Some time ago we forecast on this page that West Ham United would have to pay compensation to Sheffield United over the Carlos Tevez affair, but the Blades would not get as much as they hoped. That is the way it looks like turning out. The Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne is not going to look at the issue, so it will have to be resolved in the UK, but probably through an out-of-court settlement. West Ham has had access to United’s books, allowing them to work out the real cost of relegation.
Some time ago we forecast on this page that West Ham United would have to pay compensation to Sheffield United over the Carlos Tevez affair, but the Blades would not get as much as they hoped. That is the way it looks like turning out. The Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne is not going to look at the issue, so it will have to be resolved in the UK, but probably through an out-of-court settlement. West Ham has had access to United’s books, allowing them to work out the real cost of relegation. It would appear that the Blades suffered a drop of about £8m in income from their football activity after being relegated from the Premiership two seasons ago. Overall income fell by £12m and ticket sales by about £1.5m, but then costs, particularly wage costs, are lower outside the Premiership. Sheffield United claim that the fact that a £2.7m profit turned into a £3.5m loss following relegation can be attributed to the breach of Premiership rules by West Ham in their signing of Tevez which helped to keep them in the top flight.
West Ham have made it clear that they will use every legal avenue to contest the ruling, delaying making payments. This is a perfectly legitimate tactic and an understandable one given the financial problems they may face after the effective collapse of the Icelandic economy. West Ham have engaged Paul Chaisty, QC and Wilson Horne, a barrister, both from Kings Chamber in Manchester, who are scrutinising every element of Sheffield United’s income and expenditure to estimate the cost of relegation. Should the Hammers find grounds for driving down Sheffield United’s claim of £60m (which takes account of the effects of a second year of relegation) it is possible that the Blades might be willing to settle out of court. As we originally suggested, compensation of around £10m could be closer to the mark. This would give the Blades a substantial sum which could boost their promotion hopes, but would not drive West Ham into administration and even threaten the existence. After all, the fans of West Ham were not to blame for the mistakes made by their board. Rivalry between clubs is one thing, but threatening another club’s existence is another. One may question the whole way in which no points deduction was originally awarded, which would have surely been the most appropriate penalty and has led to the present difficulties. This matter needs to be resolved sooner rather than later for the good of football.