Man Utd Fans: Do You Hate Me? - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Man Utd Fans: Do You Hate Me?

borolad94 Avatar
8y, 2m agoPosted 8 years, 2 months ago
Link Below.

The problem is, he got the ball but just carried on going in 2 footed. Just aswell it was a youngen and not Ronaldo or Rooney or there would be hell on otherwise. Not that it makes it better.

WARNING! GRAPHIC TACKLE DO NOT WATCH IF SQUEEMISH
Tags:
borolad94 Avatar
8y, 2m agoPosted 8 years, 2 months ago
Options

All Comments

(35) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
banned#2
Yes, i do :p
#3
Why would they hate you? :thinking:

Deserves to be banned for life.
#4
t0mm
Why would they hate you? :thinking:

Deserves to be banned for life.


Why do people say that. NO WAY does he need to be banned for life. I didn't think martin taylor should be banned for life either. Taylor tackle was much worse then Poggy's but Poggy got the ball and I think Possebon had enough time to jump or do something to avoid that tackle and I am not saying that as a Boro supporter I'm saying it as a football fan.
#5
borolad94;3042084
Why do people say that. NO WAY does he need to be banned for life. I didn't think martin taylor should be banned for life either. Taylor tackle was much worse then Poggy's but Poggy got the ball and I think Possebon had enough time to jump or do something to avoid that tackle and I am not saying that as a Boro supporter I'm saying it as a football fan.

Every player (even from my team that I support) if they go out their with a double footed tackle they obviously want something to come out of it. Therefore I think they should be banned. Poggwhateverhisnameis should have just walked off the pitch.
#6
t0mm
Every player (even from my team that I support) if they go out their with a double footed tackle they obviously want something to come out of it. Therefore I think they should be banned. Poggwhateverhisnameis should have just walked off the pitch.


Now that I agree with you, he shouldn't have protested he should have got up and walked straight off and not looked back.
#7
Possesion is 9/10s of the law :P
#8
Shocking tackle from Pogatetz who has previous form. Lucky he never broke the boy's leg there.
#9
to all you hipocrites out there. do you remember roy keanes tackle on alf inge haaland a few seasons back. no one said anything then!!!!:p
banned#10
mr miagi
to all you hipocrites out there. do you remember roy keanes tackle on alf inge haaland a few seasons back. no one said anything then!!!!:p


Roy Keane is fit, yum yum :oops:
#11
It was a terrible tackle, Not acceptable regardless of what team they play for.

You have to ask yourself why would someone tackle like that if their professional players?

You have to question that mentality
#12
football is going to turn into a games for ballet dancers
#13
mr miagi
football is going to turn into a games for ballet dancers


I can't belive you said that :cry:
#14
borolad94
I can't belive you said that :cry:
didnt mean to offend you:thumbsup: it does my head in when something happens to a man utd player everyone goes mentle but when they are dishing it out no one says a thing. all hipocrites. including ferguson
#15
it was a bad tackle but i'd be more concerned that a thug like barton who has to be dragged off a team mate as his volley of punches detaches his already unconcious victims retina only gets in practise a 6 game ban.
#16
Last season Noble put in a mis-timed tackle on an Arsenal player, Flamini I think and Wenger went mental saying Noble should be banned even though the following match Flamini played.

In the reverse fixture though one of the Arsenal players cunched Parker in an even worse tackle which was not mis-timed just a very bad challenge. Parker was out injured for ages yet Wenger didn't say anything about that.
#17
Simple idea that I think would work and Football associations should adopt:

Anybody that makes a tackle like that should be banned for the entire length of time it takes the other player to make a full recovery.

It would make footballers think twice before lunging in to hurt other players.
#18
modoc
Simple idea that I think would work and Football associations should adopt:

Anybody that makes a tackle like that should be banned for the entire length of time it takes the other player to make a full recovery.

It would make footballers think twice before lunging in to hurt other players.
we would be watching 3 a side every week:whistling:
#19
modoc
Simple idea that I think would work and Football associations should adopt:

Anybody that makes a tackle like that should be banned for the entire length of time it takes the other player to make a full recovery.

It would make footballers think twice before lunging in to hurt other players.


what happens when a player makes an inocious run of the mill tackle but some how ends up rupturing knee ligamnets or dislocating a knee of his opponent, should that player then suffer months on the sidelines as well yet a player can go in two footed and do no damage whatsoever.

also what happen when a player suffers a setback in his recovery that had nothing to do with the original tackle or a certain player recovers quicker than another player after suffering a similar fate. Should one player spend more time on the sidelines than another who committed a similar tackle just because he tackled a guy who's recovery took longer.

In theory that sounds great but I can't see how that in practise it'd work far too many grey areas and variables.
#20
modoc;3042648
Simple idea that I think would work and Football associations should adopt:

Anybody that makes a tackle like that should be banned for the entire length of time it takes the other player to make a full recovery.

It would make footballers think twice before lunging in to hurt other players.


A bit unfair really as you can do a hard tackle on say Scott Parker and he'll most likely shake it off and get back up. You do the same tackle on say Cisse or Dyer and they've got a broken leg.

Also there's nothing wrong with a hard tackle and to take them out of the game wold ruin it. I think the Premier League can do with being more gritty like the Championship and below.

Also it's always going to be difficult to prove the intent, for example when Dyer broke his leg a year ago the player didn't intend to do it whereas say with Fagan, Guthrie intended to do that challenge. To ban the player who injured Dyer for over a year would be completely unfair as it was unintentional whereas Guthries was intentional but as Fagan will only be out for 3 months he would under your idea only be banned for under a quarter of the time the player who ijured Dyer was.

Players like Kevin Davies need to be banned as he openly admitted he told his team to go out there and kick Walcott or Carragher who openly admitted he wants to hurt Neill in a match.
banned#21
RedIron

Players like Kevin Davies need to be banned as he openly admitted he told his team to go out there and kick Walcott or Carragher who openly admitted he wants to hurt Neill in a match.


Hmmm. Maybe its a bit soft at WHU, but letting the opposition know you are there is part and parcel of the game. I'm sure thats what both the players you mention meant - not "I'm going to break his leg". God knows what they would think of the olden hard men like Dave Mackay for example!

Having said that, there have been prime examples where the intent and action was there, like Roy Keene against Man Citeh.

BTW - what did you make of West Hams response regarding Tevez not being influential in them staying up? I doubt any WHU fan would agree with that comment! He was your ONLY player on the pitch in that season when I saw them at Charlton (despite the result!). I did think the decision of arbitration was actually binding (with both sides having to accept the outcome, with no right of appeal and no further legal action.)
#22
guv;3042946
Hmmm. Maybe its a bit soft at WHU, but letting the opposition know you are there is part and parcel of the game. I'm sure thats what both the players you mention meant - not "I'm going to break his leg". God knows what they would think of the olden hard men like Dave Mackay for example!

Having said that, there have been prime examples where the intent and action was there, like Roy Keene against Man Citeh.

BTW - what did you make of West Hams response regarding Tevez not being influential in them staying up? I doubt any WHU fan would agree with that comment! He was your ONLY player on the pitch in that season when I saw them at Charlton (despite the result!). I did think the decision of arbitration was actually binding (with both sides having to accept the outcome, with no right of appeal and no further legal action.)


Who knows what's happening, Sheffied United have just kept going to appeal after appeal. We're now taking it to the court of arbitration for Sport now which is basically the highest court we can g to. We've chosen that as back in May 07 both parties agreed that the results of the first arbitration (which Sheffield United were never really entitled too) will be final and will be respected whatever the outcome. Sheffield United backed down on their agreement though as it didn't go their way. The CAS will recognize that. We've also already been punished for that so now we're being punished again which is a bit unfair.

I think saying Tevez gained us 3 points is a completely ridiculous statement however true as there are so many variables for example;

1. If we didn't sign Tevez we would have signed another striker, we can argue that Tevez was the type of caliber player we was looking for so if we didn't get him we would have pursued other targets. For fairness I will use two players we signed the following season, that would be Scott Parker and Craig Bellamy. Though they aren't in Tevez and Mascheranos league They would have both had a bigger impact that season that the Argentines did.

2. It is widely reported that the bad run of form we was in was due to the squad being worried about their position after the arrival of these two superstars. So it ca equally be assumed that if we didn't sign them our performances would have been better over the course of the season.

3. When we played Sheffield United in the run in, Tevez started and this was in the middle of our good run of form. Yet Sheffield United still beat us 3-0. From that you can read that the Sheffield United squad was better than that of the West Ham squad with Tevez playing. So they should have been expected to pick up more points than us over the course of the season.

4. They say that the 3 points Tevez gained us was what caused Sheffield United to be relegated. How were those 3 points more influential in their relegation than the 76 points Sheffield United drpped that season?

5. They keep saying if Tevez didn't score that influential goal at Old Trafford we would have been relegated. Yes if he didn't score the game would have finished 0-0 giving us only 1 point meaning though that we would have finished the season on 39 poits, still 1 ahead of Sheffield United so that goal was not important at all.

6. Sheffield United widely report that we fielded an ineligible player as he was not registered to play. Whereas in fact Tevez was always properly registered with us and there was never a problem with his registration (referring to the bit of paper we held enabling him to play) the problems lied with withholding a document which as the Premier League admitted if we had included it they would told us to remove that clause and worked with us to ensure that it was correct. Not so much of a problem as Sheffield United make out. Them calling us cheats etc in the media and undertaking their campaign for fairness under those circumstances can be considered libelious and would have effected each and every trial meaning we never had a fair trial.

7. The problem with Tevez related to third party ownership, yest Sheffield United blatantly broke this rule themselves when they stopped Kabba playing for Watford against Sheffield United. Kabba was a good player for Watford and played in every Watford fixture after his transfer except the Sheffield United game. So surely according to Sheffield United third party ownership is OK? The only difference is the clause relating to third party ownership in Tevez' contract was never acted upon whereas Sheffield United did break that rule (twice in fact but I can't remember the other players name)

So I don't agree with their findings at all, Tevez was important but he did not keep us up single handedly, the poor performances from the 3 relegated teams were equally instrumental as was Zamora (our top scorer that season), Green who was immense, Noble, Neill etc. To give credit for our run of 7 of 9 to one player is just wrong.

Another reason I disagree is the outcome this is going to have on football for example;

If Hull are relagted this season can they then sue Newcastle for £30 million because of Fagans injury deliberately caused by Guthrie.

If Watford are relegated by 2 points can they then sue the championship for that goal that never was.

The list can just go on and it will ruin football as we know it.

Also as we've already been punished shouldn't Shefield United be suing the Premier League as they made the wrong decision supposedly.

Sheffield United are also suing us for lost revenue in Premier League income. They fail to mention that they have received Parachute payments from the relegation which is equal to £11 million per season for a maximum of two seasons. So through relegation they have already received £22 million. If they do gain compensation from us they should be made to repay that.

I'm waffling now anyway, in short

Tevez was an important player in our fight for survival, probably the most influential but there are too many variables to say for sure that he kept us up. Ultimately the 76 points that Sheffield United dropped that season were a more important factor than the points Tevez gained us.

The outcome is a joke, not just because i'm a West Ham fan but the effect it will have on football in general. Sheffield United should have stuck to their agreement over a year ago that the original arbitration decision was final.
#23
RedIron
Who knows what's happening, Sheffied United have just kept going to appeal after appeal. We're now taking it to the court of arbitration for Sport now which is basically the highest court we can g to. We've chosen that as back in May 07 both parties agreed that the results of the first arbitration (which Sheffield United were never really entitled too) will be final and will be respected whatever the outcome. Sheffield United backed down on their agreement though as it didn't go their way. The CAS will recognize that. We've also already been punished for that so now we're being punished again which is a bit unfair.

I think saying Tevez gained us 3 points is a completely ridiculous statement however true as there are so many variables for example;

1. If we didn't sign Tevez we would have signed another striker, we can argue that Tevez was the type of caliber player we was looking for so if we didn't get him we would have pursued other targets. For fairness I will use two players we signed the following season, that would be Scott Parker and Craig Bellamy. Though they aren't in Tevez and Mascheranos league They would have both had a bigger impact that season that the Argentines did.

2. It is widely reported that the bad run of form we was in was due to the squad being worried about their position after the arrival of these two superstars. So it ca equally be assumed that if we didn't sign them our performances would have been better over the course of the season.

3. When we played Sheffield United in the run in, Tevez started and this was in the middle of our good run of form. Yet Sheffield United still beat us 3-0. From that you can read that the Sheffield United squad was better than that of the West Ham squad with Tevez playing. So they should have been expected to pick up more points than us over the course of the season.

4. They say that the 3 points Tevez gained us was what caused Sheffield United to be relegated. How were those 3 points more influential in their relegation than the 76 points Sheffield United drpped that season?

5. They keep saying if Tevez didn't score that influential goal at Old Trafford we would have been relegated. Yes if he didn't score the game would have finished 0-0 giving us only 1 point meaning though that we would have finished the season on 39 poits, still 1 ahead of Sheffield United so that goal was not important at all.

6. Sheffield United widely report that we fielded an ineligible player as he was not registered to play. Whereas in fact Tevez was always properly registered with us and there was never a problem with his registration (referring to the bit of paper we held enabling him to play) the problems lied with withholding a document which as the Premier League admitted if we had included it they would told us to remove that clause and worked with us to ensure that it was correct. Not so much of a problem as Sheffield United make out. Them calling us cheats etc in the media and undertaking their campaign for fairness under those circumstances can be considered libelious and would have effected each and every trial meaning we never had a fair trial.

7. The problem with Tevez related to third party ownership, yest Sheffield United blatantly broke this rule themselves when they stopped Kabba playing for Watford against Sheffield United. Kabba was a good player for Watford and played in every Watford fixture after his transfer except the Sheffield United game. So surely according to Sheffield United third party ownership is OK? The only difference is the clause relating to third party ownership in Tevez' contract was never acted upon whereas Sheffield United did break that rule (twice in fact but I can't remember the other players name)

So I don't agree with their findings at all, Tevez was important but he did not keep us up single handedly, the poor performances from the 3 relegated teams were equally instrumental as was Zamora (our top scorer that season), Green who was immense, Noble, Neill etc. To give credit for our run of 7 of 9 to one player is just wrong.

Another reason I disagree is the outcome this is going to have on football for example;

If Hull are relagted this season can they then sue Newcastle for £30 million because of Fagans injury deliberately caused by Guthrie.

If Watford are relegated by 2 points can they then sue the championship for that goal that never was.

The list can just go on and it will ruin football as we know it.

Also as we've already been punished shouldn't Shefield United be suing the Premier League as they made the wrong decision supposedly.

Sheffield United are also suing us for lost revenue in Premier League income. They fail to mention that they have received Parachute payments from the relegation which is equal to £11 million per season for a maximum of two seasons. So through relegation they have already received £22 million. If they do gain compensation from us they should be made to repay that.

I'm waffling now anyway, in short

Tevez was an important player in our fight for survival, probably the most influential but there are too many variables to say for sure that he kept us up. Ultimately the 76 points that Sheffield United dropped that season were a more important factor than the points Tevez gained us.

The outcome is a joke, not just because i'm a West Ham fan but the effect it will have on football in general. Sheffield United should have stuck to their agreement over a year ago that the original arbitration decision was final.



Did you write that all yourself?
#24
borolad94;3043350
Did you write that all yourself?


Yes that's what took so long to reply, I was going to continue but I think there is max length of post and I was about to hit it, plus I didn't think anyone would bother reading it lol
#25
RedIron
Yes that's what took so long to reply, I was going to continue but I think there is max length of post and I was about to hit it, plus I didn't think anyone would bother reading it lol


I don't think anyone is going to read all that TBH
#26
borolad94;3043364
I don't think anyone is going to read all that TBH


It's a good read :thumbsup:
#27
RedIron
It's a good read :thumbsup:


For Hammers...... :p

Prediction this week?
#28
borolad94;3043381
For Hammers...... :p

Prediction this week?


For anyone really who doesn't understand why we are appealing

Anywya Fulham 1-2 West Ham United

I'm going away on the 23rd of October for between 28 and 42 days, so I will pm you my predictions for that period before then :thumbsup:
#29
RedIron
For anyone really who doesn't understand why we are appealing

Anywya Fulham 1-2 West Ham United

I'm going away on the 23rd of October for between 28 and 42 days, so I will pm you my predictions for that period before then :thumbsup:


K Then
banned#30
RedIron
Who knows what's happening, Sheffied United have just kept going to appeal after appeal. We're now taking it to the court of arbitration for Sport now which is basically the highest court we can g to. We've chosen that as back in May 07 both parties agreed that the results of the first arbitration (which Sheffield United were never really entitled too) will be final and will be respected whatever the outcome. Sheffield United backed down on their agreement though as it didn't go their way. The CAS will recognize that. We've also already been punished for that so now we're being punished again which is a bit unfair.


Eh? Was there an arbitration before? I just thought the FA made a decision which they should have made months before and not let it drag on as it did. And after that, West Ham continued to play him. We were led to believe he was now a registered West Ham player and there was no longer any third party involved. That wasn't the case. Man Ure had to pay money to the third party to get his full registration and player ownership.


I think saying Tevez gained us 3 points is a completely ridiculous statement however true as there are so many variables for example;


Snip the examples.

You are not appearing before arbitration here - and I'm quite amused that you are trying to say he didnt gain you at least 3 points. It wouldn't be an exageration to say he was your only player that performed. He was probably more influentional than Ronaldo was for Man Ure last season. By all means tell me they would have won the league and champions league without his influence and goals.

Another reason I disagree is the outcome this is going to have on football for example.

If Hull are relagted this season can they then sue Newcastle for £30 million because of Fagans injury deliberately caused by Guthrie.

If Watford are relegated by 2 points can they then sue the championship for that goal that never was.

The list can just go on and it will ruin football as we know it.


Sorry, you are clutching at straws here. The goal that never was (Mendes) cost Spurs Europe that year. That's life. You can't compare a bad referee decision or poor challenge with what this situation.

Also as we've already been punished shouldn't Shefield United be suing the Premier League as they made the wrong decision supposedly.


Now that is a fair point, though I don't beleive that option was actually available for them. Correct me (with a linky) that says differently. Where the FA actually went wrong in reaching their decision was the thought you were already down. (And at the time most people would have drawn that conclusion also.)



Sheffield United are also suing us for lost revenue in Premier League income. They fail to mention that they have received Parachute payments from the relegation which is equal to £11 million per season for a maximum of two seasons. So through relegation they have already received £22 million. If they do gain compensation from us they should be made to repay that.

I'm waffling now anyway, in short


Cant argue with the last part!! :w00t:

Yes, they got parachute money, but they would still have been in the premier and planning on staying there. As it was, they were relegated and had to amend their strategy accordingly.

Tevez was an important player in our fight for survival, probably the most influential but there are too many variables to say for sure that he kept us up. Ultimately the 76 points that Sheffield United dropped that season were a more important factor than the points Tevez gained us.


Of course there are lots of variables and yes, Sheffield United messed up and found themselves in that position through their own fault. But their argument is that you could never have caught them without Tevez so is a mute point as a result.

The outcome is a joke, not just because i'm a West Ham fan but the effect it will have on football in general. Sheffield United should have stuck to their agreement over a year ago that the original arbitration decision was final.


Why will it affect Football in General? The only affect should be a postive one. The FA shouldnt be so namby Pamby and reach the correct outcome in the first place and clubs will learn not to breach the rules for fear of the consequences.
#31
Eh? Was there an arbitration before? I just thought the FA made a decision which they should have made months before and not let it drag on as it did. And after that, West Ham continued to play him. We were led to believe he was now a registered West Ham player and there was no longer any third party involved. That wasn't the case. Man Ure had to pay money to the third party to get his full registration and player ownership.
Sheffield United launched the first arbitration basically immediately after they was relegated. Since then they've been to court again to try and get themselves re reinstated to the PL and are now after compensation

Man Utd paid West Ham for for the registration of Tevez, when you sign a player that is realistically what you are paying for. They have to pay Kia Joorabchian £18 million to own him fully. The basic way of putting it is Tevez was never a permanent player at West Ham nor Man Utd he was only ever on loan from Kia Joorabchian (well his cmpany Media Sports Investment). This wasn't against Premier League rules but since then 19 of the 20 PL clubs agreed to make it illegal to loan a player from anyone but another club. The £18 million they hav eto pay to KiJ is basically a transfer fee.

Snip the examples.

You are not appearing before arbitration here - and I'm quite amused that you are trying to say he didn't gain you at least 3 points. It wouldn't be an exaggeration to say he was your only player that performed. He was probably more influential than Ronaldo was for Man Ure last season. By all means tell me they would have won the league and champions league without his influence and goals.
Zamora's goals that season were more iportant as there was more of them, Tevez didn't even provide the most assists so on paper he contributed less. In court anything other than facts is just hear say. To say Tevez was more important than Zamora is a ludicrous statement to go before a court as there is no evidence what so ever to back it up.

Green was our best player in my opinion but no one remembers how many goals he saved, only how many Tevez scored.

I agree he was a key player in our relegation battle but no way was it all down to him, football is a team game. Each player is as important as the next.


Sorry, you are clutching at straws here. The goal that never was (Mendes) cost Spurs Europe that year. That's life. You can't compare a bad referee decision or poor challenge with what this situation.
I don't think you can, but if Sheffield United win this it opens the flood gates for clubs to sue each other and or the league for any decision that goes against them. That is not just my opinion that is fact. Read the reports in the newspapers for more information

Now that is a fair point, though I don't beleive that option was actually available for them. Correct me (with a linky) that says differently. Where the FA actually went wrong in reaching their decision was the thought you were already down. (And at the time most people would have drawn that conclusion also.)
I have no idea on what their options were to be honest though I would be willing to bet if they don't get anything from us they will try to sue the PL.A few of the papers have reported that it should be the Premier League who are being sued. The way I see it is we have already been punished, if Sheffield United felt agrieved by the ruling then that is down to them and the Premier League. West Ham after all did fully co operate with the Premier League's decision and paid the fine that we gave without complaint nor appeal. So to do that and be punished again is a surreal situation.

Cant argue with the last part!! :w00t:

Yes, they got parachute money, but they would still have been in the premier and planning on staying there. As it was, they were relegated and had to amend their strategy accordingly.
Lol, so in theory if they can sue us for loss of Premier League revenue and we pay them the full sum they have asked for. We can then ask them for the parachute money as if they think it's fair that they get the money we got from being in the Premier League they shouldn't have a problem with us getting the money that they got in the Championship.

If not they will have gained £30 million from us for last season and £11 million from the Championship whereas West Ham would have ended up with a minus revenue as we would have received our £30 million but gave that straight to Sheffield United.

So if there really was this massive injustice and they want that money from us as they feel they should have been earning that then surely we are equally entitled to the money we wold have earned in the Championship.

Of course there are lots of variables and yes, Sheffield United messed up and found themselves in that position through their own fault. But their argument is that you could never have caught them without Tevez so is a mute point as a result.
That's the argument too many variables as no one can say how well we would have plaeye without Tevez. There is nothing saying that if Tevez left in January or got an injury someone would hae stepped into his boots and scored more goals. That's the argument.

Why will it affect Football in General? The only affect should be a postive one. The FA shouldnt be so namby Pamby and reach the correct outcome in the first place and clubs will learn not to breach the rules for fear of the consequences.
As as I said above it opens the floodgates for every team to sue each other after ebing relegated. Say you are relegated this season you could then sue Man Utd for the effect that their puruit of Berbatov caused your team.

Or say Hull are relegated they can sue Newcastle for injuring Fagan.

Say you play a weakened squad in the Premier League towards the end of this season as you want to save the legs of your players for a mid week UEFA cup game. You then lose that game with your weakened squad (see Liverpool v Fulham in the 06 07 season). You lose to say Portsmouth who then finish the season in 17th place only 1 point above Wigan who are relegated. Wigan can then sue you for playing the weakened squad.

That's why it will effect football as in the past results were decided on the pitch and what happened up until the final whistle was final. This will mean that any decision on the pitch can then be challenged in court and every relegated team will be able to pick something that happened in the season and blame that for their relegation.
#32
reported. thread title should be "Man Utd Fans: Do You H4te Me?"
banned#33
Sorry Red Iron, but there is a very good reason Tevez was voted your player of the season and whilst you are disagreeing with that, the fans that went don't!

You're comments on the final compensation figure and mention of parachute is quite true. That is why they have agreed the decision, but not the final payment. All of what you say will be taken into account. To be honest, I expect the outcome will end up with a payment of about £10M from WHU to SUFC, not the £30M being quoted.

I can understand your frustration. As you said, they have been fined by the FA. I do also think you are right when you say the FA should be in the firing line. This could all have been avoided if they had just docked the points that should have happened in the first place. When the outcome was annouced, all the bottom clubs spoke about court action if you escaped and sent them down. This is what is happening.

And your comments about playing a weekened side has alreadly been played out. We were fined for doing just that in a game against Southampton which they won. There is no way that any action would be taken by Spurs regarding Berbatov. If they were going to, they would have already done it. Thats the point though. Why did the FA take so long to act and allow Tevez to carry on playing? I agree with you that the FA is in serous fault here, but I dont believe it opens any floodgates on dodgy referee decisions as you have suggested.

Anyway, on a brighter note. We've finally won another game!!! They looked ok, but you could tell they weren't overly confident. Newcastle were just complete pants though. Empty stadium too! Not often you will hear Spurs fans thoughout a game at SJP and not a murour from the home fans!
#34
I don't hate you OP - don't even know you.

All I know is Pogatetz fancied a bit of double bubble - the old "win the ball but I can carry through and give the guy a whack/stiff leg" tackle.

Unfortunately for Pogatetz he did it so well he busted the guys leg real sweetly.

Guess it's just one of those tackles - 6 and out as they say in back garden cricket.

Well deserved red card, hope the lad recovers well:)
#35
guv;3044643
Sorry Red Iron, but there is a very good reason Tevez was voted your player of the season and whilst you are disagreeing with that, the fans that went don't!

You're comments on the final compensation figure and mention of parachute is quite true. That is why they have agreed the decision, but not the final payment. All of what you say will be taken into account. To be honest, I expect the outcome will end up with a payment of about £10M from WHU to SUFC, not the £30M being quoted.

I can understand your frustration. As you said, they have been fined by the FA. I do also think you are right when you say the FA should be in the firing line. This could all have been avoided if they had just docked the points that should have happened in the first place. When the outcome was annouced, all the bottom clubs spoke about court action if you escaped and sent them down. This is what is happening.

And your comments about playing a weekened side has alreadly been played out. We were fined for doing just that in a game against Southampton which they won. There is no way that any action would be taken by Spurs regarding Berbatov. If they were going to, they would have already done it. Thats the point though. Why did the FA take so long to act and allow Tevez to carry on playing? I agree with you that the FA is in serous fault here, but I dont believe it opens any floodgates on dodgy referee decisions as you have suggested.

Anyway, on a brighter note. We've finally won another game!!! They looked ok, but you could tell they weren't overly confident. Newcastle were just complete pants though. Empty stadium too! Not often you will hear Spurs fans thoughout a game at SJP and not a murour from the home fans!


I agree he was one of our best players and very instrumental in our survival but I don't agree in the sense that they have used that in court to get a compensation payout as there is no proof he was our best player, just opinion and hear say.

If that makes sense, the reason it took so long for the FA to act was it wasn't apparent until late January that their had been a breach of the rules. We was heard in late April so it didn't actually take them that long really. Especially when you consider that there had never been a trial for a club breaking the rule that we did and the Premier League needed to consult a lot of people to grasp what had actually happened.

Spurs haven't appealed over Berbatov as you can't as in PL rules one PL club cannot sue another, if they decide they want to they must forfeit their place in the league to do so. But if Sheffield United win this case it opens the floodgates and the PL will be powerless to stop clubs suing each other. It's taken me ages but i've found one of the papers mentioning it

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/sport/football/article-1060111/West-Ham-set-fight-Blades-30m-compensation-claim-tribunal-finds-Hammers-Carlos-Tevez-affair.html?ITO=1490

Seriously, if they win it will happen

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!