[dazza1011]

As the title suggests do you think Sheffield United deserve the money paid to them by West Ham.

simple yes or No answer

[Marc]

i think no. They didn't get relegated because Tevez was playing for West Ham, they got relegated because they were and are a rubbish team who don't deserve to be in the top tier of football. West Ham just had a bad year, overall they are actually quite a good team.

I see Leeds are thinking of sueing WH now as well, because they didnt get some money from 'stay in the premier league' transfer clauses for players who went to Sheff Utd

Actually i think i might sue West Ham as well. I do remember feeling a bit sad for a minute when Man Utd lost to West Ham in that end of season match. Obviously the title celebrations after picked me up, but i still think i would have been 1% happier that day if Tevez wasn't playing. I wonder how much i can get..

[daftmole]

No!! I am a WHU fan so I'm bound to be biased but here are my thoughts:

Tevez may have scored the goals but he alone did not keep us up, the fact that the new signings at the time like Upson and Lucas Neil settled in and we could defend again was just as much factor in keeping us up. One player cannot carry a whole team and to say that Tevez was the reason we stayed up is just derespectful to the other players and clearly came from somebody who has never played or understands football.

We broke some rules about ownership and got fined, should have stopped there.

I now hear Leeds are going to sue us because Sheffield United bought some players from them who had details in their contracts about aditional payments to Leeds if they remained in the Premier League.........and off course Neil Warnock is personally sueing us aswell.........it will never stop!

[blackrod]

Yes and no really. The PL completely bottled it in the first instance and WHU got away with it. They should have been docked points in the first place and gone down because of it. Now, two years later and this debacle continues because of the way the PL handled it. I can understand why Sheff Utd are aggrieved and I think some form of compensation is probably fair but it should never have got to this stage in the first place.
Leeds & Warnock are clutching at straws, give over!

[mooperman]

YES. Like it or not Tevez DID score those goals when he shouldnt have even been on the pitch at all. As a result Sheff Utd who had done there bit with legal players went down because of goals scored by an illeagal player, regardless of how you call it a team victory, would West Ham have had all those wins without him - no chance.

Besides, what we think doesnt matter, what does matter is that West Ham saw fit to give Sheff Utd £15mil or so... what does that tell you....

[dazza1011]

Originally Posted by daftmole

No!! I am a WHU fan so I'm bound to be biased but here are my thoughts:

Tevez may have scored the goals but he alone did not keep us up, the fact that the new signings at the time like Upson and Lucas Neil settled in and we could defend again was just as much factor in keeping us up. One player cannot carry a whole team and to say that Tevez was the reason we stayed up is just derespectful to the other players and clearly came from somebody who has never played or understands football.

We broke some rules about ownership and got fined, should have stopped there.

I now hear Leeds are going to sue us because Sheffield United bought some players from them who had details in their contracts about aditional payments to Leeds if they remained in the Premier League.........and off course Neil Warnock is personally sueing us aswell.........it will never stop!

i didnt know you were a hammers fan ( dazza deletes moley off friends list)

bottom line if you had been given the appropriate punishment for fielding an illegible player ( i.e points deduction ) then none of this would have happened

[Sicknote10]

Yes, West Ham cheated and should have been relegated instead

[BlackCountryBob]

Not really, as I remember it they had to get a draw at home to Wigan on the final day which would have sent Wigan down regardless and they failed so tough.

And the whole ambulance chasing atmosphere which has followed is becoming ridiculous, the players are suing, the manager is suing and now I read Leeds will sue because they missed out on bonus when United went down. It is daft, how about if every club who have been relegated since then sues West Ham because they could have stood a better chance if Seff Utd were still in the league.

Sheffield United had their fate in their hands and they blew it, and inspired run from Tevez closed the gap and brought them back into it but in the end the players, coaches and manager of Sheffield United failed. They failed to get 40 points in the season, they failed to build a sufficient lead over West Ha when Tevez looked like Diego Forlan mk2 and they failed to do what was required when their destiny was in their own hands so all this blaming West ham is fruitless and pathetic; you will note that Charlton and Watford are not also suing.

[blackrod]

BlackCountryBob, I think you are correct in that Tevez didn't single handedly keep WHU up, it was a team effort. However, he should never have been on the pitch in the first place and no amount of teeth grinding by West Ham fans will remove the fact. They broke the rules and should have paid the price with a points deduction, simple. They didn't and the sporting arbitration panel concluded that Sheff Utd had a case for compensation. The PL executives have made themselves a mockery, well done!

[gosties]

I am not sure about the payment as the merits of whether it's deserved almost wholly depend on who you support. In my opinion a player that is ineligible to play should not have played in any games what so ever. Both Mascherano and Tevez were owned by that Kia Joorbian fellow.

Footballer's are supposed to belong to the club they play for under the registration rules supposedly. That also includes player loan's between respective clubs.

I don't also really see much difference in what Man Utd are doing with Tevez with their two-year loan and potential purchase clause. They lease the player from the same Kia fellow but through one of his companies supposedly.

I don't believe that Tevez or Mascherano should have played for West Ham. My opinion only, but if you are willing to pay between 15-35 million depending on reports surely their is something you are hiding.

If the player is ineligible, the FA ought to have stripped West Ham of all the points accrued during his playing period even if it resulted in West Ham being relegated. This whole issue is because the FA and Premier League did not have the nerve to sort it out as and when it happened.

It's a simple issue Tevez is either eligible to play or not eligible.

I have no particular feeling for either of the clubs involved in this 2 year debacle.

[kopchoir]

I vote no only on the basis of the fact the season is 38 games long over them 38 games if your good enough over 38 games to win the league then so be same goes im afriad my old mucker, if your not good enough over 38 games then you go down so i say no but as someone has also said i dont see the difference in man utd doing it either it stinks of big team bias and how much cash man utd brings into the league

[dazza1011]

Originally Posted by kopchoir

I vote no only on the basis of the fact the season is 38 games long over them 38 games if your good enough over 38 games to win the league then so be same goes im afriad my old mucker, if your not good enough over 38 games then you go down so i say no but as someone has also said i dont see the difference in man utd doing it either it stinks of big team bias and how much cash man utd brings into the league

thats another off the friends list

[mooperman]

Originally Posted by kopchoir

I vote no only on the basis of the fact the season is 38 games long over them 38 games if your good enough over 38 games to win the league then so be same goes im afriad my old mucker, if your not good enough over 38 games then you go down so i say no but as someone has also said i dont see the difference in man utd doing it either it stinks of big team bias and how much cash man utd brings into the league

whilst i agree over the 38 games comment its not quite as black and white as that... if you take away Tevez's goals that season and the points that the goals converted into wins then it wouldve been West Ham who were not good enough over the 38 games would it not?

[ed_mcl]

Originally Posted by kopchoir

I vote no only on the basis of the fact the season is 38 games long over them 38 games if your good enough over 38 games to win the league then so be same goes im afriad my old mucker, if your not good enough over 38 games then you go down so i say no but as someone has also said i dont see the difference in man utd doing it either it stinks of big team bias and how much cash man utd brings into the league

Would West Ham have been good enough over 38 games if they hadn't deliberately lied and deceived the Premier League to be able to keep a player that scored vital goals for them?

West Ham would've had draws instead of wins against Man Utd, Bolton and Blackburn had it not been for Tevez's goals, so there's six points they've acquired, which they shouldn't have. That would have left them with 35 points and in 18th position, thus relegated.

[BlackCountryBob]

For gods sake, the vultures are circling.

Fulham Seek Compensation Over Carlos Tevez Affair - Goal.com

[mooperman]

Originally Posted by ed_mcl

Would West Ham have been good enough over 38 games if they hadn't deliberately lied and deceived the Premier League to be able to keep a player that scored vital goals for them?

West Ham would've had draws instead of wins against Man Utd, Bolton and Blackburn had it not been for Tevez's goals, so there's six points they've acquired, which they shouldn't have. That would have left them with 35 points and in 18th position, thus relegated.

exactly the point!!

Judging by the votes though im guessing there are more West Ham fans than Blades here as anyone who knows about whats happened with all this should understand that even with the pay out Blades still got a raw deal from it all....

[davidjohnson]

If Wigan had been relegated, they would have pursued WHU, as would Fulham or any other team. That was made clear at the time.

As time passed by and people became weary of the story, it was easy to start blaming SU for being "bad sports" etc. Also the football media seems to have a WHU bias, but I think the compensation is appropriate.

It is not a case of who is or isn't good enough to stay up, it is the worst three teams that go down and without Tevez, I am sure WHU would have been amongst those three and not SU.

[lostinspace]

Playing an ineligible player should mean match forfeit and no points.

Also, can anyone remember if his goals affected anything at the top of the league? I'm sure there must be someone near the top, as well as at the bottom, who's position may have been affected. Maybe with a European place at stake?

I don't think it goes far enough, though. Tevez should be banned from professional football: he was complicit in deliberately breaking league rules. But that won't happen. Can you imagine what ferguson would say if he was retrospectively banned and Man U were docked 50+ points this season?

[sdu1975]

Bottom line WHUFC were guilty and punished. IMO the prem league should have been sued as they assumed that WHUFC were going down anyway and applied the incorrect punishment. I am an Irons fan and as such do not buy into this Tevez kept you up. Over the last part of the season the team was more stable as we had other players coming into form (Mark Noble) and others back from injury Lucas Neil and Matt Upson to name but to. Why is it inconceivable that another player may have scored instead of Tevez. Some of the losses where Tevez played may have become draws as he was carried for many of the games he played. Not many of his goals where spectacular just good finishes which a bread and butter striker could have scored.

Lets be honest when we signed the two boys didn't everyone smell a rat and will Man U really sign him. I doubt it as far to much baggage

Sheff U went down as they were not good enough. Of course I could mention the gentlemens agreement between Sheff U and Watford regarding a former player, but I shan't.

Fulham and Leeds both have greedy media hungry chairmen (ala McCabe) and of course Warnock loves the spotlight but he may want to concentrate on his day job first.

Sheff U have their money. Any loss of earnings or additional payments they would have made to other clubs or their own players is now down to them. It will be interesting if McCabe gives any money to the club for new players.

It always struck me as strange that on the last day of the season Wigan and Sheff U had to draw. If Wigan had kept their cool that would have happened. Then at the end both managers left the clubs. Strange but I do love a good conspiracy theory!

Hopefully the best 3 fizzy pop clubs will be promoted to the Premiership next year. Another year missing for Sheff U then (only joking)!

[ed_mcl]

Originally Posted by sdu1975

Bottom line WHUFC were guilty and punished. IMO the prem league should have been sued as they assumed that WHUFC were going down anyway and applied the incorrect punishment. I am an Irons fan and as such do not buy into this Tevez kept you up. Over the last part of the season the team was more stable as we had other players coming into form (Mark Noble) and others back from injury Lucas Neil and Matt Upson to name but to. Why is it inconceivable that another player may have scored instead of Tevez. Some of the losses where Tevez played may have become draws as he was carried for many of the games he played. Not many of his goals where spectacular just good finishes which a bread and butter striker could have scored.

Lets be honest when we signed the two boys didn't everyone smell a rat and will Man U really sign him. I doubt it as far to much baggage

Sheff U went down as they were not good enough. Of course I could mention the gentlemens agreement between Sheff U and Watford regarding a former player, but I shan't.

Fulham and Leeds both have greedy media hungry chairmen (ala McCabe) and of course Warnock loves the spotlight but he may want to concentrate on his day job first.

Sheff U have their money. Any loss of earnings or additional payments they would have made to other clubs or their own players is now down to them. It will be interesting if McCabe gives any money to the club for new players.

It always struck me as strange that on the last day of the season Wigan and Sheff U had to draw. If Wigan had kept their cool that would have happened. Then at the end both managers left the clubs. Strange but I do love a good conspiracy theory!

Hopefully the best 3 fizzy pop clubs will be promoted to the Premiership next year. Another year missing for Sheff U then (only joking)!

West Ham weren't punished by the PL for lying to them when they registered Tevez again and claimed to have sole ownership of him when they didn't. For this alone West Ham should have been severely punished and ultimately relegated, but the jobsworths at the PL tried to pretend that it didn't happen.

Lying to the PL and fabricating official documentation should have resulted in a points deduction. West Ham played Tevez knowing fine well they shouldn't have, you can argue that some other player might have scored the goals he did and excuse them a "bread and butter finishes" , the fact remains is that he did and Tevez should not have been wearing West Ham colours.

[Marc]

going off on a tangent slightly, everyone always complains that the premier league is a joke as only 4 teams can ever win it, but i think it's more of a joke the other end with the yoyo effect of some teams.

I'm not blaming the teams exactly (Derby, WBA, Sheff Utd and Crystal Palace (about 100 times) but the problem as i see it, is that when a team gets relegated, they use their parachute payment to buy a few old journeymen who can't cut it in the premier league but can score for fun in the championship, causing them to get promoted again due to the unbalanced resources, but then these journeymen fail to impress in the premier league and it's straight back down again for that side, only for them to repeat the same thing again in the future, or every bloody year like palace did.

I actually think relegation from the premier league should include a 1 year exclusion from promotion, to force teams to a) get their finances in order and b) stablise and build a side who can challenge properly, either that or get rid of the parachute payment entirely so that all the teams in the league have a fair shot at the title.

[sdu1975]

Originally Posted by ed_mcl

West Ham weren't punished by the PL for lying to them when they registered Tevez again and claimed to have sole ownership of him when they didn't. For this alone West Ham should have been severely punished and ultimately relegated, but the jobsworths at the PL tried to pretend that it didn't happen.

Lying to the PL and fabricating official documentation should have resulted in a points deduction. West Ham played Tevez knowing fine well they shouldn't have, you can argue that some other player might have scored the goals he did and excuse them a "bread and butter finishes" , the fact remains is that he did and Tevez should not have been wearing West Ham colours.

Not sure the above was ever proved (although i'm not saying it is incorrect). Hence the following action by Sheff U being unsuccessful until the final legal action which findings was based on 'probabilities and he said she said'. I agree things were not done correctly but the PL are accountable here and that is my point which you have touched on.

If you look at his finishes they were goals I believe Bobby and Marlon could have scored had they been playing. But the whole point is it is an opinion as was the final verdict which went against us. You should have seen the chances he missed.

Points should have been deducted and Tevez and Masch shipped off home as this should have been the correct punishment which I don't dispute. Who knows if the action was done sooner we may still have stayed up anyway

[Steven]

Sheffield United went down because they lacked players with Tevez's heart for the fight and Warnock was in charge

People say "... and Mascherano", but of course the now Argentine captain never featured for West Ham in all but a handful of appearances

I can somehow see the legal argument for Sheffield United gaining compensation. But I still have a wry smile at Warnock claiming he would not have resigned
Of course West Ham's legal representatives will now be examining furiously the limit of possible claims. I can quite easily see how ex-Sheff Utd players have a claim, but West Ham will really be in trouble in other PL sides can get in on the action

[dazza1011]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Sheffield United went down because they lacked players with Tevez's heart for the fight and Warnock was in charge

as has been quoted Tevez never had the heart for the fight Tevez had the heart to try and impress for a couple of games in order to get a big money move to a big club ( Man Utd ).

At the end of all this the people who should walk the plank are the WH board ( for trying to hide the facts and lying ) and the PL board if they had done the right thing and docked WH points ( which they said would be unfair on the fans ) then hardly any of this would have come out as it is WH are now being looked at for lying to the FA which could include further punishment.

The West Ham Board have dragged the clubs name through the mud and they will always be tarnished.

as for Kevin McCabe being a media hungry chairman can anyone (apart from during this saga ) remember the last time McCabe was in the news not like Al Fayed and Bates who are constantly banging on about something.

[Steven]

Yeah that Tevez is so rubbish for Man Utd(!)

[dazza1011]

Originally Posted by LFC_SL

Yeah that Tevez is so rubbish for Man Utd(!)

i think youve misunderstood my post

What im trying to say is that he didnt really try that hard when playing for West Ham if he did he would have featured in every match but as mentioned in an earlier post he didnt really light up the team and was just at West Ham to put him in the shop window

[kopchoir]

Originally Posted by dazza1011

i think youve misunderstood my post

What im trying to say is that he didnt really try that hard when playing for West Ham if he did he would have featured in every match but as mentioned in an earlier post he didnt really light up the team and was just at West Ham to put him in the shop window

totally agree
besides you shouldn`t take anything lfc sl says about football seriously, i have been trying for ages to teach him about the beautifull game but alas no avail

[Hi-Def]

No, weren't good enough over 38 games so went down. I also seem to remember by the time tevez actually started scoring his position was known to the PL and they allowed him to carry on playing?

but always makes me wonder why WHU didn't play Mascherano 7 games(5 starts and 2 subs) in all comps in 6 months was a joke.

[dazza1011]

Originally Posted by Hi-Def

No, weren't good enough over 38 games so went down. .

i agree we weren't good enough over 38 games but at least we weren't good enough with legally registered players.

Originally Posted by Hi-Def

I also seem to remember by the time tevez actually started scoring his position was known to the PL and they allowed him to carry on playing?

Thats because they told the PL that they had torn up the contract with Kia Joorbian but hadn't.

As revealed by Joorabchian's highly respected solicitor, Graham Shear, during an independent tribunal chaired by Lord Griffiths last year.

Shear said even as Duxbury was telling the Premier League the third party arrangement had been ripped up, he was giving Shear 'oral cuddles' to reassure him that it was still in place.

[kopchoir]

Originally Posted by dazza1011

, he was giving Shear 'oral cuddles' to reassure

wizard sleave style

Im actually siding more with you daz after your rationale behind the debacle