Sheffield Utd has 24hrs
October 9th, 2008 | 
Author: West Ham have reversed the problems that Sheffield Utd gave the Hammers since the end of season 06/07.
It is now West Ham who are pushing for justice and have gone to the CAS to find it. The CAS have agreed a preliminary hearing to decide whether they will hear the appeal in full.
Sheffield Utd have been given 24hrs to provide and arbitrator for the hearing and if they fail to provide one then the CAS will appoint one.
West Ham have appointed an arbitrator for themselves who will provide a 12 page legal document that argues a case for West Ham and the ‘Right of Appeal’ to which they have not been given, and Sheffield Utd had twice over.
If all fails with the CAS then West Ham are seeking permission from Fifa to take the case to the High Courts.
Sheffield are claiming for a loss of earnings since their relegation for amount of £30m to £50m when the true cost of their loss is around £1.3m loss of profits as stated here.
Random Related Posts
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
Posted in Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson, Sheffield Utd, West Ham News, finance | 
Tags: 30m, 3m, Arbitrator, fifa, hammers, High Courts, Legal Document, Loss Of Earnings, Preliminary Hearing, Profits, relegation, Sheff U, Sheffield Utd, West Ham
To be fair, I am sick of all this and the majority of Blades and Hammers are reasonable about it all with the whole money man issue of sueing West Ham. We are championship and that is it, so will just concentrate on getting up. Its the Premier League and Scudamore that messed up by putting the incorrect punishment together lets forget about it all and move on, what does annoy me though is really incorrect comments from fans. IF we had been Premier League the fact we made a 1.3 million profit in the championship means we would have had a higher profit in the Premiership, we have reduced costs to maintain this profit due to the league we are in. This is a poor article and makes no sense. Secondly, this whole 10 point thing yes, you need the points to stay up that is a fact and we didn’t get them, but we were ten points ahead then played Chelsea, Everton, Man Utd, Arsenal, bolton (who were good then). IF we had played our ten points after these games we would have been level and just made up less points than you, so stop with the points and profit arguments, just stick with the fact Blades were didn’t get enough points and the FA were wrong.
Why mess around with FIFA when they should surely cut out the middle men and go directly to CACL (Court of Arbitration for Cheats and Liars)
You clearly haven’t graspsed the “LOSS” bit.Sheffield United PLC did make an operating profit HOWEVER, if they had remained in the PL they would have made an extra £30m - £50m - effectively therefore the arbitration panel (that allparties agreed to KNOWING there was no appeal process) agreed that SUFC had lost earnings there.The CAS are NOT hearing the case, they are deciding whether they SHOULD hear the case based on the fact that BOTH CLUBS signed an agreement BEFORE entering arbitration that they agreed to stand by the result and that there was no RIGHT TO APPEAL.So, like so many of your fellow fans told us Blades in May/June/July/August - can’t you just leave it alone and admit defeat?
It would be a different story if sheffield united had palyed teves and west ham got religated wouldnt it. The point is that west ham cheated and didnt get punished. When they finally get their punishment, they cant seem to accept that.
But Sheffield United broke the same rule by not allowing Watford play Steve Kabba against them.Or is it ok for Sheffield to do this as they got relegated?Â
KabsWHU lied about Tevez’s registration, then lied about cancelling the agreement.Kabba was never illegally registered or owned by a 3rd party.  Had Tevez been our player, same registration issues etc would you calmly say, no problem Sheffield - you enjoy the PL while we have a season or two in the CCC. Sure you would……sure you would.
S66 Blade, It still breaks the same rule over 3rd party influencing a team. Sheffield united told Watford they can not play one of there players against them.
S66BLADE: why are you still in the CCC? its obvious that you are at where you were destined to go and that is the CCC, 06/07 was your own fate and it wasnt Tevez that put you there, it was the incompetence of warnock and the players, and thats why you will be there for the years to come
3rd party ownership is not against the rules, however contracts allowing for influence by a 3rd party is against the rules. Just because it was a gentlemens agreement doesn’t make it OK, although the claim it was only a gentlemens agreement conflicts with what was written at the time on both the Sheffield United and Watford websites and quoted by Warnock in the Sheffield Star.Needs more investigation in my opinion.
http://uk.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idUKL1758254420070617the PL DID look into it.Joe J - hope you are wrong about the “years to come” !!
Ah. It all went quiet over there.Presumably when presented with an article on an internationally trusted news website you choose to ignore this. If you don’t read it, it doesn’t exist!!