• Current Donation Goals

Harvz

Transfer Talk Topic

Recommended Posts

Kezza   
3 hours ago, bONes said:

To be devils advocate: they only had 2 and us 29 signed unlawfully

29 players signed unlawfully. You'd have think that with those we'd be a world beater by now and rightfully for a few more generations to come. The club fully deserves this punishment for such reckless policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sciatika   
13 hours ago, Mark Kelly said:

I've no faith in any of them , too much introspection not enough action .

No fight whatsoever every chance they get to fight they fold

2

It's unworthy of me, but I keep wondering how much money was passed to FIFA officials in brown envelopes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Sciatika said:

It's unworthy of me, but I keep wondering how much money was passed to FIFA officials in brown envelopes.

Given that we unlawfully signed 29 players, I don't think that anyone from FIFA involved in this required brown envelopes full of money passed to them. The people at the club who presided over it, should be sacked, imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sciatika   
40 minutes ago, Michael Tucker said:

Given that we unlawfully signed 29 players, I don't think that anyone from FIFA involved in this required brown envelopes full of money passed to them. The people at the club who presided over it, should be sacked, imo.

I am not complaining about our ban (though I think that the FA should have greater culpability) but that Man City, who have done the same thing, are not banned. We require fairness in the law whether that be referee decisions or the results of the deliberations of our courts. We talk about the need for consistency all the time. Equality is a central requirement of a well-regulated system. It is true that there seem to be more infractions by us than by them. But we were told by FIFA that these were only examples. There was a suggestion that there were others. It seems that since they admitted that they knew that they had broken the rules, they are given a small fine. Chelsea got the advice of the FA and believed that they were acting properly and were banned. So, it seems that knowingly breaking the rules is OK but accidentally breaking the rules because you accepted the advice of the body responsible for your association is not. Should those responsible be sacked? Only if they can be shown to have placed club interest above the wellbeing of the child (and I would include the employees of all clubs in this).

However, there is also the problem that FIFA's own regulations are unclear, which is why the FA gave us bad advice in the first place. For instance, the relevant regulations do not precisely define terms like "transfer". It seems clear that it is related to registration. My understanding is that the FA was involved because we tried to protect the individuals by formal registration. Should we register every player who is a triallist or has training? I would say yes to the first and maybe to the second. The second is difficult because then you get into what constitutes training. Should every user of a blue pitch be registered? Clearly not. Making rules is very hard to do. It seems scary to me to think that we might have been better off not registering the players at all. However, we need to place the wellbeing of the player above all other considerations and so registration was the proper thing to do, in my opinion.

I think, in the future, we should not bring in any players from any other country for youth programmes and academy until they are 18. We might have to limit it to 20 given that we need to recognise that, in some foreign countries, the records of DOB are not always accurate and reliable. Does that mean the end of programmes like Asian Football Star? This is a trial for Asian players between eight and 13. Probably. Not only should the player be a UK resident but the program should also require that the parents or those with the legal responsibility for the young person should also be UK resident and show a long history of residency. They should also only be resident in areas that are local to the club as defined by our association.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
synavm   

Thing is Man City signed two players before guidance was issued and held their hands up. We signed 29 players after guidance was issues and tried to deny it. We deserve our ban. If heads should roll it should be our own employees. FIFA would have zero reason to target us unfairly. 

Edited by synavm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
xCELERYx   
3 hours ago, Sciatika said:

I am not complaining about our ban (though I think that the FA should have greater culpability) but that Man City, who have done the same thing, are not banned. We require fairness in the law whether that be referee decisions or the results of the deliberations of our courts. We talk about the need for consistency all the time. Equality is a central requirement of a well-regulated system. It is true that there seem to be more infractions by us than by them. But we were told by FIFA that these were only examples. There was a suggestion that there were others. It seems that since they admitted that they knew that they had broken the rules, they are given a small fine. Chelsea got the advice of the FA and believed that they were acting properly and were banned. So, it seems that knowingly breaking the rules is OK but accidentally breaking the rules because you accepted the advice of the body responsible for your association is not. Should those responsible be sacked? Only if they can be shown to have placed club interest above the wellbeing of the child (and I would include the employees of all clubs in this).

However, there is also the problem that FIFA's own regulations are unclear, which is why the FA gave us bad advice in the first place. For instance, the relevant regulations do not precisely define terms like "transfer". It seems clear that it is related to registration. My understanding is that the FA was involved because we tried to protect the individuals by formal registration. Should we register every player who is a triallist or has training? I would say yes to the first and maybe to the second. The second is difficult because then you get into what constitutes training. Should every user of a blue pitch be registered? Clearly not. Making rules is very hard to do. It seems scary to me to think that we might have been better off not registering the players at all. However, we need to place the wellbeing of the player above all other considerations and so registration was the proper thing to do, in my opinion.

I think, in the future, we should not bring in any players from any other country for youth programmes and academy until they are 18. We might have to limit it to 20 given that we need to recognise that, in some foreign countries, the records of DOB are not always accurate and reliable. Does that mean the end of programmes like Asian Football Star? This is a trial for Asian players between eight and 13. Probably. Not only should the player be a UK resident but the program should also require that the parents or those with the legal responsibility for the young person should also be UK resident and show a long history of residency. They should also only be resident in areas that are local to the club as defined by our association.

Man City weren't banned because they only breached the rule twice, that's a full twenty-seven less times than us. They also pleaded guilty when pulled up on it. We on the other hand were warned, ignored that and continued to sign players while knowingly breaching the rules (throw in other funky dealings) and then got caught. We were also guilty of similar years ago when it came to signing Kakuta - thus we've had prior history. What did you expect? 

There's absolutely nothing unjust about what has happened and both teams have been punished accordingly based on their actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
10 hours ago, Kezza said:

29 players signed unlawfully. You'd have think that with those we'd be a world beater by now and rightfully for a few more generations to come. The club fully deserves this punishment for such reckless policy.

yes, you wouldn't mind if one or two of those players had actually been any good, and heaven forbid, Traore aside, actually played for the first team

It's a bit like getting caught for shop lifting for something you don't need / want. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paulw66   
37 minutes ago, Droy was my hero said:

Kakuta. can't check right now but pretty sure we werent guilty in the end.  Not that that ever helps. 

correct. ban was overturned 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, paulw66 said:

yes, you wouldn't mind if one or two of those players had actually been any good, and heaven forbid, Traore aside, actually played for the first team

It's a bit like getting caught for shop lifting for something you don't need / want. 

Isn't Christensen one of the 29 players involved?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now