Tribunal findings today - West Ham to pay Sheff Utd £30m?

[Barry the bird boggler]

If the FA hadn't have bottled it at the time, none of this would still be relevent.

They said "we should deduct points but we have 6 mitigations"

Each of the 6 reasons they gave to fine rather than deduct was pretty shoddy.

Any fine should have taken into account the possible revenues of the PL as opposed to the Championship.

They bottled it and for that reason, it is still being resolved.

Quite agree, points earned from the games in which Tevez and Mascherano played should have been deducted. This is the precedent when players who are not properly registered are played in games and happens at all other levels in all other competitions.

Instead they chose to bottle it with a fine in the hope that any legal action could be avoided!

As a result Sheffield United took issue with the matter and, even though they screwed up in their final game that season, were justified in doing so.

Not sure about players and management suing West Ham though, perhaps they should be taking issue with Sheffield United for compensation as employees of the club.

[papereyes]

I think it also would have been less contentious had they also stopped Tevez from playing any further part in the season thereafter.

[cmonurz]

If the sheffield untied players and Colin all decide to get involved in this bunfest I do hope Danny Webber hasn't got the cheek to claim

Apparently Phil Jagielka is one of the players looking at making a claim, despite having gone on to earn more money at Everton than he ever would have at Sheffield United (relating to a bonus he would have received had Sheffield United stayed up).

[Thaumagurist*]

As a result Sheffield United took issue with the matter and, even though they screwed up in their final game that season, were justified in doing so.

I'd read somewhere that even if Sheffield United did win their final game against Wigan, there would still be somebody else to sue Wet Sham - i.e. Wigan.

[Skyline]

Not sure about players and management suing West Ham though, perhaps they should be taking issue with Sheffield United for compensation as employees of the club.

Spot on. You have to look at where the money Sheff Utd claim they lost would have ended up, i.e. mostly going to pay players' salaries. It's Sheff Utd who should be paying any monies the players claim they are owed, not West Ham.

In a further twist, it said in the Times today that Ken Bates is looking into the possibility of claiming money off Sheff Utd for bonus payments Leeds would have received as a result of transfer dealings if Sheff Utd had stayed up.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/article5927365.ece

[Baines]

Not sure about players and management suing West Ham though, perhaps they should be taking issue with Sheffield United for compensation as employees of the club.

Spot on. You have to look at where the money Sheff Utd claim they lost would have ended up, i.e. mostly going to pay players' salaries. It's Sheff Utd who should be paying any monies the players claim they are owed, not West Ham.

In a further twist, it said in the Times today that Ken Bates is looking into the possibility of claiming money off Sheff Utd for bonus payments Leeds would have received as a result of transfer dealings if Sheff Utd had stayed up.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/article5927365.ece

I'm not sure that that's right. Sheff U are (or rather, were, prior to settling) entitled to the difference between what they would have received in money terms by virtue of being in the Premiership, less what they did receive in money terms by virtue of being relegated, with a further deduction in respect of any costs which they would have incurred by virtue of staying up.

So, any savings in terms of bonus payments, higher salaries and payments to other clubs (ie dirty Leeds) contingent on their Premiership status would be deducted from the damages to which Sheff U would have been entitled to from West Ham.

So, unless West Ham's lawyers are stupid (something which we probably shouldn't assume, given the basket-case nature of the club's management over the past few years), any payment to Sheff U should have been reduced accordingly.

[gh7901]

Nice to see that the players are so greedy they want to get their bit too, despite relegation ultimately being their fault for being shit, and despite most of them still probably earning over 10k a week

If it was a player who had since dropped far down the divisions then fair enough, but people like Jagielka? How oxf*rd tight

[Mr Optimist]

I haven't read the whole thread but I can't help thinking West Ham seemed to have been in a rush to resolve the matter out of court given that most people would have held their ground saying they had already been punished by the FA (albeit inadequately and incorrectly with only a fine)and that should be the end of it.

I expect it is all so that the cash strapped owners of West Ham have resolved the big outstanding liability hanging over the "business" they can now try and sell the club to someone else without the "Tevez saga" stench hanging over them during any discussions with interested parties.

You just knew watching that press conference with Alan Pardrew with glazed rabbit in the headlights expression, where they unveiled the signings of Tevez and Monster Masch, that something smelt not quite right!! You know the saying, if it seems too good to be true it probably is...!

Poor old Hamsters.

[soggy biscuit]

Fulham reported to be putting in a £700,000 claim due to loss of earnings from West Ham finishing above them in the league

[Dirk Gently]

Chris Armstrong is one of the players concerned.

http://www.getreading.co.uk/sport/football/readingfc/s/2047493_help_me_end_my_tevezgate_pain