Sheffield United Appeal Over Carlos Tevez Affair Dismissed By Arbitration Panel
Soccer: Sheffield United will be playing in the Championship next season after an arbitration panel dismissed their appeal over the Carlos Tevez affair.
Sheffield United's slow, slow death is complete: they have lost their legal challenge against the Premier League after an arbitration panel dismissed their claim over the Carlos Tevez affair.
United had wanted the panel to order a new disciplinary commission deal with West Ham but had their claim dismissed today. The club also lost another claim - made jointly with Fulham - that the Premier League should have forced West Ham to de-register Tevez.
A statement from the arbitration panel read: "The tribunal have found in favor of the FA Premier League on both issues and dismissed the claims of Sheffield United FC and Fulham FC."
West Ham breached Premier League regulations by including third-party agreements when they signed Tevez and Javier Mascherano last summer, and as a punishment they were fined £5.5m in April by an independent commission.
Sheffield United, who were relegated from the Premiership on the last day of the season, claimed that West Ham should have been deducted points instead.
The three-man panel, headed by retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton, did not have the power to change West Ham's punishment but could have ordered a new independent commission to judge the case.
The Blades' failure effectively ends their battle to avoid relegation to the Coca-Cola Championship.
The ruling from the arbitration panel said Sheffield United would not normally have been allowed to dispute another club's punishment but that there were "exceptional circumstances" due to their relegation and therefore affected their membership of the Premier League.
The tribunal said they had "sympathy" with the Blades, while West Ham had been "deliberately deceitful" and yet remained in the Premier League. They could not, however, rule that the independent commission's decision had been wrong.
The panel's ruling states: "Ian Mill QC [representing Sheffield United] mounted a strong attack on the legality of the decision and the tribunal had much sympathy for Sheffield United's grievances.
"However the tribunal had to apply the principles of judicial review and determine whether the decision was irrational or perverse. This is a very strict test and is very difficult to satisfy. It concluded that it was impossible for this tribunal to find that the decision was irrational or perverse."
United had wanted the panel to order a new disciplinary commission deal with West Ham but had their claim dismissed today. The club also lost another claim - made jointly with Fulham - that the Premier League should have forced West Ham to de-register Tevez.
A statement from the arbitration panel read: "The tribunal have found in favor of the FA Premier League on both issues and dismissed the claims of Sheffield United FC and Fulham FC."
West Ham breached Premier League regulations by including third-party agreements when they signed Tevez and Javier Mascherano last summer, and as a punishment they were fined £5.5m in April by an independent commission.
Sheffield United, who were relegated from the Premiership on the last day of the season, claimed that West Ham should have been deducted points instead.
The three-man panel, headed by retired High Court judge Sir Philip Otton, did not have the power to change West Ham's punishment but could have ordered a new independent commission to judge the case.
The Blades' failure effectively ends their battle to avoid relegation to the Coca-Cola Championship.
The ruling from the arbitration panel said Sheffield United would not normally have been allowed to dispute another club's punishment but that there were "exceptional circumstances" due to their relegation and therefore affected their membership of the Premier League.
The tribunal said they had "sympathy" with the Blades, while West Ham had been "deliberately deceitful" and yet remained in the Premier League. They could not, however, rule that the independent commission's decision had been wrong.
The panel's ruling states: "Ian Mill QC [representing Sheffield United] mounted a strong attack on the legality of the decision and the tribunal had much sympathy for Sheffield United's grievances.
"However the tribunal had to apply the principles of judicial review and determine whether the decision was irrational or perverse. This is a very strict test and is very difficult to satisfy. It concluded that it was impossible for this tribunal to find that the decision was irrational or perverse."

Use the feedback form below to submit your comments.

Use the form below to email this article to your friends.

- Robson's Bramall Lane Future Hangs in Balance
- Robson Gives Angry Fans the Slip But His Number May Be Up
- Respite for Robson As Blades Carve Up City
- Sheffield United Hold on to Dump City Out of Cup
- Robson Asks for Time As Fans Vent Spleen
- Selection Whispers Hint at Anelka Move
- Robson Lands a Triple Whammy
- United Land a Triple Whammy
- Beattie Adds Meat to Robson Plan
- Williamson Strike Sends Hornets Top
- Blades to Launch Legal Fight for Relegation Compensation
- Blades Chief Eyes Deal That Would Bring in Young Hungarian Stars
- Sheffield United Threaten Legal Action Against West Ham and League
- Blades Denied Right to Appeal
- Derby Agree £3m Deal for Sheffield United Centre-back Claude Davis
- Blades Consider Lodging High Court Appeal
- West Ham Should Have Lost Points, Says Panel
- League Reality Hits Home for Blades
- League Threaten Blades As Relegation Row Grows
- Bryan Robson Confirmed As Sheffield United Manager



