The Sheffield Effect

One unhappy side-effect of the threatened legal action by Sheffield United is that Alan Curbishley may lose several of his transfer targets. Take Scott Parker, for instance. He is said to be Curbishley’s first choice replacement for NRC. But if you were Scott would you really be prepared to put pen to paper unless you were 100 per cent sure of playing in the Premier League next season? I think not.

Advertisements

20 Responses to The Sheffield Effect

  1. ny hammer says:

    perhaps its time for a class action suit to be filed on behalf of the 25,000 upton park season ticket holders against mccabe and whelan.

    they ve lied, distorted the facts and erroneously smeared the club.

    as has by now been well documented, the argentines have NEVER been ineligible,right from the start all the way through the lat match of the season.

    if they want to play hardball with the ,let them. i can think of at lesst 25,000 people who wouldn t mind filing suit against mccabe and whelan for 250 million quid each.
    and quite a few barristers who d take the case on a fee by results basis.

  2. Gordon McBroon says:

    So what percentage likelihood do you think that West Ham will be playing in the Premier League next year ? 60% ? 70% ? 80% ?

  3. Greezy Pimp says:

    I was thinking exactly the same thing yesterday I’m sure get out clauses would be written in but the problem remains that the best players will not want to talk to West Ham unless we pay grossly over the top. I don’t know about class action but some kind of restriction of trade law suit would probably be in order, however I get the impression we’re keeping our heads down at the moment, legal action on our part would inevitably be seen as an admission of guilt.

  4. Oddball says:

    HERE’S WHAT I FIND REALLY OFFENSIVE ABOUT YOU, SCU
    OLIVER HOLT 16/05/2007

    LAST week, Premier League chief executive Richard Scudamore talked about things he found offensive. He’s had his go. Here’s a different list.

    What’s offensive is that Scudamore now presides over a league that makes Dodgy Derek’s Used Car Emporium look above board.

    What’s offensive is that Scudamore is so in thrall to the most powerful of his member clubs that they’re giving the impression they’re making up the rules as they go along.

    It’s the Wild West in the Premier League that Scudamore built. It’s getting to the point where it feels like anything goes.

    What’s offensive is that six months ago, a leading Premiership manager placed a bet on one struggling club to stay up this season which, for obvious reasons, is against the rules and open to serious abuse.

    What’s offensive is no one I know – no supporter, no manager, no player – would have any faith in the Premier League doing anything about it even if the evidence was to be presented to them on a silver platter.

    What’s offensive is that if you want to concoct a ‘gentleman’s agreement’ between two leading clubs which is going to have a radical effect on the title race, you’re going to get away with it.
    What’s offensive is that Manchester United and Everton did that right underneath Scudamore’s nose and then the Premier League put out a statement saying they were content Everton were free to play Tim Howard against United.
    Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

    What’s offensive is Scudamore fiddling while the Premier League writhes in its shame at West Ham’s survival.

    What’s offensive is that we have to rely on Sepp Blatter and FIFA to say they’re going to investigate the failure to deduct points for the breaches of rules U18 and B13 while our own league pleads impotence.

    What’s offensive is that West Ham effectively made tens of millions of pounds out of the Premier League commission ruling because their £5.5m fine and failure to dock points allowed them to stay up and rake in the television cash next season.

    What’s offensive is Scudamore paying lip service to a decision that allowed cheats to prosper and sent an honest club like Sheffield United down.

    What’s offensive is the presumption that just because West Ham ripped up its copy of the agreement with the companies that controlled Carlos Tevez, then the companies that controlled Tevez must have ripped its copies up, too.

    What’s offensive is the sight of Scudamore sitting in front of Kia Joorabchian in the directors’ box at Old Trafford on Sunday.

    What’s offensive is Scudamore not having the bottle to be at Bramall Lane instead to see the fruits of the ‘independent’ commission’s decision to let West Ham off the hook.

    What’s offensive is knowing that Scudamore didn’t witness the effects relegation had on the Sheffield United fans who were ignored by the Premier League commission when it waxed lyrical about the ‘loyalty’ of West Ham supporters. What’s offensive was the pain and the anger on their faces as they walked up to the press box and asked us why the Premier League didn’t value their loyalty as much.

    What’s offensive is that the commission decision backed by Scudamore will have cost a good manager his job if Neil Warnock decides he can no longer continue at Bramall Lane.

    What’s offensive is that Scudamore reacted with warnings and disdain to the dismay of the four or five clubs outraged by the commission’s decision.

    What’s offensive is that Scudamore suggested their show of emotion was driven by financial concerns when the entire Premiership under his control has become driven by financial concerns.

    What’s offensive is that he appears not to have the wit to understand that just because his 20 member clubs empowered the commission to act on their behalf, it shouldn’t mean they can’t express their disquiet about the West Ham decision.

    What’s offensive is a system that forces West Ham fans and London-based Manchester United fans to travel to their game on Sunday on a day when there were no morning trains northbound between Euston and Manchester Piccadilly.

    What’s offensive is a system that doesn’t take measures to prevent those same fans arriving first at Chesterfield, then at Sheffield, to find their connecting trains have been cancelled.

    What’s offensive is those fans having to club together to catch taxis from Sheffield to Manchester to get to Old Trafford before kick-off.

    What’s offensive is that the Premier League says it cares about its fans and it does nothing to prevent or at least improve a situation like that. What’s offensive is a Premier League allowing football’s rich to get richer and its poor to get poorer.

    What’s offensive is tin-pot Premier League spin doctors getting so carried away with their own arrogance they start emailing journalists and telling them they’re ‘spectacularly off-beam’.

    Off-beam? I’ll you what’s off-beam. Off-beam is that same spin doctor inadvertently alerting a colleague of mine to the Tim Howard story in the first place.

    Off-beam is the quiet corner where the reputation of the Premier League has gone to lie down and die.

    Off-beam, my sanctimonious little friend, is this sad and unavoidable truth: West Ham’s presence in the Premiership next season and the seasons after that will act as a lasting reproach to Richard Scudamore and leave a bitter, bitter legacy of his period in charge

  5. ny hammer says:

    agreed that it s clear we re keeping our heads down. i m not sure that legal action would be an admission of guilt. Fifa ,despite announcing that they will review the proceedings has already clearly stated that “the transfer of Tevez was done correctly regarding the international transfer of players.” Additionally, the Premier League has stated that “this has never been a question of West Ham fielding an ineligible player. From the day they signed him ,West Ham have owned his registration That has never been an issue .West Ham have never tried to conceal that Tevez and Mascherano are owned by Joorabchian and MSI.”

    in the Premier League s words ” the only problem we had was the existence of a clause in the agreement which would allow Joorabchian to sell the players to another club at any time. There is an ocean between that and Whelan and Mccabe s inaccurate claims of fielding “ineligible” players.

    the insistence of mccabe and whelan to carelessly,inaccurately and persistently use the phrase “fielded ineligible players” is PRECISELY what could ultimately make them vulnerable to a libel suit that will make the approximately 35 million quid Sky will give each club next season look like peanuts. Whelan and mccabe have made their bed. now they can lie in it ,nails included.

  6. ny hammer says:

    get used to it BITTER and TWISTED. you weren t good enough. face it. and stop making excuses.

  7. Bobby Z says:

    oddball……youre a prat, grow up little boy

  8. ny hammer says:

    how conveniently the self-righteous of the world seem to forget that despite paying 5.5 mio quid in fines, there was NO guarantee that we wud stay up. As if it was an easy peasy 5.5 million for 35 million quid trade ,with us having no risk of avoiding relegation.

    there was just a small matter of us having to beat Wigan away,Bolton (not easy for ANYONE,home or away) and then get a minimum of a draw away from home against the league champions. so to stay up , we needed to get 7 points from th elast 9 available ,with 2 of those matches away from home , and 2 of them against top 6 six sides.

    Even AFTER the Premier League decision ,we were STILL favored to go down by the bookies. For that matter were still favored to down by the bookies AFTER beating Wigan. It wasn t until the last day of the season that the bookies had wigan as the likely to drop and us to survive.

    so this illusion of getting off cheap with 5.5 million quid is just that -an illusion. at the time the fines were handed out ,the MOST LIKELY scenario, admitted by anyone and everyone involved in football, was that we were GOING DOWN despite “only” being given a fine. at the time ,the likely scenario was that we would lose the 5.5 million quid on top of another 35 milluion quid from relegation.

    for all those who thought the 5.5 million fine was “nothing”, implying that we had no chnace of getting relegated,how much money did you bet on us staying up then?

    i thought so. sweet FA.

    stop moaning and get on with it

  9. ny hammer says:

    how conveniently the self-righteous of the world seem to forget that despite paying 5.5 mio quid in fines, there was NO guarantee that we wud stay up. As if it was an easy peasy 5.5 million for 35 million quid trade ,with us having no risk of avoiding relegation.

    there was just a small matter of us having to beat Wigan away,Bolton (not easy for ANYONE,home or away) and then get a minimum of a draw away from home against the league champions. so to stay up , we needed to get 7 points from th elast 9 available ,with 2 of those matches away from home , and 2 of them against top 6 six sides.

    Even AFTER the Premier League decision ,we were STILL favored to go down by the bookies. For that matter were still favored to down by the bookies AFTER beating Wigan. It wasn t until the last day of the season that the bookies had wigan as the likely to drop and us to survive.

    so this illusion of getting off cheap with 5.5 million quid is just that -an illusion. at the time the fines were handed out ,the MOST LIKELY scenario, admitted by anyone and everyone involved in football, was that we were GOING DOWN despite “only” being given a fine. at the time ,the likely scenario was that we would lose the 5.5 million quid on top of another 35 milluion quid from relegation.

    for all those who thought the 5.5 million fine was “nothing”, implying that we had no chnace of getting relegated,how much money did you bet on us staying up then?

    i thought so. sweet FA.

    stop moaning and get on with it.

  10. Geoff says:

    sheffield united didn’t go down because of an ‘injustice’, they went down because they were awful this season. Besides, any club who can do the double over both Arsenal AND Manchester United doesn’t deserve to go down, and thankfully we didn’t.

  11. Andy Foster says:

    Why not make more people aware of Whelan’s mirky past and present every time he opens his big fat gob about ‘cheating’?
    Pot calling the kettle black doesn’t come into it with someone who has profited in the millions from Burmese child labour, price fixing (JJB shirt rip offs) and asset stripping (see Orrell RU Club’s demise).

  12. David King says:

    HEY IAIN
    I read a lot of papers that are left lying around the factory and unfortunately one of the mucky little tabloids is the Mirror. Any chance of you telling that pratt Oliver Holt ,”chief” sportswriter that he is getting a little bit boring now? Like its become a personal vendetta, which is fine, but you know, its like a needle stuck in a broken vynyl? The Mirror has had its stall set out aginst West Ham all season now and unlike some more upmarket papers, has forgotten to do some INVESTIGATIVE journalism, concentrating more on the opinions of some spoilt, boring opinionated little prick, who hasn’t really gotten all his facts correct.

  13. The Headmaster says:

    blimey – oddball is way too stressy for me. what a rant! still, nothing compared with the rant that would ensue were any kangaroo court to attempt to overturn the previous ruling by the distinguished and balanced independent committee that all 20 clubs signed up to pre-season!
    get over yerself oddball – the irons are here to stay.

  14. ny hammer says:

    inferior publications like the daily express and daily mirror have nothing better to do than concoct manure, because they can t establish the facts, properly analyze the facts or ,for that matter even get access to the facts. these tabloids are run by mugs who employ mugs wwho have no hope in hell of ever having a proper career in journalism. Tevez s deal was effectively just a loan deal as goes on worldwide. Any of the holier than thou types have a problem with it? then why don t we just ban player loans full stop then? whelan and mccabe will face it eventually- they got beat fair and sqaure by a better side. except now they re gonna get beat again. first on the pitch, thein in the court. Good – west ham love doing the double over right pratts ,no matter which end of the table. rock on east london.

  15. True Hammer says:

    Fifa has clearly stated that they wont over Write the ruling over Carlos Tevez, so why does big mough chairmen off Shefild united just concentrate on there team for next season or just go and Join Milwall in there divishion as there chairmen makes me sick. let’s change the subject to the Transfer kity next season.

    With a 45 milion Transfer kity i dont think you can go wrong,

    Iv heard about these players we are Sighning like Godjohnson and Numo Gomez. I can’t stand lisening to loads off coblers, tell you the trufe my Dad is a close friend of one off the coaching staff and they have been that way since he started school. When my dad asked him about these sighning they laught about it, Yer he’s Alan got a list off player he would love to sighn every Manager has, but at the end off the day know one will now these playes until the deal is nearly set! we are being linked with every one this week. I think evry one should just stop telling use all this coblers.

  16. KeithR says:

    I’m boycotting JJB Sports …so stick that in your pipe, Oddball

  17. Ian the Hammers says:

    FACT – both Tevez & Mascarano were correctly registered as players for/by West Ham. If not then we WOULD have been deducted points. The rule broken is to stop 3rd partys from removing players like …… er…….. MSI did to Corinthians when they removed both Argies & brought them to England. WHU were the only club willing to allow MSI to have a contract that allowed them to be removed as there was no other way they would have played for us. We broke a rule to protect us. We were fined a record 5.5 million, a massive, world record fine, regrdless of all the bullshit about staying up – CFC tapped up Cole, less that 1/2 million fine & how much money do they have
    I just wish all the bitter twats would get there fact right brfore they try & compare all previous cases.

  18. ny hammer says:

    well stated ian

  19. 100%iron says:

    u wanna read the blade sites, we’re nothing but cheats according to them.

  20. play free poker online says:

    howdy I quite enjoyed this website .

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: