Article Details

Having lost out in their attempt to use the courts to force disciplinary action over the Carlos Tevez saga, Sheffield United now plan to sue West Ham for the cost of their relegation from the Premier League. Legally speaking, it is difficult to see how United can prove its case.

It is by no means clear precisely how the case will be put in law, but it seems from the club''s reference to "breaches of contract" that it will challenge West Ham''s adherence to the contract that underpins clubs'' membership of the Premier League. Sheffield United asserts that West Ham was dishonest with the league over the ownership by a third party of Tevez and Javier Mascherano. They are likely to assert that the misrepresentation was not only negligent but fraudulent.

Assuming United can prove that, they will still have a difficult battle to demonstrate what, if any, loss was suffered directly as a result.

The club is claiming that relegation cost £30 million to £50 million. But was that really all down to Tevez? Yes, his goal on the last day of the season was the final twist of the knife for the Blades - the irony of which cannot be lost on any follower of the game - but to claim that West Ham could not have stayed up without him is highly speculative.

Relegation depends on the outcome of all 38 games each team plays in a season. Tevez did not play in all of them and Sheffield United were consistently poor performers. And if West Ham couldn''t register him, they may have found another player of similar calibre.

Nor did his presence have any impact on United''s own performance. It must also be remembered that United only had to draw against Wigan in the last game in order to stay up. To that extent, at least, the team''s survival was in its own hands. It is hard to see how United will come up with evidence compelling enough to get around that.

Antony Sendall is a sports barrister at Littleton Chambers.

This article was first published by Times Online on 17 August, 2007.