As its based on our story, i have no problem in copying the full article here !!
BTW Kigelia, your article was read by over 1,600 people yesterday alone.
Charlton court failure may set precedent in Tevez case
Matt Scott and Paul Kelso
Tuesday May 15, 2007
The Guardian
Charlton Athletic mounted a failed high court challenge earlier this season which set a precedent that could scupper attempts to take the Premier League to court over the Carlos Tevez affair.
The south-east London club had tried to overturn a judgment by a football disciplinary commission and the high court's ruling will have a direct impact on the efforts of the so-called "gang of four" clubs to contest the failure to penalise West Ham with a points deduction.
The Hammers' case was further strengthened last night when the BBC's Inside Sport programme broadcast details of a letter, dated April 27, which appeared belatedly to resolve the controversial shared-ownership issues in Tevez's contract. The letter, sent to the player, Kia Joorabchian's investment vehicle Media Sport Investment and Just Sport Inc, said: "We hereby notify you that the private agreement (as so amended, varied, modified or replaced) is hereby terminated with immediate effect and shall cease to have any further force or effect."
The Charlton case was brought before Justice Simon in the commercial division of the high court in January. It challenged the Football Association's right to extend the one-match ban handed to Osei Sankofa, for his dismissal against Arsenal to two matches on the grounds that the appeal had been "frivolous".
The judge found that recourse to the courts for actions against sports bodies should be limited. "I would not wish to be taken to decide that the court will never intervene in this type of case," he said. "However, such cases are likely to be wholly exceptional."
The impact of that ruling is likely to be that courts would have to be persuaded of the "wholly exceptional" nature of a challenge to the Tevez case, adding a supplementary first barrier to legal action. Even so Sheffield United, Wigan, Charlton and Fulham do believe they retain a strong case against the Premier League's ruling and are determined to pursue it.
Wigan's owner, Dave Whelan, claimed yesterday that Tevez, who was last night linked with a £30m transfer to Real Madrid, could not have been properly re-registered after West Ham were fined. He said the league had effectively "created a new [transfer] window". Wigan lost 3-0 only 24 hours after the commission judgment ruled that the Premier League could annul Tevez's registration. "I don't think there's any chance of reversing the decision but we still believe that Tevez has been playing illegally," said Whelan.
The four clubs chose not to contact the Premier League yesterday over the steps they will now take, with unconfirmed reports stating that as many as seven Premiership sides harbour serious misgivings about the Tevez judgment, but the league's chief executive, Richard Scudamore, contacted all 20 in an attempt to broker peace. He informed them that he would today send out a letter setting out the Premier League's position and clarifying issues he feels have been "misconstrued". He also stated his intention to expand on previous correspondence, with Whelan and Sheffield United's plc chairman, Kevin McCabe, demanding details of Tevez's new contract.
That is unlikely to satisfy Whelan, whose comments turned against Scudamore personally yesterday. "It's widely accepted that [Scudamore] did a good job on the renegotiation of the [broadcasting agreements]," the Wigan chairman said. "I've always respected him. But, on this one, I want him to be a bit more up front, take responsibility and admit they were wrong. And get the thing put right.
"West Ham should be relegated and they should be relegated in the next fortnight," he said. "£5.5m sounds a lot but it's nothing in terms of what they'll earn in the league. My sympathies lie with Sheffield United because they have been treated very, very badly and the fight to get them reinstated by me, by Fulham, by Charlton and by Middlesbrough continues."
Some of Whelan's attack appears to have been bluster, however, with Middlesbrough's chief executive, Keith Lamb, stating that his club would not be party to action against the league.
[cite]Posted By: Salad Spinner[/cite]Good work Kigelia!
In fairness, it is possible that the journalists also read the judgement against us.
I know for a fact that they have a copy of the judgement.
also this is the second time we have inspired a story by one of the Guardian's. Earlier in the season I put up an article about the FA's drug testing regime, a couples of weeks later one of their guys had a very similar story on the web.
Comments
For some reason my poxy firewall won't let me onto any sports site (other than Charlton Life thankfully!).
:-)
BTW Kigelia, your article was read by over 1,600 people yesterday alone.
Charlton court failure may set precedent in Tevez case
Matt Scott and Paul Kelso
Tuesday May 15, 2007
The Guardian
Charlton Athletic mounted a failed high court challenge earlier this season which set a precedent that could scupper attempts to take the Premier League to court over the Carlos Tevez affair.
The south-east London club had tried to overturn a judgment by a football disciplinary commission and the high court's ruling will have a direct impact on the efforts of the so-called "gang of four" clubs to contest the failure to penalise West Ham with a points deduction.
The Hammers' case was further strengthened last night when the BBC's Inside Sport programme broadcast details of a letter, dated April 27, which appeared belatedly to resolve the controversial shared-ownership issues in Tevez's contract. The letter, sent to the player, Kia Joorabchian's investment vehicle Media Sport Investment and Just Sport Inc, said: "We hereby notify you that the private agreement (as so amended, varied, modified or replaced) is hereby terminated with immediate effect and shall cease to have any further force or effect."
The Charlton case was brought before Justice Simon in the commercial division of the high court in January. It challenged the Football Association's right to extend the one-match ban handed to Osei Sankofa, for his dismissal against Arsenal to two matches on the grounds that the appeal had been "frivolous".
The judge found that recourse to the courts for actions against sports bodies should be limited. "I would not wish to be taken to decide that the court will never intervene in this type of case," he said. "However, such cases are likely to be wholly exceptional."
The impact of that ruling is likely to be that courts would have to be persuaded of the "wholly exceptional" nature of a challenge to the Tevez case, adding a supplementary first barrier to legal action. Even so Sheffield United, Wigan, Charlton and Fulham do believe they retain a strong case against the Premier League's ruling and are determined to pursue it.
Wigan's owner, Dave Whelan, claimed yesterday that Tevez, who was last night linked with a £30m transfer to Real Madrid, could not have been properly re-registered after West Ham were fined. He said the league had effectively "created a new [transfer] window". Wigan lost 3-0 only 24 hours after the commission judgment ruled that the Premier League could annul Tevez's registration. "I don't think there's any chance of reversing the decision but we still believe that Tevez has been playing illegally," said Whelan.
The four clubs chose not to contact the Premier League yesterday over the steps they will now take, with unconfirmed reports stating that as many as seven Premiership sides harbour serious misgivings about the Tevez judgment, but the league's chief executive, Richard Scudamore, contacted all 20 in an attempt to broker peace. He informed them that he would today send out a letter setting out the Premier League's position and clarifying issues he feels have been "misconstrued". He also stated his intention to expand on previous correspondence, with Whelan and Sheffield United's plc chairman, Kevin McCabe, demanding details of Tevez's new contract.
That is unlikely to satisfy Whelan, whose comments turned against Scudamore personally yesterday. "It's widely accepted that [Scudamore] did a good job on the renegotiation of the [broadcasting agreements]," the Wigan chairman said. "I've always respected him. But, on this one, I want him to be a bit more up front, take responsibility and admit they were wrong. And get the thing put right.
"West Ham should be relegated and they should be relegated in the next fortnight," he said. "£5.5m sounds a lot but it's nothing in terms of what they'll earn in the league. My sympathies lie with Sheffield United because they have been treated very, very badly and the fight to get them reinstated by me, by Fulham, by Charlton and by Middlesbrough continues."
Some of Whelan's attack appears to have been bluster, however, with Middlesbrough's chief executive, Keith Lamb, stating that his club would not be party to action against the league.
Nice work Kigelia.
Bloody lazy journalists - could at least have credited you!
In fairness, it is possible that the journalists also read the judgement against us.
I know for a fact that they have a copy of the judgement.
also this is the second time we have inspired a story by one of the Guardian's. Earlier in the season I put up an article about the FA's drug testing regime, a couples of weeks later one of their guys had a very similar story on the web.
Mine
Theirs
Now if only I can get them to pay me.