Adrien Silva - Terms Agreed

[Merging Cultures]

 
It doesn't sound concerning, it sounds bog standard protocol to me.
 
The club will want to fully appreciate where we stand legally and what our best course of action is before we take our next move. I'm sure lawyers are going through the finer details of laws and regulations so we fully understand our position whether we're obligated to buy Silva whatever the outcome or whether there are any grounds to appeal.
 
We're not going to make our next move half cocked and will wait until we're confident of all the other options.

I agree they want to understand the full legal position.

But, if they had proof they sent it on time, they'd have said so themselves by now, and probably shown the evidence. They would want to show that they are not incompetent.

A lawyer would have easily been able to review FIFA's terms and compare to the evidence we have. It is nearly a week since we have known there has been an issue.

Plus this isn't a criminal issue so it's not like they have to withhold evidence. It might become a labour dispute, but I'm pretty sure the club producing evidence it was sent on time wouldn't affect that.

This indicates to me, as has been said, that the club itself have no proof it was sent on time.

[Bob Weasel Fox]

1 hour ago, HankMarvin said:

Edited ?

Nice one  

[Bob Weasel Fox]

13 minutes ago, davieG said:

If only it was that simple. It's been stated that LCFC submitted the paperwork in time but the FA are saying they received it after the deadline.

We don't know what length the elapsed time was but it exposes a flaw in the system as LCFC have no control over how long electronic data takes. 

What if they'd submitted it hours before and it still arrived late? Surely the process should be based on the submission time which if it's electronic means it will be time stamped at the time of submission.

I agree

[jon1bc]

1 hour ago, Dames said:

You miss a deadline you miss a deadline - We didn't just miss the deadline however we missed the extended deadline after being given an extension so you know we've already had our leeway and still messed it up.

The problem for me is that an extension of time somewhat trivialises the 11pm deadline, so it's reasonable to assume that 14 seconds beyond the extension isn't a show stopper.

[justfoxes]

7 hours ago, weller54 said:

Open letter to FIFA should sort this! 

Make sure there's a nicely sized brown envelope stuffed with cash for those incompetent pedantic dodgy bent FUCHERS !! ?✊️?

[fuchsntf]

one thing that is really being, left out of the equation here...Yes others have hinted on it.

The players right, to ply his trade, and compete and earn his right to play for Portugal,

because of FIFAs lack of common sense, and The 2 clubs poor management.

 

Yes there have to be rules, but common sense to me, contract completion should be honoured,

when intent is shown, to close it out before window closure, and not sending in papers hours or 

day later.It cuts out any president needed to be shown or set.

 

But why should the players and his familys careers /life  suffer on macho obstinance, from any of the organisations.

Its short as it is, then penalise the player...its pathetic. Whether its Leicester, Dortmund, or Barcelona.

There is no fraud, no abuse of the rules intended, just a group of people missing THE Major issue on the table.

The players union and association in both countries should also be realising that they have a duty to their

present and would be members....

This isnt about bending the rules, the people involve were not trying it on ,or trying to pull the wool over,

Fifas eyes........Common fking Sense is other peoples blindness to other peoples rights of trade...

 

[StriderHiryu]

1 hour ago, Costock_Fox said:

Errrrr we will be the ones that witness Amartey and King in CM, who suffers most? Its not Silva.

In theory we have Iborra, James and Ndidi ahead of those two. King will likely be the captain for cup games.

 

For sure though, this debacle could end up costing us up to 5 league places if it's as tight as last year.

[Livid]

The club keep everything pretty much in house these days. Our argument is with FIFA, we could go and leak snippets to the press but it's FIFA, they really won't care. 

 

The lawyers will no doubt look at all the facts and the legal position and take it from there. 

 

FIFA have presented a black and white, you were fourteen seconds late, case closed kind of argument. It's wether we can drag that decision  into a sufficiently grey area to challenge it. 

[Merging Cultures]

If only it was that simple. It's been stated that LCFC submitted the paperwork in time but the FA are saying they received it after the deadline.
We don't know what length the elapsed time was but it exposes a flaw in the system as LCFC have no control over how long electronic data takes. 
What if they'd submitted it hours before and it still arrived late? Surely the process should be based on the submission time which if it's electronic means it will be time stamped at the time of submission.

Trouble is I think that the time stamp is on the database. Seems we don't have any evidence we have submitted on time.

It will be a fight to get FIFA to open up their systems.

[Snik-Snok]

24 minutes ago, davieG said:

If only it was that simple. It's been stated that LCFC submitted the paperwork in time but the FA are saying they received it after the deadline.

We don't know what length the elapsed time was but it exposes a flaw in the system as LCFC have no control over how long electronic data takes. 

What if they'd submitted it hours before and it still arrived late? Surely the process should be based on the submission time which if it's electronic means it will be time stamped at the time of submission.

It wasn't a document that was uploaded late.  According to the Leicester Mercury, all documents were loaded to the TMS before the deadline.  However, the final step of clicking the 'go' button which authorises the F.A. to proceed with actioning the transfer (and request, if required, clearance via FIFA from another country's FA) was clicked late.  Therefore, I don't think the excuse of an upload delay is relevant because the amount of data transferred in that final step would be minimal, and therefore instant.  

 

If they did believe it was done before the deadline, the only hope they have is to prove that the TMS system clock was ahead of actual time by at least 14 seconds.  If the LCFC computer click said 11:59 that's irrelevant, as the only clock that matters is the one on the TMS server.

 

From what I can gather, clubs can put all the documents in, but if they don't complete the final step of requesting authorisation then the F.A. don't action the transfer.  Therefore a club could put all the documents in for a potential transfer, but if a condition isn't met (e.g. in our case the Drinkwater sale doesn't go through), then they can void the potential transfer by not completing the final step.  I suspect the documents may have been uploaded with plenty of time to spare but they didn't want to hit that button until they'd got confirmation that Chelsea had hit the button at their end for the Drinkwater transfer (which must have come very late, and perhaps itself was also past the deadline but not a problem because being a non-international transfer wouldn't have needed to go via FIFA as international clearance wasn't required).

[davieG]

20 minutes ago, Merging Cultures said:

I agree they want to understand the full legal position.

But, if they had proof they sent it on time, they'd have said so themselves by now, and probably shown the evidence. They would want to show that they are not incompetent.

A lawyer would have easily been able to review FIFA's terms and compare to the evidence we have. It is nearly a week since we have known there has been an issue.

Plus this isn't a criminal issue so it's not like they have to withhold evidence. It might become a labour dispute, but I'm pretty sure the club producing evidence it was sent on time wouldn't affect that.

This indicates to me, as has been said, that the club itself have no proof it was sent on time.

Or although the club has evidence it sent it on time FIFAs procedures only take account of when the FA receive it so there is no legal way around the procedure therefore any appeal will need to based on something else perhaps that the procedure itself is wrong and maybe dates back to a time before it was all done electronically for example.

[davieG]

2 minutes ago, Merging Cultures said:

Trouble is I think that the time stamp is on the database. Seems we don't have any evidence we have submitted on time.

It will be a fight to get FIFA to open up their systems.

Surely it will be embedded in our systems data?

[dedlock]

Who ensures that all times on the club,FA and FIFA technology is accurate and synchronised?

[davieG]

4 minutes ago, Snik-Snok said:

It wasn't a document that was uploaded late.  According to the Leicester Mercury, all documents were loaded to the TMS before the deadline.  However, the final step of clicking the 'go' button which authorises the F.A. to proceed with actioning the transfer (and request, if required, clearance via FIFA from another country's FA) was clicked late.  Therefore, I don't think the excuse of an upload delay is relevant because the amount of data transferred in that final step would be minimal, and therefore instant.  

 

If they did believe it was done before the deadline, the only hope they have is to prove that the TMS system clock was ahead of actual time by at least 14 seconds.  If the LCFC computer click said 11:59 that's irrelevant, as the only clock that matters is the one on the TMS server.

 

From what I can gather, clubs can put all the documents in, but if they don't complete the final step of requesting authorisation then the F.A. don't action the transfer.  Therefore a club could put all the documents in for a potential transfer, but if a condition isn't met (e.g. in our case the Drinkwater sale doesn't go through), then they can void the potential transfer by not completing the final step.  I suspect the documents may have been uploaded with plenty of time to spare but they didn't want to hit that button until they'd got confirmation that Chelsea had hit the button at their end for the Drinkwater transfer (which must have come very late, and perhaps itself was also past the deadline but not a problem because being a non-international transfer wouldn't have needed to go via FIFA as international clearance wasn't required).

As I understand it the Drinkwater deal was finished 30mins before the deadline.

[PaulW]

45 minutes ago, Dames said:

Its more as in the essence once it becomes legal all lawyers are pretty much the same in what they advise you can and can't do. The fact West Hams lawyers are letting them spout all this off means pretty much they have a strong case.

 

When a lawyer advises you to keep completely quiet it means you're struggling and waiting on someone else to slip up.

Empty vessels make the most noise.

[Great Boos Up]

Clocks on all phones and computers read as 4 digits. So 14 seconds plus will still read as 01.00 and NOT 01.00.14.

Hence 01.01 is late.

 

[PaulW]

34 minutes ago, Merging Cultures said:

I agree they want to understand the full legal position.

But, if they had proof they sent it on time, they'd have said so themselves by now, and probably shown the evidence. They would want to show that they are not incompetent.

A lawyer would have easily been able to review FIFA's terms and compare to the evidence we have. It is nearly a week since we have known there has been an issue.

Plus this isn't a criminal issue so it's not like they have to withhold evidence. It might become a labour dispute, but I'm pretty sure the club producing evidence it was sent on time wouldn't affect that.

This indicates to me, as has been said, that the club itself have no proof it was sent on time.

The club do not conduct their business in public, unlike some.

[Snik-Snok]

3 minutes ago, dedlock said:

Who ensures that all times on the club,FA and FIFA technology is accurate and synchronised?

Nobody needs to.  They are all using the same system, the TMS (Transfer matching system).  The clock on that system is the only one that matters.

 

I've not tried it, but I suspect if I change my PC clock to midday yesterday and then post a message on Foxestalk, it would be stamped with the time from now, not yesterday, as it's Foxestalk's server that stamp the date/time, it's not taken from the device it's submitted from.  

Same principle applies to the TMS.  All transactions (both clubs, both football associations, and FIFA) are all done using the same system.

[weller54]

16 minutes ago, Merging Cultures said:

Trouble is I think that the time stamp is on the database. Seems we don't have any evidence we have submitted on time.

It will be a fight to get FIFA to open up their systems.

.....or their dodgy offshore Bank accounts!! 

[josh]

9 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said:

Clocks on all phones and computers read as 4 digits. So 14 seconds plus will still read as 01.00 and NOT 01.00.14.

Hence 01.01 is late.

 

I wonder, is the deadline stated as 01:00:00 or just 01:00?

[Finnegan]

9 minutes ago, Great Boos Up said:

Clocks on all phones and computers read as 4 digits. So 14 seconds plus will still read as 01.00 and NOT 01.00.14.

Hence 01.01 is late.

 

 

 

Using ten year old shit software I can tell you to the second what time a fat council plumber turned up at Neston Gardens last night. 

 

I'm pretty sure the sever team at LCFCHQ can time stamp down to the nano second the exact moment in time Silva's paperwork left and what sort of latency they were experiencing at the time. 

[Wakeyfox]

If it has to be before the deadline it would have to be 00:59:59 at the latest surely?

[onekeithweller]

20 minutes ago, dedlock said:

Who ensures that all times on the club,FA and FIFA technology is accurate and synchronised?

Bugger it's the cuckoo

[Turbogre]

Who is the guy that sky sports news keep showing in relation to this story, running back in to get some paper work then running back to his car?

 

I blame him for not running fast enough. 

[Dan]

Did I seriously read that if the appeal is unsuccessful, we're not going to sign him in January either?

 

What a disgrace if so.