FLAWED ARGUMENT

Five reasons why Fulham don’t deserve £700k from West Ham

Without mentioning the fact they thought this was a good idea…

Lawrie Sanchez and Les Reed ended the season as Fulham’s managerial duo

Fulham are the latest club hoping to make money from West Ham’s decision to compensate Sheffield United. According to The Independent. they will launch a legal claim on the basis that were it not for Carlos Tevez, they would have finished above the Hammers and would therefore have made an extra £700,000 in prize money.

Here are five flaws that The Spoiler has found in Fulham’s argument:

1) Fellow compensation-seeker Neil Warnock believes Fulham would have been relegated that season if Rafael Benitez hadn’t fielded reserves against them in the penultimate game of the season. Warnock has said since: “Maybe Rafa gets a yearly hamper from Harrods for his team selections.” That was Fulham’s only win from their final twelve games.

2) Carlos Tevez lasted only 13 minutes against them that season before getting injured at Craven Cottage. His replacement Bobby Zamora, West Ham’s top scorer that season, scored. Using Lord Griffiths magic calculator, it could be argued that the game may have finished 3-2 to the hosts had Zamora not replaced Tevez, a result which would have seen Fulham finish above West Ham

3) As Fulham did not directly suffer from Tevez’s presence, their claim appears to be based on the belief that West Ham should have been deducted at least two points. There is no precedent which suggests that punishment should have been given in relation to the rules they breached.

4) The Cottagers have since signed Paul Konchesky, John Pantsil and Zamora, who were all members of West Ham’s 2006-07 squad. Therefore Fulham mustn’t believe the myth that Tevez was a one-man team that season.

5) Since gaining promotion in 2005, West Ham have never finished below Fulham so there is no reason to believe 2006-07 was unique.


4 responses so far
  • jen // March 20, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    ahaha, but will they this year (Fulham finish above West Ham I mean)? Spoiler boys that know all please tell me.

  • Fulham Jules // March 20, 2009 at 2:52 pm

    Your part 2 backs fulham because they would have been 2 points ahead. Your part 3 is unimportant as it is about Lord Griffiths stating that ‘Tevez was woth two points’ not if you think he is worth two points. Your part 5 is irrelvant as Fulham where above West Ham since their promotion in 2001.

    But must importantly….West Ham cheated and must be punished for the benefit of all in football.

  • Mike // March 20, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    I must now sue Fulham for fielding ex West Ham players this season, with which they have done rather well with.

    If West Ham had been relegated or this case was not brought before them. The need to sell such players, to Fulham may not have arised. Therefore they would have been worse off this year and not challenging for an European place at all.

  • asif // March 20, 2009 at 8:24 pm

    i guess when west ham agreed the compensate the money with sheffield united, every club in the country got a eyes to the hammers money… just as zola.. im also annoyed.. the reason they dont do well in 06-07 its started with tevez all along, then when he start to turn up.. ppl sued west ham. i mean if he dont deliver in the first place does anyone even bother if he was legal or not?

Leave a comment
  1. View comments in RSS feed