West Ham still have ‘Rights to Appeal’ - Sheffield Utd may still Lose!
The FA have said West Ham have no rights to appeal under the FA Rules, the FA Rules only apply to the FA and not Sport in General.
West Ham still have the right to appeal at CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) in Lausanne, which is where many football teams go to after arbitration hearings and where i am sure Sheffield Utd would have went if they had lost.
As of 2004, the majority of recent cases considered by the CAS dealt with transfer disputes within professional football.
Random Related Posts
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
September 23rd, 2008 at 11:55 AM
I think the club has seen this coming, hence the surefire sales of Zamora, Ferdinand and McCartney (hardly the fringe players we would’ve like to have got rid of). However, as you righlty point out, this only covers a third of the potential costs we could be forced to pay Sheff Utd.
At the end of the day, we broke the rules, and deserved to be punished. However this is hard to take considering we’ve already been punished once by the Premier League, in the region £5m, and also because I find it hard to believe any court in the world can rule on one player costing another team £30m in lost revenue over a season of 38 games?!!??!
The courts are basically slapping every other WHUFC player who helped keep us up in the face - dismissing their contribution in obtaining 21 points from a possible 28 in the last 9 games of the season. Would West Ham have stayed up without significant contributions from Green, Noble and Zamora to name but three? No they wouldn’t have. Would Sheff Utd have gone down without those players contributing to West Ham, no they wouldn’t have.
So how any court in the land can justify or decide that one player and one player alone has cost another club £30m in revenue is simply ridiculous.
And then there’s the failure of this other club in question (Sheffield United) to actually earn enough points themselves over a season to stay up in the first place? How is their inability to secure enough points to stay up the fault of Carlos Tevez?
Finally, we need to look at Sheff Utd’s own failure to follow the rule book in the case of Steve Kabba joining Watford and not being eligible to play against the Blades? IN fact there’s a whole can of worms waiting to be opened regarding other players at other teams where a third party was involved last season. Let us not forget the infamous dropping of Tim Howard by Everton for the game against United, in which the deputy keeper had a nightmare and gifted Manchester United the 3 points, and in doing so, also the title.
Is there not a case to be answered here? Are Chelsea not owed millions of pounds for not winning the title last year because of this?
I am not bitter, I accept we broke the rules, and I accept we needed to be punished, but if we are to be punished in the way that we are, then other cases need to be looked at and similar verdicts need to be reached.
I would like to sum up this piece, by saying that I wish Sheffield United all the best for the future…. Indeed I hope to see you back in the Premiership very soon…. Simply for the fact it will be so satisfying to relegate you again!!!! IRONS!!!!
September 23rd, 2008 at 12:37 PM
Bravo Oli.. words of wisdom my friend.
a follow up to your Kabba comment..
Rule U18, if you remember, states:
“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.”
Here’s what I know of the Steve Kabba situation - feel free to correct me if I’m wrong:
On 28th April 2007, Sheffield United played Watford at home. Steve Kabba had transfered in the 2007 January transfer window to Watford, and both the Sheffield United club website and the Watford club website state that there was a clause in Steve Kabba’s contract which prevented him from facing his former employers that season.
From the Sheff Utd site:
From the Watford site:
Isn’t this equal to allowing Sheffield United to materially influence the team selection of a league match? Wouldn’t that make it a breach of rule U18?
For the record, I think that Sheffield United should be allowed to protect their interests in this way.
However, is this a breach of rule U18 or not? And if so, how does that impact the Tevez ruling, not to mention the subsequent Sheffield United arbitration?
By the way, Sheffield United won that game 1-0.
September 23rd, 2008 at 1:44 PM
What annoys me most is the constant reference to illegally registered players. This was not the case. There was a clause in the contract that had the potential to allow third party influence. The premier league have a rule against third party influence but until this affair most people assumed the rule was more to do with club officials and shareholders having interests in other clubs. West Ham enquired to the Premier league whether or not this constituted a breach and were told (over the phone) that it did not. The woman at the league denies this, West Ham at the tribunal said that it was the case. The third party influence was there but it could only ever have worked against West Ham. This is why a points deduction was not the correct punishment, but a fine for not filing the paperwork correctly was deemed appropriate. That should really have been the end of the matter.
Forgive me if I am wrong but the supposed result today mentions that the panel believed that West Ham were not likely to have won as many points in the last couple of games without Tevez. Surely law is normally based on facts and not supposition? This outcome, if true, is a complete mockery and does not bode well for the future of football and has far reaching implications for sport in general.
I believe West Ham were wrong. West Ham were not, however, responsible for Sheffield United being relegated. Ideally what should have happened back at the time was West Ham being docked 2 points. There had been no precedent to suggest anything more than a one point deduction.
This arbitration result, if true, is ridiculous.
September 23rd, 2008 at 3:45 PM
I hope Sheff utd rot in the lower leagues for eternity.
September 23rd, 2008 at 7:18 PM
More biased opinions are festering on talk sport, yet not one mention about the Steve Kabba business,all they keep ranting about is how sorry they feel for Sheff utd and how justice is done. I didnt see that lot moan when we played sheff utd and Tevez played then and they won. I truly despise some media and the smaller club in Sheffield
September 24th, 2008 at 5:27 AM
No mention either that Tevez played 19 games before scoring…..during those 19 games how many points did Sheffield pick up……they got relegated due to their own inability to perform and gain the points required to stay up, anyone with an ounce of footballing knowledge can this this plain and simple.I wonder if West Ham can go to FiFa with this, yes we may have done wrong but certainly one man did not save us, Green kept us in four games Arsenal and Man U twice each, Etherington played his part, Zamora played his part, there are a number of other players who gave it their best and all helped along the way.Maybe West Ham should fund a Watford court case against S.U for not letting Kabba play against his former team…..what a load of b*ll*cks that rule is……the F.A and FiFa need to simplify the transfer rules, if a player changes team thats it end of, he should be able to play against whoever his new team decides….after all they now own him.My 2 cents
September 24th, 2008 at 11:21 AM
Finally some sort of justice has been done. The fact of the matter is yes other west ham players played their parts but tevez was the main instigator of your lot staying up. Eight goals in ten games, a clearance of the line against blackburn and the straw that broke the camel’s back the winner against Man Utd. Although you think it is sour grapes from us lot but I’m sure you would feel exactly the same in our position. It is a fact Carlos Tevez kept the hammers up.
September 25th, 2008 at 1:16 AM
WTF are you talking about mate, so the fact that Robert Green kept out almost 100 shots on target over the two Arsenal and Man U games doesn’t come into it - this didn’t help us gain 12 points from four games then……what season are you talking about mate, its nothing to do with sour grapes as its not my money, its to do with facts being presented in a court of appeal, these facts have not been considered by the arbitration, they seem to think one man kept us up when statistics show different. I thought any court of any descriptiuon had to base their findings on facts - statistics are factual and they have not been taken into account, maybe during the appeal they will consider there were 18 other temas in the league all playing for the title or to prevent relegation, what were Sheffield doing to save themselves against all these other teams - nothing, subsequently they got relegated.