THE SUN - QPR SET TO BE STRIPPED OF THE TITLE.

[Gingerpele 0]

[quote user="Jonzey"]Rules are there for a reason.Those that blatantly break the rules should be punished, otherwise what''s the point in rules? Plus I really want to see Neil Warnocks face when he''s moaning on TV about it!![/quote]

If we didn''t have Rules where would we be?

[alysha 0]

[quote user="paul moy"]Anybody else find it strange that lawyers from the same company ( Blackstone ) are being used for defence and prosecution.  [:D] [/quote]

I also heard that QPR are using the same lawyer which Sheffield United used in the Tevez affair - I thought it would make QPR less credible if they got someone to defend them who in a previous case tried to prosecute a club over third party ownership

[robingry 0]

According to a QPR supporter, his bet is on the enquiry is promoted as runners up and 10 point deduction for next season, because any other solution cause major playoff headaches ( due to appeal period) and potential law suit from Cardiff. However , since the FA have now said that QPR''s dressing rooms do not meet the size requirements for premier league, but hang on they were a founding member ?,

Is there a conspiracy> He doesn''t know what they have to do to go up . Oh, improve the TV gantry and press boxes by 50% was requested last Saturday by FA and is already underway.

So NCFC Champions?

[paul moy 235]

☆alysha☆ said:

---------------------------------- 

I also heard that QPR are using the same lawyer which Sheffield United used in the Tevez affair - I thought it would make QPR less credible if they got someone to defend them who in a previous case tried to prosecute a club over third party ownership

-----------------------------------

 

They probably got a discount on the fees as they didn''t have to spend time learning all of the intricacies of new territory..... LOL   It''s also a shame that QPR didn''t hire them to check out the contracts and rules on signing Faurlin three days after the new Third Party rules were implemented. [:D]

[paul moy 235]

Obviously the Prem rules have changed since QPR were relegated 15 years ago.

Any other solution would cause play-off headaches ?  That''s rubbish because the cleanest solution is to relegate QPR !!!  [:D]

[paul moy 235]

[quote user="paul moy"]

Obviously the Prem rules have changed since QPR were relegated 15 years ago.

Any other solution would cause play-off headaches ?  That''s rubbish because the cleanest solution is to relegate QPR !!!  [:D]

[/quote]

Dunno what happened there... wrong thread [*-)]

[Alex Moss 2,165]

To go up as Champions would surely see us get more than the £40,000,000 that McNally quoted for 2nd spot, would it not?. Interesting Paul, that they''re both using the same lawyers, I don''t know whether that''s coincidence or it means something else? Either way, if QPR''s is the chap who was used during the Tevez affair, then they must think it''s a similar case and are calling on his experience to dig them out of a very deep hole - despite what QPR fans are maybe saying i.e it''s nothing like the Tevez case.

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Alex"]To go up as Champions would surely see us get more than the £40,000,000 that McNally quoted for 2nd spot, would it not?. Interesting Paul, that they''re both using the same lawyers, I don''t know whether that''s coincidence or it means something else? Either way, if QPR''s is the chap who was used during the Tevez affair, then they must think it''s a similar case and are calling on his experience to dig them out of a very deep hole - despite what QPR fans are maybe saying i.e it''s nothing like the Tevez case.[/quote]

The prize money for the Championship is .... (drum roll)..... £50,000 (don''t spend it all at once QPR) and second place is....... £25,000. I wonder what McNally will spend it on? That statue of Delia maybe.

[Hutcherby46 0]

i will be the first to kiss the statue of delia!!

[Gingerpele 0]

I''m disappointed no one picked up on my line :P

[Bethnal Yellow and Green 1,557]

[quote user="Gingerpele"]I''m disappointed no one picked up on my line :P[/quote]

Sorry, sorry.

France?

[Gingerpele 0]

Thats better :) Much more important than any of this QPR points deduction nonsense....

[bjg123 0]

They won''t be docked points for next season I don''t think. Would make it a bit of a farce as they''d be guaranteed to go down. Would probably rather stay in the champ and have a chance of being in the Prem the year after (as they wouldn''t be if they were docked prem points) if it weren''t for all the money for being in the Prem.

[ricardo 7,384]

[quote user="bjg123"]They won''t be docked points for next season I don''t think. Would make it a bit of a farce as they''d be guaranteed to go down. Would probably rather stay in the champ and have a chance of being in the Prem the year after (as they wouldn''t be if they were docked prem points) if it weren''t for all the money for being in the Prem.[/quote]Well, thats certainly clarified things for me.

[O.T.B.C 0]

They can''t get points deducted for next year as it is in the Prem.

[YankeeCanary 0]

Common sense would suggest any penalty that is applied would be assessed against this season. I would not be at all surprised to see a decision by tonight/tomorrow morning at the latest. This is not a Brussels meeting to determine European agricultural policy.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="YankeeCanary"]Common sense would suggest any penalty that is applied would be assessed against this season. I would not be at all surprised to see a decision by tonight/tomorrow morning at the latest. This is not a Brussels meeting to determine European agricultural policy.[/quote]

But it does give you an idea of the magnitude, or rather, amount of what evidence the FA/FL have got to sift through to come to their decision. 3 days is quite a trial!. We''re told we''ll know on Friday, Yankee, and I will imagine they''ll stick with that - Would be very surprised to hear anything tonight (officially). Would love to know what''s been going on behind closed doors right now though - Not as much as a snippet of information has reached the press as far as I can seen so far...

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="Alex"][quote user="YankeeCanary"]Common sense would suggest any penalty that is applied would be assessed against this season. I would not be at all surprised to see a decision by tonight/tomorrow morning at the latest. This is not a Brussels meeting to determine European agricultural policy.[/quote] But it does give you an idea of the magnitude, or rather, amount of what evidence the FA/FL have got to sift through to come to their decision. 3 days is quite a trial!. We''re told we''ll know on Friday, Yankee, and I will imagine they''ll stick with that - Would be very surprised to hear anything tonight (officially). Would love to know what''s been going on behind closed doors right now though - Not as much as a snippet of information has reached the press as far as I can seen so far...[/quote]

I''m waiting patiently, but sooner would be better than later. 

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Well WAY, here''s an interesting article from a Welsh newspaper on the man defending QPR to tide you, and everyone else following this case, over. After reading it you can be forgiven for thinking even if QPR are guilty, then they''ve got the man behind them to ensure that very little comes of it....

.http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/football-in-wales/2011/05/04/qpr-hire-celebrities-lawyer-to-fight-their-case-91466-28629852/

[WeAreYellows49 0]

[quote user="Alex"]Well WAY, here''s an interesting article from a Welsh newspaper on the man defending QPR to tide you, and everyone else following this case, over. After reading it you can be forgiven for thinking even if QPR are guilty, then they''ve got the man behind them to ensure that very little comes of it.... .http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/football-in-wales/2011/05/04/qpr-hire-celebrities-lawyer-to-fight-their-case-91466-28629852/[/quote]

 

Interesting article, what i''d like to know is how does Simon Jordan know what the hell is going on when no one else seems to lol.

The bit, if I were a QPR fan that id be most worried about would be the ''''subsequent falsifying of documents'''', isn''t that fraud?

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="Alex"]Well WAY, here''s an interesting article from a Welsh newspaper on the man defending QPR to tide you, and everyone else following this case, over. After reading it you can be forgiven for thinking even if QPR are guilty, then they''ve got the man behind them to ensure that very little comes of it.... .http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/football-in-wales/2011/05/04/qpr-hire-celebrities-lawyer-to-fight-their-case-91466-28629852/[/quote]

 

Interesting article, what i''d like to know is how does Simon Jordan know what the hell is going on when no one else seems to lol.

The bit, if I were a QPR fan that id be most worried about would be the ''''subsequent falsifying of documents'''', isn''t that fraud?

[/quote]

Yes. From what I can gather from this whole case, WAY, is that it''s the possible fraud business that will cost them, rather than the mix up over dates of signing Faurlin etc - The latter they may get away with, but trying to cover things up is where they *may* come unstuck. I do agree, an interesting article and made a change from all the rehashed info going around elsewhere today (though admittedly they probably rehashed it themselves ;)).

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="WeAreYellows49"]

[quote user="Alex"]Well WAY, here''s an interesting article from a Welsh newspaper on the man defending QPR to tide you, and everyone else following this case, over. After reading it you can be forgiven for thinking even if QPR are guilty, then they''ve got the man behind them to ensure that very little comes of it.... .http://www.walesonline.co.uk/footballnation/football-in-wales/2011/05/04/qpr-hire-celebrities-lawyer-to-fight-their-case-91466-28629852/[/quote]

 

Interesting article, what i''d like to know is how does Simon Jordan know what the hell is going on when no one else seems to lol.

The bit, if I were a QPR fan that id be most worried about would be the ''''subsequent falsifying of documents'''', isn''t that fraud?

[/quote]

Yes. From what I can gather from this whole case, WAY, is that it''s the possible fraud business that will cost them, rather than the mix up over dates of signing Faurlin etc - The latter they may get away with, but trying to cover things up is where they *may* come unstuck. I do agree, an interesting article and made a change from all the rehashed info going around elsewhere today (though admittedly they probably rehashed it themselves ;)).

[Bill 1,788]

I would suggest that the real cause for concern is why QPR over inflated the transfer fee to £3.5m. If Faurlin signed for QPR then he is a QPR player. A player who hasn''t really had that much affect on QPR''s season.

That QPR went so far as to forge documents suggests that something exceedingly iffy (alledged payments to an unregistered agent) needed to be covered up. ie probable money laudering. This would mean that the integrity of the playing side of things has not really been breached or even challenged. If that is what has been going on then a clear message will need to go out. Which would require a fairly draconian punishment.

If then, it is proven that, the transfer fee was nowhere near the true figure (for whatever reason) perhaps some fans might begin to question the absurd figures put out as transfer fees. Both McNally and Keane have disputed the figures that were bandied about regarding each clubs figures and both sets of clubs accounts have shown those claims to be way of the mark.

Again if the payments to unregistered agents are proven then perhaps a few fans might also wish to take a closer look at these ''hinvestors'' and ask themselves what is their true intent - to carry on their shady business practices through another medium(football) or to help a few English football fans fulfill their dreams. If you are daft enough to believe the latter, then you are daft enough to believe that all transfer fees are as quoted and that all agents are not conduits for channeling ''illicit'' money back to various owners, managers and players.

Not that anyone at QPR could be thought to be capable of acting in such a manner, heaven fordid !

ps curious aside - who was the manager who signed Faurlin ?

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="City1st"]I would suggest that the real cause for concern is why QPR over inflated the transfer fee to £3.5m. If Faurlin signed for QPR then he is a QPR player. A player who hasn''t really had that much affect on QPR''s season.

That QPR went so far as to forge documents suggests that something exceedingly iffy (alledged payments to an unregistered agent) needed to be covered up. ie probable money laudering. This would mean that the integrity of the playing side of things has not really been breached or even challenged. If that is what has been going on then a clear message will need to go out. Which would require a fairly draconian punishment.

If then, it is proven that, the transfer fee was nowhere near the true figure (for whatever reason) perhaps some fans might begin to question the absurd figures put out as transfer fees. Both McNally and Keane have disputed the figures that were bandied about regarding each clubs figures and both sets of clubs accounts have shown those claims to be way of the mark.

Again if the payments to unregistered agents are proven then perhaps a few fans might also wish to take a closer look at these ''hinvestors'' and ask themselves what is their true intent - to carry on their shady business practices through another medium(football) or to help a few English football fans fulfill their dreams. If you are daft enough to believe the latter, then you are daft enough to believe that all transfer fees are as quoted and that all agents are not conduits for channeling ''illicit'' money back to various owners, managers and players.

Not that anyone at QPR could be thought to be capable of acting in such a manner, heaven fordid !

ps curious aside - who was the manager who signed Faurlin ?[/quote]

God points, City1st. I think it was John Gregory that signed Faurlin but I maybe wrong, that''s what I *think* I read the other day anyway.

[ricardo 7,384]

The hearing has been going on for two days now and some people still think its all a minor misunderstanding. If that was the case it would all have been done and dusted by lunchtime on the first day.My own view now is that it won''t be points. It will be a straight relegation.

[Alex Moss 2,165]

[quote user="ricardo"]The hearing has been going on for two days now and some people still think its all a minor misunderstanding. If that was the case it would all have been done and dusted by lunchtime on the first day.My own view now is that it won''t be points. It will be a straight relegation.[/quote]

Exactly that, Ricardo. A 3 day hearing is not to be scoffed at, As for who the manager was that signed Faurlin, well from what I can see it was none other than ''good old'' Jim Magilton - Who''d have thought that one of the old Ip5h1t boys would have found their way into this murky case?!

[dhickl 0]

I just had a thought about the punishement for QPR.  Instead of a points deduction, could they get a transfer ban, like Chelsea were given for their illegal approach of a youth player - before it was overturned by the court of arbitration for sport

[Alex Moss 2,165]

Neil Warnock in the last 45 mins odd has said this to the BBC - He would know exactly what''s been going on over the last 72 hours - Sounds like they''ve managed to get away with it, and have kept the title. Good for their fans, but I''m not sure football in general. Just goes to show - Money talks!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/13290568.stm

[Alex Moss 2,165]

The interview with Colin that I''ve just posted was infact given this morning - But it does suggest that the last 2 days have gone in Ecclestone et als favour!

[Bill 1,788]

"I would not be at all surprised to see a decision by tonight/tomorrow morning at the latest" -

Wed 6.13pm

well, that''s that theory out of the window then