davieG Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 Newcastle are after £20 mill off the FA for Michael Owen - Is this the way to go? Some thoughts If you agree should it be limited? (e.g fixed amount, based on wages) It could potentially bankrupt the FA - maybe! Isn't a players/clubs earnings/value enhanced by appearing for England anyway? Is this another example of the big clubs being too greedy? From Sky Arsenal vice-chairman David Dein has pledged to support Newcastle United's fight for compensation of £20 million from The Football Association. The Magpies are reportedly asking for that sum from The FA following the injury suffered by Michael Owen while playing for England at the World Cup. Owen picked up a serious knee injury in the group game against Sweden and could miss the entire season for Newcastle. The Tyneside outfit are keen to be compensated for the striker's absence and it is the latest chapter in the row over who should pick up the tab when players are injured whilst on international duty. Dein was appointed as chairman of the powerful G14 group earlier this week and has a vested interest in the issue as Arsenal defender Philippe Senderos was hurt after representing Switzerland at the World Cup. He admits it is a topic that requires addressing and Dein has vowed to offer his help to Newcastle in their quest for compensation. "We have the issue where he (Owen) has been injured in the World Cup and could be out for a whole year," said Dein. "In our case, we had Philippe Senderos injured in the World Cup and we haven't seen him play for Arsenal this season and we are already in October. "The G14 will back Newcastle. And why shouldn't we? "In what other industry would you allow your employees to go to someone else and then be off for a length of time because they were on secondment to someone else?"
Fez of Mahrez Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 I agree with Newcastle on this. He was obviously rushed back into playing full games for England when he wasn't ready and they are being punished for an injury he sustained when he was off duty for them. Only thing is, they knew his injury history when they signed him. It's always a gamble taking on a player with such a history of serious injuries.
The People's Hero Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 When you sign: a) An injury prone player b) An international You do so accepting that he plays for his country and could potentially get injured whilst on duty with them. I sympathise with Newcastle in a way, but it's just unfortunate.
Thracian Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 It was ridiculous taking Owen to the World Cup. There is certainly a case for the FA to answer in respect of playing him. But the outcome surely partly depends on what Newcastle said to the FA regarding Owen's condition - and of course what the player's input was. I'd imagine the FA will cop for a figure based on the balance of the evidence. I'd be surprised if it's anything like £20m unless they've been wholly irresponsible and ignored compelling medical evidence not to play him. Mind you, common sense should have told anyone not to play him as I said at the time.
davieG Posted 6 October 2006 Author Posted 6 October 2006 I agree with Newcastle on this. He was obviously rushed back into playing full games for England when he wasn't ready and they are being punished for an injury he sustained when he was off duty for them. Only thing is, they knew his injury history when they signed him. It's always a gamble taking on a player with such a history of serious injuries. Englan didn't rush him back though did they, he wasn't forced to go to the World Cup, I'm sure if he or Newcastle had said no way he's not fit enough he wouldn't have gone. Compensation or not you can't lay that on the FA.
Thracian Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 Englan didn't rush him back though did they, he wasn't forced to go to the World Cup, I'm sure if he or Newcastle had said no way he's not fit enough he wouldn't have gone. Compensation or not you can't lay that on the FA. That's why "Can't Decide" seems the only reasonable answer to the Poll. Until anyone knows what was said by Newcastle, the medics and the FA is seems impossible to play Solomon.
davieG Posted 6 October 2006 Author Posted 6 October 2006 That's why "Can't Decide" seems the only reasonable answer to the Poll. Until anyone knows what was said by Newcastle, the medics and the FA is seems impossible to play Solomon. The poll was intended to focus on Owen I just posted his report as an example and to show the arguments put forward by the clubs. I've edited it now to try to clarify that.
Thracian Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 It's a complex issue which was bound to surface sooner or later and one that needs addressing urgently by the clubs/England/the insurance people and the players.
s1mhol Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 Could someone please explain to me where this £20 million insurance claim comes from? Didnt owen cost less than this? Its like buying a car for £50000 and insuring it for £70000,
lildave3 Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 Could someone please explain to me where this £20 million insurance claim comes from? Didnt owen cost less than this? Its like buying a car for £50000 and insuring it for £70000, They're after £10 million because they claim they had to buy a replacement in Obafemi Martins. But when Owen comes back and he plays up front with Martins, does that mean the FA get the money back? Because he then becomes a partner and not a replacement.
syston_fox Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 I think the FA should simply pay for the players wages until the player is back in action.
davieG Posted 6 October 2006 Author Posted 6 October 2006 I think anyone chosen to play for England should sign a contract that says they wont make a claim if injured. If they're not prepared to play for their Country under terms that have been accepted for over 100 years by players earning far less over a whole career than these guys earn in a week then the can feck off. It should be an honour.
Thracian Posted 6 October 2006 Posted 6 October 2006 You're right, it is an honour. But there are so many grey areas nowadays not least the impression that the FA sometimes seems willing to override or at least question a club's medical opinion about the fitness of a player and, of course, the club seeming sometimes to pretend a player is injured when he's not, or at least not as badly injured as is made out. It is integrityand selflessness that seems to be missing all round. The attitude that the common good comes first and my word is my bond. Then there's the pressure from sponsors who might have spent fortunes on the basis that their particular man is going to be appearing at the competition - and I'm not talking specifically about Owen here. It's easy to see a conflict of interests in such contracts from various points of view but they still get signed and that's not going to change even though the existence of such contracts could easily be thought - rightly or wrongly - to have an influence on squad/team selections and therefore result in risks being taken with unfit/out of form players. So deciding fault in the event of injury is not cut and dried. And however desirable from England's point of view, I cannot imagine modern players signing anything which might disadvantage them. The whole issue needs deep thought and mutual understand plus a dollop of goodwill.
Ultra Posted 13 October 2006 Posted 13 October 2006 This could open up a whole can of worms. If Newcastle win the case, ANY club could claim for losses sustained due to players being injured in internationals. And the G14 will end up dictating to national associations who can and cannot play for their countries. International football as we know it would wither away. What may seem like a valid principle is being twisted by corporate greed.
lookwhaticando Posted 13 October 2006 Posted 13 October 2006 This could open up a whole can of worms. If Newcastle win the case, ANY club could claim for losses sustained due to players being injured in internationals. And the G14 will end up dictating to national associations who can and cannot play for their countries. International football as we know it would wither away. What may seem like a valid principle is being twisted by corporate greed. Frankly, at present, International Football is not exactly great, is it? A bunch of overpaid, under-proud ninnies pitting themselves against nations with only around 20 football-capable citizens. Perhaps the death of International Football would be no bad thing.
lookwhaticando Posted 13 October 2006 Posted 13 October 2006 Oh, while we're at it - could we send Tiatto away on international duty, or perhaps Sylla - get them crocked and claim compensation? Perhaps then we could buy some decent replacements... or pay the respective players off.
Ultra Posted 13 October 2006 Posted 13 October 2006 Oh, while we're at it - could we send Tiatto away on international duty, or perhaps Sylla - get them crocked and claim compensation? Perhaps then we could buy some decent replacements... or pay the respective players off. Aren't we doing that with Sylla at the moment?
lcfc_jme Posted 14 October 2006 Posted 14 October 2006 Oh, while we're at it - could we send Tiatto away on international duty, or perhaps Sylla - get them crocked and claim compensation? Perhaps then we could buy some decent replacements... or pay the respective players off. :laugh: I like it very much Love to see this happen and claim massive compensation for the injuries they sustained, but really it wouldn't happen ... Surely Masters Football can't be too far away for them now...
lookwhaticando Posted 16 October 2006 Posted 16 October 2006 :laugh: I like it very much Love to see this happen and claim massive compensation for the injuries they sustained, but really it wouldn't happen ... Surely Masters Football can't be too far away for them now... Some of them will never Master the game, surely ruling them out for the Masters Football competition.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.