No Right to Complain
The Premier League handed West Ham a record 5.5m GBP fine last Friday, for irregulations concerning the transfers of Argentinian duo Javier Mascherano and Carlos Tevez. The pair were part owned by Iranian businessman Kia Joorabchian, which violated Premiership rules regarding third party ownership. The club was found guilty of “acting improperly” and “witholding vital documentation.”
The controversy concerns what didn’t happen, a points deduction. AFC Wimbeldon were docked 18 pts (reduced to 3 pts on appeal) for fielding an ineligible player. Following precedent, West Ham should have faced a 3 pt deduction as well, which would have effectively ended their late season push to escape the relegation zone. The fine was no trifle, but nothing compared to the tens of millions of GBP to be made by staying in the Premier League next season.
One of the reasons put forward was that it would be unfair to take away pts, since the violations occurred under the previous administration, prior to the Eggman’s purchase of the club. However, fellow incompetents Wigan Athletic and Fulham suggest a more cynical explanation, the Premier League wants West Ham to stay up.
West Ham are a big London club. They have a passionate fan base that fills Upton Park every week. They have a new owner willing to pump money into the club. Their presence fuels London derbys, stokes fan interest, and makes everyone a lot of sweet moolah. Fulham are a small club with a lukewarm fan base, and Wigan are a small club that struggles to fill its stadium. The dots aren’t hard to connect. The Guardian’s David Conn suggests that Fulham or Wigan may consider legal action if they are relegated over West Ham.
Money conquers all in the world of football. That is why the Premier League was created in the first place. That is why Fulham and Wigan are so desperate to avoid the drop. West Ham having a shot to stay up is great for business. Immediately, it maintains interest in the last two weeks of the season, where Man U essentially has the title wrapped up and most clubs will be fielding reserves and packing it up for the year. For next season, the league avoids losing both a big club with a large fan base, and a third London area club. It is fairly clear that there was, at the very least, a strong incentive for the league to not drop points.
That said, Wigan and Fulham have zero right to complain. Carlos Tevez and West Ham did not put Wigan and Fulham on the brink of relegation. Their rubbish play did.
Paul Jewell was keen to blame the referees for costing the team 50mGBP with a questionable decision against Arsenal early in the year. It was obviously the referees’ fault. It surely had nothing to do with a stretch in the middle of the season when the club lost 9/10 matches. Fulham’s situation is certainly due to Tevez as well, rather than say, going winless in their last 11 league matches.
The other clubs have every incentive to blame the Premier League and West Ham for their troubles. It provides an easy target to deflect blame for their rubbish play and forgettable season. However, the blame resides squarely with them. Wigan had an opportunity to dock 3 pts from West Ham on the pitch last weekend and got spanked 3-0. If Wigan and Fulham want to stay in the Premiership, they should shut up and start playing like it.
Tags: Carlos Tevez, Fulham, Premiership, Relegation, West Ham, Wigan Athletic
You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.
2 May 2007 at 11:09 pm
“Carlos Tevez and West Ham did not put Wigan and Fulham on the brink of relegation. Their rubbish play did.”
Look, this is silly. Of course they could escape relegation if they played better, but the point is that they played *well enough* to beat West Ham. And that’s all that’s demanded. They don’t relegate you for being 16th, and those teams played well enough for 16th, assuming West Ham received the points deduction they clearly deserve.
If the season ends with West Ham up one point on Fulham, there is ZERO chance that would still be true if they didn’t have Tevez. Zero. So while their crappy play put them on the brink of relegation, the shameful decision to not dock points may very well be what pushes them over.
2 May 2007 at 11:29 pm
If they don’t finish ahead of West Ham, they didn’t play well enough to beat them. Particularly, since Wigan had an opportunity to put them away last weekend on the field and got beaten badly. You don’t play out the seasons relying upon someone else to get a points deduction to push yourself ahead.
Tevez played well for them, but you can’t logically state what would have happened had he not played.
If Fulham finishes in 17th, their bad play put them there. It has nothing to do with West Ham.
3 May 2007 at 1:39 am
Well of course they should have played better. And they shouldn’t feel good about how well they’ve played over the year. But they have played better than 2 teams, and as well as third who cheated to obtain an unfair advantage. They played bad, but they played well enough to escape relegation.
As for how they would have done without Tevez, 1) are you serious? He has been basically their only good player for quite a while. 2) it doesn’t matter. A rule is a rule, and violation of the rule should deserves consequences. Even if Tevez was rubbish, they knowingly signed him in an effort to gain an unfair advantage.
Should Juventus be the reigning holders of the Serie A title? After all, if Inter wanted to win, they should have just played better. It was their poor performance that prevented them from winning. Right?
3 May 2007 at 7:30 am
First of all, nowhere in the entry or in my comment did I ever say that I did not think that West Ham should have been docked points or that there was a legitimate reason they should have been docked points.
Second, I never said that Tevez didn’t make them a better club. What I said was that there is no way to prove what hypothetically would have happened had another player played in his stead.
Third, I don’t quite understand how the Serie A scandal is quite relevant. There is no way of calculating what would have happened had there been no match-fixing, which is why most view this season and not last as the year their scudetto drought ended.
A more relevant situation from that incident would be Lecce suing Serie A because Lazio were not docked enough points to relegate them or Palermo whining because AC Milan were not docked enough points to boost themselves into the Champions League. Those claims would be ridiculous, and even then they would have more merit than Wigan or Fulham whining about 3 points, particularly when they both had the opportunity during the season to take 6 off West Ham.
8 May 2007 at 6:56 am
The Italian situation however is an example of clubs being docked points. West Ham should have been docked points and the only reason that they haven’t is quite clearly a financial decision by a league whose only goal is money. Something which you touch upon in your post.
If you look behind the complaints of the clubs who feel West Ham should have been docked points, Charlton have said that it’s their own fault they’ve been relegated, not West Ham’s, but they still believe the decision not to dock West Ham points was unjust.
This really does set a precedent of “If you’ve got enough money you can buy yourself out of trouble”.
8 May 2007 at 7:15 am
Yes, Charlton have handled it quite admirably. But, Whelan has been making statements for a couple weeks about lawsuits over W. Ham not being docked three points, when his club have lost three matches in a row that would have given them nine. I find that nauseating.
I think West Ham are going to beat Man Utd. and get through with pts to spare.