|
Post by londonranger on May 3, 2011 13:18:45 GMT
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 13:25:59 GMT
They're under the ramp up to the Stadium and therefore safe from satellites and US attack drones
|
|
eskey8
Dave Sexton
www.cycle2austria.com
Posts: 2,274
|
Post by eskey8 on May 3, 2011 13:27:14 GMT
Wayne Routledge Twitter; (I wonder what he is referring too!)
WayneRoutledge Wayne Routledge I hate waiting...
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 13:27:32 GMT
"Free The Gianni Fifteen"
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 13:28:18 GMT
hmmmmm I am surprised you can't see Paladini's huge ego from up there
|
|
|
Post by Zamoraaaah on May 3, 2011 13:29:10 GMT
They're under the ramp up to the Stadium and therefore safe from satellites and US attack drones You're right Eus. I'm thinking it would be better to park up in ASDA, nip over the road, put their windows through and back for a quick escape over Blackbird Hill.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 13:31:14 GMT
"Free The Gianni Fifteen" Should read: Interest free Gianni
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 13:41:38 GMT
The Case Explainedwww.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/cardiff-city-fc/2011/05/03/the-qpr-case-explained-91466-28625882/QPR have been charged by the FA for allegedly breaking the rules on third-party ownership. They face a formal FA hearing, which begins toady, with a decision expected on Friday. Here, football correspondent Chris Wathan explains what it means. QPR have seen their promotion hopes plunged into uncertainty after being accused of breaking FA rules over third-party ownership. The Championship leaders are already promoted but their stranglehold on the division has been thrown into doubt after being threatened with points deduction for allegedly breaking FA regulations over player ownership, use of an unauthorised agent and providing false information on official documents. They are currently nine points ahead of Cardiff and 11 ahead of Swansea going into the final match of the season on Saturday, with some reports suggesting they could even be docked 15 points if found guilty. The seven different charges made against the Loftus Road club and chairman Gianni Paladini relate to the signing of midfielder Alejandro Faurlin. QPR deny any wrongdoing and are ready to contest the charges, ready to face a formal FA hearing to stop any potential docking of points that would throw the race to the Premier League wide open. Here, WalesOnline looks at just what QPR have been accused of - and what it could mean for our Welsh top-flight chasers. THE STORY Midfielder Faurlin was signed by QPR from Argentine club Instituto de Cordoba in July 2009 in a deal reported to be worth £3.5m. However, it has now been reported that Instituo have not received any monies from the transfer and the deal was instead allegedly agreed with a third party over the player's economic rights and that QPR failed to notify the FA of this. Furthermore, QPR have been accused of using an agent not registered or approved by world governing body Fifa during the transfer. In addition, when extending the player's Hoops contract last year, QPR and Paladini have been accused of falsifying FA documents to cover up the true nature of the player's original contract. The alleged events were uncovered last September by the Football League - but they passed the case to the FA as they had no rules regarding third-party ownership. And the 24-year-old was given the go-ahead to continue playing in the Championship despite this after they gave the green-light for QPR to buy-out his third-party contract and make him unreservedly a QPR player. WHAT IS THIRD PARTY OWNERSHIP? Third-party ownership is the ownership of a player's economic rights by third-party sources, such as football agents, sports-management agencies, or other investors. It is common place in South America but against strict FA rules. WHAT IS AN UNAUTHORISED AGENT? All football clubs are only permitted to deal with agents officially recognised, licensed and registered with Fifa, world football's governing body, and the FA. WHAT HAPPENS NOW? QPR will put their case in front of a formal FA hearing today, with a decision expected on Friday. If found guilty, they could face a fine or a points deduction. They would, of course, appeal, meaning the play-off semi-finals could yet be delayed. THE PRECEDENTS Luton Town were recently hit with a 10 point deduction in 2008 for breaching FA rules over agents, although that was referring to illegal payments made to agents as well as the use of unlicensed agents. The most famous case regarding to third-party ownership is Tevez-gate in 2007 which sparked the FA's rule banning such contracts. The Hammers were fined £5.5m by an independent Premier League commission for their signing of Argentine striker Carlos Tevez, a player who would have a large impact on Premier League survival that season at the expense of Sheffield United. That outcome was criticised for not being severe enough after West Ham avoided a points deduction, with Blades boss - and current QPR manager Neil Warnock - leading the claims for docking of points. However, West Ham's punishment did not include breaching the rule on third-party ownership as it was only put in place following the Tevez affair. They were simply charged by the Premier League for failing to supply all relevant information regarding the transfer. In contrast, QPR have been charged of breaking that rule - as well as others - so there is no real precedent for the charges they are accused of.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on May 3, 2011 14:30:10 GMT
Thanks Eus. what is puzzling that after they got the case, and or discovered,which I doubt, why
did they give QPR the right to continue playing Faurlin if he was not approvable. If they had in mind to have an investigation and it has become now an end of season mess, why did they not ban Faurlin, start the investigation and rule early.
to let this go to the penultimate seems rather peculiar, severe and unnecessary.
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 14:40:51 GMT
Stand outside and get the scoop Eus ;D
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 15:03:36 GMT
Our Brief www.blackstonechambers.com/people/barristers/ian_mill_qc.htmlfrom his CV Sheffield United FC v West Ham United FC Acted for the Claimant in an arbitration under FA Rule K, seeking damages from the Defendant as a result of alleged breaches by the Defendant of its agreement with the Claimant (such agreement being constituted by the FAPL Rules governing their membership of the Premiership). Following a hearing before Lord Griffiths, Sir Anthony Colman and Robert Englehart QC in June 2008, an award was made in favour of Sheffield. Quantum hearing fixed for March 2009. Successfully applied to the Commercial Court (Teare J) in November 2008 for an interim injunction restraining West Ham from seeking to appeal the arbitration award to the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne. Also successfully opposed (at the same hearing) West Ham’s application to set aside that award under Section 68 of the Arbitration Act 1996. A hearing to assess quantum was due to begin on 16 March 2009, but settled immediately beforehand.
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 15:39:06 GMT
The hearing to determine the immediate future of Queens Park Rangers (QPR) started today at Wembley. The Football Association’s Independent Regulatory Commission will hear charges brought against the Club for an alleged breach of Third Party Ownership Rules as well as paying an unauthorised Agent in relation to the signing of Argentinean Midfielder Alejandro Faurlin in 2009. The alleged breaches Third Party Ownership is strictly prohibited under FA Regulations, put in place following the Tevez dispute in 2007, when West Ham were charged with concealing the true nature of the Player ownership. The prohibition, made in accordance with Rule C.1 (b) (iii), states that no Club may enter into an agreement with a Third Party whereby the Club makes or receives a payment to or from that Third Party as a result of, or in connection with, the registration of a Player. The specific charge against QPR, which relates to the existence of an agreement between the Club and a Third Party in respect of Faurlin’s economic rights, would, if proven, be a breach of that regulation. The charges may also extend to a breach of the FA Agents Regulations, which were put in place to police and monitor Agents, but also binds Players and Clubs. Clause H11 states that an Agent or Agent’s Organisation must not have, either directly or indirectly, any interest in relation to a Registration Right, which includes owning any interest in any transfer fee or future sale value of a Player. Whilst this Rule forbids Agents from having an interest in a Player’s registration right, the Club has a duty to uphold the regulations (Clause E1), and Clause J1 clearly stipulates that a Club must not use or pay an unauthorised Agent. If the evidence goes against QPR, there could potentially be further breaches, including not having a valid Representation Contract in place (B1) and the more serious offence of failing to disclose arrangements (contractual or customary) with an Agent, together with details of the remuneration involved. There is also a ‘catch all’ clause under E3 of the Rules of the FA which states that no party under the jurisdiction of the FA should act in a way that is improper or brings the game into disrepute. It is also not impossible that the Player could be brought within the charges, although there is no indication that the FA intends to do this. Players registered in England (as Faurlin now is) have a duty to uphold the FA Agents Regulations and not to facilitate the payment of (either direct or indirect) an unauthorised Agent (Clause I1 of the FA Agents Regulations), as well as a general duty of disclosure. Comment As set out above, if found guilty, QPR could find themselves in breach of a number of Regulations, and could face a sanctions of a fine and/or a points deduction. The severity of the penalty will depend on what comes out in evidence about the details of the Club’s arrangement, and their awareness of the involvement of an unauthorised Agent. Although it is assumed that a Club is aware of an Agent’s status because Clubs are obliged to ensure they are dealing with an authorised Agent, and if they are dealing with an overseas Agent registered to another national association, they are obliged to ensure registration with the FA takes places before any transaction, in this case a Fifa-licensed Agent was involved in the initial discussions which may well assist QPR from a mitigation perspective. The decision in the West Ham case will obviously be brought into the equation, and it should be noted in that in this case there was no points deduction, principally on the basis that such a sanction would have consigned the Club to relegation, which was deemed to be unfair on the Club’s supporters. However, the situation is slightly different here because the Third Party Rules were brought in after the Tevez dispute, so a deduction cannot be ruled out. Indeed, it is possible that any deduction, if it is imposed, could pass over until next season, and QPR could start next season in the Premier League with a negative points balance. Either way, one of the key issues will be the potential impact on other Clubs trying to secure promotion from the Championship. The considerable sums both Sheffield United (and to a lesser extent Fulham) lost out on as a result of the West Ham ruling will be recalled, as will the breach of contract claim Sheffield United brought against West Ham. Such a scenario cannot be ruled out on this occasion, and should QPR escape a deduction then Clubs who may have failed to reach the play offs as a result will obviously wish to consider their position, particularly in view of the huge financial windfall involved in securing Premiership promotion. The hearing, and the subsequent decision by the Commission, therefore has a number of potential and wide ranging ramifications, and it is unlikely that a line will be drawn under this on Friday when the hearing is handed down. Indeed, should it go against QPR the likelihood is an appeal will be launched, a step that will have to be taken within 14 days of the ruling and to which the FA would have 7 days to respond. Andrew Nixon is an Associate in the Sport and Media Group at Thomas Eggar. www.sportingintelligence.com/2011/05/03/the-sports-lawyer-if-found-guilty-qpr-could-find-themselves-in-breach-of-a-number-of-regulations147258/
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 15:50:13 GMT
Now that is a proper read of the facts Eus.
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 15:55:25 GMT
Everything is going a bit slow at the moment regarding the FA, I just want the smallest piece of news to be leaked out so we know how its going so far. But I suppose they finish in 5 minutes
|
|
eskey8
Dave Sexton
www.cycle2austria.com
Posts: 2,274
|
Post by eskey8 on May 3, 2011 15:59:28 GMT
I can't cope with this!!
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 16:01:39 GMT
So does anyone here know what actually happens now, why do we need to wait for Friday when surely they would have decided it today?
Also what does the club and the FA do tomorrow and Thursday?
|
|
|
Post by froggyranger on May 3, 2011 16:16:47 GMT
Cheers for that Froggy.......... How is the tadpole? ? Tadpole doing well txs H,already 4 months old. At least he is too young to understand what is happening to our team re the court case! He has watched 5 games already and I haven't had any other games on just in case he somehow begins to like another team!!! I will bring him over to a game next season but won't tell mrs Froggy. I don't care if he only watches 1 minute before we have to leave, I need to get him involved in the qpr family asap!
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 16:17:24 GMT
I just passed the journos again.....so presume they're still in there
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 16:18:40 GMT
OY You are not allowed to go home!!!
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 16:19:09 GMT
I could swear I heard the hearing ended at 5, oh well
|
|
|
Post by eusebio13 on May 3, 2011 16:20:28 GMT
I could swear I heard the hearing ended at 5, oh well Could be they hadn't left the building yet...can't see why journos would be there otherwise...no sign of camera crews
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 16:21:28 GMT
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 16:23:57 GMT
Well SSN says the hearing is still underway
|
|
|
Post by cpr on May 3, 2011 16:28:47 GMT
Murdoch won't pay ovies.
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 16:31:13 GMT
I nearly had a heart attack then, just now on SSN it flashed up with 'Breaking News' and they said it was about the championship. Don't worry guys, it was only about who owns Leeds (Ken Bates has completed his takeover)
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 16:33:31 GMT
(FYI, I just posted further re Leeds/Bates on another thread)
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 16:35:22 GMT
Cheers Mac
|
|
|
Post by Macmoish on May 3, 2011 16:39:51 GMT
Apologies if this one was already Soccernet QPR ruling could leave league in limbo May 3, 2011 By Dale Johnson Four years ago Carlos Tevez scored the only goal of the game for West Ham United at Manchester United, a goal that kept the Hammers in the Premier League ultimately at the expense of Neil Warnock's Sheffield United. GettyImages Alejandro Faurlin's ownership is the key to the case against QPR Tevez, as we are all now well aware, arrived at West Ham essentially on secondment from Kia Joorabchian's MSI investment group, something West Ham decided not to tell the Premier League and which, in many people's eyes, should have resulted in a points deduction. None more so than Warnock, who spent months accusing the Football Association of lacking bite and fudging the inquiry as the Blades went down on the last day. Today, Warnock is playing a very different tune as his Queens Park Rangers side wait anxiously to find out if they will rejoin English football's elite next season. QPR sealed the Championship title with victory at Watford on Saturday with celebrations that were, understandably, a little more muted than Norwich's after they confirmed the second automatic slot at Portsmouth on Monday. The QPR fans are well aware that doubts hang over their place back in the Premier League. QPR's automatic promotion fate may be decided at Wembley this week, and they will be desperate not to be forced to return to the stadium at the end of the month in a possible play-off final. Newspaper speculation suggests they could lose as many as 15 points - just two weeks after whispers indicated a positive outcome for the Loftus Road club. Warnock may continue to stand firm in his belief that they will be exonerated, but it now appears unlikely they will receive the sort of leniency that saw West Ham escape with a £5.5 million fine. It's remarkable that the FA has managed to get itself into this position for a second time. West Ham's punishment was handed down on April 28, with a points deduction ruled out by an independent panel as that would have meant certain relegation for the East London club amid fears of ongoing legal battles. As it was, the legal battles did go on but not so that the league calendar was affected. That may not be the case this time. QPR's fate will be revealed even later, with the decision over the transfer of Alejandro Faurlin from Instituto in 2009 set for Friday, May 6 - 24 hours before the final day of the Championship season. It threatens to throw the end of season into turmoil should QPR be deducted enough points to send them out of the automatic places and into the play-offs. There are links between the Faurlin and Tevez cases - including Warnock and Ian Mill QC, who represented Sheffield United over Tevez and is now fighting QPR's corner - but nothing to set any precedent. Back in 2007 there was no specific rule to bar clubs from third party ownership, with West Ham's charges based around them entering into an agreement with another party who could influence their use of the player. That has now changed, but when QPR signed Faurlin in what they claimed was a £3.5 million deal in the summer of 2009 the rules had not been adopted by the Football League, which means they may argue there was no rule to break. The Football League fell into line with the Premier League at the start of this season, when QPR applied to buy the outright ownership of the midfielder. They were directed to the FA to complete the paperwork, which began an investigation into the transfer. While West Ham pleaded guilty to all charges in a bid for leniency, QPR and chairman Gianni Paladini are fighting it all the way. PA Photos Neil Warnock celebrates with Alejandro Faurlin and Adel Taarabt The whole case is going to centre on exactly what QPR told the authorities in 2009, both in terms of the player's contract and the intricate details of his transfer. Although QPR claim to have paid £3.5 million to Instituto, the club actually received no money from Rangers. Faurlin had affectively come to the end of a leasing arrangement from his true owners, three Argentine agents, and as such they had no economic rights. It could be the alleged illegal payments made to an unlicensed agent which are the Rs' biggest downfall, with Luton Town docked 10 points for a similar offence recently. There is pressure on the FA to right the wrongs of the Tevez case at the first opportunity; by docking QPR points it can set a precedent. No one wants a disciplinary hearing such as this to take place in the final week of the season - and that goes for players, managers, chairmen, the FA and the Football League. So how has the FA managed to cook up a convoluted disciplinary process which lands them in precisely that position? Although the charges relating to Faurlin - the QPR fans' and players' Player of the Year in 2009-10 - were only announced in March, the FA had been looking into the deal for six months. And still it will only manage to reach a conclusion on the eve of the season's finale. It leaves not just the FA, but more notably the Football League, backed into a corner. If QPR are docked enough points to knock them out of the automatic promotion places they are certain to lodge an appeal; they have 10 days to do so. The Championship play-offs are due to begin on May 12, which will be impossible should an appeal be necessary. The number of points deducted will have a direct bearing on which sides play each other in the play-offs, as well as who has home advantage. And if QPR fail in their appeal they are certain to look at every other avenue to test the ruling. QPR have worked steadily to achieve a return to the top flight, backed by the millions of Flavio Briatore, Bernie Ecclestone and Lakshmi Mittal and, considering their wealth, it is likely they will investigate every option to ensure their investment obtains its place among the riches of the Premier League. While it is thought the Football League has already drawn up a new play-off schedule in anticipation of a points deduction, QPR's next move will be crucial and could leave English football in limbo. The situation could have been easily avoidable had the FA not dithered and sorted out the case in a more timely manner. It has had almost eight months to do so. If the Football League cannot get the play-off final staged on May 30 as planned, a two-week international break follows which could easily rob the finalists of key players. That would make June 12 the next available date for a final - six days before the new season's fixture list should be published. It's a situation which has infuriated those managers in the play-offs who will be affected by the ruling. Swansea boss Brendan Rodgers and Dave Jones at Cardiff have both expressed their dismay at the timing of the hearing. If QPR are docked seven points or more Cardiff will be back in the hunt for automatic promotion; nine points and Swansea remarkably come back into contention. If it is as much as 15 points then Cardiff and Swansea will battle it out to join newly-crowned champions Norwich in the Premier League. But none of those teams want to meet the best side in the division in the play-offs. While it would be a huge task for QPR to recover and win the play-offs, they still have the better players and, arguably, a better manager than any of the four other clubs who could contest the play-offs. It does not seem beyond the realms of possibility that the FA will hand down a face-saving six-point penalty and a considerable fine soccernet.espn.go.com/columns/story/_/id/914854/qpr-ruling-could-leave-league-in-limbo?cc=5901
|
|
|
Post by RoryTheRanger on May 3, 2011 17:30:31 GMT
Right Mr Mills has left FA HQ after 8 hours of lawyer stuff.
|
|
|
Post by londonranger on May 3, 2011 17:38:57 GMT
A fighter that Mills, just like old Freddie Mills, world Light -Heavy weight champion, uncle of our
Don Mills, inside forward in 48 championship. Fate will smile upon us.
|
|