Jump to content

Recommended Posts

To go back to the lawyer West Ham are going to need, surely:


http://www.xenix.ch/_img/1_programm/movie/1077.jpg


But back to the football. Aresenal were imperious last night. The commentators on 5live ran out of superlatives. No wonder Wenger never buys anyone these days. He can just bide his time.


And as a Leeds fan:


a) Through to the next round after beating Jeff "Hartlepool" Stelling last night. Give us a big team at home in the next round please. Except Arsenal.

b) As much as it pains me to say it, my sympathies do rest with the Blades on the whole Tevez issue. But it'll never go anywhere.

We did a wrong un and we were fined.

Maybe we should have been docked points, maybe not, but if you're going to get compensation from anyone for that decision go to the FA, don't blame west ham.


And to say that Tevez kept us up is absolutely ridiculous and an insult to the rest of the team, Green's excellent goalkeeping for instance; especially as the blades happily managed to bag 3 points off a west ham team with Tevez in it.

I'm bored of the whole thing so I'll shut up, we've had a fire sale in preparation for this, which obviously if we go down as a result of, I think a counter-compensation suit may be in the offing...ad infinitum....

I confidently expect a Rotherham v Leeds tie to emerge from the draw! A battle between the two points-deduction giants, so clearly an all-northern tie :))


Rotherham of course are now the only Sheffield side (their home ground this season is the Don Valley Stadium) left in the competition.


Noone will want Arsenal! My heart sank the moment I saw the 3rd Round draw, but 6-0 is a bit much: more goals shipped last night than in 7 league games this season. What a magician of a manager Wenger is...

I remember writing a little something on here last year about Peter Scudamore during the Tevez - West Ham/Sheffield Utd affair and today I've taken this article from today's Daily Mirror as I think it's worth reprinting here and pretty much sums up how I feel about the whole sorry affair and him in particular.


Opinion: Premier League chief Richard Scudamore must resign over Carlos Tevez farce

By Oliver Holt 24/09/2008


So Sheffield United will get some money as a belated apology for the injustice that was visited upon them.


And West Ham, who have already been fined once for the sins of a previous regime, will be fined again.


But the real culprit, the man who presided over this shameful episode in English football history, will get away scot free.


Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore was swanning around Valhalla at the weekend like a man without a care in the world.


But if he had any dignity, he would resign today over the decision no fan independent tribunal to rule against West Ham in the Carlos Tevez affair and order them to pay compensation to the Blades.


The decision is an indictment of everything Scudamore has let the Premier League become.


It's a damning comment on the way the league under his stewardship has slid rapidly into something approaching anarchy, a crazed free-for-all where money does all the talking.


It's a blessed condemnation of Scudamore's gut - wrenching subservience to men like former Manchester City owner Thaks in Shinawatra, who have dragged the reputation of English football into the gutter.


Shinawatra is a fugitive from the law now but Scudamore ignored all the warnings about him when he first took over at Eastlands and buddied up to him as best he could.


The Premier League boss might be a bright negotiator but he has also revealed himself as spectacularly gullible. His organisation misjudged the West Ham situation by trusting them over the registration of Tevez when they should have been all over the case like forensic scientists.


Scudamore misjudged Shinawatra, too, aggressively defending him when there were plenty of people pointing out that his human rights record in Thailand left a lot to be desired.


He misjudged public reaction to his desperation to wring even more money out of English football with plans to prostitute it around the world for a farcical 39th game that would have destroyed the integrity of the Premier League.


And he misjudged the mood of a nation that is growing increasingly concerned at the way he is presiding over the colonisation of our football by the world's super rich.


This isn't the first time I've called for Scudamore to resign and, if his recent track record of colossal mismanagement is anything to go by, it probably won't be the last.


But Scudamore doesn't do accountability. Not unless it's to one of the billionaire Premier League owners who wave their wads in his face and watch him scurry to do their bidding.


Still, it's worth remembering for a moment just hows cathing, patronising and downright bloody arrogant he was when he ridiculed Sheffield United's chances of winning some sort of redress after their relegation from the Premier League in May 2007.


Looking back on it now, Scudamore's attitude to the club's protests and his scorn for their plight was the first sign that he was allowing the top tier of English football to become a free-for-all.


It was the moment when a league that many admired for the progress it had made morphed into the Greed is Good League, where money talks, might is right and the little clubs go to the wall.


It was the moment when Scudamore lost his golden touch, when eagerness to serve his masters' greed blurred his vision of right and wrong in football.


Yesterday's tribunal decision should have been all the confirmation needed that Scudamore has become a liability and an embarrassment.


But the Premier League has no shame any more and Scudamore has got fresh billionaire flesh to press and new millions to make.


Scudamore has become a liability and an embarrassment. But the Premier League has no shame any more.

That article is quite disgraceful and totally unworthy of what used to be a quality newspaper. The "journalist" seems to be aiming his buckshot wildly at any or every target he can think of, including several red herrings, if I might wildly mix the metaphor. Of course Tony Cascarino writing in the same newspaper was quite enethusiastic in his support of the decision reached by the three-man, independent commission, which is about par for the course for the Press these days - something for everyone!


Had to laugh at the implication that Steve Kabba is another Carlos Tevez though....

I'll let you have shooting red herrings in a barrel, it works.


Regardless of journalistic quality it still stands for me that, as I said before, it was a ridiculous decision that essentially denigrates the contribution of the rest of the team across a whole season and that the whole saga from the initial speculation, to their dodgy signing, to Mascherano's malign influence unsettling the team (and I was saying that loooong before the winning streak) and caused such a bad run that put us in the relegation fight.


I say it again, blame the FA, but to grant compensation on the perceived influence of one player (who was present for 8 straight defeats) is poppycock.

I'm bound to be wrong here but I may as well wade in. Is this fine (and I believe there is no way that that sort of money will change hands and I think the whole thing will disappear in quiet farce) awarded on the basis of the fact the Tevez shouldn't have been playing, not that he had an undue influence on the outcome of the relgation battle?


I thought they were treating it like playing an inelligble player or having an extra player on the pitch i.e. it's not the player themselves but the unfiar advantage gained. Is this not the legal equivalent of the player interferring with play in an offside decision?

The fine for the infraction was a record breaking 5 million. This is the compensation due to Sheffield Utd due to an ineligible Tevez (though FA gave him permission to play those last games) being the difference between their Premiership survival and relegation, ?30 million being the perceived loss of earnings as a result of the latter (McCabe was after ?50m).

The so-called "record-breaking" fine of ?5.5million imposed on West Ham was of course as meaningful as fining Man Utd ?25000 for having 6 players yellow-carded in one game - which is to say no punishment at all given the context. It is true we would not have been relegated had we drawn and not lost that final game against Wigan. But had that come to pass then it would have been Wigan seeking and presumably being awarded the compensation: and if not Wigan then Fulham or whoever. It makes no difference to West Ham - this reckoning was always coming.


Sheffield United are entitled to seek compensation because their position is analogous to that of the crime victim sueing the perpetrator for compensation even though the state has already imposed its own punishment by way of a fine or whatever. West Ham agreed to go to arbitration and now refuse to accept the outcome. ?30million sounds a lot but of course given the choice at the end of a season of staying in the Premiership or paying this sum every club would be reaching for its cheque book


And it was not just that last game against Man Utd where Tevez shone and made a diffence - it was severeal goals scored over the last 8 games or so. West Ham are seeking to rewrite history by downplaying how crucial a difference he made and how it was all down to team effort: yeah right.

"the so-called "record-breaking" fine of ?5.5million imposed on West Ham was of course as meaningful as fining Man Utd ?25000 for having 6 players yellow-carded in one game"


As a Blades fan you really should know better than to come out with nonsense like that.


We are by no means a wealthy team, though we used to be one of the best at balancing the books, at least prior to the ground expansion followed by the drop. Many of today's high profile players are in other teams thanks to that fire sale; we can't even hold on to the likes of Zamora these days (whom I was genuinely sorry to see go, have a lot of time for the boy).


I actually do have a great deal of sympathy for your position Simon (funny how we take it all so personally 'my team' 'your position'), but that's a little disingenuous.

God knows what's happened to the supposed ?30 million (which isn't a lump sum but a sort of estimate at maintained revenues over the course of a season) but all our ground debt was calculated against maintaining that income prior to our two year premiership hiatus, and I suspect we have very little to show for it bar a slight dent in our debts.


A ?30 million cash payment could easily send us the way of Leeds.

You may think as a Spurs fan I could be licking my lips at the prospect of playing away to Portsmouth on Sunday who have shipped ten goals in two games. I'm not. I'm fearing a backlash, especially with the amount of ex-Spurs players in their ranks who may feel they have something to prove.

Just because we've won a couple games recently (but not in the league yet) doesn't mean we're anywhere near out of the shit yet. We have a very long way to go but I'm hoping the win against Newcastle last night will have given us the confidence to improve our form in the Premiership and start moving up the table.

>>As a Blades fan you really should know better than to come out with nonsense like that.


We are by no means a wealthy team,<<


Sorry I did not mean to imply that WHU was a wealthy club a la Merde Utd. I just meant the ?5.5million fine was merely a slap on the wrists compared to the punishment that had been widely expected to be imposed on the club by almost everyone, and one that could relatively easily be absorbed by the fact of its Premiership membership being preserved.

SimonM Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >>As a Blades fan you really should know better

> than to come out with nonsense like that.

>

> We are by no means a wealthy team,

> Sorry I did not mean to imply that WHU was a

> wealthy club a la Merde Utd. I just meant the

> ?5.5million fine was merely a slap on the wrists

> compared to the punishment that had been widely

> expected to be imposed on the club by almost

> everyone, and one that could relatively easily be

> absorbed by the fact of its Premiership membership

> being preserved.


Simon, I am glad WHU shafted you by playing Tevez.


Yours a 'Merde Utd' fan.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • These have reduced over the years, are "perfect" lives Round Robins being replaced by "perfect" lives Instagram posts where we see all year round how people portray their perfect lives ?    The point of this thread is that for the last few years, due to issues at the mail offices, we had delays to post over Christmas. Not really been flagged as an issue this year but I am still betting on the odd card, posted well before Christmas, arriving late January. 
    • Two subjects here.  Xmas cards,  We receive and send less of them.  One reason is that the cost of postage - although interestingly not as much as I thought say compared to 10 years ago (a little more than inflation).  Fun fact when inflation was double digits in the 70s cost of postage almost doubled in one year.  Postage is not a good indication of general inflation fluctuating a fair bit.  The huge rise in international postage that for a 20g Christmas card to Europe (no longer a 20g price, now have to do up to 100g), or a cheapskate 10g card to the 'States (again have to go up to the 100g price) , both around a quid in 2015, and now has more than doubled in real terms.  Cards exchanged with the US last year were arriving in the New Year.  Funnily enough they came much quicker this year.  So all my cards abroad were by email this year. The other reason we send less cards is that it was once a good opportunity to keep in touch with news.  I still personalise many cards with a news and for some a letter, and am a bit grumpy when I get a single line back,  Or worse a round robin about their perfect lives and families.  But most of us now communicate I expect primarily by WhatApp, email, FB etc.  No need for lightweight airmail envelope and paper in one.    The other subject is the mail as a whole. Privitisation appears to have done it no favours and the opening up of competition with restrictions on competing for parcel post with the new entrants.  Clearly unless you do special delivery there is a good chance that first class will not be delivered in a day as was expected in the past.   Should we have kept a public owned service subsidised by the tax payer?  You could also question how much lead on innovation was lost following the hiving off of the national telecommunications and mail network.
    • Why have I got a feeling there was also a connection with the beehive in Brixton on that road next to the gym
    • Ah, thanks,  it all comes flooding back. I've actually been to the Hastings shop, I'd forgotten all about it, along with her name! Didn't she (in between?)  take over what  was then The Magnolia, previously The Magdala, now The Lordship, with her then partner? Or is that some figment of my imagination?  In fact, didn't they transform it from The Magdala (much missed) to The Magnolia? With flowery wallpaper covering the front of the bar? Which reminds me of the pub's brief period after The Magnolia  as the ill-conceived and ill-fated The Patch.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...