chelsea - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

chelsea

rm13_hammer Avatar
banned7y, 4m agoPosted 7 years, 4 months ago
banned from signing players for next 2 transfer windows
still laughing now!
Tags:
rm13_hammer Avatar
banned7y, 4m agoPosted 7 years, 4 months ago
Options

All Comments

(51) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
Page:
#1
There'll be an appeal against it, and it'll probably on apply for Jan window, if at all. With a lot of their players being over 30 though, it could make it interest if the ban sticks :)

On the occasion of its last meeting held on 27 August 2009, the Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) was called to pass a decision in a contractual dispute opposing the French club Lens to the French player Gael Kakuta and the English club Chelsea.

The French club had lodged a claim with FIFA seeking compensation for breach of contract from the player and requesting also sporting sanctions to be imposed on the player and the English club for breach of contract and inducement to breach of contract respectively.

The DRC found that the player had indeed breached a contract signed with the French club. Equally, the DRC deemed it to be established that the English club induced the player to such a breach.

As a result the player was condemned to pay compensation in the amount of EUR 780,000, for which the club, Chelsea, are jointly and severally liable, and sporting sanctions were imposed on both the player and Chelsea in accordance with art. 17 par. 3 and 4 of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.

A restriction of four months on his eligibility to play in official matches has been imposed on Kakuta. Chelsea are banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the two next entire and consecutive registration periods following the notification of the present decision. Furthermore, the club, Chelsea, have to pay Lens training compensation in the amount of EUR 130,000.



From FIFA.com
banned#2
midlandscomics
There'll be an appeal against it, and it'll probably on apply for Jan window, if at all. With a lot of their players being over 30 though, it could make it interest if the ban sticks :)





True. This is more to do with Platini's feelings about the English clubs then it is specifically Chelsea.

It'll be reduced on appeal and if it isn't then I'm sure Chelsea won't take it lying down.
#3
serves them right for going after Mutu the way the did

Horrible club
#4
theres no way on earth that this will apply. chelsea will appeal and it'll be overturned or just be given a slap on the wrist with a tiny fine or if the appeal is thrown out then I'm sure the lawyers are already working on a way to get this lifted. It'll never happen.
#5
FilthAndFurry
True. This is more to do with Platini's feelings about the English clubs then it is specifically Chelsea.

It'll be reduced on appeal and if it isn't then I'm sure Chelsea won't take it lying down.


As well as the age of some of their players, there's the African cup of Nations in January which they'll lose Drogba, Kalou, Essien etc for.

I've never heard of a case like this before though, I wonder if they're investigating any other teams - Man City or Madrid perhaps, with the amount of cash they've been throwing around?
#6
ants97
theres no way on earth that this will apply. chelsea will appeal and it'll be overturned or just be given a slap on the wrist with a tiny fine or if the appeal is thrown out then I'm sure the lawyers are already working on a way to get this lifted. It'll never happen.

[COLOR="Red"]
^^This^^

Chelsea have money and money = power.[/COLOR]
#7
I think you'll find a lot of clubs are guilty of this, seems chelsea have been made an example of.
#8
ants97
theres no way on earth that this will apply. chelsea will appeal and it'll be overturned or just be given a slap on the wrist with a tiny fine or if the appeal is thrown out then I'm sure the lawyers are already working on a way to get this lifted. It'll never happen.


At the end of the day though, this is a FIFA ruling (rather than UEFA) so it might not be so easy to overturn.
banned#9
midlandscomics
There'll be an appeal against it, and it'll probably on apply for Jan window, if at all. With a lot of their players being over 30 though, it could make it interest if the ban sticks :)



From FIFA.com


yeah cant see the ban sticking at all will prob just end up with the fine but no doubt if it was a smaller club i.e not top 4 it would stick

if it does stick the african cup of nations will make it very interesting
#10
midlandscomics
As well as the age of some of their players, there's the African cup of Nations in January which they'll lose Drogba, Kalou, Essien etc for.

I've never heard of a case like this before though, I wonder if they're investigating any other teams - Man City or Madrid perhaps, with the amount of cash they've been throwing around?


not been about the cash though has it, its about enticing players to breach contract, i've heard of united doing it with some kid by offering his parents a job as groundsman, but how far does this stretch? by clubs announcing their desire to sign players and unsettle them? madrid and city would be screwed.
#11
On teamtalk the heading was.........

'blues hit with shock signings ban'

then i thought, chance would be a fine thing ................ !!!!! :roll:
#12
midlandscomics
At the end of the day though, this is a FIFA ruling (rather than UEFA) so it might not be so easy to overturn.


it won't matter, once the lawyers start to get involved FIFA will buckle if they don't, expect a long drawn out court case which chelsea will win.
#13
MinstrelMan
not been about the cash though has it, its about enticing players to breach contract,[COLOR="Red"] i've heard of united doing it with some kid by offering his parents a job as groundsman, but how far does this stretch[/COLOR]? by clubs announcing their desire to sign players and unsettle them? madrid and city would be screwed.


Wasn't that with that Macheda kid? They bought his whole family over and employed them?

I think the main one with United would be Berbatov tbh.... some serious tapping up went on there IMO.

As F&F said above, Platini has it in for the English clubs. First Eduardo gets a ban, now this for Chelsea. What next for Utd and Liverpool. Perhaps they'll force American owners on us who don't know what they're doing and then take all of our transfer funds away to pay of their debts.




Oh wait :thinking:
#14
FilthAndFurry
True. This is more to do with Platini's feelings about the English clubs then it is specifically Chelsea.

It'll be reduced on appeal and if it isn't then I'm sure Chelsea won't take it lying down.


Platini has nothing to do with decisions made by FIFA.
banned#15
rm13_hammer
yeah cant see the ban sticking at all will prob just end up with the fine but no doubt if it was a smaller club i.e not top 4 it would stick

if it does stick the african cup of nations will make it very interesting


Not being funny, but it seems like small clubs like your's get off for much worse,e.g. the Tevez affair.:whistling:
#16
FilthAndFurry
True. This is more to do with Platini's feelings about the English clubs then it is specifically Chelsea.

It'll be reduced on appeal and if it isn't then I'm sure Chelsea won't take it lying down.


This is a ban by FIFA, Platini is in charge of UEFA

They done a similar thing with Obi Mikel (and what a ***** player he turned out to be), and they had to pay united £12m to shut them up
#17
The2020
Platini has nothing to do with decisions made by FIFA.


As president of Uefa I'm sure he has a say in matters involving European teams when FIFA get involved, as Jack Warner (??) does with the CONCACAF nations..
banned#18
The2020
Platini has nothing to do with decisions made by FIFA.


Nothing? He's the UEFA president. FIFA is one of the most corrupt organisations in sport. I'm sure he wasn't too far away from this decision, but that's just my opinion.
#19
midlandscomics
As president of Uefa I'm sure he has a say in matters involving European teams.


no he hasn't

Platini talks a lot, but he is an idiot, he wouldn't have the guts to do this
banned#20
hassony
This is a ban by FIFA, Platini is in charge of UEFA

They done a similar thing with Obi Mikel (and what a ***** player he turned out to be), and they had to pay united £12m to shut them up


And Liverpool don't?????

Gareth Barry
Christian Ziege
#21
hassony
no he hasn't

Platini talks a lot, but he is an idiot, he wouldn't have the guts to do this


Of course he has. If you look on the FIFA site he's been on the Executive Comittee for 7 years.
banned#22
FilthAndFurry
Not being funny, but it seems like small clubs like your's get off for much worse,e.g. the Tevez affair.:whistling:


having to pay out 30+mill is not exactly getting off lightly
what was chelsea's fine again 130,000 ???
#23
FilthAndFurry
And Liverpool don't?????

Gareth Barry
Christian Ziege


All club talk with players before making bids, I know that

What chelsea have done is different though both this player and Obi mikel went back on a contract they have already signed
banned#24
terry's reaction to the news

http://i27.tinypic.com/t7g7s2.jpg
banned#25
rm13_hammer
having to pay out 30+mill is not exactly getting off lightly
what was chelsea's fine again 130,000 ???


Considering you shouldn't be in the premiership and you didn't have to sell your better players, you absolutely got off lightly.
#26
Jan 2011 then for new signings for Chelsea, with an ageing squad. Not to mention whatever departures occur during that time, that they can't replace.

I too though, can't see it sticking, although it's going to be interesting how it all turns out.
banned#27
FilthAndFurry
Considering you shouldn't be in the premiership and you didn't have to sell your better players, you absolutely got off lightly.


why shouldnt we be in the premiership? who should be in our place?
#28
Can't see any grounds for appeal tbh for Chelsea, unless they have substantial evidence to disprove the decision that they forced Gael Kakuta to terminate his contract with Lens.

Regarding the punishment that they received, the rule was already there beforehand and they knew what the consequences would be if they were caught.

The relevant rule:

4. In addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall be imposed on any club found to be in breach of contract or found to be inducing a breach of contract during the protected period. 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.


Taken from article 17, section 4 on page 16 of http://www.fifa.com/mm/50/02/49/status_transfer_en_25.pdf
#29
rm13_hammer
terry's reaction to the news

http://i27.tinypic.com/t7g7s2.jpg


Repped :lol:
banned#30
rm13_hammer
why shouldnt we be in the premiership? who should be in our place?


I'd hate for it to be Sheffield Utd and Warnock but I'm pretty sure they were below you.

If a team gets a 10 point deduction for going into administration, I don't think it'd be that odd for West Ham to have got the same retroactively.
1 Like #31
rm13_hammer
why shouldnt we be in the premiership? who should be in our place?


Sheffield United, by the sounds of it.

People seem to forget that Sheffield Uniteds future was in THEIR OWN hands. A win against the team they played against the last day of the season would have kept them up. Regardless of the final West Ham game result.

They only blamed West Ham when they didn't win it and went down.
banned#32
modoc
Can't see any grounds for appeal tbh for Chelsea, unless they have substantial evidence to disprove the decision that they forced Gael Kakuta to terminate his contract with Lens.


They'll appeal the punishment, which is why it was so severe.

They'll be banned for one transfer period, and the player's ban will be reduced too.
#33
peodude
Sheffield United, by the sounds of it.

People seem to forget that Sheffield Uniteds future was in THEIR OWN hands. A win against the team they played against the last day of the season would have kept them up. Regardless of the final West Ham game result.

They only blamed West Ham when they didn't win it and went down.


Exactly..........well said that man!!

We paid our pennance in the extortionate fine
banned#34
FilthAndFurry
I'd hate for it to be Sheffield Utd and Warnock but I'm pretty sure they were below you.

If a team gets a 10 point deduction for going into administration, I don't think it'd be that odd for West Ham to have got the same retroactively.


if sheffield utd had won or drawn the final match against wigan (they had an easier team aswell) they would of stayed up it's not west ham's problem that their squad was too **** too stay in the prem

why should we get the punishment for going into administration when we didnt?
surely you get the punishment that is ment for the rule break

you wouldnt get life in prison for shoplifting just because the judge fancied giving you it
you would get the punishment that matches the crime
banned#35
rm13_hammer
if sheffield utd had won the final match (they had an easier team aswell) they would of stayed up it's not west ham's problem that their squad was too **** too stay in the prem

why should we get the punishment for going into administration when we didnt?
surely you get the punishment that is ment for the rule break

you wouldnt get life in prison for shoplifting just because the judge fancied giving you it
you would get the punishment that matches the crime


But there wasn't a precedent for the crime West Ham committed. I was just comparing the punishment for what I consider a lesser crime. Obviously the authorities differ.

Of course Sheffield Utd should have won the last game, but I'm not talking about them.

I'm talking about the punishment West Ham should have received. It just so happens Sheffield Utd would have benefitted.
banned#36
chas76
Exactly..........well said that man!!

We paid our pennance in the extortionate fine


The fine was better than being relegated.
#37
peodude
Sheffield United, by the sounds of it.

People seem to forget that Sheffield Uniteds future was in THEIR OWN hands. A win against the team they played against the last day of the season would have kept them up. Regardless of the final West Ham game result.

They only blamed West Ham when they didn't win it and went down.


well said that man.:thumbsup:
#38
my team(leeds) are collecting points deductions just a few more and we will have the whole set:-D
#39
i think people are getting off track here, quoting berbatov and stuff. Spurs got 30 million quid for the lazy git! Utd should be taking them to court! This is about chelsea trying to take young kids basically from their clubs. Teenagers. This isn't about proven professionals. They've done it several times. Macheda was on lazio's books i believe but they had no contract with him, he was free to choose. This kid belonged to lens i believe. They also convinced mikel to lie and say utd forced him to sign and that he really wanted to sign for chelsea. The truth is chelsea offered him more money AFTER utd had legally signed him. He simply changed his mind.
#40
FilthAndFurry
They'll appeal the punishment, which is why it was so severe.

They'll be banned for one transfer period, and the [COLOR="Red"]player's ban[/COLOR] will be reduced too.


I feel sorry for the kid. Four month ban and a £682,000 fine, for something he was probably forced into doing. He would have only been 16 at the time too.

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!