Bournemouth To Discuss Legal Challenge After Premier League Relegation

Discussion in 'The Hornets' Nest - Watford Chat' started by Simmos, Jul 28, 2020.

  1. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    I hope the idea of a legal challenge against the PL or Hawkeye is quickly forgotten. There may be enough of a legal argument, but I just don't care. Football is a sport, and I don't want barristers involved, earning their thousands.

    And the notion that people like referees, VAR officials, etc having to be legally accountable for their split second decisions made when under extreme pressure is just extraordinarily distasteful to me. Where on earth would we draw the line?

    Every player, coach club owners and club staff all know, when they choose to get involved in the game, that their livelihood could be reliant on decisions made completely beyond their control , but they still choose to have their involvement in the game.

    And, I've got no love for Villa. It may have been VAR people that mad the errors, but it was those Villa players including the keeper that saw the ball clearly cross the line but decided to keep quiet about it. They are the real villains, the cheats, and yet there has been remarkably little criticism of them. We want people that make honest mistakes to suffer in the courts, yet we accept cheating. Why can a player get punished retrospectively for a shove above shoulder height, yet the Villa players got away with clear cheating.

    Something has gone wrong somewhere
  2. Gladiator

    Gladiator Academy Graduate

    No love for Muff from me, but I hope they pursue the claim and are successful. Obviously not in terms of changing the football result but the PL/Hawkeye are accountable for a massive tech failure which should not have happened and should have to pay accordingly. It was a matter of fact, not opinion, and both parties in my view were negligent in the administration of this technology.

    This negligence has quite clearly had some contributory effect on Muff’s relegation and let’s say the missed revenue in terms of going down is £150m then I think a claim of £20-£50m would not be far wrong. There is some precedence in terms of relegation compensation from the settlement paid in the West Ham / Sheffield Utd Tevez case. Indeed SU’s relegation was likely even less directly impacted from that rule breach than this issue.

    Also, absolutely right that one of the smaller clubs takes it to the PL and make them sweat. Their general attitude to the implementation of technology has been appalling. They don’t seem to care about either the mistakes or communicating decisions to fans (on TV or in the stadium). Imagine if this Hawkeye issue had had some effect on Liverpool and it resulted in them missing out on the title by one point? Do you think it would be getting brushed under the carpet? Not a chance! There would be calls to replay the game and all sorts going on.

    So on this occasion, go on Bournemouth!
    a19tgg and The Voice of Reason like this.
  3. Hogg-DEENEY!!!

    Hogg-DEENEY!!! Reservist

    A Championship rival getting a much-needed £20m payout? No thanks! :D

    Hard for me to care about the morals of this story when there's basically no chance anything will come of this
  4. Hornpete

    Hornpete Squad Player

    I see the only way they would be successful is if the VAR /Hawkeye teams had broken the rules or were derogatory about Bournemouth, is there a recorded transcript of conversations between stockley park and the ref? Do they have them saying "dont bother its just Bournemouth"? I doubt it.

    And is the purpose of VAR that it will confirm hawkeye is right? Its not. They would have had to break the laws of the game to award the goal.

    Its not the only wrong decision, you would need to proove it affected the final outcome of the table against all the other wrong var and referee decisions, and you can't even proove it effected the outcome of the game as there was plenty of time left in it.

    Theres no real difference in us highlighting the spurs game and saying the 2 decisions cost us 2 extra points.
  5. Gladiator

    Gladiator Academy Graduate

    No you wouldn’t need to prove it was solely responsible for their relegation. Only that it was a contributing factor and there was an negligence in the administration/implementation of the tech. It’s absolutely NOT the same as a VAR decision which is based on someone’s opinion of what has happened. This was a failure to provide the necessary infrastructure to ensure a ball crossing there line is given as a goal. Not a refereeing decision.

    There is definitely a claim here and I hope they’re successful. Not happy they’ll have additional funds mind, but absolutely happy they’re challenging the PL who have total contempt for both the fans and anyone outside the top 6.
    The Voice of Reason likes this.
  6. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason First Team Captain

    I have no love for Muff either, but I would have expected us to try and get financial compensation if we had gone down under similar circumstances as I have already said in earlier posts. Therefore, I too hope Muff have success in getting financial compensation, even though that could ultimately work against our chances of bouncing back to the PL.
  7. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason First Team Captain

    This is my argument to gladiator, it is totally different to VAR, for the reasons you say above, and I have made a similar argument to yourself elsewhere about it being totally different to VAR, but I can't remember if it was a post on here or on another medium?
  8. Diamond

    Diamond Squad Player

    Whereas the Watford players, the wonderful caring bunch they are, would have immediately told the ref it's not a goal.
    wfc4ever and The Voice of Reason like this.
  9. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    I’d say it has to be more than “contributory”. It think it would be necessary to show a causal link between the failure and the relegation. The problem is, as I mention above, that there are too many potential intervening factors between a game not even involving Bournemouth and their relegation several games later, most obviously their own performance in subsequent matches as well as the fact that Villa might have equalised in that match. I just think it is too much of a stretch, but who knows?
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020 at 8:56 AM
  10. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    Why would they speak about Bournemouth? They weren’t involved in the match.
  11. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    I don’t disagree but I think this ship has long since sailed. Sport is a multimillion pound business so legal involvement is inevitable from time to time.
  12. WillisWasTheWorst

    WillisWasTheWorst Its making less grammar mistake's thats important

    The purpose of VAR, or so we were told, is to rectify clear and obvious errors relating to goals or penalty decisions, of which this was clearly and obviously one.
  13. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    To say it wasn't a goal would to have been cheating. But I know what you mean.

    I'm not suggesting that Watford or other teams would have been more honest. My point is that we seemingly want to castigate honest mistakes, even to the extent of making them accountable in the courts, but we seemingly accept deliberate cheating.

    That is all around the wrong way, in my opinion.
  14. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    If we accept it is inevitable, then it is.

    If we don't accept it, then it is far less likely.

    Once we start on VAR, then match officials are next, and then why not players to follow?
  15. dsr

    dsr Academy Graduate

    If Bournemouth successfully claim against Hawkeye on the basis that their system must be perfect at all times and must never fail, then that's the end of Hawkeye and we will be back to lineman's call.

    If they successfully claim against the PL, then all refereeing decisions will be challengeable and the whole football league will become impossible. It's well established in law (or has been so far) that the law will not intervene if a referee gets it wrong. No, not even if he has high tech equipment that he uses wrongly.
  16. a19tgg

    a19tgg Reservist

    For me this is the fundamental issue. If it would’ve required the laws of the game to have been broken to award a perfectly valid goal, then it’s clear the rules are not fit for purpose and need to be challenged.

    I would argue that if the rules of the game prevent a valid goal being given then they’re effectively null and void at that point. You cannot have a situation where that is possible, because it undermines the very point of having those rules and the technology in the first place.
  17. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    That's not what I meant. I don't think that courts should be involved with questioning of VAR/Hawkeye type decisions for exactly the reasons you suggest. And I personally think they will not wish to be, as they will see it as an opening of floodgates. If I were defending any action whcih Bournemouth bring, that would be the underlying basis of my argument (although as a matter of legal principle I would get to that result by arguing that there were too many intervening events to prove causation).

    I was responding to your more general point that "Football is a sport, and I don't want barristers involved, earning their thousands.". I think that it's too late for that now given the multimillion pound nature of this, and other, sporting businesses. But it's not too late to stop lawyers being involved in reopening 'in game' decisions made by officials and I think (though others may not) that we should hold that line if we can.
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2020 at 12:54 PM
  18. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    Right, but as a matter of law you still need to prove that this has a sufficiently proximate causal connection to Bournemouth's relegation. The legal action being considered isn't simply to overturn the rules - it is that a wrong/negligent application of the rules resulted in a situation (relegation) which has caused Bournemouth financial loss.
  19. hornmeister

    hornmeister Administrator Staff Member

    Absolute non-starter opens us all sorts of retrospective challenges. Reading ghost goal anyone?
    Should have protested at the time or just after the match.

    One of the reasons why I advocate the 3 challenges rule for managers/captains like they have in tennis.
  20. a19tgg

    a19tgg Reservist

    I think you could look at things like Villa’s record once going behind and how often they come back as reasonable proof that it had an impact.

    Either way, somewhere along the line there has been negligence. Whether that’s hawkeye, those operating VAR, or those responsible for setting rules that prevented a goal being given or a combination of all three.

    I wish Bournemouth all the luck in pursuing it, it’s not like Villa will lose their place is it.
    Gladiator likes this.
  21. a19tgg

    a19tgg Reservist

    The ghost goal is a poor example really, if a ghost goal was still given with a GLT and VAR review available then that would be more comparable to this.
  22. It's a very poor example as what financial loss can we claim we suffered as a result ?
  23. No but they would get a cash windfall to strenthen their squad. I hope they lose and any future legal costs are awarded against them.
  24. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    But this wasn't the last game of the season. Even if we look at a factor like that (and it's a bit speculative), we don't know whether Villa might have performed better still in their remaining games given that they then would have had a bigger gap to make up, or the impact on Bournemouth's performance in those games of being a further point ahead. Arguably, it might even have affected - albeit more indirectly - our performance and results in the remaining games.

    I agree that Villa suffer no loss as a consequence. The question is whether it sets a sound precedent to allow decisions made in games at the time effectively to be overturned subsequently.
  25. LaClusazSki

    LaClusazSki First Year Pro

    It will not happen.
    Some Bournemouth board members are embarrassed that the club are looking this.
    Yes it was a goal, we all know that.
    Hawkeye have apologised. Something the Referee's Association would never do.
    That is the end of the matter
  26. a19tgg

    a19tgg Reservist

    Bit also it’s just a bad referring call, it’s an extreme one but it’s no different to the hand of god, or Henry against Ireland, or Lampard's ‘goal’ against Germany. Bad refereeing calls have happened since the dawn of time that have affected the outcome of games, it hasn’t been possible for anyone to sue the on field officials because it was accepted that human error was part of the game.

    Because of the vast sums of money at stake and the integrity of elite competition technology was brought in to help reduce these errors. Yet in this instance despite infallible, unequivocal evidence that a goal was scored it was not given. Completely different circumstances and in no way does it open up a can of works for historical refereeing decisions to be challenged.
    The Voice of Reason likes this.
  27. Keighley

    Keighley Squad Player

    I see what you are saying but the consequences would be the same had a referee made that decision with no technology in place - so, as far as the law is concerned, I am not sure it does make a difference, meaning that it could still set a precedent.
  28. nornironhorn

    nornironhorn Administrator Staff Member

    FIFA paid the FAI $5m after that incident
  29. dsr

    dsr Academy Graduate

    Not necessarily. It is possible, in law at least, to get things wrong without being negligent. Otherwise clubs could start suing their own players for missing open goals or scoring own goals, on the grounds of negligence - as opposed to just being not good enough at what they do, which is how it is taken at present.

    If football clubs can sue the league for mistakes, then there is no point playing. If the league wants to correct egregious mistakes - which can only be done by immediately declaring the result null and void, not with hindsight, unless it is literally a last-kick error - then fiar enough. Otherwise, they need a "penalty pot" like on Tipping Point, where they can share out a pot based on "what you could have won" (Bullseye, I believe.)
  30. UEA_Hornet

    UEA_Hornet First Team Captain

    We'll take the speedboat thanks.
    Since63 likes this.
  31. Ybotcoombes

    Ybotcoombes Reservist

    I could imagine them settling out of court with a NDA stating never talk about it again at a stretch. If it did go to court asume it wouldn’t be for a while so couldn’t see it being any advantage for the 20/21 season.

    The good thing would be if they did go to court they would absolutely be public enemy number 1 with the FA/ Prem and can’t see the media seeing it as anything other than sour grapes
  32. The Voice of Reason

    The Voice of Reason First Team Captain

    Muff would not be expecting anything to be overturned as regards to their current status as a Championship Club, it would all be about FINANCIAL compensation for what that appalling decision has cost them, which is of course TENS of MILLIONS!!!

    That is why I think they should go for it, as I would have wanted WFC to go for it had we been effected in the way Muff were.
  33. Markoa$

    Markoa$ Reservist

    I hope they fail though. We can’t have them getting awarded extra cash. They are a championship rival. We need the league to be as weak as possible so we can get promoted. Don’t need the likes of Bournemouth being awarded millions in compo.
  34. NathWFC

    NathWFC First Team

    How can they possibly have a case? How can you possibly say and successfully prove that that one, single moment, 9 games ago, has cost them their Premier League place. It's utterly ridiculous.
    wfc4ever likes this.
  35. zztop

    zztop Eurovision Winner 2015

    Ok, fair enough.

    For me, I accept that there is bound to be legal interventions about the running of the game, the financials, the contracts, etc - the off the field stuff. It is legal intervention in on the field incidents that I am so against. Hope that is now clear, as it seems we agree.
    Keighley likes this.

Share This Page