*Official* English Football Season 2006-07

[Scaly piscine]

So you really don't have any argument at all then.

Tell us why what he said was so wrong then, rather than just making bland statements which mean nothing.

* marc71178 was hit for 879315093 points by irony in a forceful blow
* marc71178 exploded
* marc71178 was killed
* game over

 

[Scaly piscine]

There was so much talk about the player's ownerships, that the FA are at fault for clearing them to play without clarifying the matter.

However the facts are that West Ham have broken no Footballing rules, so any punishment should be financial.

West Ham tried to hide some of the details. West Ham knowingly broke the rules and should get punished properly.

 

[marc71178]

And that they have been, with far and away the largest financial punishment yet seen.

 

[Scaly piscine]

And that they have been, with far and away the largest financial punishment yet seen.

How the hell can they have been punished when they've made a net profit with two players they'd have otherwise never have gotten and they've also managed more points because of their presence - possibly keeping them in the premiership which is worth a huge amount of money.

It's like someone buying a ferrari for a few magic beans then the police coming along and say oh you can have the car, we'll fine you a few hundred quid.

 

[marc71178]

How do you know they've made a profit?

I'll wager that they haven't, even before the fine (especially since they own Tevez still)

They've not commited any footballing crimes, so cannot have any footballing punishment.

 

[BoyBrumby]

I'm fairly indifferent on the issue, but there is a precedent this season already. AFC Wimbledon were initially docked 18 points (reduced to 3 on appeal) for fielding an ineligible player:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_conf/6496543.stm

That being so in the interests of fairness Wigan et al may have some cause for grievance.

 

[Scaly piscine]

How do you know they've made a profit?

I'll wager that they haven't, even before the fine (especially since they own Tevez still)

They've not commited any footballing crimes, so cannot have any footballing punishment.

The two players they bought have a market value, given the circumstances they were 'acquired' in it's probable that they got the two players for far less than market value - obviously only the authorities and the people responsible will know for sure.

 

[marc71178]

I'm fairly indifferent on the issue, but there is a precedent this season already. AFC Wimbledon were initially docked 18 points (reduced to 3 on appeal) for fielding an ineligible player:

But the thing is, at no point have West Ham played players who were ineligible. The FA controls the registration of the players and permitted them to play.

 

[marc71178]

The two players they bought have a market value, given the circumstances they were 'acquired' in it's probable that they got the two players for far less than market value - obviously only the authorities and the people responsible will know for sure.

So you're talking about probables then?

I reckon that to secure the registration of Tevez in order to allow him to play after the fine, they will have had to pay the 3rd party to get the FA's approval, and I'm sure that won't have come cheap.

 

[roseboy64]

I'd be happy with Hargreaves if we were paying around £5 million - the possible fees that are being thrown around are ridiculous.

Between £10 - 15 million for me with clauses to come into force should we say win the EPL and/or CL.

 

[roseboy64]

But the thing is, at no point have West Ham played players who were ineligible. The FA controls the registration of the players and permitted them to play.

They were permitted to play because West Ham withheld all the details. If it was revelaed to the FA that there was a company that owns them, MSI I think, the transfers would not gone through. Hence West Ham duped the FA just ot bring in two players and should be made to pay.

 

[marc71178]

With the speculation at the time (and which had been going on for months about these players and that company), the FA should've investigated further before even allowing the registration.

They didn't, and they allowed the players to play, so therefore West Ham haven't committed any footballing offence, so any sanctions should be financial (in keeping with the actual offense)

 

[Scaly piscine]

With the speculation at the time (and which had been going on for months about these players and that company), the FA should've investigated further before even allowing the registration.

They didn't, and they allowed the players to play, so therefore West Ham haven't committed any footballing offence, so any sanctions should be financial (in keeping with the actual offense)

We're talking about what should happen here, yes your pathetic version of 'justice' might well be what happens more often than not in this crappy world where the cheats and criminals are favoured more than they deserve to be - but don't pretend it's right because it isn't.

 

[marc71178]

So then Scaly, what footballing rules have they broken, ie ones that there is precedent for which a points deduction can be justified?

 

[BoyBrumby]

So then Scaly, what footballing rules have they broken, ie ones that there is precedent for which a points deduction can be justified?

Rule B13 - acting in bad faith in their dealings with the premier League (lying in other words) &

Rule U18 - entering into illegal contracts that potentially could've allowed a third party (the actual owners of Tevez & Mascherano) to "influence its policies or performance".

Moreover the panel said in its verdict that the Irons' former CEO (Paul Aldridge) actually withheld documents that disclosed the true nature of the Argies' ownership despite them having been directly requested by the Premier League.

The only thing that can have saved West Ham a points deduction was the fact that the bulk of the wrong-doing was done under the previous regime.

 

[roseboy64]

Whoo!! The title's coming back to it's rightful home.

 

[steds]

Anfield?

 

[PhoenixFire]

Whoo!! The title's coming back to it's rightful home.

*High Five*

 

[BoyBrumby]

Clear pen & technically the correct decision to send him off too, but I personally think it's a little tight when the team has a penalty anyway.

Looks like we're winning the Premiership. Albeit for ManUre.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Clear pen & technically the correct decision to send him off too, but I personally think it's a little tight when the team has a penalty anyway.

Looks like we're winning the Premiership. Albeit for ManUre.

Yea, doubly whammies like that are stupid... but that's football.