Thursday, 24 May 2007

Statement Of Intent

Most of the papers this morning have picked up on the 'Chairman's Statement' as delivered by Eggert Magnusson on the official site yesterday. The Times say Magnusson is intent on keeping Carlos Tevez and the Daily Mail suggest significant funds will be made available to Alan Curbishley. The statement in full reads:
"There is bound to be a lot of speculation over the summer about our playing squad. It is normal in a transfer window - who is going, who we want to bring in. We are ambitious for this club and what we can achieve next season. We want to strengthen the squad and to build on the positives of the 2006/07 season. I'm proud of what the club has achieved and now we can move forward. We will work hard over the summer to prepare for next season and that includes keeping our best players who want to play for us. There will be a particular focus on Carlos Tevez and I want him to stay. I suspect a lot will be written about his future but the starting point is that he is a West Ham player, registered with and contracted to the club with three years remaining on a 4 year contract. Whatever happens next we will act to protect the best interests of West Ham United FC".
An article in The Independent states the Premier League is to press ahead with preparations for next season's fixture list despite agreeing to set up an arbitration tribunal to rule on relegated Sheffield United's complaints over the Carlos Tevez affair. The three-man panel is due to be appointed tomorrow, but any final decision is not likely before the end of next month. The League is preparing to publish the fixtures for the new season on 21 June on the basis that the Blades have been relegated and West Ham remain in the top flight. It is claimed League officials are confident that the arbitration tribunal will find they acted according to their regulations in both the disciplinary case against West Ham and with regard to the registration of Tevez. Interestingly, it is thought likely that even if the Blades should persuade the arbitration panel of their case, they would be awarded a compensation payment rather than having the commission's decision overturned. The Sheffield United plc chairman, Kevin McCabe, said he believed the club's stand would be justified. "I'm here to protect Sheffield United's position against what I firmly believe was an irrational decision," McCabe said. "I genuinely believe that the arbitration proceedings will reverse decisions. Whether that means they are able to reverse decisions and deduct points rather than [impose] fines I do not know," he added.

The only other item of news is a piece in the Daily Mail in which James Collins expresses his desire to see Carlos Tevez remain at the club. Although busy preparing for a return to international duty with Wales, Collins clearly has the little Argentine firmly in his thoughts. "None of the players ever thought about the situation with Carlos," he said. "The funny thing is no-one was talking about how Carlos came to the club when he was not playing or scoring goals. As soon as he started scoring, people started having an opinion about him. We were just happy to have him in our team as he is a world class player and a fantastic professional. It would be great for West Ham and English football if he is still in the Premiership next season. I am sure we will do our best to keep hold of him."


Kieron said...

The commission were wrong in their sentencing beause they looked at the league table and realised that if any points were deducted, it meant certain relegation. The report states this. It should not matter if West Ham were 3rd from top or 3rd from bottom, that facts were that they had two international players at their disposal who should not have been there. West Ham admited that they concealed documents as they knew the registrations for the two players would be rejected if the PL or FA were aware of what they had done. This was pure deception. They did not even pay a transfer fee, meaning they had more money to spend in the January transfer window. The commission issued a punishment which untimately affected Sheffield United, who had done absolutely nothing wrong. The idea of punishemt is to peanalize the guilty, not the innocent, but this does not apply in this case. The commision did everything right except for the punishment, which was oh so wrong.

HeadHammerShark said...


"West Ham admited that they concealed documents as they knew the registrations for the two players would be rejected if the PL or FA were aware of what they had done"

That statement completely contradicts Richard Scudamore's letter to clubs recently whereby he stated that if West Ham had approached the PL they would have worked with them to ensure the registration was correct, as they did with Liverpool and Mascherano.

In the event West Ham concealed the documents as a result of legal advice they received.

(Incidentally, I have read on two separate occasions, reports from sports lawyers who claim that West Ham have a strong case to argue that they interpreted the rules correctly. As I understand it, this theory is based around the fact that Rule U18 governs 3rd party ownership of clubs rather than players, as is therefore very unclear).

As for Sheffield United doing "nothing wrong", it mystifies me how a club who accrued only 35 points in a season feel that they should not be relegated. They went down because they were utterly crap, not because of Carlos Tevez.


Copyright 2007 ID Media Inc, All Right Reserved. Crafted by Nurudin Jauhari