Sheff U link
It seems they are confident that they wlll be reinstated. It also seems that they think the Prem may have an extra team next season, with West Ham being allowed to stay up.
I have long thought that this is the most likely compromise solution to avoid long and protracted legal wrangling.
If this is the outcome, they should make it four down next season. It would be extremely wrong of them to make it two up next season and as a club we should fight any attempt by them to do that.
Comments
The premierleague's incompetence should not affect the Championship club's chances of going up. Plus they'd lose money via playoffs (unless they done winners up and 2-5 as playoffs)
See how complicated it is already!!!
From a selfish point of view not having either in the CCC next year might make it just a little easier for us to go up but the complications in both divisions (one team not playing every weekend/who has the last game of season off/only 22 home games in the CCC = lose of income for every club/Sky money split 21 ways not 20/4 down or 2 up, etc, etc) are such that no sensible governing body would agree to them.
Oh, the Premier League! I see what you mean.
What a mess
I accept the complications which you raise but unless one accepts the status quo and the imbalance of the original judgement, there really is no alternative which is less problematical. Retrospectively relegating West Ham instead of the Blades would just open up huge wrangling and not just amongst the lawyers. Hence, if any change of heart is sanctioned, the extra team scenario outlined by Sheff Utd is the most likely in my opinion.
Incidentally I see from todays Observer that we have decided not to support Sheff Utd's legal battle. I wonder if we are positioning ourselves to oppose any two up scenario for next season? Or am I making two and two equal five?
"We have already indicated that we are satisfied that the FIFA and FA rules were observed somewhat casually, and in some respects hardly at all, and we should add that we are satisfied (partly from the evidence we heard and partly from the Quest report) that BCFC was by no means the only club whose respect for the rules was less than strict."
"It is not surprising that many (though not all) clubs and agents were somewhat casual in their approach to the rules, when the chances of being penalised for non-compliance were negligible, if not non-existent."
West ham haven't been punished one iota.
I'm sure Terrance Brown will be receiving a £5.5m claim against him once this has all settled down.
The only way they can put Sheffield United back in the Premiership is by docking West Ham points, they can't have it both ways. Sheffield United's only claim for a place in the Premiership is that West Ham should have been docked points and were not, so unless West Ham have enough points docked to put them in 18th and below the Blades then nothing can change.
Of course, if they dock West Ham points then the whole litigation thing spins back into life led by the Spammers and their many mates in the press.
There is no way there will be a 21 team Premiership next season, the big four will go apeshit at playing extra games and I think there is also a UEFA directive that top-tier competitions have to be 20 teams or less.
As we all know, West Ham scammed the league in order to register 2 players whose contracts otherwise could not have been completed in time within that transfer window.
We are all aware of similar precedents - and in each case clubs were docked points.
But the Premier League are not going to dock West Ham points and so Sheffield Utd will stay relegated.
As AFKA says, West Scam haven't been punished one iota.
:)
You are right, the points deduction given correctly months ago would have been right, therefore it follows that the logically correct remedy is to give the deduction to West Ham now. What is overlooked by this logic is the likely outcome of this volt face.
West Ham will appeal/sue over this citing
a) the unprecedented and huge fine already imposed on them
b) the independance of the initial decision
c) the lack of natural justice in retrospectively relegating them when the original offence happened in August 06
d) the offence happened on somebody else's watch
From my reading of the legal runes, there is more chance of West Ham succeeding in obtaining a judicial review of this retrospective punishment, than there is of Sheff Utd successfully challenging the decision in court.
So the legal position of the original decision is pretty unassailable but the FAPL are still faced with many of the teams believing there has been an injustice to Sheff Utd and West Ham have got off too lightly. So, this being a private "club", the most likely outcome is they will offer a compromise "change the rules" to allow one of the members to be "given a lifeline". This at least rectifies the injustice to Sheff Utd and they can all get on with their lives.
Where they will, by so doing, pour injustice upon injustice, is if they allow a "two up", scenario at the end of next season. I have no doubt though that this is the most likely scenario and our club should be pressing to stop this.