This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
LeftWinger Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...sea/8236187.stm
LeChuck Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Wow. Now that is a big story. Chelsea will surely challenge this though, I bet it goes down to just the January window on appeal. If it stands it could absolutely cripple them, they have one of the oldest teams in the league and will desperately need freshening up before 2011.
BB9 Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 About time some English clubs got their reward for poaching foreign kids
Anti-Dingle-Brigade Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Whoa, that news is massive. They can't even get free agents?
Mattyblue Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Just watch our big 4 dazzled press go on a crusade to 'protect the Premier League' from big bad UEFA. I am all for it, now go after the debt.
USRoverME Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 wow, that is huge news.... but no way it stands, just like a lot of the FIFA and UEFA punishments for match antics, chants, racism etc. or those point deductions for match fixing in Italy, it'll get reduced on appeal and in the end it will affect little. Still good news to see them at least TRYING to do something, I guess.
LeChuck Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Whoa, that news is massive. They can't even get free agents? Doesn't look like it - 'banned from registering any new players'.
sloth_frattelli Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Yeah I reckon they'll get this reduced on appeal. Still glad to see it highlighted though.
Grabbi Graeme Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 The thing is that if they cant sign players, and the African nations is coming up I can se Di Santo being called back in Jan.
niggit Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 The thing is that if they cant sign players, and the African nations is coming up I can se Di Santo being called back in Jan. Was thinking the same, can't see us been able to keep him.
ben_the_beast Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 hahahahahahahahahahahaha I think that comment sums this up perfectly hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah ha
LeChuck Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 The thing is that if they cant sign players, and the African nations is coming up I can se Di Santo being called back in Jan. Depends on the fitness of other players I guess...they might see Anelka, Kalou and Sturridge as enough for that month.
Anti-Dingle-Brigade Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Won't Kalou be off the the ACN as well?
67splitscreen Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 The thing is that if they cant sign players, and the African nations is coming up I can se Di Santo being called back in Jan. His contract is only to Jan anyway then an option to extend is what nicko reported if I remember.
Grabbi Graeme Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 But the news today now reduces the chances of an extension
Blue blood Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Wow. Now that is a big story. Chelsea will surely challenge this though, I bet it goes down to just the January window on appeal. If it stands it could absolutely cripple them, they have one of the oldest teams in the league and will desperately need freshening up before 2011. Agree this is what will happen. Shame as the full punishment would really hit the club.
modes98 Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 but no way it stands, just like a lot of the FIFA and UEFA punishments for match antics, chants, racism etc. The fines for racist chants are a joke. They dish out £20k or £50k fines and what does that mean to a club or a national federation? I agree with getting tough and if chelsea have poached this kid then they deserve the ban. They aren't the only team and hopefully others get picked up for it.
greggyk Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 At least it will help thier current youth players...maybe even a few English ones too
bob fleming Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Yeah I reckon they'll get this reduced on appeal. Yep. Probably until January 2010.
Parsonblue Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 Personally, I see it as yet another example of FIFA and UEFA trying to weaken the strength of the Premier League. If they broke the rules then they should be fined and compensation paid to the French club, but this seems way over the top. When you look at the racial abuse that our players have had to withstand in Spain and yet that barely gets a mention by the suits of FIFA or UEFA. Kakuta has been banned for FOUR months - which seems harsh on a lad who was 15 or 16 when this happened. While I have no sympathy for Chelsea if they broke the rules, I do feel that FIFA and UEFA are determined to put a stop to the money that is flowing into the Premier League. Does anyone believe that the likes of Real Madrid, Barcelona or any of the top Italian clubs would have been treated the same? I would hope that Chelsea would challenge this ruling in a higher court. From a Rovers point of view, if this stands, then I think that Franco di Santo will certainly be returning to London in January.
Al Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 If Chelsea are guilty then surely Arsenal, Man U., Man City, and Real have all induced players to break their contracts and should receive similar bans.
Mr. E Posted September 3, 2009 Posted September 3, 2009 What counts as a "break of contract" exactly, because I am deeply confused?
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.