Montgomery Burns
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 14 Apr 2007
- Messages
- 514
Sorry for the delay in posting this thread which I put on other City sites last week and Tottenham sites over the weekend.
I e-mailed the FA Premier League last week re the above and have now received a reply. My original message read as follows:
I write in connection with yesterday's transfer of Dimitar Berbatov from Manchester United, as it would seem prima facie that your own rules have been broken during the course of this transfer.
According to press reports Tottenham received a bid from Manchester City for the player, which they accepted. Tottenham then gave Manchester City permission to speak to the player.
Tottenham's chairman was widely reported throughout yesterday evening stating Manchester United did not have permission to speak to the player, but despite this club officials, including the manager met Mr Berbatov, discussed and agreed personal terms and conducted a medical. It was furthermore suggested that Tottenham withdrew their threat of a complaint as part of the 'deal' that eventually took the player to Manchester United.
Of course one simply cannot take press reports as being absolute truth. But equally, one simply cannot turn a blind eye to allegations of this nature, which surely merit an appropriate investigation by the governing body whose rules have been allegedly broken. I would therefore ask you to contact all relevant parties and ask for their explanation of events.
The Premier League responded with:
Thank you for your email. The Premier League is able to act on matters such as this only when a complaint is received from a club. In this case no complaint has been made at this time, but if any club is unhappy with the conduct of another they have the opportunity to contact the League and ask us to investigate. If that happens then we follow a certain procedure, investigate and then act if it appears that a Rule has been broken. Please be assured that when we do receive such complaints they are thoroughly investigated and that the Rules always apply equally to every club. There may be plenty of speculation in the newspapers but we do not comment or act upon rumours or conjecture.
Thanks again for taking the time to write to us.
I wrote to them again on Friday in the following terms:
Thank you for your reply. Your comment that 'the Premier League is able to act on matters such as this only when a complaint is received from a club' appears to be at odds with your own stated Rules namely:
SECTION R Disciplinary
Power of Inquiry
1. The board shall have power to inquire into any suspected or alleged breach of these Rules and for that purpose may require any Manager, Match Official, official or Player to appear before it and to produce documents.
This rule does not indicate that a complaint has to be received from a club, indeed, quite the reverse. Please let me have your comments as to the possible circumstances as to how you could inquire into any 'suspected' breach as opposed to an alleged breach, which implies an specific allegation by a third party.
In addition, could you please let me know the specific rule that specifies a complaint has to be received from a club before you are able to act.
And finally, can you let me know what your views would be if a club, who had knowingly broken the rules, paid another club not to report it for the specific breach? As you will know from media reports, allegations have been made that this is exactly what Manchester United did, which could explain why no complaint was made by Tottenham in respect of the intial allegation. (end)
As this was only sent on Friday I do not expect a reply until sometime this week, but I will post their response as I have it.
As an aside, the FA say they only investigate matters such as this when there has been a complaint from another club. But this is simply not true.
For example, per David Conn's piece in the Guardian on 22 September 2006 opens with:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...sport.comment2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...sport.comment2</a>
'The Football Association stressed yesterday that it has asked the BBC for all material filmed and compiled for Tuesday's Panorama programme, and maintained it is confident its compliance department is robust enough to investigate all the programme's allegations'.
No club complaining there. Simply allegations of wrongdoing in the media that the FA had to be seen to make enquiries into.
The same article refers to the long list of charges against Wayne Rooney's agent, Paul Stretford, after the collapse of the prosecution of three men charged with blackmailing him - again, I don't believe that any club made complaints to prompt the enquiry; it was a natural knee-jerk 'something must be (seen to be) done' reaction by the authorities.
And remember Mike Newell opening up a big can of worms a couple of years ago when he made allegations concerning so-called bungs? The FA Compliance Unit (which would oversee any enquiry into the Berbatov affair) were called in on the strength of these allegations made by the manager, not his club.
And did Manchester City make a complaint over the Barton/Dabo incident or was it in fact Dabo himself?
The precedents are very clear. The FA act when they absolutely have to and not before. The idea that they only take on cases where allegations or complaints have been made by clubs is patently false. But it's an argument to hide behind rather than take on the big boys.
I e-mailed the FA Premier League last week re the above and have now received a reply. My original message read as follows:
I write in connection with yesterday's transfer of Dimitar Berbatov from Manchester United, as it would seem prima facie that your own rules have been broken during the course of this transfer.
According to press reports Tottenham received a bid from Manchester City for the player, which they accepted. Tottenham then gave Manchester City permission to speak to the player.
Tottenham's chairman was widely reported throughout yesterday evening stating Manchester United did not have permission to speak to the player, but despite this club officials, including the manager met Mr Berbatov, discussed and agreed personal terms and conducted a medical. It was furthermore suggested that Tottenham withdrew their threat of a complaint as part of the 'deal' that eventually took the player to Manchester United.
Of course one simply cannot take press reports as being absolute truth. But equally, one simply cannot turn a blind eye to allegations of this nature, which surely merit an appropriate investigation by the governing body whose rules have been allegedly broken. I would therefore ask you to contact all relevant parties and ask for their explanation of events.
The Premier League responded with:
Thank you for your email. The Premier League is able to act on matters such as this only when a complaint is received from a club. In this case no complaint has been made at this time, but if any club is unhappy with the conduct of another they have the opportunity to contact the League and ask us to investigate. If that happens then we follow a certain procedure, investigate and then act if it appears that a Rule has been broken. Please be assured that when we do receive such complaints they are thoroughly investigated and that the Rules always apply equally to every club. There may be plenty of speculation in the newspapers but we do not comment or act upon rumours or conjecture.
Thanks again for taking the time to write to us.
I wrote to them again on Friday in the following terms:
Thank you for your reply. Your comment that 'the Premier League is able to act on matters such as this only when a complaint is received from a club' appears to be at odds with your own stated Rules namely:
SECTION R Disciplinary
Power of Inquiry
1. The board shall have power to inquire into any suspected or alleged breach of these Rules and for that purpose may require any Manager, Match Official, official or Player to appear before it and to produce documents.
This rule does not indicate that a complaint has to be received from a club, indeed, quite the reverse. Please let me have your comments as to the possible circumstances as to how you could inquire into any 'suspected' breach as opposed to an alleged breach, which implies an specific allegation by a third party.
In addition, could you please let me know the specific rule that specifies a complaint has to be received from a club before you are able to act.
And finally, can you let me know what your views would be if a club, who had knowingly broken the rules, paid another club not to report it for the specific breach? As you will know from media reports, allegations have been made that this is exactly what Manchester United did, which could explain why no complaint was made by Tottenham in respect of the intial allegation. (end)
As this was only sent on Friday I do not expect a reply until sometime this week, but I will post their response as I have it.
As an aside, the FA say they only investigate matters such as this when there has been a complaint from another club. But this is simply not true.
For example, per David Conn's piece in the Guardian on 22 September 2006 opens with:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...sport.comment2" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...sport.comment2</a>
'The Football Association stressed yesterday that it has asked the BBC for all material filmed and compiled for Tuesday's Panorama programme, and maintained it is confident its compliance department is robust enough to investigate all the programme's allegations'.
No club complaining there. Simply allegations of wrongdoing in the media that the FA had to be seen to make enquiries into.
The same article refers to the long list of charges against Wayne Rooney's agent, Paul Stretford, after the collapse of the prosecution of three men charged with blackmailing him - again, I don't believe that any club made complaints to prompt the enquiry; it was a natural knee-jerk 'something must be (seen to be) done' reaction by the authorities.
And remember Mike Newell opening up a big can of worms a couple of years ago when he made allegations concerning so-called bungs? The FA Compliance Unit (which would oversee any enquiry into the Berbatov affair) were called in on the strength of these allegations made by the manager, not his club.
And did Manchester City make a complaint over the Barton/Dabo incident or was it in fact Dabo himself?
The precedents are very clear. The FA act when they absolutely have to and not before. The idea that they only take on cases where allegations or complaints have been made by clubs is patently false. But it's an argument to hide behind rather than take on the big boys.