neill and Upson and the mockney support crying into their beer THAT'S what is at stake here, it's more than just money or principle or any of that sh?t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted June 20, 2007 Moderators Share Posted June 20, 2007 You are all missing the main point here It would be funny as f?ck - beyond belief to be honest - if West Ham got sent down, it would be absolutely brill All the money grabbers like Neill and Upson and the mockney support crying into their beer THAT'S what is at stake here, it's more than just money or principle or any of that sh?t Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traf Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 It now seems that Sheff Utd aren't whiter than white either. Steve Kabba played for them against Watford when the contract of his sale prevented him from doing so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Whites man Posted June 21, 2007 Share Posted June 21, 2007 It now seems that Sheff Utd aren't whiter than white either.Steve Kabba played for them against Watford when the contract of his sale prevented him from doing so. The Sheff United chairman has denied any such clause existed in the contract and you are not comparing like with like to be honest. Send them down, increase the fine, deduct points from next season, slap a prohibitive tax on pie and mash.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Casino Posted June 21, 2007 Moderators Share Posted June 21, 2007 It now seems that Sheff Utd aren't whiter than white either.Steve Kabba played for them against Watford when the contract of his sale prevented him from doing so. would such a term not be in breach of regulations? does nobody at the fa check contracts? piss poor all round Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts