Monday, 18 March 2013
Watford ruling: since when has ignorance been a defence in law?
Watford FC claim "It is clear from the decision of the Football Disciplinary Commission that the offences which the club has been found guilty of were committed by one or two individuals who are no longer associated with the club - and without the knowledge of the full board of the club" but since when has ignorance been a defence in law?
It makes you wonder if the "full board of the club" at West Ham understood that the Tevez deal broke the rules on a technicality and if the "full board of the club" knew about the "oral cuddles" that were allegedly given to Kia Joorabchian. I suppose it is easier to wash your hands of it all when the "guilty party" has left the club, and a little more difficult when the legal adviser has been promoted to the position of CEO. Presumably the CEO will not now negotiate a compensation package of £20m+ to a rival team missing out on promotion, should Watford go up.
Who were the players involved in this case? If any have played a role in this season's promotion push, then Watford have arguably benefited from wrong doing. The club's "lend lease" transfer deals (for the want of a better term), have already triggered cries of unfair from some; this ruling will simply heighten the sense of injustice in certain quarters.
That feeling is probably totally unjustified but affection for Watford is being tested still further.
Posted by Hammersfan at 18:53