Saturday, August 18, 2007

Do Sheffield United Have Forged Documents?

The only basis that Sheffield United have for reopening this whole affair and taking West Ham to FA arbitration is that they have new evidence that was not considered by the original disciplinary commission.

The Blades claim they have 'secret documents' that no-one else has seen. The Blades then mention a December 1st contract. This contract West Ham say was submitted to the Premier League and was part of the documents passed onto the disciplinary commission. Today The Telegraph say that the English Premier League will back up this claim by West Ham.

Therefore Sheffield United will need new evidence substantially different from this December 1st contract. The Blades have had a number of meetings with Kia Joorabchian, who obviously feel he is not bound by the non-disclosure agreement he signed with West Ham, and obviously feel they do have documents substantially different to the December 1st contract.

The document they may have is a signed copy of the December 1st document that West Ham claimed was never signed. During the protracted transfer of Tevez to Manchester United MSI claimed that the contract was signed. West Ham have said that if MSI have a contract signed by Tevez it was signed later and not returned to the club.

One problem for Sheffield United is that MSI have a history of forging documents. In July the Court of Arbitration for Sport ruled that Corinthians had to pay Lyon for Nilmar. The reason for this was that MSI had forged documents in Nilmar's transfer from Lyon.

It has emerged that MSI found a Lyon official who was prepared to sign a document confirming Nilmar's transfer before any money was received. Next, MSI got the help of a FIFA employee to complete paperwork to make the illegal transfer appear legal.

During Tevez's transfer to Manchester United Kia Joorabchian was very keen for the case to go to FIFA and seemed very reluctant for West Ham to receive any money from the transfer. However after FIFA passed the case onto the Court of Arbitration for Sport MSI quickly settled the issue with West Ham. Is this because the whole matter revolved around a disputed contract and that CAS had only recently decided that MSI had forged documents?

Which brings us to Sheffield United's current attempt to screw West Ham out of up to £50 million on the basis of what could be forged documents. The Blades are certainly basing their whole case on their discussions with the shady Kia Joorabchian, who is wanted by the Brazilian police on suspicion of money laundering. This seems a very dangerous path to take and Sheffield United may well find themselves open to a counter-claim of attempting to defraud West Ham.


At 4:07 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

MSI pay WHU £2m for a player worth £30M? And you think it was MSI who were keen to settle out of court?

Two parties didn't want this case to reach the courts - EPL and WHU.

And the same two parties won't want SUFC's case to reach court.

Just what was Scudamore doing dictating to ManU and WHU just how much Tevez is worth?

At 11:39 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

He's only worth 30m if he wants to play for you, if he's got 3 years left on his contract and he refuses to play for you how much is he worth then? Bugger all!

SUFC are clutching at straws and I really hope Eggy takes them to the cleaners for slander.

At 10:32 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Eggy should coutersue McCabe, after all McCabe is claiming that Eggy lied to the premier league if this is not true and SU are holding forged documents then they are guilty of trying to defraud and defamation!


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Add to Google Add to My Yahoo!