West Ham Still Awaiting FA Compensation
The Daily Mail and The Guardian both say that Scott Parker is out of today's game with the chest infection he has been suffering. The papers also claim that Valon Behrami and Danny Gabbidon are both out with injuries.
The Sun say that West Ham will hit the FA with a £10.5million over the injury to Dean Ashton. The FA have so far refused West Ham's claims for compensation.
The Sun report that West Ham are suing the FA for the £8m insurance Ashton had, plus the £2.5m payout from the club when he was forced to call it a day in December 2009, aged just 26.
The Sun also say the club are considering their position with regard to the solicitors who advised them in the Carlos Tevez affair.
posted by Keir Clarke @ 9:41 AM
9 comments
9 Comments:
good. The FA should be sued. And they should be stripped of their right to regulate the sport. They are inept and unfit for purpose. They represent exactly why the UK is getting buried alive in sport and business by developing countries.
Fat,lazy and boring . Lethal combination.
Yeah I agree, didn't Newcastle claim successfully over Owen?
Let's get the money Sheff Utd robbed us of too. Solicitors have Professional Indemnity insurance and this stunk from day one
I never did understand why we were liable for that Sheffield United fine anyway! The prem cleared Tevez to play the remaining games! WTF is that all about? Yes he can play, oh no he weren't meant to, you are gonna have to pay a fine! BAFFLIN!
its cos we lied to them about the arrangement we had with Tevez and that company which resulted in them clearing him to play...as for ashton. the FA were more than happy to pay out for gerrard getting i9njured for a MONTH a few weeks ago, how the fuck are they not paying up for ashton???
Oh right, I thought they looked into all the documentation when they made that decision! Is the game defo on tonight? COYI's!
ATDHE.NET,
MYP2P, or
JUSTIN TV
one of these should have the game streamed.
COYI'S
Coolio, it's on sky sports1 too just wondered with the bad weather today! ;) 父
Sheff Utd failed to have the original decision (of a fine) overturned so they accused us of s second crime. This was failing to honour the PL's demands of destroying Tevez's illegal contract before he played the remaining few games.
Not only did Sheff Utd fail to prove this adequately in their FA based arbitration (they only produced one witness who answered one question) but from there on they ignored all issues regarding eligibility, which is the most important thing. All the arbitration concentrated on was how well Tevez played, which should been completely irrelevant. Either he should have been playing or not. So Sheff Utd won their money on the strength of the arbitration panel's conclusion that "Tevez was infinitely more talented than the rest of the team" (quoted from the arbitration report which was very difficult to find on the internet (tut tut Mr FA)).
The whole arbitration was completely one sided and a farce. Who ever heard of being fined £18.1m for playing well!!
To add insult to injury the joint FA/PL inquiry into whether West Ham did in fact commit a second offence concluded that we are innocent. We may, however, be able to use this when claiming against the lawyers who advised us.
What I would like to know is why we can't use this to claim the money back off Sheff Utd. The FA/PL conclusion should override the arbitrations decision and render it null and void. Just MO.
Post a Comment
<< Home