West Ham and FA Cup

[BensGrandad]

The difference being that AFC Wimbledon fielded a player whom they KNEW under FA rules to be illegible WHU didn't.

All FA rules even down to your lowly Sunday League Div 10 side are required to get international/county clearnce if a player comes from abroad. In the case of Dunday League club it is done by the County FA for youi and they then sanction the player. Wales in terms of governing bodies are abroad as is Scotalnd & Ireland.

 

[Gritt23]

We broke the rules, we got found out, we admitted guilt, we got punished.

How about the fact that you are continuing to lie to the authorities over this whole sordid business.

The contract giving MSI Third Party influence was to be removed from the deal before Tevez could play again, before he could score the goals to earn your survival.

"It's been torn up" - like that cancels a legally binding contract - "his registration is ours," "he's a West Sham player blah blah blah." Magnusson was saying just last week that he's under contract at West Sham and is going nowhere.

Okay so how has this "loan" deal with Man Utd come about? WSU's best player by a mile is about to leave, and rather than having £20m in the bank from selling him, you will have erm, well, nowt actually. All you'll get is Tevez off your wage bill? Why on Earth would West Sham choose that option?

Truth is they wouldn't if it was up to them. If this loan deal isn't Third Party influence then you have a Chairman who is voluntarily giving your best players away to other member of the Premiership.

Which is it? Completely mad Chairman, or Third Party influence?

 

[Schrödinger's Toad]

You say there is no precedent ? How about this.
In March of this year, AFC Wimbledon were found guilty of fielding an ineligable player (Jermaine Darlington) in their FA Trophy tie against Gravesend and Northfleet. Apparently he hadn\'t gained the required International clearance.

They were fined their £7,000 prizemoney, expelled from the competition, and had an 18 POINT DEDUCTION imposed on them, as redress for the fact he\'d also played in 11 League games. The points deduction was eventually reduced to 3 points on appeal (as clearly the original punishment was insanely harsh), but the fact remains that they had points docked for fielding a player who they shouldn\'t have.

Now in light of AFC Wimbledon being expelled from a Cup competion, incurring what is (for them) a hefty fine AND having a points deduction for fielding an ineligable player in 12 games, can you tell me how West Sham can field an ineligable player for an ENTIRE SEASON and not be deducted points ?

Oh...hang on...
West Sham are a big PREMIERSHIP club, wheras AFC Wimbledon are only a two-bit Rymans League outfit. Therefore, punsihments are doled out accordingly, such has always been the case. Glad to see you keenly EMBRACE that sense of fair play jevs, but then being as its contrived to buy your grubby lot another season in the top flight, I guess we shouldn\'t expect anything less than your preening celebration of everything that stinks in the game. As long as YOUR lot are alright eh.

Bitter and twisted ? Damn right I am. A fool ? Only if I believed the bullshit being spouted by the likes of you and Magnusson over this whole thing.

Amen to that. One of the more galling aspects of it was just how predictable it was ... we know how "big" teams like West Ham get treated.

 

[jevs]

How about the fact that you are continuing to lie to the authorities over this whole sordid business.

The contract giving MSI Third Party influence was to be removed from the deal before Tevez could play again, before he could score the goals to earn your survival.

"It's been torn up" - like that cancels a legally binding contract - "his registration is ours," "he's a West Sham player blah blah blah." Magnusson was saying just last week that he's under contract at West Sham and is going nowhere.

Okay so how has this "loan" deal with Man Utd come about? WSU's best player by a mile is about to leave, and rather than having £20m in the bank from selling him, you will have erm, well, nowt actually. All you'll get is Tevez off your wage bill? Why on Earth would West Sham choose that option?

Truth is they wouldn't if it was up to them. If this loan deal isn't Third Party influence then you have a Chairman who is voluntarily giving your best players away to other member of the Premiership.

Which is it? Completely mad Chairman, or Third Party influence?

So who says we're still lying.....a few very bitter Brighton fans, Sheffield Utd fand.....fans from other teams, a few chairman from relegated or near relegated teams.......well f*** the lot of them.

The FAPL, UEFA, FIFA, SAS, MFI and f*** knows who else.....AND THESE ARE THE PEOPLE WHO MATTER...all say we are NOT continuing to lie over the situation.

Presently, Tevez is contracted to WHU for another 3 years. Our chairman...Eggert Magnusson has stated that he is a WHU player unless he wants to move elsewhere.....in which case there's little point of holding on to a player who wants to play for someone else.

 

[Easy 10]

So who says we're still lying.....a few very bitter Brighton fans, Sheffield Utd fand.....fans from other teams, a few chairman from relegated or near relegated teams.......well f*** the lot of them.

"Your honour, in light of the accusations being levelled at my client regarding all evidence indicating that Tevez is indeed owned by a 3rd party and therefore being ineligable to sign for or represent West Ham United in the Premiership, I would like to close defence of said client with this final indisputable statement. f*** the lot of them. No further questions, your honour."

Presently, Tevez is contracted to WHU for another 3 years. Our chairman...Eggert Magnusson has stated that he is a WHU player unless he wants to move elsewhere

And if you'll swallow that, you'll swallow ANYTHING.

 

[Gritt23]

Presently, Tevez is contracted to WHU for another 3 years. Our chairman...Eggert Magnusson has stated that he is a WHU player unless he wants to move elsewhere.....in which case there's little point of holding on to a player who wants to play for someone else.

So why are you loaning him to Man Utd when you could sell him for £20m? Unless of course he's not actually yours to sell.


You still haven't answered my question, do you have a mad Chairmen who is prepared to give your best player away for nothing, or is this Third Party influence?

If there is another possibility that can explain why this is going to be a loan deal to Man Utd, then please explain, I am literally on the edge of my seat waiting to hear.

 

[Gritt23]

"Your honour, in light of the accusations being levelled at my client regarding all evidence indicating that Tevez is indeed owned by a 3rd party and therefore being ineligable to sign for or represent West Ham United in the Premiership, I would like to close defence of said client with this final indisputable statement. f*** the lot of them. No further questions, your honour."

And that, I think you'll find is the winning argument from Jevs. It's like listening to Rumpole at his eloquent best.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

One possible avenue would be for West Ham to be paid a transfer fee and then agree a compensation figure with Joorabchian for breaching contracts with his company, Media Sports Investments (MSI), when the Hammers terminated third-party agreements following their fine.

However, it is understood the League would want a substantial chunk of the transfer fee to remain at West Ham rather than it all be handed over to MSI in compensation.

If that was the case, they could be accused of merely covering up the third-party agreements that have caused so much controversy.

So all above board then.

 

[Easy 10]

Almost laughable isn't it.

 

[Gritt23]

Almost laughable isn't it.

Well, if this loan deal goes through and the FAPL decide "Yep that all seems above board, no sign of any Third Party influence in that arrangement" then yes, they would have sealed their fate as a laughing stock.

 

[Barrel of Fun]

It is despicable and makes a mockery of the whole system.

Found guilty - and didn’t lie

Manchester Utd deducted 1 point Brawl on pitch 1990
Arsenal deducted 2 points Brawl on pitch 1990
Preston NE deducted 1 point fielding unregistered player
Sunderland deducted 2 points illegible player 1890
Bury deducted 1 point fielding unregistered player thrown & out of FA cup
Blackpool deducted 2 points fielding unregistered player 1982/83
Stockport Co deducted 2 points illegible player 1926/27
Middlesbrough deducted 3 points for failing to fulfil fixture 1996
Chesterfield deducted 9 points financial irregularities 200/01
Leyton Orient deducted 3 points ineligible player 1997/98
Leeds Utd deducted 10 points for going into administration
Brighton & HA deducted 2 points crowd trouble 1996/97
Tranmere Rov deducted 2 points failing to meet a fixture 1987 /88
Bristol Rov deducted 2 points fielding unregistered player 1981/82
Wrexham deducted 10 points for going into administration
Rotherham Utd deducted 10 points for going into administration
Mansfield Town deducted 2 points fielding unregistered player
Halifax Town deducted 1 point fielding unregistered player 1987/98
Peterborough Utd deducted 19 points and were automatically relegat4ed for irregular bonuses 1967/68
Newport Co deducted 1 point fielding unregistered player
Aldershot deducted 1 point fielding unregistered player
Cambridge Utd deducted 10 points for going into administration 2004/05
Boston Utd deducted 14 points financial irregularities 2002/03

West Ham - no points deducted