What is the point of a record fine? For richer clubs it is like small change - meaning they can do it again and again; a small club, it could financially ruin them. Punishments are supposed to be consistent and hurt so that you don't do it again. Points deduction hits you the same whether you are a rich, big club like Chelski or a small, family club like Charlton. West Ham just having a fine is a travesty and just lays bare the quesstionable ethics of the FA, who not so long ago gave one of our players an EXTRA match ban just for APPEALING a questionable red card!
He and the other feller have always been registered to West Ham ever since August 31st. so this is not the issue.
The point is that they have been allowed to change their contracts, paperwork and the third party deals outside of the window - but then clubs can turn a loan deal into permanent outside of a window.
The real scandal is that if West Ham had declared all of the paperwork then the registration would NOT have been allowed as they would not have had time on deadline day to change it to remove the third party control. look at the delay when Liverpool signed Mascherano.
Even worse than this West Ham decided at the time that to avoid this risk of delay they would simply hide the third party contracts which are clearly designed to make a large transfer profit for an agent not the original club nor West Ham.
All this at a time when the FA are trying to clean up and clarify the role of agents.
So we (Charlton Wigan, Fulham etc.) should go above the premier league to the FA, UEFA and the sports arbitration court to point out that every other club caught out on player registrations and contracts are deducted points. as someone pointed out going to the UK courts is probably a waste of time and would not get resolution before next season.
I realise that son of selhurst won't know much about the premier league since they only visit one year in ten but £5m is not a lot when the play off final is being touted as the 60m game especially when the sentence was dished out 24 hours before the Wigan game.
I've never had anything against West Ham before (except when they loaned us Mike Small and nicked Defoe) but personally I think automatic relegation (forget how many points to take off) is appropriate for this kind of institutional corruption.
[quote][cite]Posted By: son of selhurst[/cite][quote][cite]Posted By: PeanutsMolloy[/cite]It could be argued that a record fine of 5.5million is not lenient.[/quote]
Only by a moron[/quote]
Nice well thought out response. But West Ham would argue that a record fine is itself a ground breaking punishment.
One thing that does not make sense is that West Ham were told they could not play Tevez against Wigan unless he was registered correctly, which suggest's he was not West Ham's player. So by sorting out his registration surely that means West Ham signed Tevez outside the transfer window.[/quote]
If West Ham survive relegation then a £5.5m fine is extremely lenient. The team that finishes in last spot next season will scoop £27m in prize money, say West Ham finish in mid league and make ca £35-40m, so £5.5m is nothing, factor in also the money they'll get more money from TV generally, sponsorship, shirt sales, overseas TV rights etc. If they do get relegated then it looks pretty hefty - around half of the parachute payment, but then they deliberately broke the rules.
The EPL have made two blunders here - they have opened themselves up to legal action that could drag on and on through the summer, meaning that when the new season kicks off we still may not know who is relegated (the Dowie/Jordan case is still to come to court). Second, they've set a precedent. If another club signs a player on a dodgy contract or does something to incur a penalty, then what do the EPL do? If they dock points then they open themselves to charges of inconsistency, if they don't it'll look like a cave-in.
The best thing the EPL can hope for is for Bolton and/or Man U to beat West Ham and send them down, no legal action will be necessary and then they need to amend the code making a deduction of x points mandatory for signing players on dodgy contracts and then lying about it so there are no further misunderstandings. Right now I'm in two minds about West Ham going down. Keeping them in the EPL benefits Charlton as I reckon they'll be a major force in the CCC, and the weaker the CCC is the better our chances are next season. On the other hand for the good of the game and for sport's sake generally they cheated to gain an unfair advantage on the pitch, signing two players they otherwise could not have afforded and because of that they picked up points they otherwise might not have gained - the penalty for that should be a points deduction, not a fine. That means I hope they go down and that the penalty/fine stands.
Can I just make it clear that I do not think that West Ham have recieved the correct punishment at all, I was mostly making the point that they will point to the fine and say "how much is enough then??"
Of course the only sanction that really hurts prem clubs is points and in truth I think they should have been relegated, the football league didn't muck around when it was Swindon and although this is a different body handling the case the punishment does not fit the crime.
Seriously Red, it matters not wether Palace are in the prem or not , a torquay fan could tell you this has been badly handled. So don't be a typical premiership introvert who does not realise there is life outside the prem......
Son of Selhurst - couldn't pass by an opportunity to throw one in your direction and will look forward to next season whichever division we're in - I have always kept an eye on the championship as I have not forgotten the days when we were a yo-yo club.
BFR - I know what you say about making our push for promotion as easy as possible but this goes to the heart of the whole competition. Whether we finish in the top two or top six and playoffs mainly depends upon who goes and who comes in as I think Pardew has been there before and knows how to get promoted. What I mean is that over 46 games, with our relative financial clout we should be OK similar to the last time we went down.
Back to the West Ham thing i think that all of the affected clubs should initiate action BEFORE the last game if possible so that it reduces the risk of allegations of sour grapes - I think that the Premier League will be more likely to reconsider if they are dealing eith five or six clubs rather than just one who has lost out.
[quote][cite]Posted By: son of selhurst[/cite] "how much is enough then??"[/quote]
Answer - no amount is enough. WHU should have had a points deduction end of - simple and quote from the hearing minutes "The Rules of the FAPL allow us to penalise a club by deducting points. That is a course that we consider would normally follow from such a breach of these Rules"
It is an absolute load of b0110ck$ that WHU were let off so lightly.
It's going to get very messy this and the clubs seeking action are going to have to prove that Premier League failed to follow there own rules in handing out a fine rather than a points deduction.
Either way I see a few Lawyers making a few quid and nothing changing in terms of who goes or should go down.
unfortunately the "rules" are flexible for the punishment !
but when you compare it to say 'Boro being deducted their 3 points and subsequently relegated for not playing a fixture when scheduled, then WHU's punishment for being blatently corrupt, is by any reasonable interpretation leanient - the hearing got WHU's punishment all wrong.
Please see the attached and make your own mind up about WHU's dishonesty - if they do not get relegated because of this, then any team in the future can cheat the PL rules and expect to only have a meaningless fine imposed on them http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2067189,00.html
This entire mess is the fault of The premiership League. If they thought there was a problem, they should have queried the "signings" months ago. The whole world knew the signings were 'unusual' except The league?????? Yea right!!!
I think West Ham were unjustly punished. They didnt lie about the contracts. Even the press had details.
There is no way an appeal will result in deducted points. I suspect a 'behind closed doors' deal was done by the lawyers of West Ham and The league, that they would have a fine but no points deducted because if West Ham ever took the League to court, the League would be shown to be the complete bunch of bozo's that everyone knows they are.
It's just sour grapes from the 3 clubs. At the end of the day, did West Ham actually benefit from the 2 signings? No. Actually the reverse is true. West Hams problems started with the signings. Maybe they should appeal to try to get some points added to ensure they stay up? lol
Shadow are you serious? Did W Ham benefit? Tevez has been their player of the season by a country mile. They would already be relegated if he had not played for them illegally all season.
West Ham intentionally concealed aspects of the contracts for one major reason.
It was the last day of the summer transfer window, and because it would take time to sort out the complicatons of 3rd party ownership, the transfers could not otherwise be completed in time before the midnight deadline.
Accordingly, West Ham intentionally concealed aspects of the players' contracts to ensure the midnight deadline was met.
If the deadline hadn't been met, then the players would not have been eligible to play under Premier League/FA rules.
Tevez is their player of the season and would not have been available to play until the January transfer window.
West Ham knowingly and deliberately sought to gain an unfair advantage in competitive games.
Charlton, Fulham, Wigan and Sheff Utd have every reason to ensure the punishment actually fits the crime.
But it is in the interests of every Premier League club - indeed throughout football - that West Ham are not seen in most peoples eyes, 'to have got away with it'.
Comments
The point is that they have been allowed to change their contracts, paperwork and the third party deals outside of the window - but then clubs can turn a loan deal into permanent outside of a window.
The real scandal is that if West Ham had declared all of the paperwork then the registration would NOT have been allowed as they would not have had time on deadline day to change it to remove the third party control. look at the delay when Liverpool signed Mascherano.
Even worse than this West Ham decided at the time that to avoid this risk of delay they would simply hide the third party contracts which are clearly designed to make a large transfer profit for an agent not the original club nor West Ham.
All this at a time when the FA are trying to clean up and clarify the role of agents.
So we (Charlton Wigan, Fulham etc.) should go above the premier league to the FA, UEFA and the sports arbitration court to point out that every other club caught out on player registrations and contracts are deducted points. as someone pointed out going to the UK courts is probably a waste of time and would not get resolution before next season.
I realise that son of selhurst won't know much about the premier league since they only visit one year in ten but £5m is not a lot when the play off final is being touted as the 60m game especially when the sentence was dished out 24 hours before the Wigan game.
I've never had anything against West Ham before (except when they loaned us Mike Small and nicked Defoe) but personally I think automatic relegation (forget how many points to take off) is appropriate for this kind of institutional corruption.
Only by a moron[/quote]
Nice well thought out response. But West Ham would argue that a record fine is itself a ground breaking punishment.
One thing that does not make sense is that West Ham were told they could not play Tevez against Wigan unless he was registered correctly, which suggest's he was not West Ham's player. So by sorting out his registration surely that means West Ham signed Tevez outside the transfer window.[/quote]
If West Ham survive relegation then a £5.5m fine is extremely lenient. The team that finishes in last spot next season will scoop £27m in prize money, say West Ham finish in mid league and make ca £35-40m, so £5.5m is nothing, factor in also the money they'll get more money from TV generally, sponsorship, shirt sales, overseas TV rights etc. If they do get relegated then it looks pretty hefty - around half of the parachute payment, but then they deliberately broke the rules.
The EPL have made two blunders here - they have opened themselves up to legal action that could drag on and on through the summer, meaning that when the new season kicks off we still may not know who is relegated (the Dowie/Jordan case is still to come to court). Second, they've set a precedent. If another club signs a player on a dodgy contract or does something to incur a penalty, then what do the EPL do? If they dock points then they open themselves to charges of inconsistency, if they don't it'll look like a cave-in.
The best thing the EPL can hope for is for Bolton and/or Man U to beat West Ham and send them down, no legal action will be necessary and then they need to amend the code making a deduction of x points mandatory for signing players on dodgy contracts and then lying about it so there are no further misunderstandings. Right now I'm in two minds about West Ham going down. Keeping them in the EPL benefits Charlton as I reckon they'll be a major force in the CCC, and the weaker the CCC is the better our chances are next season. On the other hand for the good of the game and for sport's sake generally they cheated to gain an unfair advantage on the pitch, signing two players they otherwise could not have afforded and because of that they picked up points they otherwise might not have gained - the penalty for that should be a points deduction, not a fine. That means I hope they go down and that the penalty/fine stands.
Of course the only sanction that really hurts prem clubs is points and in truth I think they should have been relegated, the football league didn't muck around when it was Swindon and although this is a different body handling the case the punishment does not fit the crime.
Seriously Red, it matters not wether Palace are in the prem or not , a torquay fan could tell you this has been badly handled. So don't be a typical premiership introvert who does not realise there is life outside the prem......
BFR - I know what you say about making our push for promotion as easy as possible but this goes to the heart of the whole competition. Whether we finish in the top two or top six and playoffs mainly depends upon who goes and who comes in as I think Pardew has been there before and knows how to get promoted. What I mean is that over 46 games, with our relative financial clout we should be OK similar to the last time we went down.
Back to the West Ham thing i think that all of the affected clubs should initiate action BEFORE the last game if possible so that it reduces the risk of allegations of sour grapes - I think that the Premier League will be more likely to reconsider if they are dealing eith five or six clubs rather than just one who has lost out.
Answer - no amount is enough. WHU should have had a points deduction end of - simple
and quote from the hearing minutes "The Rules of the FAPL allow us to penalise a club by deducting points. That is a course that we consider would normally follow from such a breach of these Rules"
It is an absolute load of b0110ck$ that WHU were let off so lightly.
Either way I see a few Lawyers making a few quid and nothing changing in terms of who goes or should go down.
but when you compare it to say 'Boro being deducted their 3 points and subsequently relegated for not playing a fixture when scheduled, then WHU's punishment for being blatently corrupt, is by any reasonable interpretation leanient - the hearing got WHU's punishment all wrong.
Please see the attached and make your own mind up about WHU's dishonesty - if they do not get relegated because of this, then any team in the future can cheat the PL rules and expect to only have a meaningless fine imposed on them
http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2067189,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/6624305.stm
I think West Ham were unjustly punished. They didnt lie about the contracts. Even the press had details.
There is no way an appeal will result in deducted points. I suspect a 'behind closed doors' deal was done by the lawyers of West Ham and The league, that they would have a fine but no points deducted because if West Ham ever took the League to court, the League would be shown to be the complete bunch of bozo's that everyone knows they are.
It's just sour grapes from the 3 clubs. At the end of the day, did West Ham actually benefit from the 2 signings? No. Actually the reverse is true. West Hams problems started with the signings. Maybe they should appeal to try to get some points added to ensure they stay up? lol
Shadow
It was the last day of the summer transfer window, and because it would take time to sort out the complicatons of 3rd party ownership, the transfers could not otherwise be completed in time before the midnight deadline.
Accordingly, West Ham intentionally concealed aspects of the players' contracts to ensure the midnight deadline was met.
If the deadline hadn't been met, then the players would not have been eligible to play under Premier League/FA rules.
Tevez is their player of the season and would not have been available to play until the January transfer window.
West Ham knowingly and deliberately sought to gain an unfair advantage in competitive games.
Charlton, Fulham, Wigan and Sheff Utd have every reason to ensure the punishment actually fits the crime.
But it is in the interests of every Premier League club - indeed throughout football - that West Ham are not seen in most peoples eyes, 'to have got away with it'.