Howard probe: United could be docked points

[433tom]

This is Sundays headlines. Says we had no right to keep Howard from playing. No other details at this time.

[433tom]

Even if nothing comes out of this.. it will still give Chelsea a little bit extra for the Arsenal match. Bad timing all around.

[haven]

Absolute rubbish.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/e/everton/6362649.stm

Everton have signed on-loan keeper Tim Howard from Manchester United on a permanent deal for an undisclosed fee.
The 27-year-old United States star has signed a five-year contract, that will start at the end of the season.

He's technically still on loan right now. Thus, the provision is enforceable for the duration of that loan. This is yellow journalism.

So no worries, sleep easy.

[Potomac Red Devil]

I agree with Haven. This is total B.S.

FYI, here is a link to a Daily Mail "story" on the "controversy."

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/sport/article-23395198-details/United%20probe%20-%20Premier%20League%20to%20investigate%20the%20champions-elect/article.do

[433tom]

Absolute rubbish.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/e/everton/6362649.stm



He's technically still on loan right now. Thus, the provision is enforceable for the duration of that loan. This is yellow journalism.

So no worries, sleep easy.

Hopefully there are no obscure technicalities involved.

[MasterShake29]

The deal was agreed in mid-February, which is outside the transfer window. Thus, the permanent transfer can't happen until the next window opens after the season. Ergo, Howard is still on loan and can be barred playing against his parent club.

[haven]

Well, the Daily Mail story contains more than I read in the Guardian. That suggests that the reports stating that the deal would begin in June were false.

Still, I'm not all that worried:

(a) there's almost no actual evidence in the actual article - it's all 2nd hand and supposition;

(b) if David Gill were actually that stupid, he wouldn't be able to breathe (and if he did this, he deserves to be terminated with immediate effect and thrown to the fishes after having his heart cut out with a spoon);

(c) a nice little precedent has just been set for violation of this rule in which points are not docked; and

(d) maintaining the loan until the summer makes more sense, especially as there isn't a transfer window in Feb.

[billyireland]

It's a load of ABU bollocks, but even if it does somehow turn out to be true (honestly can't see how) there is no chance in hell the Premiership will be docking points off anybody for the remainder of this season after the West Ham debacle. If they did for arguments sake take three points off us and Chelsea won the title by a point or two there would be serious lawsuits from us and (no offense to the likes of Wigan, who got completely screwed by the West Ham verdict) but we do have a lot more money for a considerably stronger legal team. In that situation either us or Wigan & co. would be successful in one of our cases, which would not only cost the Premier League a LOT of money but would also seriously complicate issues with regards to champions/runners up, who stays up/goes down, etc.

[433tom]

This part does not sound good.

Moyes:
"Although we have now signed him ourselves, United wanted the loan clause to remain in operation. It was partly the reason we were able to tie up the deal for next season as early as we did. We have abided by their wishes."

"It is understood that Everton will claim a gentlemen's agreement' existed over Howard's availability and they were at liberty to pick him against United if they chose to. But such an argument may not satisfy the Premier League.

Premier League sources say that last season Birmingham attempted to insert a clause into a transfer deal forbidding Robbie Savage playing against them for his new club, Blackburn Rovers.

Birmingham were refused permission to do so."

[billyireland]

[...] there isn't a transfer window in Feb.Bingo.

[433tom]

The deal was agreed in mid-February, which is outside the transfer window. Thus, the permanent transfer can't happen until the next window opens after the season. Ergo, Howard is still on loan and can be barred playing against his parent club.

I'm thinking that would be Manchester Uniteds response.

[haven]

This part does not sound good.

Moyes:
"Although we have now signed him ourselves, United wanted the loan clause to remain in operation. It was partly the reason we were able to tie up the deal for next season as early as we did. We have abided by their wishes."

"It is understood that Everton will claim a gentlemen's agreement' existed over Howard's availability and they were at liberty to pick him against United if they chose to. But such an argument may not satisfy the Premier League.

Premier League sources say that last season Birmingham attempted to insert a clause into a transfer deal forbidding Robbie Savage playing against them for his new club, Blackburn Rovers.

Birmingham were refused permission to do so."

David Moyes didn't write the contract. It's entirely plausible that he knew two things: (a) Tim Howard was Everton's and (b) he still couldn't play against United for the rest of the year. He's a manager, not a lawyer. It's not like he cares if Howard is technically on-loan until June.

Just look at the way the article is written. "It is understood . . . ." What garbage. Couched in such a way as to avoid a libel suit.

This is just some journalist trying to sell papers since the title is decided.

[433tom]

Bingo.

But what we don't know is if the papers reached the FA before Jan 31, and the news just came out a bit later. Hoping thats not the case. According to Sky it was the second week in Feburary.

http://http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=448507&CPID=8&clid=11&lid=&title=Howard's+way (http://home.skysports.com/list.aspx?hlid=448507&CPID=8&clid=11&lid=&title=Howard's+way)

[haven]

But what we don't know is if the papers reached the FA before Jan 31, and the news just came out a bit later. Hoping thats not the case.

Why on earth would this deal be a secret? Your paranoia is getting the better of you.

[433tom]

Why on earth would this deal be a secret? Your paranoia is getting the better of you.

I found the story on the transfer and linked to it above. It was reported second week in Feburary. So hopefully thats the case that the transfer happened outside the window.

[Achtung]

It's a load of ABU bollocks, but even if it does somehow turn out to be true (honestly can't see how) there is no chance in hell the Premiership will be docking points off anybody for the remainder of this season after the West Ham debacle.

Though I don't expect the FA to display even the slightest bit of fairness towards us, I'd be shocked if this went beyond some Chelsea fan in the London media and his grasping at straws.

[433tom]

Though I don't expect the FA to display even the slightest bit of fairness towards us, I'd be shocked if this went beyond some Chelsea fan in the London media and his grasping at straws.

:) :) The timing is a bit suspect.

[schafer]

I hope you guys get slammed for this. I've been saying forever that the only reason you're ahead of us in the table is because of your shady loan dealings;)

[Devil500]

I hope you guys get slammed for this. I've been saying forever that the only reason you're ahead of us in the table is because of your shady loan dealings;)

I wonder how much you paid Watford off to win the game.

[Numquam Moribimur]

F*ck off you plastic rent boy. I wonder how much you paid Watford off to win the game.


bit over the top don’t you think ...Schafer is a good rent boy and I am pretty sure it was in tongue and e cheek