Adrien Silva - Terms Agreed

[murphy]

4 minutes ago, shade said:

dear fifa,

 

you're a corrupt gang of beta cucks,

 

sincerely,

 

shakey.

succinct and to the point.

[vanity]

6 hours ago, s11nny said:

How can lcfc proove that they submitted it on time though if the only proof (as far as the news reports and my assumptions go) is the timestamp when TMS received the documents. It seems as though that timestamp is the only thing that evidences everything was done in time. So although the FA were happy with it being 14 seconds late FIFA have thrown the case out on the same basis. I'm sure if there was a way they could see lcfc submitted it on time then they would re-consider but there clearly isn't and now it's on lcfc to prove they have. I doubt there is any proof though because rudders is most likely chatting sh*t 

So, I don't know what the standard is on appeal for FIFA. For instance, out here in California, if you want to appeal, you don't get a retrial of the facts, you are limited to arguing a mistake of law was made by the court. 

 

But you could do that here, based on what I said. You could argue FIFA has misapplied it's own rule. That what is written in it's regulations is submission, but FIFA using the time of receipt.

 

Here, I don't believe you need to prove the documents were sent before the deadline. You can test the system. You can use the system to send something of this size to the FA. Do it 100 times. See what the avg time it takes is. You would also likely retain an expert witness or two to testify regarding the possibility -- perhaps even likelihood -- that the transmission took 15 seconds or more.

 

You wouldn't need to prove it was sent in time. You would need to make the showing that FIFA did not properly apply it's own rule, and that submissions could possibly take more than 14 seconds. That seems a very doable showing to me. 

 

Though realistically, the idea that there is not an electronic record of the submission time seems like BS. The issue is, FIFA is in control of the system, we need their ok to get an IT professional access to their logs. If we appeal, IDK whether we get any sort of discovery requests -- if so, perhaps we could gain access then.

[NotTheMarketLeader]

8 hours ago, BigMicky said:

Having potentially 8 centre midfielders is not a good business model.

The trick is to sell the shit ones and buy better, as opposed to selling the better ones and not replacing them at all.

 

We have 5 as things stand;your way of doing things / support of the club in this total shambles has clearly not worked out.

 

(Sometimes one has to accept it's a mugs game attempting to defend the indefensible?)

 

Its also true that 2 of the 5 should not be playing PL football (Amartey and King) and should have been moved on.

 

Selling the the right players is just as important as buying the right ones, and again the department responsible within the club has failed miserably in respect of the very important midfield area.

 

 

[shen]

34 minutes ago, shade said:

dear fifa,

 

you're a corrupt gang of beta cucks,

 

sincerely,

 

shakey.

If anything, this is one time when FIFA have NOT been corrupt.

Just our luck that we're on the losing side of their decision.

[shen]

54 minutes ago, KFS said:

He should pull a Ched Evans so we could sign him on a free 

Great idea, think you're the first to come up with it.

Can't believe the club haven't suggested this yet.

Get it done!

 

*sign*

[HighPeakFox]

It feels like that moment after a horrible defeat when one stands back a bit and looks at what actually happened.

 

I think there has been a catalogue of errors/blunders/naivete. no doubt within LCFC, and I am moderately understanding, since we have got, it would seem, into deeper transfer waters these days. I hope the entire apparatus learns from this episode. I also hope that, internally, one person isn't blamed, because it is rarely the fault of a single individual in such a complex, involved matter.

 

However, I would also add that difficulties will have been added by DD applying extra pressure so late, the vagaries of an arbitrary deadline that is in place for (it seems to me anyway) the benefit of the bookies and the talking heads in the media, and the intransigence of FIFA.

[Merging Cultures]

This is all so confusing.

 

If the documents were being done through their TMS system, I assume we uploaded the documents and then clicked 'submit' or whatever (just) before the deadline. Otherwise, we have no leg to stand on at all. It may then have taken a few seconds (or more) to register on their database. We've all updated something online, and known that it takes x seconds/minutes for it to register on the relevant database and then be accessible. It should therefore be the time 'submit' was clicked, not the time that the online system has updated/sync'd. 

[Babylon]

19 minutes ago, NotTheMarketLeader said:

The trick is to sell the shit ones and buy better, as opposed to selling the better ones and not replacing them at all.

 

We have 5 as things stand;your way of doing things / support of the club in this total shambles has clearly not worked out.

 

(Sometimes one has to accept it's a mugs game attempting to defend the indefensible?)

 

Its also true that 2 of the 5 should not be playing PL football (Amartey and King) and should have been moved on.

 

Selling the the right players is just as important as buying the right ones, and again the department responsible within the club has failed miserably in respect of the very important midfield area.

 

 

To sell players there needs to be another party interested and the want of a player to go. Again, lots to slate the club about... but I don't get that one.

 

Perfect world, yes you are totally correct... but in a perfect world I'd be tucked up in bed and Natalie Portman would be in the kitchen making my breakfast. (That's the family friendly version).

[funkyrobot]

1 hour ago, foxinsocks said:

Is it an email?

To the fa?

If so the time of arrival at the fa is arbitrary !

What is the process at the fa ...does someobe have to sit and enter stuff onto tms?

 

We should immediately look at the time on our email log and get an indepaccountant to verify the accuracy of our system clock

 

It is still not clear if our responsibitity is to get the doc to the fa in time. .. or...  thst we have to ensure the fa put it onto tms in time.

 

If the former it coukd be said that we should allow a time of email transit 

 

If the later we can say the fa are fuchwits and it was fifas fault for involving them in their rules

 

Anyone know what our responsibities were?

 

 

 

1 hour ago, foxinsocks said:

Is it an email?

To the fa?

If so the time of arrival at the fa is arbitrary !

What is the process at the fa ...does someobe have to sit and enter stuff onto tms?

 

We should immediately look at the time on our email log and get an indepaccountant to verify the accuracy of our system clock

 

It is still not clear if our responsibitity is to get the doc to the fa in time. .. or...  thst we have to ensure the fa put it onto tms in time.

 

If the former it coukd be said that we should allow a time of email transit 

 

If the later we can say the fa are fuchwits and it was fifas fault for involving them in their rules

 

Anyone know what our responsibities were?

 

 

 

1 hour ago, foxinsocks said:

Is it an email?

To the fa?

If so the time of arrival at the fa is arbitrary !

What is the process at the fa ...does someobe have to sit and enter stuff onto tms?

 

We should immediately look at the time on our email log and get an indepaccountant to verify the accuracy of our system clock

 

It is still not clear if our responsibitity is to get the doc to the fa in time. .. or...  thst we have to ensure the fa put it onto tms in time.

 

If the former it coukd be said that we should allow a time of email transit 

 

If the later we can say the fa are fuchwits and it was fifas fault for involving them in their rules

 

Anyone know what our responsibities were?

 

 

Great song but needs a chorus

[katieakita]

10 hours ago, Soundman said:

He is talking bollocks 

Moi, read the posts kind sir as mentioned someone he seems to be wanting this to foul up than go through had claimed it was over SSN which clearly was BS

[Brenfox]

On one hand if the club involved lawyers im sure something could be done but if it was another club I'd want Fifa to stand firm. They granted us a two hour extension that they didn't have to give & we were still late.

[davieG]

Not read all the above but this is how the Merc are seeing it.

 

Before we get into what went wrong for Leicester, here is how it should have worked, according to Fifa's own regulations.

The stages of an international transfer

Leicester City and Sporting Lisbon agree to the transfer of Adrien Silva.

Leicester and Sporting then enter the details and documents for the transfer into Fifa’s Transfer Matching System (TMS). All the information must match.

When the details are matched, the FA is notified on the TMS. This must happen before the deadline.

The FA then apply for an International Transfer Certificate (ITC), through Fifa, to the Portuguese FA. This can happen after the deadline.

The Portuguese FA will then ask Sporting and Silva to confirm that the early termination of his contract has been mutually agreed. Once that is done, they will accept the ITC.

The FA receive the ITC and then enter and confirm the registration date into the TMS. Only then is Silva eligible to play for Leicester.

Unfortunately, things did not go as planned.

 

 

So, what did go wrong?

Leicester applied for a two-hour deadline until 1am to complete to deal to bring Silva to the club.

City are adamant they filed their final documents before the deadline, however the FA did not receive notification of the transfer until 14 seconds after the deadline.

One o’clock…and 14 seconds.

When the FA asked Fifa to request an International Transfer Certificate from the Portuguese FA, they were told that they were too late.

Fourteen seconds too late.

Adrien Silva's move is in doubt after Fifa rejected Leicester City's application to register the player(Image: Getty Images)

Even though Leicester are adamant they completed the paperwork before the deadline, it is the time that the FA received it that counts. This is time-stamped electronically, for those asking whether the relevant person at the FA was on a tea break at the time.

Leicester are understood to have the support of the FA in trying to find a solution, and both have already worked together in asking Fifa if they are willing to change their minds. It was only 14 seconds after all. Not 14 minutes, or an hour.

However, Fifa have reiterated their stance that rules are rules, late is late.

 

What can Leicester do now?

The ball, then, is now in Leicester’s court and it is up to them how they wish to appeal the decision.

Leicester are believed to be considering their options for appeal, but are still hopeful of being able to resolve the situation.

It remains to be seen what avenue they take, but they could argue that all their paperwork was done and sent before the deadline, and that there was just a slight delay, of just 14 seconds, in it being received on the system by the FA.

Who will Silva play for?

That is another question that still needs to be answered. There have been reports that, even if Fifa do not change their mind, Silva will remain at Leicester but cannot play until January, when he can be re-registered.

The Sporting president said today that: "The transfer is done. What is at stake is the registration and I hope they can register."

Leicester have even named Silva in their 25-man squad for the Premier League campaign.

 

 

However, the Mercury understands that Leicester maintain that the £22million deal to bring Silva to the club will NOT go through if the decision stands.

This could end up being the second transfer window in which Silva’s desired move to Leicester breaks down.

Silva thought he was coming last summer only for Sporting to block the move at the last minute.

 

 

Seems like it was the communication channel between LCFC and the FA was the problem nothing to do with FIFA as such.

[shiv]

3 minutes ago, Brenfox said:

On one hand if the club involved lawyers im sure something could be done but if it was another club I'd want Fifa to stand firm. They granted us a two hour extension that they didn't have to give & we were still late.

We weren't late! Why do people keep saying this? The rule states the paperwork should be submitted before the deadline, which it was. 

[DelBoy73]

The one and only question is, who in his right mind would wait till the very last strench of 23:59 PM to submit documents of the fooking most importance ???

I know i would have got fired the next morning for such a sleazy way of work, period.

 

[shiv]

Just now, DelBoy73 said:

The one and only question is, who in his right mind would wait till the very last strench of 23:59 PM to submit documents of the fooking most importance ???

I know i would have got fired the next morning for such a sleazy way of work, period.

 

Sounds like we didn't receive the documentation until a few mins before we submitted it. 

[danny.]

Exactly, it needs to be the time sent. As a pointless thought experiment, and counter to the argument that you have to have a deadline otherwise the line will never be drawn – what if the FIFA system takes 1 minute to receive the information, 5 minutes, an hour? It goes both ways. A deadline is a deadline, but it shouldn't include processing time.

[Benguin]

Not sure whether any lawyers would back me up here or even if this precedent could be employed here but I remember learning about the 'postal rule' in contract law eighteen months or so ago whereby it was ruled that acceptance of a contract is deemed to be when the acceptor posts the letter of acceptance rather than when the person offering receives the letter. There was a case, quite old but nonetheless valid, where someone sent a letter withdrawing an offer before they had received acceptance of the offer in the post, it transpired the acceptance letter had got lost in the post. Despite the acceptance being lost it was held there was a valid contract and the offer couldn't be withdrawn as acceptance of the offer was held to be when the acceptance letter was posted.

 

Clearly this isn't a case of offer and acceptance but I feel that it highlights that courts may deem sending as the true time rather than receiving and thus if we did send in time but it was received 14 seconds late, we should be okay.

[Sublime_Coatsworth]

22 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

He's somebody who had a wrongful conviction quashed. He doesn't deserve snide, ignorant comments like that.

Yeah you're right, he's an all round good guy

[Realist Guy In The Room]

3 minutes ago, DelBoy73 said:

The one and only question is, who in his right mind would wait till the very last strench of 23:59 PM to submit documents of the fooking most importance ???

I know i would have got fired the next morning for such a sleazy way of work, period.

 

The answer is nobody and in this case, those involved in the deal weren't sitting there watching a clock thinking, 'What's the absolute very latest we can send this stuff through'.

 

The situation is far from ideal but it isn't a situation that we controlled.  If Chelsea's first bid for Drinkwater was £40m, this conversation wouldn't be taking place.  The transfer window throws these situations into the mix and you have to roll with it.  As it stands we're on the shit end of the stick, but I believe on appeal it'll sort itself out.  Nothing else makes sense.

[DelBoy73]

4 minutes ago, shiv said:

Sounds like we didn't receive the documentation until a few mins before we submitted it. 

No matter what.

It is utterly unprofessional to not have gathered all the required documents by at the very least 11PM when you know your a going to submit less than an hour later, period.

 

[ClaphamFox]

Just now, Sublime_Coatsworth said:

Yeah you're right, he's an all round good guy

I didn't say that. I stated a fact. You clearly prefer sneery insinuation. But hey, each to their own.

[Sublime_Coatsworth]

6 minutes ago, danny. said:

Exactly, it needs to be the time sent. As a pointless thought experiment, and counter to the argument that you have to have a deadline otherwise the line will never be drawn – what if the FIFA system takes 1 minute to receive the information, 5 minutes, an hour? It goes both ways. A deadline is a deadline, but it shouldn't include processing time.

It all depends what's in FIFA's wording. For companies I've worked for it talks about data received by "our routers".

 

ill be very surprised if it's not 100% clear in whatever commercial agreement FIFA has in place - and is why it was rejected.

[shiv]

2 minutes ago, DelBoy73 said:

No matter what.

It is utterly unprofessional to not have gathered all the required documents by at the very least 11PM when you know your a going to submit less than an hour later, period.

 

But we don't gather the documents, we receive them?

[Sublime_Coatsworth]

2 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said:

I didn't say that. I stated a fact. You clearly prefer sneery insinuation. But hey, each to their own.

I asked a question as someone had already mentioned his name. Sorry if it triggered you

[harpendenfox]

if he can't play until January I very much hope we are not going to argue that he is not our player, as the Mercury is suggesting. Surely any good will Silva has towards us will be lost if we refuse to take him.

 

And you just know if he does ever make his debut for us he will twist his ankle after 14 seconds.