Chelsea banned from making transfers for next 2 windows

Stimulus Package wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:

TheCrazy58 wrote:

Sgoater1 wrote:Has that smug bastard kenyon said anything yet ?

'Please Mr Abramovich, please tell your bodyguard to stop hitting me.'

" I didnt know i didnt know, it was that Arnasen bloke i didnt know! "

We should offer them Robinho for £2m and watch them squirm as they have to turn us down

Or just buy all of their best players.


What makes all this particularly fun for me is that it throws a spanner in the works of the one club looking solid so far. Man U and Liverpool look dodgy, Arsenal keep selling their experienced players, City have Hughes and Spurs are Spurs. Chelsea haven't been playing that well, but they haven't really come close to being beaten yet. I had them as favourites, a few other people did too, now a bit of bad luck with injuries and they'll have to play the kids. And Chelsea's kids aren't particularly good from what I've seen.

which Chelsea kids have you seen?

Mancienne, Cork, di Santo, Hutchinson, Sinclair are all excellent prospects. Not necessarily wonderkids but top youth internationals. Trouble is most of the better ones are out on loan and it's unclear whether they'll be allowed to re-register them. Their prospects are better than most, Arsenal, Man Utd and Spurs would be the only EPL sides who could compete.

That is what I was wondering - their kids that might be good enough are pretty much all out on loan, the rest seem much of a muchness to me. Do they have any youngster who can give them some width up front? Sinclair maybe, but I don't know of any other who looks like they could make a difference in a championship winning team.

they have Joe Cole and Zhirkov to return from injury. Danny Porridge is an able replacement for Kalou. Only position I think they need to panic is a striker, it'll be all about Anelka in January, especially if Di Santo can't be recalled and registered.

Di Santo's only out on loan till Jan, if I remember right..

debaser wrote:Di Santo's only out on loan till Jan, if I remember right..

http://www.rovers.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10303~1742334,00.html

Chelsea can recall him in January

Ballack wrote:

Unflinching Frenchman wrote:

Axeslammer wrote:Roman, Roman : FIFA has ruled that you *can't* buy any players for the next year !

Hmm, FIFA you say ? How much to buy the entire FIFA then ?

have to say, even though it is against my team, i really don't see the humour in this.

It is just a joke. Obviously since it is your team you don´t like it. I wouldn´t like it if if it was mine. But it is nothing more than that.

Chelsea have a good enough team already so this won´t be such a problem for them. This is more to serve as an example. It is all politics.

They are still one of the favorite in all competitions they enter so their rivals don´t have much to celebrate anyway.

I am interested to see how far FIFA will press this issue with different clubs and players. Not that i expect them to do anything else to any other club.

Is this decision final or there will be any apeal?

From the BBC:

"If Fifa actually believes Chelsea are the only club guilty of this particular offence in world football, then naivety is being stretched to its furthest point"

Meh, you brought it on yourselves with Mikel, A.Cole, etc.

If they've decided to start cracking down on this, couldn't think of a more deserving team to set the ball rolling. Hopefully Man Utd and Harry Redknapp next

Ballack wrote:From the BBC:

"If Fifa actually believes Chelsea are the only club guilty of this particular offence in world football, then naivety is being stretched to its furthest point"

the fact is that Chelsea have already been in trouble for it, while other clubs (as I said already) will usually settle out of court as soon as a club threatens legal action.

It's not FIFA you should be angry with, their hands were tied.

Ballack wrote:From the BBC:

"If Fifa actually believes Chelsea are the only club guilty of this particular offence in world football, then naivety is being stretched to its furthest point"

But they have proof Chelsea's dirty mitts were all over this Ballack so Kenyon or one of his cronies has let you down.

Fifa have to start somewhere although I would have preferred Fergie to have been caught in the act

What about Arsenal?! They steal more kids than Marc Dutroux!

Ballack wrote:What about Arsenal?! They steal more kids than Marc Dutroux!

If Arsenal tap up a player, the club complains to FIFA, it makes it to court and they are found guilty, twice, then you can bet that Arsenal will recieve the same punnishment.

I've told this story before, but I know of the Chris Eagles case when Watford complained to FIFA, Man Utd gave them a load of money and Ben Foster on loan so they withdrew the complaint. Spurs reported them for tapping up Berbatov, but withdrew the complaint as part of the terms of his sale. We all know it happens, most clubs do it in some form, but it's Chelsea's own fault it got this far.

Both Roma and FC Sion (from switzerland) have been punished like this. Its not a precedent. More likely it was easy to prove.

Are Chelsea going to be docked points? After Cole-gate* they were fined and given a suspended three-point deduction. Why is no one talking about this kicking in?


*

What happened during this Glennda?

IIRC Ashley Cole wanted a £5000 advance on his wages so he could clear his overdraft, but Arsenal refused to give it to him. He then met Jose Mourinho in a London hotel and was spotted recieving a manilla envelope (presumed to contain a loan of said £5000) which was on the condition that he sign for Chelsea and fail to win a league title with them.

This is all very naughty, I think he made matters worse by verifying it all in his autobiography Musings With My Mobile Phone in My Rectum

If this stop other clubs from doing it and they also get punished then perhaps in the long run its a good thing. But to pick on Chelsea, I think it's yet further evidence for the anti-Chelsea campaign.

Why not delve deeper into the Merida thing? Twats.

Ballack wrote:If this stop other clubs from doing it and they also get punished then perhaps in the long run its a good thing. But to pick on Chelsea, I think it's yet further evidence for the anti-Chelsea campaign.

Why not delve deeper into the Merida thing? Twats.

it wont stop it happening Ballack, it'll just make other clubs even more careful not to be caught

I presume its different because of Spanish law where no player under 16? is tied down to a contract therefore making him a free agent in effect meaning its not illegal per se.

G for Glenndetta wrote:

Ballack wrote:If this stop other clubs from doing it and they also get punished then perhaps in the long run its a good thing. But to pick on Chelsea, I think it's yet further evidence for the anti-Chelsea campaign.

Why not delve deeper into the Merida thing? Twats.

it wont stop it happening Ballack, it'll just make other clubs even more careful not to be caught

Well thats a fucking waste then.

Ballack wrote:

G for Glenndetta wrote:

Ballack wrote:If this stop other clubs from doing it and they also get punished then perhaps in the long run its a good thing. But to pick on Chelsea, I think it's yet further evidence for the anti-Chelsea campaign.

Why not delve deeper into the Merida thing? Twats.

it wont stop it happening Ballack, it'll just make other clubs even more careful not to be caught

Well thats a fucking waste then.

it's Chelsea's fault. Should have paid Lens to keep their mouth shut, few quid here, promise to send some players on loan etc. No point in crying now shouting everyone else does it, because if everyone else did things the way you have then they'd be fucked too.

End result is, now those who milk the cow will make sure they feed it too.

Hlebagone wrote:I presume its different because of Spanish law where no player under 16? is tied down to a contract therefore making him a free agent in effect meaning its not illegal per se.

*Under 18.

Was how you got Cesc, and Man Utd Pique.

You should've been punished over Flamini though

Arsenal should be punnished for all the African teenagers they bring over for trials and then dump penniless in Kings Cross when they don't make the grade.

MadVillain wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:I presume its different because of Spanish law where no player under 16? is tied down to a contract therefore making him a free agent in effect meaning its not illegal per se.

*Under 18.

Was how you got Cesc, and Man Utd Pique.

You should've been punished over Flamini though

Aye, i think that is the dodgy one.

Looking at it on Wiki, it says that he had accepted Marseille's verbal offer. Again, our hands aren't clean but as i presume under French law, there was no binding contract, we were free to offer him a contract.

Flamini is NOT the problem

the problem is Claude Anelka wandering around Africa with a big sack, shipping teenage boys freight to Wanger's office, when he decides they're of no use to him they're dumped on the streets, far from home and with no alternative but to turn to crime in order to survive. Ask ANY young African illegal immigrant criminal how he ended up in London and he'll tell you the same story.

Oooh...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/sep/04/manchester-united-le-havre-fifa-transfer

Manchester United could be next for Fifa sanction over Paul Pogba signing

- 'We are not an academy for others' says Le Havre
- Club say they have documents proving United broke rules

Old Trafford, home of Manchester United which could find itself the centre of another Fifa inquiry following the signing of Paul Pogba from Le Havre.

Manchester United could be the next to feel the wrath of Fifa should the case of Paul Pogba be referred to the world governing body. The French club Le Havre have said they will ask Fifa to investigate the case of Pogba, who they say had agreed to join them, only to walk out in favour of the English champions.

Fifa has so far failed to register Pogba's arrival at Old Trafford, although United insist they have done nothing wrong. "It is complete nonsense," a spokesman for United said when the allegations first arose. "Everything has been done within Uefa guidelines.

"Le Havre's managing director, Alain Belsoeur, claims to have documentation showing United offered inducements for Pogba to join them and has vowed to include it in submissions to the world's governing body. "We are still pursuing our case," Belsoeur said yesterday. "It is a very serious case. We are confident that we'll win because it is in the best interests not just of our club but of sport. We spend ?5m [£4.3m] on our academy every year out of a turnover of ?12m. It is a huge investment.

"We do that to give a chance to our players to develop for our first team, not to be an academy for others. What is the point of investing in an academy if the players leave at 16? This is clearly a message from Fifa to protect the education system.

"Pogba is one of the most highly rated young players in France and has captained the national team at Under-16 level. The allegations first arose at the beginning of August when Le Havre accused United of offering "very large" sums to the 16-year-old's parents to induce him to end a contract he had until the completion of the 2009-10 season in what they described as an "unacceptable act".

Le Havre say they rang Brian McClair, United's academy director, to explain that Pogba was under contract but that United went ahead with the signing anyway. Pogba was reportedly offered a deal by United worth £3,500 a week as soon as he turns 17, when players in England can sign full professional contracts.

Not really

Just wondering, out of those 15,574 foreign youngsters (younger than 18 years) poached by EPL clubs in recent times, did any of them manage to make it big after Cesc?

If not, the risk of getting into this kind of shit for it is probably not worth it. And it's probably not worth it for the youngsters either, since they don't seem to have a great prospect. Probably should just stay in their domestic leagues instead.

Depends for us Rossi and Pique both made it big...just not really with Man Utd got decent enough fees though.

Cant think of others in other teams but im sure there's some.

Hlebagone wrote:

MadVillain wrote:

Hlebagone wrote:I presume its different because of Spanish law where no player under 16? is tied down to a contract therefore making him a free agent in effect meaning its not illegal per se.

*Under 18.

Was how you got Cesc, and Man Utd Pique.

You should've been punished over Flamini though

Aye, i think that is the dodgy one.

Looking at it on Wiki, it says that he had accepted Marseille's verbal offer. Again, our hands aren't clean but as i presume under French law, there was no binding contract, we were free to offer him a contract.

Flamini was a law student at the time, and used his knowledge of employment law to engineer the move.