Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
stu

Adrien Silva - Terms Agreed

By stu, in Leicester City Forum

Recommended Posts

UPinCarolina

UPinCarolina

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, Long Eaton Fox said:

As he's going to be at the game, maybe the club will a spring a surprise announcement that FIFA have given the go ahead for him to play:thumbup:

I wouldn't hold your breath!

KingsX

KingsX

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Babylon said:

leave it to my kids then (when I get some) lol

 

Can’t think of a better way to make that happen than 38,000 posts on here!

 

 

ft addict.JPG

deep blue

deep blue

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, leicesterseddon said:

The question for me is...on what grounds can we even make an appeal?

 

The issue is that we missed the deadline - even the club are not disputing that. 

How do you know the club aren't disputing it? I don't remember seeing them issuing any statement where they admitted that.

 

In fact, the only information I saw  (from the Merc, I think) implied that the club sent the paper's in time and it was a question of when they were received.

1972 Fox

1972 Fox

Posted
Posted

I've mentioned it previously in this thread that we should do the right thing by the player and honour our commitment to him and this transfer deal.

 

If we missed the deadline then it is in no way Silva's fault.

 

We need to show our integrity as a club to Silva and to the football world. Even if he can't play for us until January it is the right thing to do so we should accept the consequences.

vanity

vanity

Posted
Posted
13 hours ago, CyprusFox said:

Hey Vanity, think you should get your arse over to Zurich and argue the toss on this one. You could be our best chance of getting this turned over. I'm impressed anyway:thumbup:

Hah, well, I genuinely wish I could, hope other people don't think I sound too obnoxious. I was really bummed about Silva, so I was heartened to discover that the language in the regulations focuses on submission, not receipt. Just trying to let people know that we may well have a shot on appeal. This won't be LCFC simply whinging about "it was only only 14 seconds!" -- we have real arguments. They are reasonable. They make sense. They may be technically correct (the best kind of correct). And most importantly, they provide FIFA the necessary cover to reverse their initial rejection. Fingers crossed.

 

 

Dan

Dan

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, Blue Fox 72 said:

I've mentioned it previously in this thread that we should do the right thing by the player and honour our commitment to him and this transfer deal.

 

If we missed the deadline then it is in no way Silva's fault.

 

We need to show our integrity as a club to Silva and to the football world. Even if he can't play for us until January it is the right thing to do so we should accept the consequences.

If we left him unable to play until January and then tried to pull out of the transfer it would be one of the most disgraceful things I've seen in football. We'd be blasted from all angles and unlike the Ranieri debacle I'd be making no defence for us. Would come back to bite us for sure.

vanity

vanity

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, leicesterseddon said:

The question for me is...on what grounds can we even make an appeal?

 

The issue is that we missed the deadline - even the club are not disputing that. 

We have grounds for appeal. The FIFA regulations are here: http://tinyurl.com/ydhoetom. Quick and dirty, the registration application process is: (1) LCFC and Sporting independently submit info and documents via the TMS system to their associations, then (2) as the player's new association, the FA submits the ITC request to FIFA.

 

The rule is "[p]layers may only be registered – subject to the exception provided for in article 6 paragraph 1 – upon submission of a valid application from the club to the relevant association during a registration period" (Article III(6)(3)). FIFA's position is simple: the application from LCFC to the FA was outside the registration period by 14 seconds. There is a timestamp that shows the FA received it outside the window. Application for ITC denied.

 

LCFC's argument here is that FIFA is misapplying its own regulations. The rule is not the FA must receive the application from LCFC inside the window. The rule is LCFC needs to submit to the FA within the window. So LCFC can argue that it did submit within the window, but it took 15+ seconds for the submission to reach the FA. Call it the "lag" argument. 

 

There are other arguments to consider. I would research the case law and try to build an alternative argument re what the precise definition of the word "submission" for FIFA in this context. It is not defined in the regulations, so you have to check FIFA case law. You look to see whether you can argue that "submission" does not require everything to be received, perhaps "submission" makes more sense to be defined by the very first document received by the FA. This may sound overly technical to some, but figuring out precisely what words mean is the sort of thing we attorneys build arguments around all the time. 

 

Anyhow. We have arguments that can win. Many procedure-driven organizations are very severe at the gatekeeper level, but at the appellate level they tend to give more leeway. IMO, the key for LCFC is to provide an argument solid enough to give FIFA the political cover to reverse the initial ruling. Do a good job crafting the arguments using FIFA's regulations and case law, and we have a real shot.

Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted

So after 112 pages we certainly know everything there is to know about the problem. What I'd like to start speculating on is how this unfolds as another Leicester-City-I-don't-believe-it-!-phenomenal-fairy-tale. My money is on our appeal and interactions with FIFA leading to the discovery of FIFA corruption (even worse than we already knew) that brings the downfall of the whole rotten institution. To be replaced by an International Football Association led by Emile Heskey.

foxinsocks

foxinsocks

Posted
Posted
48 minutes ago, winchesterton said:

So after 112 pages we certainly know everything there is to know about the problem. What I'd like to start speculating on is how this unfolds as another Leicester-City-I-don't-believe-it-!-phenomenal-fairy-tale. My money is on our appeal and interactions with FIFA leading to the discovery of FIFA corruption (even worse than we already knew) that brings the downfall of the whole rotten institution. To be replaced by an International Football Association led by Emile Heskey.

put rudders in charge

Grey Fox

Grey Fox

Posted
Posted
42 minutes ago, vanity said:

We have grounds for appeal. The FIFA regulations are here: http://tinyurl.com/ydhoetom. Quick and dirty, the registration application process is: (1) LCFC and Sporting independently submit info and documents via the TMS system to their associations, then (2) as the player's new association, the FA submits the ITC request to FIFA.

 

The rule is "[p]layers may only be registered – subject to the exception provided for in article 6 paragraph 1 – upon submission of a valid application from the club to the relevant association during a registration period" (Article III(6)(3)). FIFA's position is simple: the application from LCFC to the FA was outside the registration period by 14 seconds. There is a timestamp that shows the FA received it outside the window. Application for ITC denied.

 

LCFC's argument here is that FIFA is misapplying its own regulations. The rule is not the FA must receive the application from LCFC inside the window. The rule is LCFC needs to submit to the FA within the window. So LCFC can argue that it did submit within the window, but it took 15+ seconds for the submission to reach the FA. Call it the "lag" argument. 

 

There are other arguments to consider. I would research the case law and try to build an alternative argument re what the precise definition of the word "submission" for FIFA in this context. It is not defined in the regulations, so you have to check FIFA case law. You look to see whether you can argue that "submission" does not require everything to be received, perhaps "submission" makes more sense to be defined by the very first document received by the FA. This may sound overly technical to some, but figuring out precisely what words mean is the sort of thing we attorneys build arguments around all the time. 

 

Anyhow. We have arguments that can win. Many procedure-driven organizations are very severe at the gatekeeper level, but at the appellate level they tend to give more leeway. IMO, the key for LCFC is to provide an argument solid enough to give FIFA the political cover to reverse the initial ruling. Do a good job crafting the arguments using FIFA's regulations and case law, and we have a real shot.

This is an interesting development.  I just read the document and have posted an image of the section below for everyone to easily see.

 

It would maybe be good if someone could tweet this image to Tanner and Steve Crossman from the BBC (the guy who has been following this story).  

 

If the media can make this public then hopefully it will help to persuade FIFA to do the right thing?

 

fifa_registration.jpg

Babylon

Babylon

Posted
Posted

I've missed about 50 pages, but what I read tonight said was that the FA needed to have requested the ITC before the deadline also, our documents were late and thus they couldn't apply? Is that right?

Ricey

Ricey

Posted
Posted
47 minutes ago, Babylon said:

I've missed about 50 pages, but what I read tonight said was that the FA needed to have requested the ITC before the deadline also, our documents were late and thus they couldn't apply? Is that right?

That's what the ex-FIFA employee who dealt with TMS states.

 

The guidelines posted above contradict that.

Struwwelpeter60

Struwwelpeter60

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Grey Fox said:

This is an interesting development.  I just read the document and have posted an image of the section below for everyone to easily see.

 

It would maybe be good if someone could tweet this image to Tanner and Steve Crossman from the BBC (the guy who has been following this story).  

 

If the media can make this public then hopefully it will help to persuade FIFA to do the right thing?

 

fifa_registration.jpg

 

I fear  that  "valid" is the key word here.

FIFA will probably argue, that an "application"

is not "valid" if it is not complete. I mean, if

the page with the signatures didn't arrive in time,

they certainly  would have a point.

At 1am on 1 September our application was,

for whatever reasons, not complete.

According to the FA.

 

Let us be honest: de facto we are hoping, that

FIFA will grant us a post hoc (second) deadline

extension.

But that would create a very dangerous precedent,

because in future every club could invoke the

"Silva case". Their whole transfer window/deadline

system would be in jeopardy.

It's a real mess. 

Trav Le Bleu

Trav Le Bleu

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Struwwelpeter60 said:

 

I fear  that  "valid" is the key word here.

FIFA will probably argue, that an "application"

is not "valid" if it is not complete. I mean, if

the page with the signatures didn't arrive in time,

they certainly  would have a point.

At 1am on 1 September our application was,

for whatever reasons, not complete.

According to the FA.

 

Let us be honest: de facto we are hoping, that

FIFA will grant us a post hoc (second) deadline

extension.

But that would create a very dangerous precedent,

because in future every club could invoke the

"Silva case". Their whole transfer window/deadline

system would be in jeopardy.

It's a real mess. 

You mean the "Guidetti case", surely?

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...