talkshite quoted one of this mornings tabloids

 

said tevez mauy not be able to play saturday as there are still problems with his registration!

 

wtf is going on

 

say they have it right

 

that would mean he played last saturday, after theyd been fined

 

its a shambles.........

As all the other managers in the relegation scrap have said over the weekend, how the fcuk have WHU not had points deducted.

 

 

Football history is littered with clubs having points deducted, thrown out of cup competitions when rules on players registrations are broken.

 

 

Take Bury this season, being thrown out of the FA Cup over a very minor registration issue compared to the Tevez fcuk up.

As all the other managers in the relegation scrap have said over the weekend, how the fcuk have WHU not had points deducted.

Football history is littered with clubs having points deducted, thrown out of cup competitions when rules on players registrations are broken.

Take Bury this season, being thrown out of the FA Cup over a very minor registration issue compared to the Tevez fcuk up.

 

if im not mistaken the rules actually say that the team will be docked points.

 

See ya Sat!

talkshite quoted one of this mornings tabloids

 

said tevez mauy not be able to play saturday as there are still problems with his registration!

 

wtf is going on

 

say they have it right

 

that would mean he played last saturday, after theyd been fined

 

its a shambles.........

It's BS.

 

Barring imjury, Carlitos will play on Saturday.

if im not mistaken the rules actually say that the team will be docked points.

And for that reason i hope we play so well that even Riley can't influence the result.

BS - biased south?

 

The Premier League officials have no balls at all. WHU should be deducted points as EVERY other team fielding ineligible players is / has been / always is.

 

How have they escaped such a punishment? Where does the figure ?5.5m come from exactly?

 

Who actually set the punishment? Who was on the panel (Lyall, Brooking and Devonshire??????)

 

The more and more I hear from Upton Park - the more I despise this team with a passion.

BS - biased south?

 

The Premier League officials have no balls at all. WHU should be deducted points as EVERY other team fielding ineligible players is / has been / always is.

 

How have they escaped such a punishment? Where does the figure ?5.5m come from exactly?

 

Who actually set the punishment? Who was on the panel (Lyall, Brooking and Devonshire??????)

 

The more and more I hear from Upton Park - the more I despise this team with a passion.

 

 

iaminagreement Smiley

Edited May 1, 200719 yr by hughesy

BS - biased south?

 

The Premier League officials have no balls at all. WHU should be deducted points as EVERY other team fielding ineligible players is / has been / always is.

 

How have they escaped such a punishment? Where does the figure ?5.5m come from exactly?

 

Who actually set the punishment? Who was on the panel (Lyall, Brooking and Devonshire??????)

 

The more and more I hear from Upton Park - the more I despise this team with a passion.

We haven't fielded an ineligible player.

 

The ?5.5m figure is made up of ?3m for breaching rule B13:

 

"in all matters and transactions relating to the league, each club shall behave towards each other club and the league with the utmost good faith".

 

and ?2.5m for breaching rule U18:

 

"No club shall enter into a contract which enables any other party to that contract to acquire the ability materially to influence its policies or the performance of its teams in league matches or in any (other) competitions."

 

If it wasn't for Eggert Magnusson the Premier League wouldn't even be aware of the non disclosure plus the Premier League have admitted that U18 (which is a new rule) needs to be clarified. All this adds up to why we were fined and not deducted points.

i do actually have some sympathy for west ham

 

wtf do the fa/premiership whoever do for their money

 

the papers are sent to them, and they should either give permission for players to play or refuse it

 

once theyve said player is eligible, surely that should be it

 

tis what i reckon, anyway

i do actually have some sympathy for west ham

 

wtf do the fa/premiership whoever do for their money

 

the papers are sent to them, and they should either give permission for players to play or refuse it

 

once theyve said player is eligible, surely that should be it

 

tis what i reckon, anyway

 

Sounds like there was deception on the part of West Ham though, possibly about who actually OWNED Tevez

 

If that's true it's tantamount to fielding an ineligible player

 

I hear what you're saying Yossi, but a player can't be 'eligible' if the transfer isn't above board, that's the way most people look at it

For me it just doesn't add up and isn't consistent.

 

Bury were kicked out of the FA Cup this season - their offence seems so minor compared to WHU.

To me, they have looked at the situation and said -

Bury cannot afford a huge fine, so we'll take points from them/remove them from the competition.

WHU cannot afford to have points taken, but can afford a huge fine, so we'll fine them.

Edited May 1, 200719 yr by Smiley

When Bury got done it was because they told the FA.

 

 

It is like your tax return it is your job to get it right, if the taxman misses it it does nt make it right if you have over claimed.

 

 

The fact is that you can not play someone who is controlled by someone else and west ham did.

 

If it was a grey area the fine would not be ?5.5m.

 

The old man has said we will pay a massive and not complain, if you fine us we will take it to ever court in the land, the league thinks the wording might not stand upto such a challenge so have given in.

 

But is only because west ham have the financial clout and influence that this route has been taken

 

I do not blame west ham for doing this but it is wrong, Yossi if the boot was on the other foot what would you say ?

 

The league has shown it is pathetic and toothless against money, this raised the issue that the mega rich clubs now have an even bigger advantage than just buiying players.

 

 

if these comments are not true i challenge anyone to sue the owners of this site in any court in the land.....'c'mon you fuckers lets have it...

For me it just doesn't add up and isn't consistent.

 

Bury were kicked out of the FA Cup this season - their offence seems so minor compared to WHU.

To me, they have looked at the situation and said - Bury cannot afford a huge fine, so we'll take points from them.

WHU cannot afford to have points taken, but can afford a huge fine, so we'll fine them.

Different rules for different competitions.

Different rules for different competitions.

 

Or different rules for big clubs / small clubs

different rules for southern clubs / northern clubs

different rules if you bung the FA halfwits enough money to shut them up!

If nobody can agee who owns Tevez and West Ham can't prove that they do, then they should have their 3 points from Wigan deducted!! (Personally I wouldn't award them to Wigan because they were really shite, I'd just lose them in the accounts somewhere !!!!!)

 

See ya Sat!

 

After the match, you can console yourself with a couple of these

 

Contract row threatens to keep T?vez out of fight against drop

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle1733900.ece

Contract row threatens to keep T?vez out of fight against drop

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle1733900.ece

 

as i mentioned yesterday, if this is accurate, west ham played him against wigan, still in breach of the rules they got fined millions for

 

its a fooking mess

 

heads should roll at the top, not just at west ham

 

unless the prem just don't care so long as west ham stay up...

 

now theres a thought

as i mentioned yesterday, if this is accurate, west ham played him against wigan, still in breach of the rules they got fined millions for

 

its a fooking mess

 

heads should roll at the top, not just at west ham

 

unless the prem just don't care so long as west ham stay up...

 

now theres a thought

 

 

west ham told the league that the agreement was no longer in force, if it is and they have lied or misled the panel, surely further more stringent punishment is due ?

 

also the league have been aware of this situation for ages now but through that period he was allowed to play.

 

it does seem very fucked up, west ham will get away with whatever is best for them so in some ways they are nt the villans here, there is also the chance that the stories are just paper talk.

Paper Talk? Don't get me wrong, I don't read The Times - but isn't it meant to be one of a few credible newspapers that ACTUALLY reports the news?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/col...icle1733890.ece

 

 

In 2003, when West Ham were last relegated, Bolton Wanderers survived in part because of Sam Allardyce?s astute use of the loan system. Players such as Iv?n Campo, Salva Ballesta, Bernard Mendy and Florent Laville kept Bolton up, home-grown English players such as Joe Cole went down and were lost to West Ham soon after. No one cared about a rogue system then. Allardyce, because he is a fine manager, built a club and made Bolton a success story with permanent players, but the foundation on which that success was laid is propping up a tower of contradictions over third-party control and interest.

 

A fair and level headed piece from Samuels until he brings up West Ham's last relegation. How on on he can compare the advantages that West Ham and Man Utd have gained this season, with the loan signings that Sam engineered, is totally beyond me.

 

Get them down.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/col...icle1733890.ece

In 2003, when West Ham were last relegated, Bolton Wanderers survived in part because of Sam Allardyce?s astute use of the loan system. Players such as Iv?n Campo, Salva Ballesta, Bernard Mendy and Florent Laville kept Bolton up, home-grown English players such as Joe Cole went down and were lost to West Ham soon after. No one cared about a rogue system then. Allardyce, because he is a fine manager, built a club and made Bolton a success story with permanent players, but the foundation on which that success was laid is propping up a tower of contradictions over third-party control and interest.

 

A fair and level headed piece from Samuels until he brings up West Ham's last relegation. How on on he can compare the advantages that West Ham and Man Utd have gained this season, with the loan signings that Sam engineered, is totally beyond me.

 

Get them down.

 

 

I actually think he makes good points throughout.

 

The Tim Howard example is a good one and the fact that Everton could be upto ?1.7m better off by losing to United was nt something I was aware of.

 

The point about loans signings is also valid, although less so, He is saying the system is flawwed he admits the points are made by a west ham fan, the fact he misses is that joe cole did nt go down he stayed up just with another team.

 

The difference is that we used the system west ham cheated, to be fair he admits they should have been docked points.

 

If we were west ham we would make the same points.

 

The more i read about this the more it becomes clear that the threat of legal action is what has stopped the points deduction.

When Bury got done it was because they told the FA.

 

Which is the same in our case. We got investigated because soon after he took over, Magnusson found out the situation regarding Tevez/Mascherano and informed the Premier League of all the facts rather than just some of them.

 

The old man has said we will pay a massive and not complain, if you fine us we will take it to ever court in the land, the league thinks the wording might not stand upto such a challenge so have given in.

 

But is only because west ham have the financial clout and influence that this route has been taken

 

Exactly - if we hadn't had the rich shareholders the fine would have been much smaller. Putting the points deduction argument aside, why should we be fined more than perhaps another club would have been, just because we have rich shareholders?

 

I do not blame west ham for doing this but it is wrong, Yossi if the boot was on the other foot what would you say ?

 

I absolutely agree that the Premier League have bottled it when it comes to a points deduction because they know that had they done so, Magnusson would have taken them to every court in the land. The fact that they have backed down can only mean that they are unsure whether they'd win the case.

 

To me, the Premier League are partly to blame also because of the length of time it took them to come to it's decision. The problem would have probably been avoided if they'd docked us points in January for example.

 

I also think, the Premier League should come out and tell us what exactly that money they have fined us is going to be put towards. They won't have budgeted for it, therefore it is 'spare money'. Why not put it to a worthwhile cause? Youth football, grass roots etc? A pot that non-league clubs can get grants from maybe?

 

 

The league has shown it is pathetic and toothless against money, this raised the issue that the mega rich clubs now have an even bigger advantage than just buiying players.

if these comments are not true i challenge anyone to sue the owners of this site in any court in the land.....'c'mon you fuckers lets have it...

That has always been the case. Fining Chelsea/Cole ?200,000? Whoopdy ragging do.

ok, yossi

 

as posted i'm not totally unsympathetic, but how the fcuk can tevez have been allowed to play last saturday, the day after the wrist slapping, while the offence is seemingly still being committed