Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Tuesday, 2nd December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Sheffield Star site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Guilty West Ham banking on legal loophole



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 10 October 2008
WITH BRAMALL Lane closed for the international break and several Sheffield United players preparing to embark on another round of World Cup qualifiers with their respective countries, the Carlos Tevez Affair has again reared its ugly head.
West Ham, who last month were ordered to pay the Championship club compensation after an independent arbitration panel ruled the Argentine striker, whose presence at Upton Park broke transfer regulations, helped them win at least three points during the controversial 2006/07 campaign.

United, who lost their Premier League status after trailing the Londoners by that exact margin, won a landmark legal victory when Lord Griffiths and his team ruled in their favour.

Proceedings designed to determine the exact amount they will receive are scheduled to take place early next year, with reports suggesting that United's representatives will submit a damages claim of between £30 million and £50m.

But West Ham, despite agreeing to be bound by the terms of the arbitration, are pressing ahead with their efforts to get the verdict overturned by invoking a little-known FIFA rule that enables the decision of national associations to be reviewed by the Court of Arbiration for Sport, based in Lausanne.

"An appeal against the decision of a federation, association or sports-related body may be filed with CAS insofar as the statutes or regulations of the said body so far provide or as the parties have concluded a specific arbitration agreement and insofar as the appellant has exhausted the legal remedies available to him prior to the appeal, in accordance with the statutes or regulations of the said sports related body," CAS's website confirms.

The devil, it appears, will be in the detail.

United have refused to comment publicly on West Ham's course of action but, privately, they insist the arbitration was a private matter and that the FA, under whose rules the process took place, had no influence over the outcome.

Officials at Soho Square have also taken that view and are likely to take a dim view of suggestions to the contrary.

While the lawyers continue their argument, United manager Kevin Blackwell is focusing purely on footballing matters.

With a clutch of players away on international duty, coaching staff at Shirecliffe will be keeping their fingers crossed that Gary Naysmith (Scotland) and David Cotterill (Wales) both return home in peak condition ahead of next weekend's Steel City derby.

Justin Haber (Malta), David Carney (Australia) and Keith Gillespie (Northern Ireland) are also likely to see action but have yet to hold down regular places in Blackwell's first-choice 11.

"It's an honour for players to represent their countries and to play at the highest level," Blackwell said. "If you have people involved in games like this then it means you've got good players.

"The only thing those of us at club level do is wish them all the best and then keep our fingers crossed they come back okay."


What do you think? Post your comments below.

READ MORE

Blades Watch 08-09 - The Season So Far
Owls Watch 08-09 - The Season So Far
Watch Premiership highlights, international football, golf, tennis, darts and much more
Football headlines
More Blades
More Owls
More Spireites
More Rovers
More Reds
More Millers
More Ice Hockey
More rugby league
More rugby union
More boxing
Sports columnists
All sport categories

The full article contains 561 words and appears in Sheffield Star newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 10 October 2008 8:28 AM
  • Source: Sheffield Star
  • Location: Sheffield
 
Prev
1
2 3
1

musicmob,

where else 10/10/2008 08:57:36
for goodness sake stop keep whining and going on about the money you think you deserve !
we all know you wont get a single penny, so please carry on in the championship where you belong.
2

donnyboy,

10/10/2008 09:26:56
hear hear,
alien blade and sheffieldsmoaniestclub.where has your airport gone?
3

I Kemp,

Poole, Dorset 10/10/2008 09:36:21
West Ham had no option but to accept the arbitration hearing under FA rules. To say simply that they 'agreed' to it is biased reporting.

In my view West Ham Football Club should have every right to an appeal. Why is it Sheffield United can have three hearings and then when finally one rules in their favour the matter is suddenly 'settled'? Unfair!!

Whatever anyone thinks of the original punishment, the matter was dealt with by the PL. Double jeopardy is in action here. It is a recipe for anarchy if one sport's club is able to sue another just because they disagree with a decision.


4

hardinga,

essex 10/10/2008 12:04:14
Stop writing rubbish and telling lies. West Ham have not been "ordered" as you say to pay anything. And by the time we have Hung you out to dry through the courts everyone knows you wont be getting a penny, MCcabe is just chasing the lost lawyers fee's from the two "LOST" appeals. And does everyone remember right at the start MCcabe said this was not about money, yea right, you are where you belong, in the lower league where you can just about compete, because you werent good enough for the premier .
5

AlienBlade,

10/10/2008 12:11:51
I Kemp?

was you there when the FA had the thumb screws planted on the west ham board ermmmm I dont believe you were,

the first 2 arbitration were in regards to re-instatement to the premier league, nothing to do with compensation,

the first 2 both indicated that the Blades had a point but was powerless without new evidence, the panel even said that had it had the power it would have found in the blades favour

the one that is in court HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FA, if you actually read the thing, so how can it be bound by FA rules NUMPTY!! the fact is that both West Ham and Sheffield Untied had signed a document to say that it would be bound by its decision, if we had lost we would have had to abide by the decision, simple as, its only because West Ham are cheats, and are looking to squirm out of this like immoral team they are, that they are now looking for loopholes in the legal system, even the Court of Arbiration for Sport, based in Lausanne has said without the Blades permission to appeal they wont even look at it, I beleive the Blades were accused of "clutching at straws" before this went to the courts. I think the West Ham legal team are beyond the "straw clutching phase!!"

as for Donny Boy, do you really have nothing better to do, than to surf through opposing teams stories? and where exactly do your loyaties lay, as surely if you are a Hammer, I dont believe they have an airport either? and can you really class Finningly as Doncaster.... but nice to see you dont resort to school boy tactics of "my dads bigger than your dad" oh wait..... you just did didnt you.

quick run I think the last bell just rang, you best get to class before you get detention
6

AlienBlade,

10/10/2008 12:26:37
hardinga, hmmm you need to get the facts too my friend, West Ham have been ordered to pay compensation following the hearing, the only thing that has yet to be decided is the actual amount, it could be £1 or £50million, but they have still be ordered to pay whatever amount is set by the panel due to be heard next year

the case wasnt about the money, had we been re-instated which was the goal of the first 2 arbitration panels, then we woulndt have pursued any monies as we would have finished above west ham even despite throwing away this lead due having Tevez, (hypothetically by the way had Sheffield United not thrown away this lead I have no dount Wigan who would have gone down would have pursued the same action given their staunch support for this case!)

but it is nice that you are viewing a Sheffield paper all the way from essex, when you support none of the teams it actually covers,
7

Getalife,

Belper 10/10/2008 14:24:36
Who can blame West Ham for "looking for a legal loophole"? Why, some people might even call it a "fight for justice".

I think we all know, in our heart of hearts, that the main reason Sheffield United were relegated from the Premiership was because they threw away a comfortable league position with a gutless and incompetent run-in to the season, and the only reason they failed to be promoted last season was because they simply weren't good enough.

And the club business didn't suffer all that much either, with the operating profit only falling from £2.6 million to £1.3 million following relegation.

£50 million is plain ridiculous, I doubt whether the club has made that much profit since the last war!
8

I Kemp,

Poole, Dorset 10/10/2008 15:10:05
er no AlienBlade I wasn't there but I can read quite well from the FA Rules Book. For your reference:

Agreement to Arbitration

1. (a) Subject to Rule K1(b) below, any dispute or difference (a “dispute”) between any two or more Participants (which shall include, for the purposes of this section of the Rules, The Association) including but not limited to a dispute arising out of or in connection with (including any question regarding the existence or validity of)

(i) The Rules and Regulations of The Association;
(ii) The rules and regulations of an Affiliated Association or Competition;
(iii) The Statutes and Regulations of FIFA and UEFA; or
(iv) The Laws of the Game shall be referred to and finally resolved by arbitration under these Rules.

IN OTHER WORDS WEST HAM HAD NO OPTION BUT TO AGREE TO ATTEND ARBITRATION. FAIR? I THINK NOT!!
9

AlienBlade,

10/10/2008 15:24:14
ARBITRATION which is what the previous two were so fair enough if it was about the FIRST TWO HEARINGS

BUT!!!

the latest case was a independant tribunal matter outside the FA and wasnt an Arbitration hearing at all it had nothing to do with the FA, as they have also pointed out, as the arbitration had already said that West Ham were guilty of the offence, and even West Ham had admitted to the offence!

so when quoting RULES And REGS at least make sure they are relevant!! as quoting arbitration rules for an independant tribunal would be like trying to apply rugby rules to football!!

oh and getalife from belper, so on the basis we have only lost £1.3million in operating profit, is a good way to gauge the £4million we lost in the sale of Jagielka as without the clause from relegation he wouldnt have been sold for just £4million having already rejected bids earlier in the season for £6million!! he fact we have had to downsize both the playing squad and other projects, just shows financial prudence following relegation! it doesnt mean that had we have remained in the top flight the club would have been paying more for players and attendances would have been higher, they would have also been paid more for sky coverage and more from the Premier League for the standing,

I do ask the hypothetical question if in the reverse situation and Sheffield United had "loaned in" Kaka and Ronaldinio illegally and West Ham or another team of your choice had been relegated as a result, would you not be the same as every Sheffield United fan, in feeling you was cheated out of the top flight!!

if you dont then you are either not that much of a fan or a complete and utter liar!


10

I Kemp,

Poole, Dorset 10/10/2008 15:31:44
AlienBlade this is from your own club's website. Note the words FA ARBITRATION. I'm laughing now. Those who throw stones shouldn't live in glass houses springs to mind:

Success in Tevez affair
Posted on: Tue 23 Sep 2008
Sheffield United have been told they have been successful in their claim for compensation against West Ham over the Carlos Tevez affair.

A Football Association arbitration hearing has awarded in favour of Sheffield United .

Premier League club West Ham were fined £5.5million by the Premier League but not docked points when found guilty of fielding the ineligible Tevez and fellow Argentina international Javier Mascherano during the 2006/7 season.

The Blades argued they were relegated unfairly on the final day of that season - West Ham survived after Tevez scored the winner at Manchester United, ironically the club he now plays for.

The Blades began their legal fight for reinstatement some 16 months ago, which also included an arbitration hearing against the Premier League. This award could now pose a question as to what the Premier League will do.
Prev
1
2 3

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.