An FA arbitration hearing has ruled in favour of Sheffield United in their claim for compensation from West Ham over the Carlos Tevez affair. The South Yorkshire club were relegated in a dramatic end to the 2006-07 season. A Tevez-inspired Hammers beat Manchester United on the final day of the season to clinch top-flight safety at the Blades' expense. The Premier League fined the Hammers a record £5.5m for fielding Tevez and Javier Mascherano when they were ineligible to play under league rules regarding third-party ownership. United initially wanted to have their Premier League place reinstated and appealed that the monetary fine was insufficient. Having failed in that regard they then turned their attentions to achieving a financial settlement. The club today issued a statement on their official website, www.sufc.co.uk, claiming success in that case, although the exact nature of the compensation is as yet unclear. Newspaper reports suggest the Blades could be looking for a figure of around £30m, while chairman Kevin McCabe is on record as saying that relegation cost United at least £50m in lost revenues. McCabe said this morning: "I can confirm that both clubs have been notified of the ruling. "The arbitration panel has awarded in our favour. The matter is still legally in process so I do not wish to comment any further until we have completed that process."
then its B*ll*cks and west hams new owners should be suing the old ones. Anyway it wouldt matte rif sheff utd won any of their last few games...
Same reasoning with, say, Rotherham's new board. They had to take a points, not monetary, hit for the mistakes of those who preceded them.
Another point The running costs in the championship are lower than in the premiership (lower wages etc) so to award sheffield united the full money as though they were still in the premiership and had premiership costs associated would make no sense.
caveat emptor (buyer beware), the new owners should have known the risk. Perhaps the club could sue the former directors.
It has a knock on affect With it coming under FA rules and regulations, the bill would be passed to them one way or another and we, along with all clubs, are under the power of the FA. FA Cup money reduced by roughly £30m next time to recoup the money? Most likely or ticket prices for england/cup games increased again to cover the cost. I would feel a little hard done by if I were west ham if they were the ones getting the bill because it wasn't them that made the decision to relegate sheffield united, it was the fa/premier league. And it was the FA/premier league that knew about the rule breaking for a long time before making the decision, thus causing the problem
West Ham hard done by? They signed and used a player they had no right to sign. He scored 5 goals, including the winner at Man Utd on the last day of the season that kept them up. To be honest, £30 million is getting off lightly.
RE: Are you sure? I was just about to say the same. The FA had several opportunities to stop west ham playing him (having given the club the all clear to play him at the start of the season, they could also have stepped in and suspended him in January when they first charged the club). They have contributed to this and should pay half the compensation. Totally mismanaged from start to finish.
you could argue it was'nt a mistake but a calculated risk that came off.It still makes no sense though if West Ham broke the rules to stay up surely they should be relegated otherwise it leaves it open for any club to buy safety.
Things go from bad to worse for West Ham http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/fo...-claims-Carlos-Tevez-deal-nailed-Hammers.html
