Detroit Blues Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 It's not like FIFA is some paragon of virtue, that abides by all legal and ethical rules. What leg do they have to stand on when they break rules left and right (like taking bribes from Qatar for the World Cup bid) and then admonishes Leicester over something as small as this? This level of pettiness makes me think that FIFA is upset that we didn't grease their hands to make it go through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotTheMarketLeader Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 4 hours ago, eddylcfc said: In all the sheer anger and frustration at the club (justified) I think we're missing one thing, the player himself. Imagine how he must feel! We've handled his transfer (both last year and this year) terribly! At the end of the day, it's his life and career the club have messed with numerous times and I think it's extremely unprofessional, bordering on disgraceful actually. Exactly Hes got World Cup qualifiers on the horizon which he won't be picked for if he's not playing. Its a total disgrace in terms of the paying fan and the player. Embarrassing doesn't do it justice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wymsey Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 2 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said: I'd like a club statement, even if it's just to say we are discussing some registration difficulties with FIFA. Don't see the point really as they know that it was announced via the media that they're set to appeal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surrifox Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 1 hour ago, Chrysalis said: Just been on SSN that FIFA offered us a 30% surcharge as a fine to push through but we refused, its only 10 million just pay up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davieG Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Leicester City, FIFA specialist, Sporting president: Portuguese press on Adrien Silva transfer By Lucas Sposito - 6th September 2017 SHARE The Portuguese press had a pretty busy Tuesday night, after FIFA rejected Adrien Silva’s transfer from Sporting to Leicester City. The local newspapers did a good job getting information from different sources on the case, as the midfielder’s future is still surrounded by smoke. Leicester officially spoke to the Portuguese papers last night. Although Jornal de Notícias claims to have the exclusive quotes, all the outlets published it today, with the club saying: “We are working with Adrien and Sporting to overcome some issues related to player registration and explore all options to find a resolution.” Embed from Getty Images As reported by A Bola, it seems the transfer was registered only 11 seconds late. And even though the FA accepted Leicester’s request for extra time, FIFA did not. Both Diário de Notícias and O Jogo interviewed Bernardo Morais Palmiero, who is a lawyer and previously worked for FIFA, to speak on the matter. He talked about all the possibilities Leicester still have. “Adrien is a Leicester player, the deal is closed and nobody questions it,” Palmiero told Diário de Notícias. “There may be some solutions that are not easy to achieve. For season a player can be registered in three clubs but can only play for two and this is a clear rule with no exceptions. So what could be done is to try to loan him to a club in a market where it is still open, like Turkey. “I don’t know if FIFA would accept it because it’s not foreseen in the regulations. The international certificate is still in Portugal, what Leicester would have to do is to ask FIFA for the certificate to go to England to be issued immediately, then, for example, to Turkey. But that would prevent him from representing Leicester this sporting season.” Speaking to O Jogo, he said: “The decision was expectable and is passed through the committee of player status and appealable for TAD. The presentation of an appeal does not have suspensive effect, but precautionary measures may be requested. “However, the examination shows that the requests for the application of those measures are invariably rejected, since the issue here is very factual: either the request wasn’t submitted or did not arrive on time. That way, the feature usually has a small chance of success.” “The validation of the transfer is not automatic. When the system blocks, it enters an exception state. It’s necessary that the FA, at the request of the club, verifies what has happened and request the intervention of FIFA to validate the registration, providing justification. The request was probably not presented or was only made yesterday (Monday).” Finally, Sporting president Bruno de Carvalho was more corteous than usual, and claims to be hoping that everything goes right for Adrien to move. Speaking to Sporting TV (via Record), he said: “Adrien has performed exceptionally well in this period and I hope that Leicester can – because there are appeal mechanisms – register a player with this quality, who deserves to be playing. “Sometimes there are these troubles. We placed the documents on time; the information I have is that Leicester have put most of the documents on time, but that the last one has entered a few seconds after the deadline has expired. If they cannot count on him for now, make him fit in, for example, it happened to us with Bruno César and André Pinto. It’s important.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCP4Ever Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 4 minutes ago, filbertway said: Sure, nothing can be done about release clauses. I think you have to be pro-active though. We used to be a pro-active club. You can be pro-active if you can afford to. And most clubs cannot afford to. When the offer is too good, you have to take it. By too good I mean of course, if there's enough money to make up for potential losses in the pitch. 2 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said: Exactly Hes got World Cup qualifiers on the horizon which he won't be picked for if he's not playing. Its a total disgrace in terms of the paying fan and the player. Embarrassing doesn't do it justice. We only have 2 more games, about a month from now. His form won't drop enough, IMO, for it to be relevant. More important is his potential recovery time for his injury. Also, Adrien's comments aren't exactly what was reported. He's not appealing, he said that appealing the decision is a possibility if the current efforts by both clubs fail, and that that is being studied by everyone. Which is pretty much what reports from LCFC have said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nnfox Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Surely this is nothing that a £500k cash birthday present to a FIFA executive's child can't sort out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polarbear Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 44 minutes ago, Chrysalis said: Funny enough I believe we didnt even haggle on musa, was one of our quick signings. Likewise with slimani. I get he feeling the owners felt burnt over those signings, and decided to play hard ball, but playing hardball in football is not very prudent unless you literally cannot afford it, some clubs are in that position but we are not. You keep saying the magic word as if to try and hype it up, but we would not go bankrupt from 20 or 30 million, we lost 100 million before promotion and the owners already proved that wouldnt be enough to dissolve the club. Also the club can spend an extra 30 million and still be in the black. Listen to what I aam saying carefully. The problem is you are approaching this argument to try and just prove yourself right, everything else is moot. "na na na" with ears covered. I will explain again, its basic business, you spend money to make money. In the EPL, each placing is worth 2million. http://www.totalsportek.com/money/premier-league-prize-money/ Second this 20-30mill losses, is all assumptions. I said I would accept a lower fee if it meant buying time. If I found the lower fee too hard to accept, I simply wouldnt sell the player. We know shiva initial asking price was lower than we paid, so again this so called 20-30 mill loss is not that amount. What happens if we get relegated? 20million suddenly seems a small figure compared to cost of relegation, we too good to go down without silva and drinkwater? dont know. Sunderland and villa all those seasons were prudent, just like you guys asked, they now struggling to get top half of championship. Its a bit like the argument where relegation doesnt matter cause can just bounce back up. I am giving up trying to explain this tho, you are set in stone that money means more than strengthening the team, and seem to think we dont have the financial muscle to absorb what it would have took to get the deal done in a timely manner. Also what about cutting losses? I expect we may have had bids of 5 million or so for musa and mendy but likely we considered that unacceptable, musa is still on our wage bill and probably will be of no use to us, mendy out on loan. Its also bad to keep players just for the sake of not wanting to be ripped off if they are to play no part in the team. we were haggling for musa in jan (of the title winning season). we then backed away at the cska's price at the time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fuchsntf Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 On Monday, September 04, 2017 at 21:06, vanity said: Your position conveniently ignores the fact that Rudkin wasn't in control of the behavior of the other sides. Chelsea came up with an acceptable bid late. Then Sporting changed the terms of the deal late. It is lazy to blame Rudkin based on nothing but speculation, especially with Sporting's management being difficult, well-known pricks. Late changes meant paperwork needed to be changed. Likely quite a bit of paperwork. Rudkin just had an outstanding window, we stole a march on Tottenham and got an incredible price on Maguire, we didn't engage in any of the overheated, overpaying BS other clubs did, we got 35 for Drinky, who we all really appreciate but who just about nobody would've paid 35 mill for, I mean, good outcomes left and right -- we added 6 players who could realistically start games for us. If anything is pathetic and embarrassing, I think it is our posters crapping on Rudkin all the time without having any sense for his degree of responsibility for problems. He gets paid to be in charge, of that area of our business..!! So either him or management disinterest kept this unecessary journey on a road it didnt need to take.Like I said poor. If it was FFP, then it would also of been a questionable business.With or without DDs move Keeping DD,if Chelsea fell through wouldnt of hurt us, we made a few bob over the last 2-3 seasons. Rudkin, I have nothing against him, especially last season.But if he was in charge of this action, I couldnt care how much crap falls at his feet, he signed his own contract, so he should know the expectations. The other small issue of letting/know interested parties, ie the fans Know/ informed would of been a courtesy, but not a must. Plus a few other folks, question the whole affair of waiting upto the last minute,last day why??? I wont loose any sleep over it, but these last minute deals seem downright stupid and not just silly/ poor management, when the player is a known wanted player that you have been chasing... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babylon Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 20 minutes ago, ealingfox said: Why would we not have gotten rid of Drinkwater? The deal was agreed. There were no potential consequences. If Chelsea had missed the deadline it would have been no skin off our noses, just as Sporting are free and easy about this. Not what's being discussed, I'm not the one setting the scenario here, just responding to it. Going to your scenario though, that presumes the other club don't have a clause in the contract. The contract might be signed, but not necessarily activated... it can also still be argued through the courts even if there isn't a clause, just as Nice / Sporting did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperMike Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Probably took more than 14 seconds to type in: "PP Aiyawatt Srivaddhanaprabha PP Vichai Srivaddhanaprabha" at the bottom of the fax! ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dannythefox Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 This is Leicester I don't expect anything less, we always have problems with one thing or another. I don't expect it to get pushed through because it us, we never do anything straight forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ealingfox Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 7 minutes ago, Babylon said: Not what's being discussed, I'm not the one setting the scenario here, just responding to it. Going to your scenario though, that presumes the other club don't have a clause in the contract. The contract might be signed, but not necessarily activated... it can also still be argued through the courts even if there isn't a clause, just as Nice / Sporting did. What are you on about? What scenario are you responding to then? Clubs announce replacements before letting players go all the time. Everton had spent 90 million before signing off on the Lukaku sale, they didn't seem to be too worried about the seller inexplicably changing their mind without reason last minute. There's no excuse for what's happened here at all. There is no reason for not making sure this was done before letting Drinkwater go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxes_rule1978 Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Not good for silva at all either, he can't play till January, certainly not the best for a World Cup year... bloody FIFA.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dynamark Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 I'm hearing a song -7 seconds away -Nina Cherry-Ill be waiting Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan LCFC Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 28 minutes ago, Detroit Blues said: It's not like FIFA is some paragon of virtue, that abides by all legal and ethical rules. What leg do they have to stand on when they break rules left and right (like taking bribes from Qatar for the World Cup bid) and then admonishes Leicester over something as small as this? This level of pettiness makes me think that FIFA is upset that we didn't grease their hands to make it go through. They're trying to make an example of a club they can afford to. Hence why PSG will get off with the Mbappe signing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DatfoxesKid23 Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 14 ****ing seconds **** the EA and **** FIFA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 1 minute ago, DatfoxesKid23 said: 14 ****ing seconds **** the EA and FIFA I know! Fooks sake...... it's so ridiculous it's laughable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorkie1999 Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 How about the player and the club cancel their contract by mutual agreement, which can be done because i've seen these words used before, and then we sign him on a free Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Just now, yorkie1999 said: How about the player and the club cancel their contract by mutual agreement, which can be done because i've seen these words used before, and then we sign him on a free I said this, but was told he has to be released as a free agent before the window closes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oxlong Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 This wouldn't have happened if Blatter was still in charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col city fan Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 13 minutes ago, Babylon said: Not what's being discussed, I'm not the one setting the scenario here, just responding to it. Going to your scenario though, that presumes the other club don't have a clause in the contract. The contract might be signed, but not necessarily activated... it can also still be argued through the courts even if there isn't a clause, just as Nice / Sporting did. To be fair Babs, it's like you had a premonition on this. And were spot on to raise the concern. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oxlong Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 1 minute ago, Col city fan said: To be fair Babs, it's like you had a premonition on this. And were spot on to raise the concern. Babs is the new Eileen Drewery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richardsfoxes Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Can people relax, the player has appealed, the club has appealed, the Portuguese FA will come out to help the player as well i'm sure as they don't wan't their player not playing for 4 months wait for the appeal process then cry if they still **** us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoyJones Posted 6 September 2017 Share Posted 6 September 2017 Haven't read many posts, but why don't our owners just take FIFA or whoever to court? Some of their rules contravene EU law, particularly employment law. Freedom of movement is enshrined in the EU, individual businesses / associations can't just do their own thing. If i was Top, I would be pushing my Dad to challenge them, particularly with their proven lack of integrity and the fact they are not fit for purpose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.