Portsmouth could have points docked....

[The Bullett]

Potentially we could extend our lead over them without doing much...roll on....

"The Premier League were facing a revolt among their own members last night amid growing suspicion that West Ham and Portsmouth have fielded ineligible players this season.

Prompted by a private Premier League document obtained by Sportsmail, Wigan and a number of other top flight clubs are now questioning whether the appearances of Javier Mascherano and Carlos Tevez, for West Ham, and Manuel Fernandes, for Portsmouth, were in breach of Premier League rules.

Breaking Rule U18 can result in a points reduction because the League will not allow England’s top-flight clubs to sign players who are owned by a "third party" who would have the "ability materially to influence its policies or the performance of its teams".

While Kia Joorabchian has a 50 per cent stake in Mascherano and Tevez, Fernandes is owned 50-50 by Benfica and a private company called the Global Sports Agency. There could be significant ramifications.

Clubs currently fighting alongside West Ham to avoid relegation are prepared to launch legal challenges if they believe they have been unfairly disadvantaged, while at the top end, it could damage Pompey’s European chances.

Complications have arisen now Mascherano is trying to complete a move to Liverpool and Fernandes has gone on "loan" to Everton.

When Everton first attempted to secure the services of Fernandes, they informed the Premier League of their wish to sign the player on loan until the end of the season with a view to a permanent deal.

The Premier League refused to authorise the deal because of Everton’s desire to make it permanent, which came as a surprise to the Merseyside club when it was their understanding that the deal between Fernandes and Portsmouth was similar.

There was a clause in the contract, Sportsmail understands, that stated that Portsmouth would have to sign Fernandes on a permanent deal if he made three successive first-team appearances.

Everton told the Premier League they would simply demand the points from their game with Portsmouth — a match in which Fernandes played.

The Premier League responded by asking Everton to re-submit their forms, stating a desire to take Fernandes only on loan even though they were aware of the club’s ambition to sign Fernandes permanently.

A Premier League meeting last night failed to reach a conclusion in relation to Mascherano. Another meeting will take place today, but even then Liverpool could be left sweating on whether he will be able to move.

The delay has been caused by a failure to provide the right paperwork and there has been real drama behind the scenes to try to ensure that the deal goes through.

The Premier League insisted that they were not aware of a breach of their rules. "With what has been presented to us we haven’t allowed anything that would transgress our rules," said a spokesman.

And they said the documents presented by Portsmouth and West Ham last summer satisfied their rules. What was less clear, however, was when the Premier League received all the necessary documentation.

Sportsmail has been told that West Ham received a letter from the Premier League warning them they could risk a points deduction if they failed to provide documentation.

Aware the situation was in danger of escalating, the Premier League moved this week to privately contact the 20 top-flight chairmen.

The document, from Premier League general secretary Mike Foster, appears to offer an amnesty to clubs that may have broken the rules.

It reminds clubs of Rule U18 which states: "No Club shall enter into a contract which enables any other party to that contract to acquire the ability materially to influence its policies or the performance of its teams."

Such contracts include those which allow the third party to control or influence the employment relationship between club and player, or give the third party the right to request or require a transfer of the player, a right to a share of the financial or economic rights.

But the Premier League then adopts a non-confrontational tone by simply "giving clubs the opportunity" within 14 days of producing details of any such contracts that were not disclosed when players were registered.

Foster’s letter ends: "Once we have your responses, the board will consider relevant disclosures and then decide on appropriate action, if any."

The letter, however, has succeeded only in fuelling the suspicion among clubs fighting alongside West Ham to avoid relegation that a breach has already occurred."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/a ... =1779&ct=5

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Interesting, thanks for that.

I don't think we've got anyone lucrative enough to be part-owned; the two Argentines were a big noise and Fernandes was rated at £12m.

But I don't know.

[norm the jedi]

Would that rule be like the one that says you can't play for three teams in the same 12 months...

unless one of them is Liverpool....

i.e only likely to be enforced against us or Watford or similar unfashionable medja unfriendly interlopers

[clingfilm]

Pretty interesting but probably nothing will come of it.

However if Portsmouth and West Ham were actually forced to forfeit all points from the games where they played illegal players, Portsmouth would drop 14 points to be on 24, 4 points clear of 18th. West Ham, despite playing Tevez or Mascherano or both in 15 games, have only picked up 5 points from those, so they'd drop to 15, level with Watford on both points and goal difference.

Sheff Utd, Everton, Villa, Liverpool, and Fulham would all pick up a few points from getting awarded wins. Liverpool would go up to 51. Everton would move up to 38, right where Portsmouth is right now. Villa and Sheff U would be on 33 and Fulham on 31.

[communistworkethic]

it was more interesting when I readabout it this afternoon in the other thread

[H. Pedersen]

Would that rule be like the one that says you can't play for three teams in the same 12 months...

unless one of them is Liverpool....

i.e only likely to be enforced against us or Watford or similar unfashionable medja unfriendly interlopers

I believe that is true of all rules in football.

[Bwfc in the bloodline]

Would that rule be like the one that says you can't play for three teams in the same 12 months...

unless one of them is Liverpool....

i.e only likely to be enforced against us or Watford or similar unfashionable medja unfriendly interlopers

I believe that is true of all rules in football.

Unfashionable teams like Bury FC getting kicked out of the FA Cup for fielding an ineligable player. Its not fair clearly!!