Official Premiership 06/07 thread

[Chris the Human]

Because the punishment is leniant, and is effectively letting West Ham off the hook?

[Matt]

But he SHOULD be allowed to play for them. The transfer was dodgy, not his registration, he's a legal player, it was the transfer itself that was illegal.

HE SHOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO REGISTER FOR THEM IN THE FIRST PLACE.

BUT HE DID! The offence commited was the transfer, not the registration, how he was registered is academic, that didn't break the rules. The transfer broke the rules and thus they were fined for a dodgy transfer.

[Chris the Human]

..No it isn't.

[Summers]

The transfer should not have happened, therefor - he should not have been registered. Therefor, the registration came from a transfer deal done illegally, making it suspect, and CHEATING.

[Summers]

Fuck Bolton & Gary Speed. :@

[therockbox]

Because the punishment is leniant, and is effectively letting West Ham off the hook?

I'm unsure, but has a benchmark for this set of circumstances been set? Because if not, how can anyone say what's lenient and what's sufficient punishment?

[Chris the Human]

A transfer done by the previous management and that (arguably) none of the players (barring perhaps Tevez and Maschiano) knew about. Fining them for a clerical error seems fair. Docking points because of an action, however illegal, from a previous management does not.

[Pesci]

A team cheating bothers me, but at the end of the day I watch football for my own personal enjoyment, I don't care what happens off the pitch. A player diving happens on the pitch, dodgy transfers happen off of it.

If they were match-fixing, I'd feel more strongly. A couple of dodgy transfers isn't enough for me to prefer watching Wigan over West Ham.

[therockbox]

Wasn't a clerical error, they witheld the document on purpose.

[Matt]

But he SHOULD be allowed to play for them. The transfer was dodgy, not his registration, he's a legal player, it was the transfer itself that was illegal. Think of it like this; a 16/17 year old buys some alcohol - that's illegal, the 16/17 year old drinks the alcohol - that's legal. Now replace West Ham with 16/17 year old and alcohol with Tevez, and that's the situation.

..No it isn't.

Yes it is. You can drink alcohol from 12 or something like that as long as it abides by general laws for alcohol and isn't in a pub.

[Chris the Human]

Bury were thrown out of the FA Cup for admitting to fielding an ineligble player, West Ham did it on purpose.

[Summers]

A transfer done by the previous management and that (arguably) none of the players (barring perhaps Tevez and Maschiano) knew about. Fining them for a clerical error seems fair. Docking points because of an action, however illegal, from a previous management does not.

Brignging up that 'previous management' arguement again is pointless, it has nothing to do with it. The club did it, those that work for the club did it, the club should be punished.

Clerical error? Hahahaha. They hid the truth. They lied.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Super Summers

[Chris the Human]

1-1. Whoooooot! Fuck you, Wigan!

[Bigal]

My understanding of the situation is that if a player is registered incorrectly, then any points gained from matches that player was involved in are deducted. So, even if the transfer was dodgy, the registration checks out, then while Tevez was illegally transferred, he is now legally playing for West Ham. Therefore the fine is for the dodgy transfer, but there can be no points deduction because as far as the law's concerned, he's like any other Hammers player.

Sheff Utd have equalised

EDIT: Bolton 1-1 Villa

Spurs 2-1 Man City

Arsenal have got a penalty

Edited May 13, 2007 by Bigal - GM For Hire

[Chris the Human]

the club should be punished.

[therockbox]

Bury were thrown out of the FA Cup for admitting to fielding an ineligble player, West Ham did it on purpose.

Meaning no offence to the FA Cup, but isn't it just a little less important than the Premiership? Crashing out of the FA Cup is bad - being relegated from the Premier League is a crushing blow

[therockbox]

the club should be punished.

And they were. Simply because you disagree with the severity or style of the punishment doesn't mean it wasn't a punishment.

[Summers]

But he SHOULD be allowed to play for them. The transfer was dodgy, not his registration, he's a legal player, it was the transfer itself that was illegal. Think of it like this; a 16/17 year old buys some alcohol - that's illegal, the 16/17 year old drinks the alcohol - that's legal. Now replace West Ham with 16/17 year old and alcohol with Tevez, and that's the situation.

..No it isn't.

Yes it is. You can drink alcohol from 12 or something like that as long as it abides by general laws for alcohol and isn't in a pub.

If you're under 14 you're not allowed in a pub/bar unless it has a suitable licence. This also includes beer gardens and family rooms.

At 14 you can enter a bar or pub but only if the landlord agrees and if you drink soft drinks (this can include low-alcohol beer).

If you're 16 or 17 you can buy or be bought beer or cider with a meal.

And no, CWB, they weren't punished, fine 5m? That's nothing to them. If this happened in Italy, or if it was Man U or Chelsea, everyone would be up in arms.

Edited May 13, 2007 by Super Summers

[Bigal]

David James has saved the Arsenal penalty. Still 0-0.

[Matt]

Come on the Blades!

And I agree on the previous management argument being stupid, rules broken is rules broken, regardless of who did it. But the fact is Tevez was registered, like the methods or not, he is a legal West Ham player and is not breaking and has never broken any rules by playing for West Ham. I have to admit, I don't particularly like it, but there is nothing wrong with Tevez playing, it was only the transfer that was breaking the rules, which hasn't directly affected the league.