Kitchandro Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 @StringerSport 37s Nigel Pearson has told us this morning that the Cambiasso to #LCFC deal has progressed & he’s now more ‘hopeful’ wut
Webbo Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 The idea that he wants to play for and its his agents that are holding things up seems a massive assumption to me. It might be true but it's just as likely that he doesn't really want to be here and his owners are just trying to squeeze 2 more years of earning potential out of him
weller54 Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 If this guy plays with half of the endeavour of Liam Moore - the next Steve Walsh - then we're laughing This!!!
Haydos Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Why do some people blame Cambiasso in this? For me it's clear Cambiasso wants to come, otherwise Pearson would have pulled the plug and wouldn't be playing this game. It's some shareholder that's being the bollox here and dragging this out for a fatter pay out. People saying that Cambiasso should be the one calling the shots don't know anything of his personal arrangement with his agent/owners, whoever this is leaving a bad taste in the mouth of some fans, but that's bidness. If we manage to complete this deal the same people will be gagging to jump on his back, saying he's only here for the money etc etc. Too many morons in this thread, your words are wasted on them.
sphericalfox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 The idea that he wants to play for and its his agents that are holding things up seems a massive assumption to me. It might be true but it's just as likely that he doesn't really want to be here and his owners are just trying to squeeze 2 more years of earning potential out of him That's fair, but as I've said if it was the player then Pearson would have got shot by now, hence my assumption that it's not the player. Those who want him to fire his reps/shareholders , yeah cos it's that easy!
Haydos Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Sack 'em then. If you want to sign for a club but someone you employ is stopping you from doing so that sounds like an excellent reason to tell that person they've lost their job. If a relationship isn't beneficial in any other area of life, business or personal, you walk away. You have to question why someone would maintain a relationship if they didn't want it. Sack them? How does that work if the player is their financial property?
lcfcsnow Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 I'd be concerned signing a player of his age without any pre season fitness behind him nevermind after all this hoo-ha.
Kitchandro Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Sack them? How does that work if the player is their financial property? Why has he let himself become someone's 'property' (other than the club he plays for?) What a sick, twisted situation.
Thefoxman Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Now it's our turn to piss about. Delay the contract signing and tell him we are waiting to see if any of our other midfield targets come off before committing to Cambiasso, see how he likes it. Me Likey
davieG Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Why has he let himself become someone's 'property' (other than the club he plays for?) What a sick, twisted situation. Perhaps it was the only way he could get to play in Europe this seems to be the norm or at least very prevalent in S. America and at the time it probably seem like it was worth it with the extra money he would be earning,
johnny the fox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/football/396197/Leicester-boss-Nigel-Pearson-wants-THREE-new-players-with-a-deal-for-Cambiasso-close
Master Fox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 @StringerSport 37s Nigel Pearson has told us this morning that the Cambiasso to #LCFC deal has progressed & he’s now more ‘hopeful’
Haydos Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Why has he let himself become someone's 'property' (other than the club he plays for?) What a sick, twisted situation. I'm not sure of the ins and outs, I only know it's common for south american players. They're not his property as such, they can just outprice people on contracts so they have a big say in who he plays for. 'Sick and twisted' is a bit dramatic
Harry - LCFC Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 I'm not sure of the ins and outs, I only know it's common for south american players. They're not his property as such, they can just outprice people on contracts so they have a big say in who he plays for. 'Sick and twisted' is a bit dramatic It's pretty bad though. It'd feel like having your freedom being taken away from you being told who you can and can't sign for. If it's true that he can't get rid of them that's pretty repulsive IMO.
Leicester_Numan Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 That's fair, but as I've said if it was the player then Pearson would have got shot by now, hence my assumption that it's not the player. Those who want him to fire his reps/shareholders , yeah cos it's that easy! It's definitely not the player, he's the innocent party in all of this. There's a lot of idiots slagging him off on Twitter at the moment though. Pearson himself said that agent after agent came crawling out of the woodwork and no-one knew who represented who. That's what's held this deal up, I guess that interview must have skipped past them all. The picture isn't yet clear about who tried to change the terms of the verbally agreed deal between Pearson and Cambiasso (when he recommended Alvarez) but according to the Mirror this morning it was the club, my money would be on the agent using our injury situation to get a better deal. Again, the picture isn't clear over Stringer's tweet, it could be as he says or it could be that we did try to change the deal and Pearson hasn't been updated by Robinson yet, time will tell. Basically though, none of it is down to Cambiasso and others shouldn't blame him
1972 Fox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 So what's pretty clear from the last two weeks: 1. No one here is ITK and yes that includes all the alleged ITK's pre this whole Cambiasso saga 2. Little or no people here fully understand how football transfers work. It's a complex business with multiple stakeholders involved. A lot of the time the actual player has little say. These players are commodities 3. It's clear that the invention of social media and easier ways to publish news has completely saturated the general quality and reliability of "press" in general with the knock on affect of even reputable sources being tarred with the same brush or becoming lazy and citing poor /made up reports 4. The fickleness of our fans is embarrassing, one min he is god, the next min everyone is on a bandwagon stating how shvt he is because someone has incorrectly suggested the deal hold up is because he is after more money/better terms 5. Many of us have delusions of grandeur, we are a smaller club than most of the PL, we are back in the PL after ten years. Its a fcuking miracle we've even held talks with such a world class player This.
sphericalfox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Cos people probably haven't done their homework. Here's a simple cribsheet Third Party Player Ownership of Footballers Registration of Football Players in the UK For a football player to play for a professional football team in either England or Scotland his registration must be owned by that club, therefore meaning that the club has the ownership right over that players services. Player registrations can be bought and sold and also loaned between clubs. In recent years, however, there has been a growing trend of footballers who are subject to third party player ownership. Third Party Player Ownership What is meant by Third Party Player Ownership? Third party player ownership is the term which is used to describe the situation whereby a football player is registered to pay for a football club but that club does not own the player and is not entitled to 100% of the future transfer value of the player. How does third party player ownership come about? The basic notion behind third party player ownership is that a company or an individual will give a club or player money in return for owning a percentage of a players transfer fee or the economic right accruing from that player. There are a number of ways in which this will come about, which are as follows: Speculation Financial Support Global Football Funding Speculation In this respect a company or an individual will act as a speculator and will purchase a percentage in a player from a club, often when the player is young, in the hope that their value will go up. Financial Support In this respect a company or an individual will provide financial support for a young player’s development in return for an agreement that when the player signs a professional contract with that club the company or individual will be entitled to a percentage of any future transfer fees. Global Fund In this respect the global fund will take a percentage of any transfer fees from a number of players who play for the same team rather than simply an individual player. Why would a football club agree to third party player ownership of its players? Third party player ownership is a system which is especially common in South America. Two of the most famous footballing countries – Brazil and Argentina – hail from this continent and as a consequence some of the world’s best football players come from these countries. There is a huge market for selling South American players to Europe and the clubs in South America often make huge amounts of money doing this. Comparatively the clubs in South America do not have as much money as the clubs in Europe so they have had to develop a system whereby they can sell young talent to European clubs for high value. Consequently there is huge money to be made which is why many companies and individuals have tried to invest into this market. It is also attractive for the South American clubs as often the companies and individuals have experience of conducting such deals and can get large sums of money for the clubs than they otherwise would have been able to. Also accepting money for a percentage of a young player may also provide an immediate solution for a club plying its trade in a league where there is no the same money as those in Europe. What is the position in England in relation to third party player ownership? Third party player ownership was relatively non-existent in English football until only a couple of seasons ago when two Argentine players were transferred to a club which would not usually have been able to attract such high class stars. Both of the players were still owned by a third party, a company run by a football agent, meaning that if the players were sold on by the club then that company would get a large percentage of the transfer fee. The players were brought to the small club as a means of introducing the third party ownership and then making huge sums of money when the players were sold on to bigger clubs – which they both were. Was this illegal under the Football Association rules? At the time third party player ownership was not banned outright as the Premier League rules only forbid clubs from entering into contracts with a third party which would allow that third party to materially influence the clubs policies or the performance of its teams. This did not, however, outlaw all third party player ownership. In the above case, however, this rule was broken as the contract with the third party owners gave them the exclusive right to negotiate any transfer involving that player. What do the current rules say? Following the saga involving the two Argentinean players both the Football Association and the FA Premier League introduced rules through the Premier League rules and the FA Third Party Player Ownership Regulations outlawing any form of third party player ownership in English football. The rules require that a player’s registration and economic rights are not retained by any third party when a player is transferred and registered with a new club. The new club must be the sole owner of the rights. These regulations do not apply retrospectively, however, meaning that any existing third party player ownership which does not fall foul of the previous rules will be allowed until that player is transferred. What is the position in world football? Following the issues with the case in English football, the International Governing Body of Football – FIFA – has changed its rules in relation to third party player ownership. The FIFA rules are not as restrictive as the FA and Premier League rules, however, proving the following: That no club shall enter into a contract which enables any other party to acquire the ability to influence in employment and transfer related matters its independence, its policies or the performance of its teams. The FIFA rules are similar to the earlier FA rules meaning that players can still be owned by third parties in other countries but this will have to be relinquished if they are transferred to play in England.
Haydos Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 It's pretty bad though. It'd feel like having your freedom being taken away from you being told who you can and can't sign for. If it's true that he can't get rid of them that's pretty repulsive IMO. They sign up for it so they have to put up with it I guess. This is complete speculation so might not apply to Cambiasso but a lot of the high profile co-owned players over the last few years might have not forged the same career/wealth that they have without this in place. I think a club/himself/anyone can make offers for the stake the investors have in them.
sphericalfox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 So as it stands, the FA state that 3rd PARTY ownership must be relinquished, therefore whoever it is, is definitely holding out for a bigger signing on fee.
TMELcfc Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 So what's pretty clear from the last two weeks: 1. No one here is ITK and yes that includes all the alleged ITK's pre this whole Cambiasso saga 2. Little or no people here fully understand how football transfers work. It's a complex business with multiple stakeholders involved. A lot of the time the actual player has little say. These players are commodities 3. It's clear that the invention of social media and easier ways to publish news has completely saturated the general quality and reliability of "press" in general with the knock on affect of even reputable sources being tarred with the same brush or becoming lazy and citing poor /made up reports 4. The fickleness of our fans is embarrassing, one min he is god, the next min everyone is on a bandwagon stating how shvt he is because someone has incorrectly suggested the deal hold up is because he is after more money/better terms 5. Many of us have delusions of grandeur, we are a smaller club than most of the PL, we are back in the PL after ten years. Its a fcuking miracle we've even held talks with such a world class player THIS!
_Fatboyslow_ Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 <p> Cos people probably haven't done their homework. Here's a simple cribsheet 25] Third Party Player Ownership of Footballers 25] Registration of Football Players in the UK For a football player to play for a professional football team in either England or Scotland his registration must be owned by that club, therefore meaning that the club has the ownership right over that players services. Player registrations can be bought and sold and also loaned between clubs. In recent years, however, there has been a growing trend of footballers who are subject to third party player ownership. Third Party Player Ownership What is meant by Third Party Player Ownership? Third party player ownership is the term which is used to describe the situation whereby a football player is registered to pay for a football club but that club does not own the player and is not entitled to 100% of the future transfer value of the player. How does third party player ownership come about? The basic notion behind third party player ownership is that a company or an individual will give a club or player money in return for owning a percentage of a players transfer fee or the economic right accruing from that player. There are a number of ways in which this will come about, which are as follows: Speculation Financial Support Global Football Fund SpeculationIn this respect a company or an individual will act as a speculator and will purchase a percentage in a player from a club, often when the player is young, in the hope that their value will go up. Financial Support In this respect a company or an individual will provide financial support for a young player’s development in return for an agreement that when the player signs a professional contract with that club the company or individual will be entitled to a percentage of any future transfer fees. Global Fund In this respect the global fund will take a percentage of any transfer fees from a number of players who play for the same team rather than simply an individual player. Why would a football club agree to third party player ownership of its players? Third party player ownership is a system which is especially common in South America. Two of the most famous footballing countries – Brazil and Argentina – hail from this continent and as a consequence some of the world’s best football players come from these countries. There is a huge market for selling South American players to Europe and the clubs in South America often make huge amounts of money doing this. Comparatively the clubs in South America do not have as much money as the clubs in Europe so they have had to develop a system whereby they can sell young talent to European clubs for high value. Consequently there is huge money to be made which is why many companies and individuals have tried to invest into this market. It is also attractive for the South American clubs as often the companies and individuals have experience of conducting such deals and can get large sums of money for the clubs than they otherwise would have been able to. Also accepting money for a percentage of a young player may also provide an immediate solution for a club plying its trade in a league where there is no the same money as those in Europe. What is the position in England in relation to third party player ownership? Third party player ownership was relatively non-existent in English football until only a couple of seasons ago when two Argentine players were transferred to a club which would not usually have been able to attract such high class stars. Both of the players were still owned by a third party, a company run by a football agent, meaning that if the players were sold on by the club then that company would get a large percentage of the transfer fee. The players were brought to the small club as a means of introducing the third party ownership and then making huge sums of money when the players were sold on to bigger clubs – which they both were. Was this illegal under the Football Association rules? At the time third party player ownership was not banned outright as the Premier League rules only forbid clubs from entering into contracts with a third party which would allow that third party to materially influence the clubs policies or the performance of its teams. This did not, however, outlaw all third party player ownership. In the above case, however, this rule was broken as the contract with the third party owners gave them the exclusive right to negotiate any transfer involving that player. What do the current rules say? Following the saga involving the two Argentinean players both the Football Association and the FA Premier League introduced rules through the Premier League rules and the FA Third Party Player Ownership Regulations outlawing any form of third party player ownership in English football. The rules require that a player’s registration and economic rights are not retained by any third party when a player is transferred and registered with a new club. The new club must be the sole owner of the rights. These regulations do not apply retrospectively, however, meaning that any existing third party player ownership which does not fall foul of the previous rules will be allowed until that player is transferred. What is the position in world football? Following the issues with the case in English football, the International Governing Body of Football – FIFA – has changed its rules in relation to third party player ownership. The FIFA rules are not as restrictive as the FA and Premier League rules, however, proving the following: That no club shall enter into a contract which enables any other party to acquire the ability to influence in employment and transfer related matters its independence, its policies or the performance of its teams. The FIFA rules are similar to the earlier FA rules meaning that players can still be owned by third parties in other countries but this will have to be relinquished if they are transferred to play in England. I am glad you think that is simple, it looks rather drawn out to me
sphericalfox Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 Did Ken format that post for you sphericalfox? Sorry the format got scuppered in the cut and paste, and I couldn't be bothered to tidy it up. Lazy posting I know. There, I've tidied it! Bastard guilt! If you want the headings looking nice click the link!
Callabinho Posted 25 August 2014 Posted 25 August 2014 He certainly did not storm out of a meeting, unless he's morphed into his brother?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.