http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/may/03/sunderland-face-legal-fight-points-deduction
This is in the Grauniad , but would it help you guys I wonder ?
This is in the Grauniad , but would it help you guys I wonder ?
Challenge ?
- Thread starter Ffsdon'tpassittohim
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
.
I think clutching at straws as Sunderland stuffed us good and proper. Ki played in the draw at the CCS but our poor substitutions gave them a point not Ki. All about money so I am not surprised at this headline. If Norwich stay up at the expense of Sunderland they would drop the complaint pretty damned quickly.
Looks like another Tevez/West Ham/Sheff Utd thing where lawyers are getting involved in our sport. I'm all for getting rid of inconsistencies in the rulings of game, but this is a step too far and an utter joke given the circumstances.
Sunderland deserve their current table position with some excellent performances at this sharp end of the season.
Sunderland deserve their current table position with some excellent performances at this sharp end of the season.
In answer to the question as to whether this would help us the answer has to be no, we got Chelsea next and somehow I can't see us getting anything from it, nevermind a win.
Should the decision be/have been challenged, most probably, it's inconsistent and seemingly unfair to those who have been docked points for the same offence, in that respect it should be challenged.
Unfortunately, as it is the bottom 3 clubs who will instigate this it definitely has a look of sour grapes, Sunderland have produced the football when needed to keep them up.
Should the decision be/have been challenged, most probably, it's inconsistent and seemingly unfair to those who have been docked points for the same offence, in that respect it should be challenged.
Unfortunately, as it is the bottom 3 clubs who will instigate this it definitely has a look of sour grapes, Sunderland have produced the football when needed to keep them up.
Lawyers are only getting involved at the express instruction of the three clubs involved. It's not as if lawyers have been knocking on doors touting for work.
Looks like the fans here find this an embarrassing challenge and that's encouraging. So who sanctioned this at the Club? Wouldn't help you anyway because if Sunderland were docked points wouldn't it just benefit the team in 18th spot? At lease as it currently stands.
Having said all that I do think 3 points is the norm so why were they let off? Even Poyet was shocked.
Looks like the fans here find this an embarrassing challenge and that's encouraging. So who sanctioned this at the Club? Wouldn't help you anyway because if Sunderland were docked points wouldn't it just benefit the team in 18th spot? At lease as it currently stands.
Having said all that I do think 3 points is the norm so why were they let off? Even Poyet was shocked.
I just took the phrase "lawyers getting involved in our sport" as an indictment of those lawyers. You may not have meant any such thing, I don't know. Perhaps it was more of an indictment of legal action being instigated in this way being a bad thing.
I was simply making the point that IF anyone is blaming the lawyers that's unfair because they are only being told what to do by the clients who pay them.
I am allowed to say that am I?
I was simply making the point that IF anyone is blaming the lawyers that's unfair because they are only being told what to do by the clients who pay them.
I am allowed to say that am I?
I accept jax coming over to gloat, it's inevitable because you hate us more than you love your own club, but you are so childlike that I cringe on behalf some the other intelligent posters who come over. You must be an embarrassment to be in the company of.
DB - you are allowed to say what you want on this forum within reason - unlike some others.
Let's put your concerned mind at rest - nobody is blaming the lawyers. It's just an assumption you've made by reading into posts something that isn't there.
I doubt anyone on here is suggesting that there are a batch of litigation-frenzy lawyers banging on club's doors asking for instructions.
Let's put your concerned mind at rest - nobody is blaming the lawyers. It's just an assumption you've made by reading into posts something that isn't there.
I doubt anyone on here is suggesting that there are a batch of litigation-frenzy lawyers banging on club's doors asking for instructions.
It's not ki they are talking about it's Ji Dong Won,he was a safc player who went out on loan to hamburg and then was brought back
"the board ⦠may also levy penalty points against the club in default".
they made it clear that they won't do that, as far as i'm concerned that should be the end of it. we will at best get compensation, but it'll be one almighty legal scrap which will cost the club a lot of money should we lose.
no one's blaming the lawyers at all, if there's a case then we should try, if we're doing it knowing that nothing will come of it out of spite and bitterness than i'd drop it.
they made it clear that they won't do that, as far as i'm concerned that should be the end of it. we will at best get compensation, but it'll be one almighty legal scrap which will cost the club a lot of money should we lose.
no one's blaming the lawyers at all, if there's a case then we should try, if we're doing it knowing that nothing will come of it out of spite and bitterness than i'd drop it.
Of course, the Jacks kept lawyers in work for years, cheating creditors out of 90p in the £. So I think your club will know it all.
Thanks for the comments on here.
To clear things up, it was Ji who was our player and had been for two years and we held his registration. He was loaned to a club in Germany at the end of last season and returned to us in the close season, still our player. One form went missing the league marked him as eligible to play and it was only when we realised that the international clearance form was missing and reported ourselves to the league that anybody knew anything.
The decision was also reported to all clubs at a league meeting months ago and no body objected to the punishment then. So on balance I think you had better keep you money and use it to rebuild your squad rather than waste it on lawyers.
One more thing the fine was with in the rules and there is nothing which says points must be deducted. Also the clubs the clubs who have had points deducted played players who had not been registered for them. Ji was always registered as a Sunderland player, so you are not looking at the same offence.
Good luck next season and we will do what we can to give Swansea a good beating for you next week
To clear things up, it was Ji who was our player and had been for two years and we held his registration. He was loaned to a club in Germany at the end of last season and returned to us in the close season, still our player. One form went missing the league marked him as eligible to play and it was only when we realised that the international clearance form was missing and reported ourselves to the league that anybody knew anything.
The decision was also reported to all clubs at a league meeting months ago and no body objected to the punishment then. So on balance I think you had better keep you money and use it to rebuild your squad rather than waste it on lawyers.
One more thing the fine was with in the rules and there is nothing which says points must be deducted. Also the clubs the clubs who have had points deducted played players who had not been registered for them. Ji was always registered as a Sunderland player, so you are not looking at the same offence.
Good luck next season and we will do what we can to give Swansea a good beating for you next week