Barnsley-Sheff Utd

If we are relegated could the roles of the Tevez saga be reversed? after all we could argue and rightly so that with a fit Iain Hume we would not have been relegated,even now Barnsley have every right to believe that with Hume in the team we would have been further up the table therefore attracting bigger gates and more revenue for the club,I think sometimes we are too nice a club,poor old West Ham thought that was the end of it all but the vultures are hovering,Warnock,all the players,probably the cleaners after them,its a joke.

 

and....

Hume was on the brink of a £15 million move to West Ham (I'm sure they'd help us! ) so we want compo for that too!

 

I think our case would be harder to prove

While sheffield united could prove that tevez catagorically (ok i cant spell) did score in west ham games and gain them points we would have to prove that iain hume WOULD have scored which is considerably harder to prove especially considering that he had hardly scored all season upto his injury.

Sheffield United would have a good defence too unfortunatly in that they could argue that the FA itself decided the 'challenge' was not exceptional and secondly that ALL teams get injuries throughout the season and it is the responsibility of all clubs to ensure they have adequate back up in case these things happen. On the second point I have to say I agree actually, Davey tried to get through this season without adequate cover.

I think we would struggle to get a payout for relegation due to the above but that doesn't mean that claims for other things couldn't go in. For example hume himself can easily claim against Morgan for loss of earning's which will most likely be in the tens if not hundreds of thousands of pounds, then there is the emotional distress etc that the claim can be extended to. Barnsley can claim for loss in revenue if out attendance dropped as a lot of people will have bought tickets to see a £1.2m player. Take him away and suddenly a big draw for the crowd has gone. Shirt printing sales too maybe? They can also try to claim for the cost having to bring in first Cureton and then Mifsud as direct replacements for Iain Hume due to the incident.

 

The Independant argued the same at the time

They said we could apply the same principles as they have done. I.e. we were 17th at the time, so any position we finish below that could be deemed as a result of losing Hume. We could also go down the lines that Hume had got four goals in fifteen games (I think it was) at the time, how many goals would he have scored in a full season at that rate and how would that have affected our position.

We could say that the FA have shafted us by ignoring all that business with Hume, but then again Scudamore appears to have done the same with the Sheff Utd affair.

Interesting though.

 

If we go down that route then I'll have to seriously question my support

Suing another club because you lost one of your players through injury. What a load of ballacks that would be.

Hopefully Hume will make a full recovery, but if he doesn't then him making a claim for loss of potential earnings is a different matter entirely.

 

Even with a full recovery he can sue for loss of earnings cant he?

He hasn't been paid any win bonus, goal bonus or appearence bonus since his injury.

 

Have we won one or scored one since then? I've lost track to be honest.

 

I don't get all this....

We all know football is so unpredictable - otherwise we'd all win the pools every week.
So how can claims be made that one player, any player, Tevez, Hume, Maradona, would or could definitely ensure the results would be different. Having 'better' players guarantees nothing. Whose to say - results could have been even better for West Ham without Tevez. Who knows?

 

Using McCabes twisted logic then yes.

However, the only reason dem blades got relegated was that theyw eren't good enough over a full season to stop up.</p>

The same applies to us if we get relegated this year.
</p>

 

I think we have but one is the key number

sheffield wednesday away if I recall. It kept davey in a job again

 

A claim for the costs of curetons loan signing is all i can see barnsley getting

if anything to be honest

 

The claim for Warnock and the players is against Sheff Utd,the money paid by West Ham is to settle the claim in total

 

I know what we could sue em for

For Blackwell sitting in our Directors Box. Giving all our supporters the idea he may be our future Manager. More devastating to BFC fans than ant Tevez affair

 

A Barnsley player seeking retribution on 7th April will do me

While they're at it one for Blackie and Ellis an' all

 

RE: A Barnsley player seeking retribution on 7th April will do me

what would retribution against Ellis entail?

getting him barred from the local off license?

 

legally................

according to PC at the last Supporters meeting the club itself cannot pursue a claim against a third party(Sheff U) for injuries/damage to an employee of BFC. If however Morgan had gone outside and smashed up eg a car owned by BFC then they could! Its an old legal ruling regarding goods and chattels compared to humans-apparently a legacy from slaving days!?</p>

He did say that when all legal advice is in they were considering appealing to a higher court-House of Lords?-to seek a change in the law
</p>

 

RE: A Barnsley player seeking retribution on 7th April will do me

That would make an interesting poll - or at least a distraction to the usual davey in/out poll

 

RE: I think our case would be harder to prove

It's still crystal ball gazing to say West Ham wouldn't have won those games anyway without Tevez. His replacement might have scored more than the 7 goals in 19 games Tevez got. I've no problem with West Ham getting fined; they broke the rules. But to say that they would have been relegated and Sheff U wouldn't is speculative. For me Sheff U have now set a precedent and opened the door to more crystal ball gazing.

 

By the same token Mifsud's nt