Surely that is nonsense. We have already been punished, this would be an extra punishment on top just to be spiteful.

It's not this is exactly what I thought which is why there will be no appeal and letting Sarri go is just a mess.

I suspect because of the other clubs who found a loop hole we are unfortunately the ones taking a hit

Surely that is nonsense. We have already been punished, this would be an extra punishment on top just to be spiteful.

It's not this is exactly what I thought which is why there will be no appeal and letting Sarri go is just a mess.

I suspect because of the other clubs who found a loop hole we are unfortunately the ones taking a hit

On 17/05/2019 at 09:19, mwblue10 said:

What the actual f**k.

 

@Boston Blue I think that theory could be correct.  It's either that or we have just completely lost it.

You would still think better to freeze the ban with the hazard money coming in and most importantly it’s a lot easier to rebuild and attract top players when you can offer CL football.

Could be the case that they don’t feel the right players and manager are available right now to inact a rebuild so would rather play the long game, which for once would be sensible.

The only snag point to this would be the aforementioned likelihood of not offering CL football the following season. 

We would however look a better prospect with RLC and CHO back fit and with plenty of minutes and hopefully Pulisic hitting form.

At that point adding a top striker, CB and a full back we would be back on our feet. 

On 23/05/2019 at 10:22, Boston Blue said:

The problem with that argument is that not a lot of major important business is done in the winter window, so having that window open up to us doesn't help a whole lot.  The advantage of the CAS appeal would be to allow us to do business in the summer, and hopefully have the ban reduced to one window...….that being the winter one.  

 

You’re wrong, doesn’t matter if the winter window is open or the summer we can sign now in the summer and register in the winter. 

I would feel a lot better about the coming season if Real decide not to meet our demands for Eden, something I don't see as completely impossible although at this stage probably unlikely.

While I certainly don't envisage the doomsday situation others do our task would certainly be a lot harder.

1 hour ago, Scott Harris said:

Surely that is nonsense. We have already been punished, this would be an extra punishment on top just to be spiteful.

I haven't read the article, so take my opinion with a grain of salt, however I think the whole extended ban is more a reference to: we appeal and get the ban froze and we aren't prepared for this transfer window therefore theoretically not making proper transfers? I could be completely wrong, but if that is correct it is pretty lackadaisical and ill-conceived by the club. I would think they would want to be prepared for all possible outcomes. 

7 minutes ago, WalterWhiteCFC said:

You would still think better to freeze the ban with the hazard money coming in and most importantly it’s a lot easier to rebuild and attract top players when you can offer CL football.

Could be the case that they don’t feel the right players and manager are available right now to inact a rebuild so would rather play the long game, which for once would be sensible.

The only snag point to this would be the aforementioned likelihood of not offering CL football the following season. 

We would however look a better prospect with RLC and CHO back fit and with plenty of minutes and hopefully Pulisic hitting form.

At that point adding a top striker, CB and a full back we would be back on our feet. 

We have built enough credit in the bank to ride out one season out of it at a time.

Last time we weren't we tempted Jorginho, Sarri and Kovacic away from CL clubs and the time before Luiz and Kante also from CL clubs alongside Antonio. 

It's if we were out of it for two season's the situation would become a big problem.

2 minutes ago, Argo said:

We have built enough credit in the bank to ride out one season out of it at a time.

Last time we weren't we tempted Jorginho, Sarri and Kovacic away from CL clubs and the time before Luiz and Kante also from CL clubs alongside Antonio. 

It's if we were out of it for two season's the situation would become a big problem.

Those times we had recently won the league and playing beside hazard is a huge draw, being nowhere close to the title race for 3 years (if including upcoming) no hazard, no impact when playing the CL, that credit starts to look pretty diminished. 

48 minutes ago, Brutos said:

It's not this is exactly what I thought which is why there will be no appeal and letting Sarri go is just a mess.

I suspect because of the other clubs who found a loop hole we are unfortunately the ones taking a hit

The length of the ban has been set at two windows by FIFA they would not be able to rule further or indeed increase the ban . In other words it’s now out of their hands.

The appeal is to CAS and Matt Law in his piece states the appeal has been made. Would CAS really agree to a stay if they thought the appeal was frivolous for any application would be a stand alone matter and would have to be argued and grounds for the stay would have to be discussed 

Edited June 5, 20197 yr by terraloon

11 minutes ago, WalterWhiteCFC said:

You’re wrong, doesn’t matter if the winter window is open or the summer we can sign now in the summer and register in the winter. 

No, you cannot comprehend what was written (again).  Major business is done in the summer window.  It is more difficult to do major business in the winter window.  The point you missed is that having the winter window be the window that we are allowed to do business in does not provide us with enough opportunity to warrant an appeal.

Lets say we request a freeze in the ban while CAS reviews our appeal, and then a month or so later it is found that our appeal through CAS is unsuccessful. What would happen then? We would technically have been able to take advantage of part of this window so I don't think it would count towards the FIFA ban.  Does that man our ban then includes next summer's window? Perhaps that is the scenario the Telegraph was trying to describe. We cannot get an extended ban but it may end up being extended over 3 windows if we get a partial freeze and fail in our appeal. The longer this goes on without us requesting a freeze in the ban, the more it looks like we are just going to serve the punishment and hope CAS gets some reduction.

2 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Lets say we request a freeze in the ban while CAS reviews our appeal, and then a month or so later it is found that our appeal through CAS is unsuccessful. What would happen then? We would technically have been able to take advantage of part of this window so I don't think it would count towards the FIFA ban.  Does that man our ban then includes next summer's window? Perhaps that is the scenario the Telegraph was trying to describe. We cannot get an extended ban but it may end up being extended over 3 windows if we get a partial freeze and fail in our appeal. The longer this goes on without us requesting a freeze in the ban, the more it looks like we are just going to serve the punishment and hope CAS gets some reduction.

Again, this uncertainty has to be hurting our ability to lay the foundation on potential deals if the teams we are trying to buy from aren't certain we can even conclude the deal.  

 

2 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

Again, this uncertainty has to be hurting our ability to lay the foundation on potential deals if the teams we are trying to buy from aren't certain we can even conclude the deal.  

 

There is only uncertainty if we are actually trying to make deals for players. If we have accepted our fate then our main focus will be on reviewing the players returning from loan to determine which of those will form part of next year's squad.

Edited June 5, 20197 yr by forbzy
typo

Just now, forbzy said:

There is only uncertainty of we are actually trying to make deals for players. If we have accepted our fate then our main focus will be on reviewing the players returning from loan to determine which of those will form part of next year's squad.

Right.  Or attempting to conclude a deal and loan the player back until we can register him.  

11 hours ago, Boston Blue said:

No, you cannot comprehend what was written (again).  Major business is done in the summer window.  It is more difficult to do major business in the winter window.  The point you missed is that having the winter window be the window that we are allowed to do business in does not provide us with enough opportunity to warrant an appeal.

So again you listen because you didn’t understand, we can do ALL our business in the summer we can even train them we just can’t reguster them until winter get it, no business in winter-registration, we are registering pulisic now...when did we do the business? 

5 hours ago, WalterWhiteCFC said:

So again you listen because you didn’t understand, we can do ALL our business in the summer we can even train them we just can’t reguster them until winter get it, no business in winter-registration, we are registering pulisic now...when did we do the business? 

I'm fairly certain we had to register Pulisic before we could loan him back to Dortmund.  The type of transfer you are referring to would be like the Naby Keita to Liverpool transfer, where they agreed to the deal and then he just played one more year at Leipzig before moving, which wasn't a loan.

33 minutes ago, mwblue10 said:

I'm fairly certain we had to register Pulisic before we could loan him back to Dortmund.  The type of transfer you are referring to would be like the Naby Keita to Liverpool transfer, where they agreed to the deal and then he just played one more year at Leipzig before moving, which wasn't a loan.

I believe a player can only be registered to play with only one team at a time.  

Pulisic remained registered to Dortmund after we bought him.  

If the transfer ban holds, we can loan existing players to other clubs. 

We can buy players and loan them to other clubs, and loan them to the club we bought them from as we did with Pulisic.

The situation is more similar to us selling Costa to Athletico.  They were under a transfer ban, so they bought him from us, but he could not (and did not) play for them until the ban was over.  It is also similar to when Arda Turan went to Barca but couldn't be registered to play because Barca was under a ban.  

6 hours ago, WalterWhiteCFC said:

So again you listen because you didn’t understand, we can do ALL our business in the summer we can even train them we just can’t reguster them until winter get it, no business in winter-registration, we are registering pulisic now...when did we do the business? 

You've completely missed the point and context of the conversation.  My comment that you keep replying to had absolutely nothing to do with when we can buy or register players.  

11 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

I believe a player can only be registered to play with only one team at a time.  

Pulisic remained registered to Dortmund after we bought him.  

If the transfer ban holds, we can loan existing players to other clubs. 

We can buy players and loan them to other clubs, and loan them to the club we bought them from as we did with Pulisic.

The situation is more similar to us selling Costa to Athletico.  They were under a transfer ban, so they bought him from us, but he could not (and did not) play for them until the ban was over.  It is also similar to when Arda Turan went to Barca but couldn't be registered to play because Barca was under a ban.  

Maybe somebody can confirm this for us, it was my understanding that in order to loan out a player they have to be registered with you first.

If not, then what's stopping us from buying whoever we want this summer and loaning them right back to their current team?

Edited June 6, 20197 yr by mwblue10

1 minute ago, mwblue10 said:

Maybe somebody can confirm this for us, it was my understanding that in order to loan out a player they have to be registered with you first.

That is correct. The player has to first be registered with the parent club before they can be loaned out. That would not be possible for us under the ban. I suppose we could make some pre-agreements to sign players (e.g. first refusal) after the ban but that would not be the same as actually signing them and then loaning back.

1 minute ago, forbzy said:

That is correct. The player has to first be registered with the parent club before they can be loaned out. That would not be possible for us under the ban. I suppose we could make some pre-agreements to sign players (e.g. first refusal) after the ban but that would not be the same as actually signing them and then loaning back.

Thanks, that is what I thought, appreciate the clarification

42 minutes ago, forbzy said:

That is correct. The player has to first be registered with the parent club before they can be loaned out. That would not be possible for us under the ban. I suppose we could make some pre-agreements to sign players (e.g. first refusal) after the ban but that would not be the same as actually signing them and then loaning back.

Yeah thats how I read it too, but theres nothing to stop us buying a player and basically parking them for several months like Barcelona did.

4 hours ago, forbzy said:

That is correct. The player has to first be registered with the parent club before they can be loaned out. That would not be possible for us under the ban. I suppose we could make some pre-agreements to sign players (e.g. first refusal) after the ban but that would not be the same as actually signing them and then loaning back.

So we would then NOT be able to keep either Higuaín or Kovacic since they are owned & registered with Juve and Real?  Or does either loan deal allow for the option to extend that may take precedence over the ban?

7 minutes ago, Boston Blue said:

So we would then NOT be able to keep either Higuaín or Kovacic since they are owned & registered with Juve and Real?  Or does either loan deal allow for the option to extend that may take precedence over the ban?

I thought it was confirmed that due to the language of the loan agreement, we could extend Higuian's loan and we could sign Kovacic permanently.  Don't know if there was a source or not on that though, so maybe confirmed is the wrong nomenclature.

3 hours ago, dkw said:

Yeah thats how I read it too, but theres nothing to stop us buying a player and basically parking them for several months like Barcelona did.

Be better to agree to sign someone like Pepe for example and just have it in the contract he officially becomes our player in the summer of 2020. He still plays for his current club, they pay his wages, we put down a down payment and pay the rest next year.

 

That way the player does not waste a season not playing.