Complaint to the FA Premier League re the Berbatov saga

Monty, this seems to be an excellent piece in many ways.

One small point in relation to Lord Triesman ... the PL clubs have agreed seemingly without informing yourself ......might be more appropriate. I'm pretty sure that if you use the 'opinion' perspective then you're covered from a legal point of view. You might also want to add a footnote to the effect that 'the opinions expressed are the views of the author' and a point of contact.

I did wonder about the opening metaphor. It's hardly inviting, though that might be just a matter of taste.


Anyway, as always Mr Burns, good work !
 
Montgomery Burns said:
PROPOSED ARTICLE FOR PUBLICATION

FOR THE ATTENTION OF ANY LEGAL EAGLES ON THE BOARD.

This is the first draft of an article I hope to have published that will feed through onto NewsNow in the near future. As the title in the piece suggests, it is MY view.

I would would appreciate any views as to whether you think there is anything in the proposed article that has the potential to cause me problems in a legal sense, as I have a rather large mortgage-free mansion that I have no wish to hand over to the lawyers. Hopefully I have avoided the bear traps.

I have left off for the moment any reference to any City websites until such time I have received feedback from all. I am inclined to mention all, or none. The reference in any event was only 'Readers of 'xxx' will be aware of my recent postings on this subject. Updates will follow on all of these sites in due course'.



Football’s Dirty Secrets revisited: the view from Burns Towers

Panorama’s 2006 programme ‘Football’s Dirty Secrets’ rolled back the Premier League’s duvet and revealed a number of rather large skid marks on the bed sheet. Although the covers have been pulled back in place the stench remains, despite the best efforts of Lord Stevens’ Quest enquiry team. In the meantime the football authorities hold its collective nose and look the other way. It twas ever thus.

But now we have a fresh scandal developing that the Premier League is desperately trying to stop turning into another Ashley Colegate. This is to do with Manchester United’s pursuit of Dimitar Berbatov on transfer deadline day just gone. Almost every UK media outlet suggested Tottenham Hotspur only received an acceptable bid from one club for the player, and that club was not the one who had pursued Berbatov throughout the summer. Whist Tottenham gave Manchester City permission to speak to the Bulgarian, their chairman David Levy was widely reported as stating United did not have permission. Despite this, United’s officials, including the manager met Berbatov, discussed and agreed personal terms and conducted a medical. To round things off nicely, press reports went so far as to suggest David Gill, was present for at least some of these discussions; Gill of course being both United’s Chief Executive and the Premier League’s representative on the main board of the Football Association. The end result was as everyone expected; United got their man, albeit at a heavy price.

But what price? Again, press reports suggested United had been forced to come to a BSE agreement with Spurs, in so much they had to pay a Bit of Something Extra to stop the London club reporting them to the Premier League for an illegal approach for the second time in a month. Nobody but the officials of the two clubs know the full truth of this, but questions remain unanswered nonetheless.

The Premier League proclaim they are unable to investigate the Berbatov transfer, but how can that be so? After all, Premier League rules are approved and sanctioned by the Football Association, who insist on a general tapping up rule being included by all leagues that fall under its jurisdiction - which is why one often hears of local clubs being penalised for misdemeanours of a similar nature.

However, and if you’re reading this Lord Triesman, this is the big story - Premier League clubs have got together with the Premier League board to largely opt out of their rule K3 which covers the area of ‘tapping up’ - they have agreed, without informing you, that allegations of tapping up will only be investigated if and when a club makes an official complaint. Which is why they were unable to investigate the Berbatov allegations in the first place - their secret agreement prevented them from doing so.

This agreement might seem to the man on the Clapham Omnibus to be little different than the same type of hidden side agreement characterised in the West Ham/Carlos Tevez affair. He could perhaps be forgiven for thinking the Premier League board had agreed, behind closed doors and completely off-record, only to uphold rule K3 in extreme circumstances and in the process given the more powerful clubs carte blanche to tap up at will.

We are left in the grotesque position that if a manager appeared on Sky Sports News and brazenly admitted to tapping a player up; even perhaps going as far to boast his club had paid the other not to report the incident, there would be no prospect of a Premier League investigation as the other club had been paid up so would not therefore make a complaint. Pass the sick bucket please.

So since the Premier League have rendered themselves incapable of enforcing their own rules the Football Association have been asked to step in. Let us hope they have the moral fibre to investigate why Premier League clubs have been allowed to largely opt out from the tapping up rule that all other clubs in the English game are subjected to. And also, of course, conduct an investigation into whether Manchester United made an illegal approach to Berbatov.
Click to expand...
Good work Monty but sorry to be picky, it's Daniel not David Levy
 
It is laike a civil matter really, if no party feels aggrieved why would a third party get involved?

It happens for almost every transfer so they are not going to bother investigating them unless the club who has the contract complains.

It is a complete waste of time, especially with no evidence or connection.
 
mammutly said:
Monty, this seems to be an excellent piece in many ways.

One small point in relation to Lord Triesman ... the PL clubs have agreed seemingly without informing yourself ......might be more appropriate. I'm pretty sure that if you use the 'opinion' perspective then you're covered from a legal point of view. You might also want to add a footnote to the effect that 'the opinions expressed are the views of the author' and a point of contact.

I did wonder about the opening metaphor. It's hardly inviting, though that might be just a matter of taste.


Anyway, as always Mr Burns, good work !
Click to expand...

'Seemingly' and a footnote added, thanks, but I wasn't sure about leaving contact details - they can come back to me via one of the sites who is publishing this.

And the opening isn't my normal style, but it was meant to grab attention. I know it's awful really!
 
Corky said:
It is laike a civil matter really, if no party feels aggrieved why would a third party get involved?

It happens for almost every transfer so they are not going to bother investigating them unless the club who has the contract complains.

It is a complete waste of time, especially with no evidence or connection.
Click to expand...

20 pages too late mate, why even bother posting? The guy should be commended for actually trying to do something, too many people slag of so much yet do fuck all to change it... I hope at the very least that some form of media give his effort the acknowledgement he deserves.

At least the majority of posts in this thread have, rightly so, been complimentary towards the OP.
 
I have now sent the final version of my article to my publisher who will ensure it gets onto the NewsNow portal shortly.

In the end I was persuaded to leave out any references to any of the six City sites; the most persuasive argument I heard was that as it was aimed at a wider audience (many City fans will have already seen this) it could be counter productive if it just red as coming from an embittered City fan - which of course I am.

So, ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, I present you with:



Football’s Dirty Secrets revisited: the view from Burns Towers

Panorama’s 2006 programme ‘Football’s Dirty Secrets’ rolled back the Premier League’s duvet and revealed a number of rather large skid marks on the bedsheet. Although the covers have been pulled back in place, the stench remains - despite the best efforts of Lord Stevens’ Quest enquiry team. In the meantime, the football authorities hold their collective nose and look the other way. Twas ever thus.

But now we have a fresh scandal developing that the Premier League is hoping doesn’t turn into another Ashley Colegate. This is to do with Manchester United’s pursuit of Dimitar Berbatov on transfer deadline day just gone. Almost every UK media outlet suggested Tottenham Hotspur received an acceptable bid from only one club for the player, and that club was not the one which had pursued Berbatov throughout the summer. Whilst Tottenham gave Manchester City permission to speak to the Bulgarian, their chairman Daniel Levy was widely reported as stating United did not have permission. Despite this, United’s officials, including the manager, met Berbatov, discussed and agreed personal terms with him and conducted a medical. To round things off nicely, press reports went so far as to suggest David Gill was present for at least some of these discussions; Gill of course being both United’s Chief Executive and the Premier League’s representative on the main board of the Football Association. The end result was as everyone expected; United got their man, albeit at a heavy price.

But what price? Again, press reports suggested United had been forced to come to a BSE agreement with Spurs, in so much they had to pay a Bit of Something Extra to stop the London club reporting them to the Premier League for an illegal approach for the second time in a month. Nobody but the officials of the two clubs know the full truth of this, but questions remain unanswered nonetheless.

The Premier League say they are unable to investigate the Berbatov transfer, but how can that be so? After all, Premier League rules are approved and sanctioned by the Football Association, who insist on a general tapping up rule being included by all leagues that fall under its jurisdiction - which is why one often hears of local clubs being penalised for misdemeanours of a similar nature.

However, and if you’re reading this Lord Triesman, this is the big story - Premier League clubs have seemingly got together with the Premier League board to largely opt out of their rule K3 which covers the area of ‘tapping up’ - they have agreed, without informing you, that allegations of tapping up will only be investigated if and when a club makes an official complaint. Which is why they were unable to investigate the Berbatov allegations in the first place - their secret agreement prevented them from doing so.

This agreement might seem to the man on the Clapham Omnibus to be little different than the same type of hidden side agreement characterised in the West Ham/Carlos Tevez affair. He could perhaps be forgiven for thinking the Premier League board had agreed, behind closed doors and completely off-record, only to uphold rule K3 in extreme circumstances - and in the process given the more powerful clubs carte blanche to tap up at will.

We are left in the grotesque position that if a manager appeared on Sky Sports News and brazenly admitted to tapping a player up; even perhaps going as far to boast his club had paid the other not to report the incident, there would be no prospect of a Premier League investigation as the other club had been paid off so would not therefore make a complaint. Pass the sick bucket please.

So since the Premier League has rendered themselves incapable of enforcing their own rules the Football Association have been asked to step in. Let us hope they have the moral fibre to investigate why Premier League clubs have largely been allowed to opt out from the tapping up rule that all other clubs in the English game are subject to. And also, of course, conduct an investigation into whether Manchester United made an illegal approach to Berbatov.


The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author, Monty Burns.
 
Well for me your proposed article is badly written. For example it is far too heavy on descriptive phraseology - 'rolling back duvet's', 'skidmarks', 'stench of corruption', holding noses'

And thats just in the first paragraph.

Since I don't think you have a case it also seems that in the absence of hard facts you have resorted to repetition and exaggeration. The PL is not 'desperately trying' to 'stop this scandal' given no one, including you, has any evidence of a scandal in the first place as witnessed by your own careful wording ie 'almost every media outlet suggested', 'press reports went on to suggest', 'press reports suggested' and so on. It is all supposition and hearsay. The one telling thing you say is that only two parties know the truth and since both of them are content to keep that truth to themselves it doesn't really leave you anywhere to go with this.

But back to the padding and the wooden phrasing well I would I avoid sentences like this:

'This agreement might seem to the man on the Clapham Omnibus to be little different than the same type of hidden side agreement characterised in the West Ham/Carlos Tevez affair.'

I mean seriously 'man on the Clapham Omnibus'? Its outdated and comes across as trying too hard. If you are intent on publishing an article then take an axe to it, keep it brief, to the point and from the heart.

In one sense I am knocking what you are doing because I think it is a waste of time and (ok hang me for this) I don't really care whether ManU or Spurs broke a rule or two but thats just me and others (seemingly the majority) do support what you are doing so what the hell knock yourself out and good luck.

Edit:
Oh well somewhat academic as you have already sent in the article! :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.