Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Tevez, the high court, and sheffield

  • 26-07-2007 12:28am
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭


    if the high court rules that Tevez continued to be owned by the third party, as put forward in the high court writ issued will Sheffield have effectively been proved right in their efforts to be reinstated to the premiership, and will it follow that simply if the high court decides on Tevez?


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,894 ✭✭✭evad_lhorg


    Sheffield Utd have already told they were right but as west ham had already been punished it couldnt be overturned.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,580 ✭✭✭uberwolf


    but if the high court says Kia Joorabchian retained interest, after the Premier League said it was to end, then it's a new offence? Which hadn't been adjudicated on


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 46,426 ✭✭✭✭Mitch Connor


    uberwolf wrote:
    but if the high court says Kia Joorabchian retained interest, after the Premier League said it was to end, then it's a new offence? Which hadn't been adjudicated on
    The papers today are saying that the PL have told West Ham it is 'unlikely' they would face further punishment should any case go against them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    That's cause, even if they do get told MSI own them, because they acted like they didn't, they can't be done for third party influence.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators Posts: 10,087 Mod ✭✭✭✭marco_polo


    PHB wrote:
    That's cause, even if they do get told MSI own them, because they acted like they didn't, they can't be done for third party influence.

    And everybody lives happily ever after. :). Even Sheff Utd, who will probably get a big pot of compensation cash for their troubles down the line.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement