NUFC Transfer Rumours

[LFEE]

  On 08/07/2024 at 16:02, Kanji said:

all the talk of Brighton is well and fine but remember they have taken a massive risk on the manager choice. They usually get it right but lot to prove out there. 

Expand  

Exactly. Thats why I think this window Brighton will spend bigger than normal to help him as much as they can.

[STM]

We get scrutinised for selling a player to Saudi but Man United can flog a rapist for 40m. Aye nee bother.

 

Rules are fucked.

[et tu brute]

  On 08/07/2024 at 15:55, LFEE said:

Think it will be tricky to one for them to win if it’s went to arbitration? 3 man panel … City get to choose someone… opposition get to choose one… PL get to choose the 3rd so logic dictates they’ll lose 2-1 without a cast iron case/dirt to chuck.

Expand  

This is against UK competition law though, so they can't on this occasion make a decision based on their loyalty.  Any decision has got to be based on the laws of the land.

[LFEE]

  On 08/07/2024 at 16:42, et tu brute said:

This is against UK competition law though, so they can't on this occasion make a decision based on their loyalty.  Any decision has got to be based on the laws of the land.

Expand  

Maybe I misunderstood but I thought this isn’t a legal court case… it’s went to a two week arbitration case through the PL channels?

[Donut]

 

Hi.

 

WHEN LEAKS???

[et tu brute]

  On 08/07/2024 at 17:12, LFEE said:

Maybe I misunderstood but I thought this isn’t a legal court case… it’s went to a two week arbitration case through the PL channels?

Expand  

You still have to apply to what is in British law. If they don't, then they're going to be well fucked down the line

[jonny1403]

  On 08/07/2024 at 16:37, STM said:

We get scrutinised for selling a player to Saudi but Man United can flog a rapist for 40m. Aye nee bother.

 

Rules are fucked.

Expand  

I mean if you ignore the rapey part (which Spanish clubs seem happy to do) he’s quite clearly a 40m player.

[STM]

  On 08/07/2024 at 17:35, jonny1403 said:

I mean if you ignore the rapey part (which Spanish clubs seem happy to do) he’s quite clearly a 40m player.

Expand  

 

Quite an important part to ignore.

[Bimpy474]

While we all agree he's as guilty as sin, he's not been convicted. That's their (we'll just overlook the mountains of unpleasantness you can actually hear him say) get out.

Football clubs have no morals at times, they really don't.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2024 by Bimpy474

[morpeth mag]

  On 08/07/2024 at 18:06, Bimpy474 said:

While we all agree he's as guilty as sin, he's not been convicted. That's their (we'll just overlook the mountains of unpleasantness you can actually hear him say) get out.

Football clubs have no morals at times, it really doesn't.

 

 

 

Expand  

I expect Man U will be donating the fee to a charity to support rape victims 

[FloydianMag]

  On 08/07/2024 at 15:55, LFEE said:

Think it will be tricky to one for them to win if it’s went to arbitration? 3 man panel … City get to choose someone… opposition get to choose one… PL get to choose the 3rd so logic dictates they’ll lose 2-1 without a cast iron case/dirt to chuck.

Expand  

The PL are the opposition, City choose one, PL choose one and one Independent with the agreement of both parties.

 

 

Edited July 8, 2024 by FloydianMag

[gdm]

  On 08/07/2024 at 17:57, STM said:

 

Quite an important part to ignore.

Expand  

While I agree he’s clearly a scumbag but his personal life has no relevance to his price tag unfortunately but fuck Man Utd for being happy to loan him out then cash in on him. He should have been sacked. Money talks tho 

[Bimpy474]

  On 08/07/2024 at 18:09, morpeth mag said:

I expect Man U will be donating the fee to a charity to support rape victims 

Expand  

 

I bet they feckin don't.

[Teasy]

Well I'd think that man united can still sell a player who was accused of rape because he's innocent until proven guilty.  Just a wild guess.  Meanwhile us selling players to Saudi is a compliance issue and not a matter of law (right now anyway).

[loki679]

  On 08/07/2024 at 18:13, FloydianMag said:

The PL are the opposition, City choose one, PL choose one and one Independent with the agreement of both parties.

 

 

 

Expand  

 

What's the point of that?  Might as well just have the one independent bloke.

[andycap]

No itk on here? Wheres ando when you need a morsal of transfer news whether that be shite or legit. 😂 

[jonny1403]

  On 08/07/2024 at 17:57, STM said:

 

Quite an important part to ignore.

Expand  

As I said, not for Spanish clubs willing to buy him. 

[timeEd32]

I'm ok with it being quiet. Just waiting for an Isak-like bomb out of nowhere.

 

 

(Though part of me is skeptical of how much we're going to spend this summer)

[FloydianMag]

  On 08/07/2024 at 18:41, loki679 said:

 

What's the point of that?  Might as well just have the one independent bloke.

Expand  

Clearly it’s been agreed that 3 person panel of very experienced legal experts was the way to go.

[LFEE]

  On 08/07/2024 at 17:16, et tu brute said:

You still have to apply to what is in British law. If they don't, then they're going to be well fucked down the line

Expand  

Are you saying that with 100% certainty? I think they just go off the PL rule book hence being able to keep it all confidential. Hence why we didn’t bother and a CAT case was the one that would everything out in the open. 

[et tu brute]

  On 08/07/2024 at 20:41, LFEE said:

Are you saying that with 100% certainty? I think they just go off the PL rule book hence being able to keep it all confidential. Hence why we didn’t bother and a CAT case was the one that would everything out in the open. 

Expand  

Of course you have to apply everything to British law. That is the law of the land and supersedes everything else. Why do you think city are putting up a case, because it contradicts uk competition law and is also restraint of trade. So yes I'm saying that with 100% certainty

[madras]

  On 08/07/2024 at 21:01, et tu brute said:

Of course you have to apply everything to British law. That is the law of the land and supersedes everything else. Why do you think city are putting up a case, because it contradicts uk competition law and is also restraint of trade. So yes I'm saying that with 100% certainty

Expand  

I'm not so sure. In English Cricket there are rules on the amount of overseas players which would seem to be in contravention of UK employment law. Similarly both Rugby codes have salary caps.

[McDog]

  On 08/07/2024 at 21:19, madras said:

I'm not so sure. In English Cricket there are rules on the amount of overseas players which would seem to be in contravention of UK employment law. Similarly both Rugby codes have salary caps.

Expand  

 

In the USA these sort of exceptions were specifically and narrowly applied by law. They can be retracted by lawmakers at any time. Is this not the case in the UK?

[madras]

  On 08/07/2024 at 21:25, McDog said:

 

In the USA these sort of exceptions were specifically and narrowly applied by law. They can be retracted by lawmakers at any time. Is this not the case in the UK?

Expand  

I'm not sure as teams can break the rules whenever they want without breaking the law but they would face a sanction by the sports governing bodies. Could a player claim it's against the law because he's been sent off and banned for two games, losing appearance money ? No, it's a sporting sanction not a restriction of trade I guess.

[et tu brute]

  On 08/07/2024 at 21:19, madras said:

I'm not so sure. In English Cricket there are rules on the amount of overseas players which would seem to be in contravention of UK employment law. Similarly both Rugby codes have salary caps.

Expand  

There must be something in the law which caters for this. Possibly as they're not British nationals. You can't just contravene UK laws, which are the laws of the country. The salary caps I would imagine have been agreed by the players union.