At the end fo the season..

Thats the difficult...

proving intent. Almost impossible. No independent witnesses except the officials and remember Morgan was only booked....

 

RE: Depends how the season ends

I like this country, but if there's one thing that annoys me it's the compensation culture. If that gets in to football then I'll have to seriously consider whether or not I continue to follow it.

 

Get ready to be appalled

pending the resolution of some technical legal matter regarding how the law sees individuals rather than chattels.

In the eyes of the law Ian Hume can currently be replaced by a.n.other irrespective of respective football ability. Providing the courts can be convinced the Hume case wont cause an avalanche of similar claims for other employees then it will got to court.

Whats at stake...1.2m? wages for a year, 2 years at least? 1/3rd our annual turnover?

Hume has 3 years from the incident to make a claim apparantly.

 

I've no problem with Hume pursuing action

lost wages etc, God forbid even worse if his career is ended.</p>

But the FA/PL etc need to get their arses in gear and nip the idea that the loss/addition of one player can be then used to predict results. Because that is football finished.
</p>

 

The problem now is....

because the FA/PL did not do the "right thing" and relegate West Ham, Sheff U have pursued it through legal means, outside the games authorities and as such there is now a legal precedent that can and no doubts will be used. I'd bet that lawyers are looking at football as the next big cash cow now the miners have all but been paid out...

 

RE: The problem now is....

Then we're fcked. Scudamore should be sacked, and rules should be put in place definitively stating what happens if a team fields an ineligible player, to try and stop this.
</p>

Well done McCabe, you've knackered the national game you ****.
</p>

 

The FA are as much to blame as McCabe IMHO

They failed to act and I don't think that the punishment fitted the crime. They should have had points deducted. Sheff U were aggreieved but did use it as a smokescreen to hide the fact that they simply were not good enough on their own merits.

But, West Ham or Sheff U? Which club did they want in the Prem? Or Wigan for that mater as they were in the **** at the time too.

Agree re Scudamore and rules being put in place. But its what nearly two years ago and nothing has been done has it?

I would also think that another rule needs to be brought in saying what the final level of arbitration/appeal within the game is and if a club choses to ignore this and go outside it, they will lose the right to compete in the competition.

 

Agreed.

Everyone would agree there's no room for politics in sport, well the same should apply for the constant recourse to legislation to defend a position. The FA and Football League have enough power to run the sport, their unability to arbitrate on the West Ham debacle has set a very dangerous precendent in terms of clubs running off to the local lawyer to get a resolution.

Stupid.

 

The only claim that should be made

is between Iain Hume and Chris Morgan.

Even then it'll only be a loss of earnings claim I would imagine.

 

What i do not get though is why several players and that whinge bag colin are now taking up the charge for loss of earnings for not being in the premiership when , if they were good enough and not lost the last ten games, they would have been safe.

 

Hear! Hear!

What next? Suing ground staff for cruciate injuries? All wrong.

 

You're either with us

or against us.

Or a paedo. Either way, you're not getting in Oakwell.

 

Don't Agree

You (and Jay) would have a very good point if there were adequate recompenses and sanctions provided through the league's own rules. But there aren't. Morgan got a yellow card - and nothing more. No further action, no investigation, nothing. The issue was swept under the carpet by the FA or football league or both.

It is precisely this lack of action by the football authorities which makes the legal action issue rear its head. If Morgan had been banned for 6 games, I doubt whether anyone would have said anything about legal action. Most people (I think) feel that a big injustice has been done and they see legal action as a last resort to get some justice.

 

Also, if they were good enough...

Surely they'd have been signed up by a Premier League club. As far as the law goes I don't really think they've got much of a case unless it was in their contracts that they'd take a cut if they went down. I don't see how Warnock has a case because he walked out and can't prove how much he would have earned. Also, it could be argued that, seeing as he walked out at the end of the season, it would be reasonable to suspect he'd have walked out regardless of league position.

 

The first question you ask when bringing a claim is "what/where is the loss"

There would be no loss so it would be pointless bringing a claim.

If we went down there would be a more tangible loss. However, the club would face problems of forseeabillity of loss in the event the club brought this claim.

 

intent would not necessarily be relevant mate.

nt

 

he wont have lost any earnings - he will still have been paid.

I don't think any claim will be made if he continues to play.

Unless there is a risk of long term damage.

 

transfer fee or a portion of it as his value will certainly have dropped
Wages 8k? a week for at least 20 weeks

Unless PC was bullshitting (which I doubt but its possible) a claim is very much on the cards