Guest neesy111 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Real Mallorca are demanding £8million compensation from Newcastle for Jonas Gutierrez. The Argentina international left the Primera Liga side for the North East on Wednesday after buying out the remaining two years of his contract in Spain. With that effectively making him a free agent, cash-strapped Mallorca are threatening to report the issue to Fifa in an attempt to secure a financial package they deem suitable for a player of international pedigree. The Spanish club's president Vicente Grande claims that they will be left on the brink of administration if the deal is allowed to stand and has urged world football's governing body to intervene. Crisis "Because of our financial crisis, this could really damage us. In fact, it has come at the worst possible time," said Grande. "We cannot understand the attitude of the player who has done this to force a move to England. "This matter is not closed because the club has decided to go to FIFA to reclaim our right. The minimum we want to recuperate is the £8million Portsmouth offered us in the winter.'' Despite the president's calls for action, Gutierrez is adamant that he has done nothing wrong and is looking forward to beginning a new chapter in his career. He said: "My conscience is clear and I am not worried by the actions of Real Mallorca. I just want to play for Newcastle in the Premier League." Loan Another issue which could scupper Mallorca's plans for compensation involves the dual ownership of Gutierrez that the club shared with his first club Velez Sarsfield. The Argentinean outfit insist that the winger was due to return to them next season anyway, although they too have suggested that they will be exploring the legalities of the 25-year-old's move to England. "Jonas Gutierrez was due to return to Velez Sarsfield on 1st July in accordance with the contract signed with Mallorca, owners of a 50 per cent stake of his economic rights," said Velez president Alvaro Ballestrini. "After three seasons on loan at Mallorca he would have had to come back to Velez if Newcastle had not come in." With confusion now surrounding the transfer Ballestrini has also been quoted as saying that there still remains a possibility that Gutierrez will return to his homeland, rather than the Premier League. "I want to contact the agent of Jonas and the directors of Newcastle," he told radio station Cadena Sar. "We have requested the player's presence at training in Buenos Aires on 7th July and after that we will announce our official position." Interesting to read he's worth at least £8m too. Hope we'd have had all this sorted before announcing the signing though tbh. A cynic might suggest the deal was pushed through in order to override a few of the negative Barton headlines... sound's to me that: that mallorca are in deep financial trouble and are afta every penny they can find velez are trying to get a cut of the deal, surely jonas's agent would know about any third part, anycase, if he has bought out his contract then he is a free agent, even if it goes to court, mallorca will get at most 5 million with the webster deal, hearts got 200k which was about a 5th of what he was worth at the time remember we've been in favour twice when we've been to court over: charlie and le harve bernard with his west ham move Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Everyone seems confused.. Chris Mort is a Lawyer isn't he Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Basically, Majorca have screwed up by trying to get too much money for the guy everytime a club showed interest. The player has taken matters into his hand and taken advantage of the Webster ruling, which Majorca clearly weren't well versed on, in order to get out. Now Gutierrez former club who should have been receiving some money for any transfer are also screwed because he wasn't sold, but bought his contract out. I reckon they fully expected Gutierrez to be sold by Majorca and were waiting for their cut of the cash, however Majorca simply messed up. I reckon we don't have a thing to worry about. We will likely pay some compensation but it will be nowhere near what they are asking for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UV Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Another weird suggestion about the transfer of Gutierrez: http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/transfers/mallorca-query-gutierrezs-newcastle-move-859879.html This transfer is very murky. Who cares if the transfer is murky or not? It shall be presumed, unless established to the contrary, that any club signing a professional who has terminated his contract without just cause has induced that professional to commit a breach. The club shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two registration periods. Not suggesting in the slightest that we have, but to be so glib about it is pretty ignorant. I'd guess this part of article 17 stopped any chance of him going to Portsmouth after he broke his contract. I guess Gutierrez will have to pay half the compensation to Mallorca and half to Velez. It will probably drag on like N'Zogbia's transfer, but shouldn't affect us directly. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Basically, Majorca have screwed up by trying to get too much money for the guy everytime a club showed interest. The player has taken matters into his hand and taken advantage of the Webster ruling, which Majorca clearly weren't well versed on, in order to get out. Now Gutierrez former club who should have been receiving some money for any transfer are also screwed because he wasn't sold, but bought his contract out. I reckon they fully expected Gutierrez to be sold by Majorca and were waiting for their cut of the cash, however Majorca simply messed up. I reckon we don't have a thing to worry about. We will likely pay some compensation but it will be nowhere near what they are asking for. this would by my understanding; no direct fee then nothing for velez can't see what there is to worry about really unless there's something we're all totally unware of...if, as it appears, he was able to terminate his contract legally then that's that surely? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 If nothing else at least he has shown he is very keen to play for us so we must've really sold the club to him which is very played on our behalf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordie jamie Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 have you seen the setanta website claiming he wasnt majorca's player to sell and the club in argentina say he is due back for training. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 have you seen the setanta website claiming he wasnt majorca's player to sell and the club in argentina say he is due back for training. Yeah it is in all the papers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 It shall be presumed, unless established to the contrary, that any club signing a professional who has terminated his contract without just cause has induced that professional to commit a breach. The club shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two registration periods. a deliberte ploy by ashley. get caught doing this then no-one can complain when we don't sign anyone as we can't. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieglory Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Although we're the beneficiaries in this instance, is no one else worried about the Webster ruling in general? Since the original case, we're the first club to sign a player under the ruling, and I'm hoping this won't set a precedent for every club to start signing 'Webster players' as I think it will only be a bad thing for football - yet more power (and money) in the hands of the players and the agents? It's bad enough that we (as supporters) get robbed blind by the clubs as it is, let alone the idea that yet MORE of all of our hard-earned is going to line the pockets of the likes of Willie McKay and his ilk... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swissmag Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alberto2005 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie :lol: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mucky01 Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it and he then chucked it in the crowd! not something I would be in a hurry to catch as a souvenir. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie Haha. I think that's my favourite post of the entire decade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tooj Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie mackems.gif Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest optimistic nit Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teasy Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 It shall be presumed, unless established to the contrary, that any club signing a professional who has terminated his contract without just cause has induced that professional to commit a breach. The club shall be banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for two registration periods. Not suggesting in the slightest that we have, but to be so glib about it is pretty ignorant. I'd guess this part of article 17 stopped any chance of him going to Portsmouth after he broke his contract. That doesn't apply in this case, and it still wouldn't have applied had he decided to sign for Portsmouth. The key phrase there is "without just cause" he had just cause to terminate his contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieglory Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Although we're the beneficiaries in this instance, is no one else worried about the Webster ruling in general? Since the original case, we're the first club to sign a player under the ruling, and I'm hoping this won't set a precedent for every club to start signing 'Webster players' as I think it will only be a bad thing for football - yet more power (and money) in the hands of the players and the agents? It's bad enough that we (as supporters) get robbed blind by the clubs as it is, let alone the idea that yet MORE of all of our hard-earned is going to line the pockets of the likes of Willie McKay and his ilk... So, no one else then...? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 Can't wait to see his goal celebration at St. James'!!! Which judging by statistics won't be very often, 6 goals in 195 games That means he had that thing in his pants for 189 games without using it Sounds like Towelie mackems.gif Rocks and glasshouses? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted July 4, 2008 Share Posted July 4, 2008 he's just arrived at newcastle airport, picture exclusive....... http://www.dlisted.com/files/caption0618_0.jpg Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now