501 replies to this topic

[Scott]

Here's a quote from the FIFA Führer Leader:

"UEFA president Michel Platini and Blatter have been vociferous in their denunciation of what they have respectively described as "child slavery'' and "child trafficking''. The two governing bodies are seeking to close loopholes under EU law that allow players under the age of 18 to move throughout Europe.

Blatter said: "We have now had a case (Chelsea) to analyse. It has been done by a committee with a judge and representatives of many clubs. That has now been settled. There are clubs now who are looking at their books, some have even announced that a certain player has no contract with them and he is an amateur."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Who are the many clubs on this committee? It seems they should be named as FiFA isn't a secretive organization, right? Anyone heard actually who these clubs are?


Full story here

[TheWestwayWonder]

Why would representatives of other, potetentially rival clubs have a hand in judging one of their own? That strikes me as the very definition of 'conflict of interest'

I frigging hate Sepp Blatter

[geezer]

Sounds like he's trying to cover his considerable sized arse

[Mr Chelsea]

Scott, on Sep 9 2009, 17:39 PM, said:

"child slavery'' and "child trafficking''.

why are these phrases are been used?

its not like any club that has signed a under 18 as signed the kids and made them make replica shirts for pennies a day
as far as i can see these kids and there parents all agree to come to the clubs, either rightly or wrongly, for a big pay day

[chelseabootboy]

any allegation under fifa rules must be reported within 2 years of alleged incedent. fifa then must rule within 30 days of complaint. well kakuta offically joined our academy on july 1st on 2007. lens would have had to make complaint on july 1st 2009. if they did make the allegation on say june the 30, then the case must of been heard by july 30th, so why was it delt with on july 27????????????????????????? i'm sure they have an excuse for it the fookers!!!

[Zola's Love Child]

Mr Chelsea, on Sep 9 2009, 19:12 PM, said:

why are these phrases are been used?

its not like any club that has signed a under 18 as signed the kids and made them make replica shirts for pennies a day
as far as i can see these kids and there parents all agree to come to the clubs, either rightly or wrongly, for a big pay day

Too right. I think it was Blatter or Plattini who made a quote along the lines of "these big rich football club owners come in and buy football clubs as if they were football jerseys". Of course the football jersey industry would be full of far more harmful child labour than the youth footballer market, but the UEAF/FIFA head honchos won't do anything about that, and try and inprove worker rights in the fabric factories out in the far East....that'd upset the rich money-backing companies...

/rant

[Zola's Love Child]

I don't know if anyone has seen this, but there is an interesting article from our friends at CFCnet.

Kakuta - No Case to Answer

Quote

Following on from Philip Rolfe’s excellent CFCnet article looking at Fifa’s decision on Gael Kakuta I’d like to hone in on one aspect that wasn’t fully covered - the timescale of the ruling given.

Philip asks “Why has it taken so long?” and states “there are questions to be answered on the part of the DRC and on the part of Lens, and those will surely shape the appeals process”.

The European Club Association (ECA) agree, stating yesterday “The FIFA panel which last week banned Chelsea from signing players until 2011 is too slow in making decisions”.

So what is the timescale for ruling on such disputes? Uefa lay this down as part of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players in Article 25:

“As a rule, the single judge and the DRC judge shall adjudicate within 30 days of receipt of a valid request and the Players’ Status Committee or the Dispute Resolution Chamber shall adjudicate within 60 days.”

But also

“The Players’ Status Committee, the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the single judge or the DRC judge (as the case may be) shall not hear any case subject to these Regulations if more than two years have elapsed from the event giving rise to the dispute”.

Chelsea’s Yearbook lists Gael Kakuta as signing Scholarship forms on 1st July 2007, age 16, subsequently signing Professional at 17 on 1st July 2008.

These details will be confirmed on Kakuta’s Player Passport, lodged with the FA at the time of signing.

Irrespective when RC Lens made a complaint to Fifa about the transfer, the event giving rise to the case is 1st July 2007 - the effective date of Kakuta’s signing with Chelsea.

The announcement from Fifa of the DRC’s decision states that they met on August 27th 2009. A date that is 2 years, 1 month and 26 days after the event giving rise to the dispute.

In accordance with Fifa’s published rules, the DRC “shall not hear any case subject to these Regulations if more than two years have elapsed from the event giving rise to the dispute”.

An open and shut case.

Interesting reading...

[Iceman]

Good stuff. Keep sending all research found to the club.

bruce.buck@chelseafc.com

[PloKoon13]

Zola's Love Child, on Sep 9 2009, 22:02 PM, said:

I don't know if anyone has seen this, but there is an interesting article from our friends at CFCnet.

Kakuta - No Case to Answer



Interesting reading...

Indeed. Our lawyers seem like a smart bunch, so they may well have picked up on this.

[KrazyTea]

I wonder how this whole 2 year thing will work out, more then likely in the end Blatter and Platini just won't give two f**ks but it is still an interesting point none-the-less...

[Zola's Love Child]

KrazyTea, on Sep 9 2009, 23:28 PM, said:

I wonder how this whole 2 year thing will work out, more then likely in the end Blatter and Platini just won't give two f**ks but it is still an interesting point none-the-less...

Doesn't matter what Platter and Prattini think about it, if its in the CAS, then something like that would be the first thing to get the decision overturned.

[Englishman]

Scott, on Sep 9 2009, 17:39 PM, said:

Here's a quote from the FIFA Führer Leader:

"UEFA president Michel Platini and Blatter have been vociferous in their denunciation of what they have respectively described as "child slavery'' and "child trafficking''. The two governing bodies are seeking to close loopholes under EU law that allow players under the age of 18 to move throughout Europe.

Blatter said: "We have now had a case (Chelsea) to analyse. It has been done by a committee with a judge and representatives of many clubs. That has now been settled. There are clubs now who are looking at their books, some have even announced that a certain player has no contract with them and he is an amateur."

What sort of moron would compare signing a footballer, paying him a substantial sum of money and generally treating him like a prince, to slavery? You know that thing where they used to (and in some parts of the world still do) forcibly seize people, keep them chained up in appalling conditions, sell them in market places and then work them virtually to death.

Then again, I'd expect nothing less from ignorant cretins like that.

[Killbill]

On Radio 5 on Tuesday evening they had Chelsea's director of communications Simon Greenberg who didn’t say much more than we already know, that he was confident Chelsea had done nothing wrong but he couldn’t go into the details because of the appeal and the usual things about the Chelsea’s youth development. After that they had a French journalist from one the major French papers, I can’t remember which one, and he really laid into French football people, how they are a bunch of hypocrites for having done much worse than the English clubs especially with African kids and for hiding behind those few kids that had been snapped up from major clubs to justify the decline of French football in recent years rather than their own incompetence. He had a real go at them I was quite surprised but I can’t find anything on the web that reports this not even on BBC website.

[isosap]

killbill idk if this is wat u were looking for but this link relates to wat the french journalist was referring to as trafficking of African players http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7235765.stm

[loz]

isosap

Can you take a minute to read number 12 please.

http://www.thesheden...?act=boardrules

[BlueBeard]

Killbill, on Sep 10 2009, 18:42 PM, said:

On Radio 5 on Tuesday evening they had Chelsea's director of communications Simon Greenberg who didn’t say much more than we already know, that he was confident Chelsea had done nothing wrong but he couldn’t go into the details because of the appeal and the usual things about the Chelsea’s youth development. After that they had a French journalist from one the major French papers, I can’t remember which one, and he really laid into French football people, how they are a bunch of hypocrites for having done much worse than the English clubs especially with African kids and for hiding behind those few kids that had been snapped up from major clubs to justify the decline of French football in recent years rather than their own incompetence. He had a real go at them I was quite surprised but I can’t find anything on the web that reports this not even on BBC website.

I was listening to that too, that French journalist was great. Finally, a French person I don't totally hate!

[Maksimov]

BlueBeard, on Sep 11 2009, 13:43 PM, said:

Finally, a French person I don't totally hate!

I guess that's the highest possible compliment a French person can get from you...

[Lofty]

And now:

Quote

Fifa adds to Ancelotti's transfer ills
Governing body insists Chelsea manager will not be able to recall on-loan players
Chelsea last night suffered another blow from Fifa, when the world governing body ruled that under the terms of their transfer ban, players out on a season-long loan cannot be recalled in January.

Earlier yesterday, Carlo Ancelotti, speaking for the first time about the punishment, said that if necessary the club would minimise it by recalling Michael Mancienne from Wolves, Scott Sinclair from Wigan and the Argentine striker Franco di Santo from Blackburn.

Di Santo can return, as his agreement was only for half the season. But Sinclair's was for the full season and in Mancienne's case Fifa will have to rule on whether an "emergency release clause" can be applied. A Fifa spokesman told The Independent: "If it's a season-long loan, it cannot be terminated in order to bring players back."

Now this really is unprecedented. Further to the extreme penalty imposed for allegedly breaching the contract of a youth team player, FIFA now say we can't recall players already on our books. What the f**k is it to do with them anyway? If we loan a player to another club till the end of the season, that agreement is between ourselves and that club, and as far as I know, terms of that loan include our right to recall the player as and when we see fit.
Full story here:

LINK

[alvarezCFC]

Now it`s personal cocksuckin french bar stewards...I hope Terry will not shake the hands of those w**ks when we get UCL trophy in our hands

[dkw]

Lofty, on Sep 12 2009, 11:51 AM, said:

And now:

Now this really is unprecedented. Further to the extreme penalty imposed for allegedly breaching the contract of a youth team player, FIFA now say we can't recall players already on our books. What the f**k is it to do with them anyway? If we loan a player to another club till the end of the season, that agreement is between ourselves and that club, and as far as I know, terms of that loan include our right to recall the player as and when we see fit.
Full story here:

LINK

this truly is a f**king disgrace to quote didier, though it wont really effect us that much. of the 3 players mentioned i would have thought franco would have been the only one likely to return anyway. but the principal of it is galling to say the least. it will be interesting to see if this is written into their rules or they have just made it up. a couple of points though. firstly, surely its our FA that regulates this so im not sure how they feel about it. secondly, does that mean we wont be allowed to register them next season, or do they automatically return to our register the minute their loan expires? and thirdly if we have an emergency recall in as part of the loan agreement (which i think we do for mancienne) then how on earth can they stop us from using that? surely thats in breach of their own rules. FIFA are a f**king disgrace and are now taking the piss. i hope we hire the best lawyers around and take them f**king apart.