Ultra Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 From the BBC.. Former Sheffield United manager Neil Warnock is considering suing West Ham now that the two clubs have concluded their legal dispute over Carlos Tevez. The Blades agreed a settlement with the Hammers on Monday after claiming compensation for the part Tevez played in keeping the London club up in 2007. Warnock, whose side went down, told the BBC he would be "seeking legal advice". He added: "We worked so hard that year. The club was going forward. You do feel bitter without a shadow of a doubt." BBC Sport understands West Ham have agreed to pay the Blades about £20m in compensation, which will be paid in instalments over a five-year period. And if West Ham are sold within a certain timeframe, a further bond of £5m will be payable to Sheffield United. Warnock, now boss of Crystal Palace, said he could think about his own position now that the clubs have sorted their issues. "It's just been a matter of finalising all those details first before you think about your personal losses," he told Radio 5 Live. In April 2007, West Ham were fined £5.5m by the Premier League for breaking rules over third-party agreements when taking striker Tevez and fellow Argentine Javier Mascherano to Upton Park. But they were not docked points and, ultimately, went on to ensure their Premier League survival, with Tevez playing a key part with his goals, including three in the last two games. Warnock spent seven-and-a-half years as Blades manager before resigning three days after they were relegated on the last day of the 2007 season following a defeat at home by Wigan. As the Blades were losing that day, Tevez scored West Ham's winner at Manchester United - the club the forward went on to join. Players from the Sheffield United team that were relegated also intend to pursue their compensation claim. "We understand, but have not been informed officially, that the club's dispute with West Ham has been settled," Chris Farnell, the lawyer representing the players, told The Times newspaper. "However, the players' claim will continue independently. We have made correspondence with West Ham's lawyers as recently as the end of last week." However, West Ham have told BBC Sport that they have not received a claim from the players. Much as Wazzock likes a good whinge, on this occasion he actually has a reasonable case. The FA should have applied the same rule for ineligible players - a points deduction - to the hammers as it does against any other team who field ineligible players. No matter how much compensation West Ham pay out, the fact is they effectively stole the blunts' place in the top flight. Unless and until they suffer the fate of relegation which should have befallen them two years ago, the bitterness will continue.
Kilworthfox Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 The F.A have again showed that they are useless! They should have deducted points from West Ham which would have saved all this crap. They just did not want to relegate West Ham for the actions of a former Board. Disgrace, The F.A caused this problem why doesn't everyone sue them?
Alexikokopops Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 The F.A have again showed that they are useless! They should have deducted points from West Ham which would have saved all this crap. They just did not want to relegate West Ham for the actions of a former Board.Disgrace, The F.A caused this problem why doesn't everyone sue them? Given that it was the Premier League that chose the fine over the points deduction it would be a bit harsh to sue the F.A.
Kilworthfox Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Given that it was the Premier League that chose the fine over the points deduction it would be a bit harsh to sue the F.A. My bad! The Premier League....... bigger cretins than the F.A
Ultra Posted 17 March 2009 Author Posted 17 March 2009 Given that it was the Premier League that chose the fine over the points deduction it would be a bit harsh to sue the F.A. Ultimately the FA, NOT the Premier League, are the supreme governing body in English football. It could have ensured that the rules were properly followed, but chose not to.
Alexikokopops Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Ultimately the FA, NOT the Premier League, are the supreme governing body in English football.It could have ensured that the rules were properly followed, but chose not to. I'm really not sure what point you're trying to make here. You can hardly blame the FA for not keeping a close eye on the way West Ham was run to "ensure the rules were properly followed". The whole point of teh Premier League Corporation is to govern the day-to-day running of the clubs. If the FA was doing that it would render the whole Premier League as a corporation redundant.
Tilley Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Oh for God sake. West Ham got more points than Sheffield United, therefore West Ham stayed up. Fuck off Sheffield United & fuck off Warnock.
LeeCovFox Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Oh for God sake.West Ham got more points than Sheffield United, therefore West Ham stayed up. Fuck off Sheffield United & fuck off Warnock. They got more points because they cheated.
Samilktray Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 This is well boring now. Its like saying West Ham staying up wasnt a team effort, which is harsh.
Finnegan Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Disagree that Warnock has a point. He didn't build a side he bought a load of crap and they deserved to be relegated. He wasn't working towards anything, he went up and struggled. Yes West Ham had an awful season but their playerbase was largely underperforming. I'm not using that as justification for their alleged cheating to stay up and I'm glad Sheff Utd won their case. But Warnock too? fook off you bitter old twat. I don't care how many people think he's entertaining - he's a horrible, kniving old tit and he's bad for the game. And he wants to accuse people of cheating? Ho ho, Mr. Warnock, pulling your players off as "injured" to get a game you're losing called off? That's perfectly ethical practice. Go burn with AIDS.
Lord Nibblington Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 And had Neil Warnock managed to get his team to draw or win their last game of the season at home to a woefully out of form Wigan side, they would have stayed up. But yeah. It was West Ham cheating that sent them down.
Shrenchel Posted 17 March 2009 Posted 17 March 2009 Ken Bates is also looking likley to sue (suprise, suprise) http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17032009/1/b...tion-claim.html Several Sheffield United players said be thinking about taking legal action as well.
Ultra Posted 18 March 2009 Author Posted 18 March 2009 Ken Bates is also looking likley to sue (suprise, suprise)http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17032009/1/b...tion-claim.html Several Sheffield United players said be thinking about taking legal action as well. As many as TWENTY, according to Sky, including that thuggish git Chris Morgan... Given his recent misdemeanours, he should perhaps know better than to involve learned friends...
Edmund Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 Ken Bates is also looking likley to sue (suprise, suprise)http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17032009/1/b...tion-claim.html Several Sheffield United players said be thinking about taking legal action as well. One of the comments on that site Next it will be the burger vans at bramell lane claiming for loss of income!
Darkzzz_ Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 I would sue the F.A and the Premier League, both clueless idiots. Warnock more than likely has a case, he could have been getting top flight wages had they stayed up so he would have had a pay rise and would have more than likely established himself as a PL manager. Who knows? Whilst I say that, I would rather the whole thing be put to bed now, it has dragged on and on with no sign of it being over just yet!
Brainy Posted 18 March 2009 Posted 18 March 2009 How can you receive compensation for not being a good enough manager? I heard yesterday that the WHU team without Tevez averaged 1.2 pts per game, and the WHU team with Tevez in averaged 1.0 pts per game. No idea if that makes any real sense, but what i'm trying to say is that over the course of the season West Ham fared better without Tevez than with him.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.