lildave3 Posted 10 September 2009 Posted 10 September 2009 not just italy, all of europe. thats why the bigger european clubs rarely have youth team graduates out. by the time they would have graduated english teams will have stolen the ones with enough talent to even make it at AC,Inter, Juve, Real Mad, Barca etc. Tis a complete farce and will have long term effects not just for the foriegn youth systems but also for english football itself Oh, no young players ever make it into the Barca first team. Ok then.
AjcW Posted 10 September 2009 Posted 10 September 2009 Oh, no young players ever make it into the Barca first team. Ok then. !!!! Bit of an error there large al Messi, Puyol(he was young once ) Xavi, Iniesta, Pique(Technically) The new crop... Pedro, Bojan, Sergio Busquets. haha
The Doctor Posted 10 September 2009 Posted 10 September 2009 Oh, no young players ever make it into the Barca first team. Ok then. A) I said rarely not never B) I was being lazy and just listing clubs from the continent rather than checking through their team C)
leicesterfox86 Posted 10 September 2009 Posted 10 September 2009 not just italy, all of europe. thats why the bigger european clubs rarely have youth team graduates out. by the time they would have graduated english teams will have stolen the ones with enough talent to even make it at AC,Inter, Juve, Real Mad, Barca etc. Tis a complete farce and will have long term effects not just for the foriegn youth systems but also for english football itself Haven't thought of it like this actually, makes a lot more sense. It probably should be 18 in England as well to be honest, espeically on the back of this. How does a 16-year-old know where they want to play there football? They can be influenced to easily by the big clubs.
samlcfc Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Chelsea ban suspended until a final decision is made. No date set for resolve http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/8319573.stm
Ford Super Sunday Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Chelsea ban suspended until a final decision is made. No date set for resolvehttp://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/8319573.stm Probably August 10th 2010, when the ban will have run out. That's the way it usually works <_<
samlcfc Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Probably August 10th 2010, when the ban will have run out.That's the way it usually works <_< If it took place after january they would probably still ban them for 2 transfer windows if tthat what they saw fit. Theyd probably appeal against that aswell
Finnegan Posted 6 November 2009 Posted 6 November 2009 Absolute joke. Football clubs just rarely get punished. Demote them a couple of divisions a la Juve!
Jay Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Just had their transfer ban completely lifted what a surprise money talks I guess a few quid chucked at Lens and it's all forgotten.
Matt Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Justice, You can't punish one of the holy elite Top 4
Fosse Boy Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Ah good. It was about time we had a reminder that football is governed by corrupt, hypocritical morons. I'd almost forgotten...
Uncle Albert Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Why are people getting so wound up by this? As if Chelsea are the only team who tap players up, they know banning them was a heat of the moment thing to do and have realised if they ban Chelsea for the permitted time then they will have to ban a fair amount of clubs.
Simi Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Chelsea will probably appeal and get it reduced anyway. ^^ Who didn't know.
Fosse Boy Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Why are people getting so wound up by this? As if Chelsea are the only team who tap players up, they know banning them was a heat of the moment thing to do and have realised if they ban Chelsea for the permitted time then they will have to ban a fair amount of clubs. So why don't they? The clubs should be playing by the rules in the first place.
Finnegan Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Why are people getting so wound up by this? As if Chelsea are the only team who tap players up, they know banning them was a heat of the moment thing to do and have realised if they ban Chelsea for the permitted time then they will have to ban a fair amount of clubs. Because it's a soul destroying reminder that the sport is an absolute shambles behind the scenes where the few rich clubs thrive at the expense of the minnows. It was great to see an example made of Chelsea - now it's just made a mockery of the governing body's ability to enforce it's rules.
Matt Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 Why are people getting so wound up by this? As if Chelsea are the only team who tap players up, they know banning them was a heat of the moment thing to do and have realised if they ban Chelsea for the permitted time then they will have to ban a fair amount of clubs. But where's the justice? What's the point in having the rules? It makes a mockery out of having the laws and rules in the first time. Similar to when an Arsenal(?) player got a ban revoked when he quite clearly dived anyway. I'd just like to see 'lower', 'less important' teams get this special treatment.
davieG Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 This was thrown out by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) which has nothing to do with football, it's all sports. So Chelsea must be innocent and means FIFA are unable to interpret their own rules and do not have adequate rules in the first place. http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5918383,00.html http://www.faqs.org/sports-science/Ce-Do/C...-Sport-CAS.html
Jay Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 This was thrown out by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) which has nothing to do with football, it's all sports. So Chelsea must be innocentand means FIFA are unable to interpret their own rules and do not have adequate rules in the first place.http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5918383,00.html http://www.faqs.org/sports-science/Ce-Do/C...-Sport-CAS.html or as I read it Chelsea have paid a big wad of cash to Lens for them to drop the action and in effect change their story. as in... In an act of good faith and with a view to the possibility of future collaboration with Lens, and without recognising any liability, Chelsea has agreed to pay compensation costs for the training given to the player while at Lens money talks
The Doctor Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 This was thrown out by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) which has nothing to do with football, it's all sports. So Chelsea must be innocent and means FIFA are unable to interpret their own rules and do not have adequate rules in the first place. so fifa don't actually have any real power over what goes on in the game they supposedly govern? Utter joke.
davieG Posted 4 February 2010 Posted 4 February 2010 so fifa don't actually have any real power over what goes on in the game they supposedly govern? Utter joke. Well they do if they can be arsed to create enforceable rules but they're probably too busy having a good time and polishing their egos.
Alexikokopops Posted 5 February 2010 Posted 5 February 2010 Why are people getting so wound up by this and claiming that Chelsea have been let off because they're one of the big boys? Weren't they found not guilty because Lens' contract with Kakuta wasn't valid? Hence they didn't nick him off Lens while he was still under contract, which is what they were receiving their punishment for (the whole breach of contract thing). I swear some people just want to get indignant and moan for the sake of it.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.