FOX Franks
Well-Known Member
We can always loan him out.
Adrien Silva
- Thread starter Jeff
- Start date
- Status
Dour
Well-Known Member
If there is, make sure you throw your poo long and hard.
Feriol
Well-Known Member
I hear suggestions that we are looking at a legal challenge, but to cancel the deal completely rather than overturn FIFA's decision. Apparently we are trying to annul the deal so that he reverts to being a Sporting player, and we don't have to pay them anything. We have also apparently missed the first installment due to be paid to sporting.
Don't have a source, but was the talk down the pub this evening.
Don't have a source, but was the talk down the pub this evening.
SilverFox
Well-Known Member
I've not looked at the rule but rely on Jeff's comments earlier. If that is right (which I am sure it is Jeff) the rule is that:-
'the International Transfer Certificate must be requested by the new association (so us - LCFC) in the Transfer Matching System (the web based system used to record transfers) on the last day of the registration period of the new association.'
So in a nutshell we had to request an International Transfer Certificate and that request had to be done in their Transfer Matching System by the midnight deadline. The obligation to ensure delivery (i.e. on that system before midnight) seems to have been ours.
All we know is that FIFA say it wasn't on that system by that midnight deadline. It was late by seconds.
We could get away with it I suppose if the problem with the request not being on that system was not our fault but FIFA's (their system being down for example).
Pure speculation (and I stress I don't really know the rules - the extent of my research is Jeff's earlier comment) but on the wording above, if we don't have a very good reason, we are just throwing ourselves at the discretion of FIFA who could decide to strictly apply the rule. There is a possibility that they might decide that enforcing against us for being 14 seconds late is unfair to the player. I don't know. On that wording it seems that they don't have to allow this. I doubt they will want to create a precedent. If one club is allowed to sign players after the deadline that everyone else is bound by it leaves a bitter taste.
'the International Transfer Certificate must be requested by the new association (so us - LCFC) in the Transfer Matching System (the web based system used to record transfers) on the last day of the registration period of the new association.'
So in a nutshell we had to request an International Transfer Certificate and that request had to be done in their Transfer Matching System by the midnight deadline. The obligation to ensure delivery (i.e. on that system before midnight) seems to have been ours.
All we know is that FIFA say it wasn't on that system by that midnight deadline. It was late by seconds.
We could get away with it I suppose if the problem with the request not being on that system was not our fault but FIFA's (their system being down for example).
Pure speculation (and I stress I don't really know the rules - the extent of my research is Jeff's earlier comment) but on the wording above, if we don't have a very good reason, we are just throwing ourselves at the discretion of FIFA who could decide to strictly apply the rule. There is a possibility that they might decide that enforcing against us for being 14 seconds late is unfair to the player. I don't know. On that wording it seems that they don't have to allow this. I doubt they will want to create a precedent. If one club is allowed to sign players after the deadline that everyone else is bound by it leaves a bitter taste.
Mike - True Blue Tinter
Well-Known Member
Not a lawyer, but I would have thought to cancel the sale, the contract would probably have to say something like, 'subject to international clearance within 2 weeks', or similar.
It does not however make us look good with the player, the selling club, or any other players and clubs we would want to do business with.
Despite the huge salaries, I am sure if we want the best players to want to come to us, we have to treat them a bit better than, 'sorry, last-minute impulse buy, did not read small print about how it worked, returning for refund'.
It does not however make us look good with the player, the selling club, or any other players and clubs we would want to do business with.
Despite the huge salaries, I am sure if we want the best players to want to come to us, we have to treat them a bit better than, 'sorry, last-minute impulse buy, did not read small print about how it worked, returning for refund'.
SilverFox
Well-Known Member
I don't think we are cancelling the contract. I've only seen speculation on that. The fact he is training with our sports science people suggests to me we are not trying to cancel any deal. If you want to say a contract has been broken or frustrated or never came into being, you can't do something to affirm it (I.e. Treat it as continuing). Inviting him to train with us (even our sports science guys) would in my view be affirmation. We are treating him as 'ours'. In doing so we are treating the contract as continuing.
Lako42
Well-Known Member
Our midfield options are so ****ing good that we haven't even appealed this yet.....nice
Whatever anyone thinks that anything suggests is probably wrong. Face it, we haven't an effing clue what's happening, how the deal is structured nor how the process goes. And I doubt CS knows either. To interpret any action, or non-action, in any particular way is simply pissing in the wind - amusing perhaps but worth little else.
We might as well suggest we're swapping Silva for a tin of pilchards.
We might as well suggest we're swapping Silva for a tin of pilchards.
Blaarev
Well-Known Member
That's now probably the talk down the pub this evening.
FOX Franks
Well-Known Member
If we do, we might as well sign him as a free agent.
camberwell fox
Well-Known Member
Oh cod.
City Fan
Well-Known Member
This is not the plaice for puns.
- Status
Championship
| P | Pld | Pts | |
| 1 | Ipswich | 43 | 89 |
| 2 | Leicester | 42 | 88 |
| 3 | Leeds Utd | 43 | 87 |
| 4 | Southampton | 42 | 84 |
| 5 | West Brom | 43 | 72 |
| 6 | Norwich City | 43 | 71 |
| 7 | Hull City | 42 | 65 |
| 8 | Coventry City | 42 | 63 |
| 9 | Middlesbro | 43 | 63 |
| 10 | Preston | 43 | 63 |
| 11 | Cardiff City | 43 | 59 |
| 12 | Bristol City | 43 | 58 |
| 13 | Sunderland | 43 | 56 |
| 14 | Swansea City | 43 | 53 |
| 15 | Watford | 43 | 52 |
| 16 | Millwall | 43 | 50 |
| 17 | Blackburn | 43 | 49 |
| 18 | Plymouth | 43 | 48 |
| 19 | QPR | 43 | 47 |
| 20 | Stoke City | 43 | 47 |
| 21 | Birmingham | 43 | 45 |
| 22 | Huddersfield | 43 | 44 |
| 23 | Sheffield W | 43 | 44 |
| 24 | Rotherham Utd | 43 | 23 |
