BBC Home

Explore the BBC

332 comments

user rating: 4 star

No points deducted

West Ham United
by Eazyee (U3097181) 27 April 2007
comment on the article

Well there it is then no points but huge 5 and half million pound fine. Glad about the points but the fine seems huge to me

Latest 10 comments

Read members' comments or add your own

posted Apr 28, 2007

When West Ham beat us earlier this season, Tevez was the difference between the 2 sides. He was an ineligible player and we should be awarded the points or WHAM should have the 3 points deducted. Personally, I hope they go down - 3 London clubs gone, more than happy with that.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

What a disgrace. West Ham United should of been in the Championship today. Middlesbrough committed their sin in December and where found guilty in February, and rightly so.
Everyone new that this was a dodgy deal back in August. WHU new it as well. In effect they have now paid 5m for 2 players who would of cost 20m to 30m.
West ham are a fashionable establishment club along with Leeds United who also got off Scott free.
Boro, Rotherham and Bury are unfashionable northern clubs and where severely punished.
I smell corruption!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

Well its a huge fine but they get to keep tevez which he would have cost more if you just brought him from Corithians so they got a bargain

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by veinara (U7007198)

posted Apr 28, 2007

My opinion, the fine is fair.
Facts:
1) the players are eligible
2) the paperwork over "could a third party influence the league" was withheld by Brown et al.
3) NO third party HAD an influence in the league.
The fine is a deterrent to withholding paperwork, and is fair.

Middlesboro's punishment was for not playing a football match because the players were ill. 3 points off for gaining an unfair advantage, is neutral. It works as a deterrent e.g. Tottenham still played their last game of the season against West Ham last year.

The FA also has it correct with clubs going into administration. You may say its a business issue and therefore by the previous argument clubs shouldn't lose points.

For one, it seems senseless to fine a club with no money. But just imagine if a club folded during the season? What happens to the games played? Goals scored, yellow cards picked up clean sheets etc. And the games to be played against? How many points how by many goals by who scored etc etc...

These three punishments I think the league/FA have gotten right, you have to give them something some of the time!

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by JeLuFc (U5430341)

posted Apr 28, 2007

Does anyone else think that the premierleague has missed a trick here? i.e. the future apprehension it may cause for the BEST South Americans in joining the league when they can instead go to Spain for example where they are more likely to be welcomed and loved without all the suspicion and deliberation over these transfers. I just think to many it will seem as they are not welcome to play here and are better off playing in Spain or other major leagues as we have seen over the last few decades.

This is likely to carry on this trend when it seemed it was beginning to sway towards the best South Americans coming over here instead of other leagues. This is emphasised by the huge fine which is disproportionate considering what other things are going on in this league!

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

'because in our finding the club has been responsible for dishonesty and deceit.'

How damning is that?

<steam>

add comment | complain about this comment

comment by Ruining (U855351)

posted Apr 28, 2007

"When West Ham beat us earlier this season, Tevez was the difference between the 2 sides. He was an ineligible player and we should be awarded the points or WHAM should have the 3 points deducted."

"The Club has not been found guilty of fielding an unregistered player and speculation about a likely points deduction has proved to be unfounded."
The report stated that Aldrich 'lied'. The people responsible have left the club and the current members of staff have been fined 5.5 million. I think they have suffered enough.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

comment by Hamilton Retard
posted 4 Hours Ago

When West Ham beat us earlier this season, Tevez was the difference between the 2 sides. He was an ineligible player and we should be awarded the points or WHAM should have the 3 points deducted. Personally, I hope they go down - 3 London clubs gone, more than happy with that.

DID YOU NOT READ ANYTHING ABOUT THIS INQUIRY ???
TEVEZ IS ELIGIBLE TO PLAY AND HAS BEEN ALL SEASON YOU COMPLETE DONUT !

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

the scum should have been relegated and also should have had all parachute payments taken away

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Apr 28, 2007

If I was the current owner of West Ham I would try and instigate legal proceedings against Terence Brown to get the money to cover the fine. Brown is in the same school as Risdale for ego-maniac chairman who ruin clubs.

add comment | complain about this comment

Comment on this article

Sorry, you can only contribute to 606 during opening hours. These are 0900-2300 UK time, seven days a week, but may vary to accommodate sporting events and UK public holidays.

RATE THIS ARTICLE

Rate Breakdown

  • 5 58.33%
    14 votes
  • 4 4.17%
    1 votes
  • 3
    0 votes
  • 2 4.17%
    1 votes
  • 1 33.33%
    8 votes

average rating:
3.50 from 24 votes