Neil Warnock

Mental Mickey

Did anyone see this complete and utter PLONKER on Sky Sports News just now? He wants MORE compensation from the FA etc over the Carlos Tevez "affair"!!??

He claims that it was HIS FAULT that Sheffield United were relegated!!?? He's also talking about getting compensation for the then Sheffield United players too!! AND he launched a personal attack on that guy Richard Scudamore live on national tv.

Does the guy not realise that the reason they were relegated that season was because they lost more than this game!??

Steve Curry(who I cannot stand btw), said that Warnock should try to engage his brain before he opens his mouth next time!!!:D

I hope to God that the FA throw this out and that we hear no more of this utter nonsense from this idiot?

Aidric

Warnock is an annoying mouthpiece, with no intelligence to back it up. His TV contributions are guaranteed cringe, Giles visibly winced everytime the guy was mentioned on RTE.

Royale with Cheese

They don't call him Colin Wanker for nothing.

x in the city

I mis-spelled his surname with a c somehow ages ago and got banned from this place I think, but he is some tool.

x in the city

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

They don't call him Colin Wanker for nothing.

are you allowed use such a word in this religiously modded forum....:D

perhaps Colin should be an exception

eagle eye

I remember reading this article earlier this year. In fairness there was some shenanigans at the time and Sheffield United imo have every right to pursue this. The potential earnings they lost by being relegated is huge and there are rules in place that were broken.

West Ham United must face up to the possibility of further punishment over the Carlos Tevez affair after the Premier League and Football Association announced a fresh investigation into the scandal.

The Hammers were fined £5.5 million in 2007 for breaching league rules over third-party agreements in signing Tevez, and the new inquiry will focus on the club's dealings with his representatives after the initial punishment.
It follows an arbitration tribunal chaired by Lord Griffiths who ruled in favour of Sheffield United, and pointed the finger at West Ham chief executive Scott Duxbury. The Blades have lodged a compensation claim of up to £50 million.
The new investigation will be conducted by both the FA and the Premier League, who said in a statement: "The joint inquiry will examine whether the conduct of West Ham United immediately after the independent disciplinary commission's decision of 27 April 2007 amounted to further breaches of Premier League or FA rules."
The key point to be investigated is the evidence provided to the tribunal by lawyer Graham Shear, solicitor for Tevez's agent Kia Joorabchian.
Shear said that Duxbury had provided verbal assurances that the third-party agreement still existed – despite the Hammers chief having informed the Premier League that the deal had been terminated. Griffith said in his findings: "If the Premier League had known what Mr Duxbury for West Ham was saying to Mr Joorabchian's solicitor following the commission decision, we are confident that the Premier League would have suspended Mr Tevez's registration as a West Ham player.
"We have no doubt that those [Tevez's] services were worth at least three points to West Ham over the season and were what made the difference between West Ham remaining in the Premiership and being relegated at the end of the season."
After being told the agreement had been terminated, the Premier League had then allowed Tevez to play for the Hammers in the crucial relegation battle that led to Sheffield United's eventual drop out of the top flight.
The inquiry means West Ham or individuals could face further disciplinary action but the club say they have nothing to hide from the new inquiry.
Club insiders acknowledged the need to investigate Griffiths' findings but say they are convinced they can provide the evidence to prevent further disciplinary action.
And as no recordings of the relevant conversations appear to exist, it will be hard to prove exactly what was said between Duxbury and Shear.
A club statement said: "West Ham United will co-operate fully with the joint inquiry convened by the FA and Premier League.
"We have acted in good faith throughout the various inquiries and investigations into this matter and fulfilled the undertakings given to the Premier League following the initial penalty.
"We have nothing to hide and will ensure that this is once again reflected in our evidence to the FA and Premier League."
The Blades are claiming compensation from West Ham as a result of winning the case, and the final figure will be decided by the tribunal some time in the spring.
West Ham have stood by their chief executive Duxbury since the arbitration tribunal and said his position is not under review.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/leagues/premierleague/westham/4176688/West-Ham-face-further-punishment-over-Carlos-Tevez-affair.html

Het-Field

The most horrible little man in Football.

Cant believe he is still complaining. Why should him, and some of his crap players get financial compensation, for flitting away a 10 point lead with 10 games to go (these including games against Charlton,Watford, and West Ham (which they won 3-0).)

I hate that club. They blame their 1993/1994 relegation on Spurs's fianancial irregularities, their failure to gain promotion in 2002/2003 on Leicester City's administrative problems, and their 2006/2007 relegation on Tevez. They should just realise that they suck, are a paradigm of mediocrity, and a destined to a life in the Championship.

eagle eye

I prefer him to a lot of other managers in the game. He is not near the bottom of the list imo.

He is also a very good manager.

JerryHandbag

I remember he said in 2007 that he hoped that Man United and Liverpool would lose their respective Cup finals that season (FA Cup and CL) because he felt they both fielded 'weakened' teams against Sheffield Uniteds relegation rivals.

The plonker got his wish.

eagle eye

JerryHandbag wrote: »

I remember he said in 2007 that he hoped that Man United and Liverpool would lose their respective Cup finals that season (FA Cup and CL) because he felt they both fielded 'weakened' teams against Sheffield Uniteds relegation rivals.

The plonker got his wish.

And whats wrong with that, he shoots from the hip and he was annoyed and why wouldn't he be?

JerryHandbag

eagle eye wrote: »

And whats wrong with that, he shoots from the hip and he was annoyed and why wouldn't he be?

Because any manager with any class about them wouldn't resort to rooting against other teams that have nothing to do with his own situation....shows what a bitter little man he is......"I should still be a premier league manager today"...Yeah right like they wouldn't have got relegated the following season anyway :rolleyes:

Handsome Bob

I have no time for him, arguably one of the biggest narcissists in the entire game of football. In his mind he is never at fault.

Chardee MacDennis

he's just a bitter, bitter man...

Unearthly

I personally think West Ham should of been AWARDED 25 million for getting rid of him out of the premiership.

eagle eye

Unearthly wrote: »

I personally think West Ham should of been AWARDED 25 million for getting rid of him out of the premiership.

By the sounds of things here, that comment is very Warnockespue. Congratulations you are just like him.:)

Unearthly

haha eagle eye saying I'm like Warnock.

Funny

Mitch Connor

What is the punishment for fielding an ineligible player? In a cup comp the tie is forfeit, so would similar not apply to the premiership (points deduction for every game he played in?) which would mean, if West Ham did lie (as I believe they did) they should have been relegated in place of Sheffield United, if it was Sheffield United who finsihed 17, can't remember exactly myself.

eagle eye

Mitch Connor wrote: »

What is the punishment for fielding an ineligible player? In a cup comp the tie is forfeit, so would similar not apply to the premiership (points deduction for every game he played in?) which would mean, if West Ham did lie (as I believe they did) they should have been relegated in place of Sheffield United, if it was Sheffield United who finsihed 17, can't remember exactly myself.

They lost out on goal difference to Wigan.

monkey9

The bloke is an idiot. He blames everyone else for his team's relegation. Liverpool for fielding weakened teams, West Ham for playing Tevez. He wasn't good enough to stay up and either was his team.
West Ham deserved to be punished, but Sheffield Utd and players and Warnock don't deserve compensation

Mitch Connor

If West had points gained deducted from the games that Tevez played in, as possibly should have happed, would Sheffield United have been relegated? I don't think they would have been.

On that basis, Sheffield United had a case against West Ham/The FA (hence the payment agreed) and thus, imo, the employees of Sheffield United should get compensation for lost earnings/bonus's.

eagle eye

Agreed and the FA and West Ham should be paying a much heavier price for this so that its clear in future that it will not be tolerated.

DSB

Can't stand the man, but he is still definitely entitled to a nice cash settlement from the Hammers.

So what if his team were rubbish that season and weren't good enough to stay up aside from that injustice? The fact remains there were injustices which meant that if justice was done Sheff Utd would have gotten 17th, and I don't think theres many who'll debate that.

We don't have a rule where 17th are punished for being **** every year so why is whats happened Sheff Utd considered ok by some in this thread?

Bounty Hunter

as far as west ham are concerned though should sheff utd agreeing a deal with west ham not draw a line under it i.e if their employees from the time want compensation it should have been factored into any settlement that Sheff utd made with West ham?

Jazzy

i hate neil warnock. hes sooooo cringeworthy and not even in that funny david brent way

GuanYin

I'm going to have to ban someone here, aren't I?

*sigh*

I'll suppose contextuality for the most part but if anyone partakes in wanton abuse they will get infracted and maybe banned.

Eirebear

I'm not particularly a fan of Warnock or his approach to this, but im pretty damn sure if the shoe was on the other foot all you people slagging him off here would be raging.

Imagine how the United fans would react if Liverpool won the league and it was subsequently shown that they played the second half of the season with an ineligible player not only playing for them, but pulling the strings in that team and lifting them when they needed it most?
This place would be unbearable.

You also have to look at the gulf in class that a player such as Tevez has in comparison to anything the relegation teams that season could offer.

Dont get me wrong, i dont think Tevez was the sole reason for Sheffield Utd going down, but he was a major part in West Ham staying up.
Why havnt they been punished more severely for this?

Jazzy

GuanYin wrote: »

I'm going to have to ban someone here, aren't I?

*sigh*

I'll suppose contextuality for the most part but if anyone partakes in wanton abuse they will get infracted and maybe banned.

relax luv - Like a moonlight shadow....

boom baby

5starpool

Neil Warnock is one of the most hateful characters in the game. I'm sick of hearing him talk.