*Transfer Window 2014/15 Season Rumours/Signings *AKA Man U fans listing every player under the Sun
- Thread starter Robert1986
- Start date
- Status
So what happens when RVP inevitably gets injured and is out for a few weeks/months of the season? Who are they going to play up front? There's no other recognised striker at the club other than youngsters. Utd should absolutely keep Hernandez - he's a decent enough back-up and seems content enough to play that role.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Well that is the point of legalise, the wording is fine, the club don't have to sell but they have to then buy out the player. It's why that entire document goes at length to say they don't have any influence and the club can choose to keep the player. This is why a lot of leagues have gotten rid of third party ownership.
By the sounds of it the Portuguese league doesn't actually prevent (they specifically say it's NOT illegal) for a third party to enforce a sale. But because they want to work in more areas/countries they are very into the whole appearing to be out of the loop.
The third party want 15 mil, they don't really care who it's from, though I guess as a company being seen to facilitate the moves the player wants obviously works in their favour in terms of getting more players to sign up with them.
Is it any wonder that almost every one of these third party owned players goes to the Portuguese league where this is fine? It's like Ireland and their dodgy tax numbers, there would always be a league where they fudge it a bit and gain an advantage, they know what they are doing, influx of top south american players via third party ownership. They don't really get the money but they get 1-2 year loans on up and coming players and occasionally this will mean a squad strong enough for europa league wins or a champs league run and potential win.
So Allegri has said that Vidal is going nowhere. Again. And yet some bookies have stopped taking bets on a Vidal transfer to Man U.
I love these drawn out transfer dramas
I love these drawn out transfer dramas
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Your baseless and stupid argument is based on quoting me incorrectly on purpose.
The entire sentence is
Which makes it CLEAR AS HELL that I was talking about the majority owner selling his share alone or the latter part of this sentence makes zero sense.
You would have to basically be intentionally misrepresenting this because you know your argument was stupid to start with and like Frank, you're doubling down on the stupid thing you said.. then half quoting a sentence to try and suggest I was saying something completely differently.
We have been told there is a clause which says, if one owner(here the majority) decides the bid is acceptable then the club has two choices, no more, no less, sell the player to the bidding club or buy out the majority share.
The agents translated statement, again quoted for you,
The club can decline the offer KNOWING THAT IT has to make up for the funds under the terms, we've been told what the clause is.
I at no time suggested or said that the third party could force them to sell the player to another club, only that they could sell their share under these circumstances.
The release clause has NOTHING to do with this, do you think a company that deals with dozens of players, has sold dozens before and wrote up the contracts.... would talk about legal action without knowing they would win? Every single thing involved suggests you're completely wrong, and every single piece of available information points to what I'm saying being correct.
He won't get injured this year, according to the forum last season it was the barbaric and brutal non RVP tailored training that caused the issues and his previous history of injury didn't ever happen. So with the Messiah now in charge I expect 40 games out of him this year....
Now any time RVP takes a knock expect the messiah to run on and fix him Mr Miyagi style
Joking aside even if RVP does get injured United could easily work around losing a pile of dross like Wellbeck. Fellaini upfront probably
In the universe of Steve Bruce, he's bang on with trying to make this deal go through, Welbeck is 23, Long is 27. I never said Long isn't a good player, he is. Although offside all the time, he's pretty good with his movement, runs the wide channels pretty well compared to Welbeck. Not as good a finisher as Welbeck though and isn't as intelligent on the on the ball as Welbeck really. I'm surprised United are going to sell Welbeck for 14m, it's a decent price for a player with his experience at 23...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Baz didn't point it out because I never claimed an agent could force the club to sell, they can in this situation force the club to choose between selling and paying them out the rest of the value of the transfer. This doesn't force the team to sell at all legally, but realistically, unless they can afford 15million, they would have to.
I'd have to check if Baz was actually correct or not, it's illegal in SOME leagues for any third party ownership, in other leagues it's not illegal, the rules vary by league and I'd have to read up more on it.
I do like your argument though, use the agents document as proof to consistently misquote me while saying your knowledge of the document and that I hadn't read it meant I was arguing from a point of ignorance yet when I quote that document it's not trustworthy or true?
So where is your angle coming from, you insisted you knew more than me because you read the translation of this document but when I quote the part that shows you're wrong this document is useless... so where is your proof I'm wrong?
The english league can't have ANY third party ownership at all, the Italian league can, the french league appears not to(haven't checked) Spanish league can. Do you not find it strange that every third party player(well almost every one) starts off in Portugal, these aren't all unproven 17yr olds, some players are by comparison old and more than proven. Does it not hint to you that the rules in the Portuguese league are more relaxed and conducive to these arrangements. Is there more money in the Portuguese league, is it more watched or more popular, yet all these third party ownership companies all send their players to this league?
Last edited:
No he ****ing wasn't. That rule is a FIFA rule that applies to every league. 3rd party ownership is banned completely in some leagues, such as English Leagues.
By the letter of the law Sporting cannot be forced to sell by a 3rd party whether they've an agreement or not.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Actually, it's a pretty ambiguous rule and Fifa are still meeting over it because they aren't sure where the rules exactly land. Second, they don't even state they WILL punish teams who have such contracts. Thirdly, it doesn't really address in what nature these contracts aren't allowed. Ability to influence employment and transfer related matters. Does that mean the club can't hire a manager who may influence these matters? Does that mean a sponsor who offers them more money which can enable more players to be bought is an illegal contract?
Where does it start and stop, it's an early "we'll put it in there so if something really dodgy happens we have a basis to go at a club", but the majority of talking about such matters with Fifa has been based around third parties ability to effect results.... football is pretty big on fighting against people being able to influence results of games in any way and a player having owners other than the club, whose interest can be other than the clubs success, is a big deal.
This rule is not all encompassing and is a prelude to real rules, there is no established punishment for having third party ownership, but the main point stands that I didn't claim the third party DID have the ability to force the club to sell the player. I said the third party in these circumstances can choose to sell their part of the player, and it's up to the club if they buy that 75% themselves or sell him to another club and split the profit.
Again it's back to the argument of, legalise, and that document from the company was oozing reassurances that they had no real control.... then stating that should a club not decide to sell the player then they would.... paraphrased, pay a pre-agreed penalty.
The world over people have control via sub penalties and clauses that allows one party legal control, while effective control lies elsewhere.
If Sporting don't have 15mil, and they have a clause that now says sell the player or pay 15mil to the third party they in effect have to sell the player, and legally.
Remember FFP rules, and how they started talking about FFP and how it would be monitored.... about 3 years before deciding what the punishments would be, and then when clubs actually broke it, it was a joke.
What City and PSG did was "illegal" by Uefa standards.... yet on they march with no real problems. Show me the rule that says "if a third party has any influence in any way what so ever via any additional clause and we'll ban the club from a competition, or impose a £10million fine... sure, till then it's like FFP... a guidance with further clarification to come. Welcome to moneyball.... I mean, corruptball, I mean, football.
It's illegal when Fifa stop letting it happen and do something, till then it's a line in a book that loads of people break and Fifa do nothing about.
It's plainly not illegal, Falcao didn't want to go to Monaco by every account and Atletico didn't want to lose him, yet both things happened. Rodriguez didn't want to go to Monaco but did and left an entire year later, same situation. Players are being moved every year with the third party both choosing the destination club and choosing for the player to leave outside of the clubs wishes. This has been going on for 8 years(since Tevez/Mascherano) and multiple years since this rule has existed...... it's worthless and VERY clearly hasn't made it "illegal" by any definition because it's happening in plain site every transfer window.
Last edited:
Not as far as I know Frank. Roma more or less said he's for sale and they'll accept around £30-35m. He's got some problems with Roma too so I think he'd leave. They agreed this price with City, but City backed out and went for Mangala instead, gambling on potential rather than proven quality. If we want an experienced and top class defender then he's arguably our only realistic option.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
In reality, we've had the situation, we've had the rules for a long time and it's basically easily wordable that a third party can have "indirect" control on what happens to a player, but they can just hide it in clauses and various methods. So they stick in a contract "we can't choose that the player leaves the club"... "but if we don't the percentage of the player we own times the offered transfer fee must be paid to the third party immediately".... considering these players are at clubs that have little to no financial muscle they can legally choose to not sell, but they'd also need to come up with, lets say in Falcao's case 40-50million that Atletico didn't have. In reality, they had completely control of where Falcao was to move to and when, legally Atletico had the option to keep him and chose instead to sell the player.
Legal, yet illegal... it's been happening for a decade. Keep in mind that after Falcao transferred Fifa had to approve the registration of the player at a new club or he couldn't play. Despite his ex third party owners choosing to sell and choosing which club to sell to, they approved it and registered the player. Illegal.... except, ratified by Fifa.
CAS has also upheld transfers on the same basis in the past that effectively prove 18bis isn't remotely valid. It prevents a third party saying flat out, "I choose for the club what happens", but it doesn't prevent them saying "I choose what happens or.... the club has to pay me 1 billion dollars" with a little picture of Dr Evil with his little finger against his mouth in the contract alongside it.
Legalese(I keep meaning to type it with an E rather than the I, as in, legal mumbo jumbo, BS to blur the lines of legalties) makes most stuff not illegal with enough work, as we can see with Fifa approving multiple such transfers. CAS have effectively said, we can't really decide what control third parties have because... how can you decide this. Then there are many third parties who have control anyway. Even without any words or clauses in a contract a third party can say "sell him or we, and all other third party investment groups will refuse to work with you again", which they would legally be able to say, which would cut off a future market of such cheap players from Sporting. They would influence them into a sale as Sporting don't want to lose out on potential young/cheap/top players to help them do better.
You can't regulate influence, because influence comes in too many forms, is too easily beaten anyway and you can't quantify influence. Outside of players intentionally throwing games because a third party can pay them more than their club can and this leaves room for betting schemes and the like, Fifa/Uefa/FA's don't give a crap as proven by literally thousands of third party transfers in the past decade.
Last edited:
Two signings in a day! Long and Gardos. I'm hoping Long's fee is around the rumored £8m with add-ons up to £12m as a flat £12m is ridiculous. Regardless i hope he does well.
Still could do with another CB as I don't trust Yoshida or Hooiveld at all, plus a winger and backup for Clyne (Cork doesn't count).
Pleased to see us getting there but i wish we could have done so sooner, giving them more of a chance to gel.
Still could do with another CB as I don't trust Yoshida or Hooiveld at all, plus a winger and backup for Clyne (Cork doesn't count).
Pleased to see us getting there but i wish we could have done so sooner, giving them more of a chance to gel.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 10,120
- Location
- Burscough
His agent has apparently rubbished this claim.
I'm not surprised to be honest. He's too good for us, but not good enough for Man U imo.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 10,120
- Location
- Burscough
As much as I'd want this transfer to happen, it never will.
No reason why LvG couldnt go with a combination of Rooney , Mata and Kagawa in the centre, admittedly Kagawa probably doesnt have the bulk to do this against the others of the top 5 or so but against the bottom half or so it could work well
As for whether RvP got injured because of Moyes training methods (a dutch trainer's reasoning at any rate), because he couldnt be bothered (which was certainly the case in some matches last season), or something else - Utd have to start looking (at the very least) for a year or two down the line right now for his replacement ....and 1st off give a few youngsters lots of sub chances in the "easier" games, once they are theoretically settled.
Hernandez for a lot of last season, and not unfairly, that he needed more playing time. He deserves a shot at being 1st choice somewhere else imo. I love his charachter and love for the club but is a little too limited for Utd. Absolute bargain for what we paid for him (especialy as we should get nearly double back if we sell this season)
Fair enough - I agree he is the only realistic option left, I could have sworn I saw direct quotes from boardroom level in the last 48 hours or so saying he wasnt for sale but I cant find them so I may have imagined it. I still think its too late to go in now and expect them to accept as they have no time to really find a replacement and do a deal themselves
Last edited:
Yeah, can always have a pop though and enquire, see what happens.
This is why i thought Cavani could be an alright buy, he could take over RVP's role next season or this season even.
------Mata------
Cavani--Rooney
would be a pretty decent front 3..
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 10,120
- Location
- Burscough
Latest rumour is that LvG won't sell Welbeck but would be open to a loan deal, be it at Hull City, or elsewhere.
Except he isnt worth the £50~m that PSG would reportedly want and when /if they are all fit it would be impossible to keep them happy
- Status