Jump to content

Could we get our money back from Manure?


Backbiter

Recommended Posts


So the trial is finally happening. That's great!

The question is what our chances are?

Does ManU have to pay us if Morgan Andersen is found guilty or is there just a possibility that they might have to pay us back if he's convicted?

I hope we do get our money back. That would mean that we got a very talented young guy for almost nothing. But I will cheer more if he stops getting those red cards icon_wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So the trial is finally happening. That's great!

The question is what our chances are?

Does ManU have to pay us if Morgan Andersen is found guilty or is there just a possibility that they might have to pay us back if he's convicted?

As far as I can tell, as long as it is ruled that Lyn Oslo never had the rights to sell Mikel to Man Utd in the first place, then his sale to Man Utd and then to Chelsea are both null and void meaning transfer fees have to be repaid to the respective clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Dream on there's no way FA/UEFA/FIFA would allow us to come out on top.

The new axis of evil now that the G14 have stopped thwarting our every move.

In the end we thwarted the G14. They had to disband and come over and try to join us for a seat at the table where the important decisions are made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dream on there's no way FA/UEFA/FIFA would allow us to come out on top.

The new axis of evil now that the G14 have stopped thwarting our every move.

There is a sentence from the original Times article which has been omitted here and which runs on from the ‘Andersen stands accused…subsequent compensation agreement with Chelsea‘ paragraph. It reads as follows:-

‘Fifa was reluctant to rule on the validity of that contract during the original dispute, but may become involved again if Chelsea ask for a revised settlement.’

Clearly, we’ll stand accused of the heinous crime of ’reopening old wounds’ if we ask for our money back, although quite why we shouldn’t do so is not explained to my satisfaction or, I’m sure, to Chelsea’s either. The good news is that Fifa’s reluctance to rule, matched only by the Media’s reluctance to impartially report, is now going to be sorely tested by any eventual conviction of Andersen.

In short, Hughes has been fed this story for a reason and if the eventual outcome is a damning verdict, despite the hack’s begrudging approach (confidentially, Matt, it’s a confidentiality agreement), you can bet your sweet bippy we’ll want £16m back, pronto.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


now im no lawyer, but what i see is this. the second party and the third party are in collision, with the first party creating said collision. therefore the first party, herein known as 1, will be liable to the second party, herin known as 2, with the third party, herin known as 3, liable to both. so, 1 + 2 = 3. but 2 - 1 = 3 also. hence lawyers make a sh*t load of money and it gets swept under the carpet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got it from Redcafe, mancs forum, apparently that's an info taken from the Norwegian media

http://avis.dn.no/artikler/avis/article7178.ece

The Mikel process:

Through middle-men and agents, Chelsea started a partnership with Lyn

regarding young talents from Africa.

Lyn earned £10m on these players. The money from the Mikel sale

ended up in the pockets of the Lyn owner, Atle Brynestad.

By taking advantage of their secret partnership with Chelsea, the Lyn director, Morgan Andersen,

managed to earn Lyn £10m on African players. This money was secretely transferred from

Lyn to the Lyn owner's (Atle Brynestad) private business.

The FIFA rules are clear. European clubs are not allowed to sign contracts with

non-EU citizens before they are 18. The clubs are not allowed to give these youngsters money

eiether, in any way or form.

But clubs do anyway, through middle-men and agents.

The real story about Mikel starts when his club, Plateu United,

are paid £30k in 2003. Mikel is 16, and Chelsea and United have fallen in

love with him. Neither club will ever own up to paying this money, seeing as it

was an illegal payment. Neither of the clubs can publicly claim

to own the player at this stage, hence this hidden system must depend on trust.

Mikel was discovered by Joseph Dosu, former Nigerian International. He has previously

claimed that Chelsea paid to release him from Plateu United.

Dosu works as an advisor for young footballers for the Nigerian FA,

hence he could not himself represent Mikel as his agent. He put Mikel

in contact with John sh*ttu, a non-licensed Nigerian football agent.

It was sh*ttu who transferred the £30k to Mikels Club, Plateu. sh*ttu

worked as a talent scout for The Sports Enertainment & Media Grouo (SEM). SEM

was paid by Chelsea to scout for talents.

In the U-17 world cup in Finland in 2003, Mikel was brilliant, and the race for his

signature increased. A month after the world cup, it all came to head at the airport

in Lagos. In an attempt to capture Mikel and three other young Nigerian players, Chelsea invited all four to train with the club. All four had got tickets for the flight to London,

but in one way or another, United knew about Chelsea plan, and when the boys arrived

at the airport, a man from Manchester was there. And when the flight landed in London,

Mikel was not on the plane. He arrived in Manchester instead.

It was still another year and a half before Mikel was 18 and "legal". Lots could happen during

this period, and the interest from Manchester United's manager, Sir Alex Ferguson, seemed

to have faded. That's when Chelsea stepped in again.

"We sent Mikel to Ajax Cape Town in SOuth Africa" says a central Chelsea source.

The trusted Chelsea official explains how Chelsea broke the FIFA rules, in an attempt to keep

an eye on Mikel until he turned 18, when they could sign him.

Chelsea demanded that Ajax Cape Town signed a document saying Mikel belonged to Chelsea. The document was written on Ajax Cap Town's headed paper, on Ajax's PC, but dictated by Chelsea. No traces left.

According to the Chelsea source, Chelsea paid Mikel 200 rands a month, during the 6.month stay in Cape Town - also illegal according to FIFA's rules. The money did not come directly from Chelsea, but via sh*ttu and SEM.

Six months after arriving in Cape Town, the four Nigerian boys suddenly found themselves in Oslo. The idea to place them in Norway came from Rune Hauge's agency.

The problem was that it was not legal according to FIFA's rules.

Lyn struggled financially, and Morgan Andersen was employed to sort out the mess at the club. How could the club increase it's revenue? The answer was money transfers. Rune Hauge had a partnership with The Norwegian Elite Athelete's College. With

support from SEM, Hauge's company contacted this college regarding the players.

Central sources in Hauge's system confirms that one of the reasons to place the players at the college was to help Chelsea get around the FIFA rules. Hauge's company was SEM'S partner in Norway. Chelsea paid SEM, SEM paid Rune Hauge.

£180k was transferred to a Norwegian account. This should cover school fees, accommodation and living costs for the four players.The money, again, originated really from Chelsea. This publication also know that Chelsea paid the four player a salary when they

were in Norway.

Neither the school money or the pocket money came directly from Chelsea though. One way to sort out these payments was to over-pay

SEM for their scouting deal - so that SEM could fix everything, whithout any traces going back to Chelsea. But, when at a point

there was a problem with the pocket money, and Mikel and the other three went on strike and refused to attend classes, Chelsea interferred,

and the responsibility for the players was transferred to Rune Hauge.

In August 2004 a deal between the College and Rune Hauge was signed, to accommodate the players. Two weeks later, Hauge witnessed that Morgan Andersen

signed a document which stated that Lyn were not allowed to sell Mikel. To protect Chelsea's interest, Rune Hauge made a deal with Lyn, and point

four in the deal states that Lyn has no rights whatsoever in regards to a transfer to another club.

As a former Players' Union leader in Norway, Andersen knew FIFA would not accept the deal. Agents are not allowed to own footballers, as Andersen

think the deal stated.

There are no doubts that Lyn and Chelsea had a close relationship regarding the four Nigerian players. Chelsea looked at the players as their property,

and Lyn followed Chelsea's demands. This publication know of correspondence between the two clubs, where Lyn's medical team reports to Chelsea about the

players fitness and injuries.

15th September 2004 Morgan Andersen and Lyn signed two amateur contracts with Mikel, which sh*ttu signed one as Mikel's representative. The other one was

sent to Nigeria to Mikel's father, who signed it.

In April 2005, things started to happen quickly. Chelsea got a message from an Englishman living in Oslo. He had seen United's scouts together with

the four Nigerian players at a coffee bar in Oslo. Chelsea's Gwyn Williams travelled to Oslo, intent on getting the same from Lyn as they got

from Ajax Cape Town; a document stating that Mikel was owned by Chelsea.

At the same time Rune Hauge's company started putting pressure on Lyn. It was his company's responsibility that the players' stay in Oslo happened

as Chelsea wanted it to. The plan was a long-term relationship between Lyn and Chelsea. And Hauge was to be paid £200k a year for his role. If Hauge

failed, he could risk his future relationship with Chelsea.

Lyn and Morgan Andersen ignored Chelsea's offers and proposals. The Lyn owner's (Atle Brynestad) business struggled. He needed money. 22nd April 2005 Mikel

turned 18. Lyn claims Mikel signed his first professional contract that weekend. Not with Chelsea, not with United. But with Lyn.

This signature would have massive importance for Lyn. With Mikel signing a professional contract, Lyn could demand as much they wanted for him.

WIth Mikel's amateur contract, Lyn didn't have these rights. If a club offered Mikel a pro contract whilst still an amateur, Lyn would only receive a tiny

compensation for him.

But, Lyn kept quiet about the professional contract. No P.R. release, no press conference. Nothing.

Mikel's pro contract reveals some interesting information. Compared to the seven-month old amateur contract, the two contracts are very similar. It looks like

the first page is changed, so the dates are different. As well as the last page, with dates and signatures.

Mikel's salary is not changed; 33,500 Norwegian Kroner a month.

Everyone involved agrees that there are something wrong with the contracts today. But people are blaming each other.

Andersen has previously been done for fiddling with receipts, when he was leader for the Norwegian Athlete's Union.

Already when Lyn sorted out Mikel's professional contract, the club knew that Manchester United wanted to make a bid for the player. Contact with the English club

was established 15th April - one week before the professional contract was signed. Lyn knew there was money to be gained. And they also knew that if Mikel went to Chelsea,

they would get peanuts. The club ignored the agreements done with Chelsea.

But, Chelsea had no legal rights, and FIFA would never accept the agreements, most of them done verbally.

29th April 2005, a week after the professional contract was signed, Mikel signed for United, for £5m.

Rune Hauge got the news on TV that evening. He called his friend, Manchester United manager Sir Alex Ferguson, and told him they had played dirty. Ferguson said his club had followed the rule book.

Neither Chelsea or United want to comment on the case. Both claims the clubs have made a confidenciality agreement regarding the Mikel deal.

And apparently, Sir Alex threatened to beat up Peter Kenyon because of this...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming Mikel's pro contract with Lynn was forged, I think the Manc defence against refunding the money to us might go something like this:

We didn't know the contract was forged. We want any money we paid to Lynn refunded to us. As the contract was a forgery, Mikel had no pro contract and was actually a free agent. He signed with us. Then we agreed a settlement with Chelsea. If Chelsea want to go and try to get their money back off Lynn then that is a metter for them. But Chelsea agreed a fee with us for our legally contracted player to move to them.

Our case for a refund probably goes something like this:

Mikel signed for United as a result of forgery and coersion. His agent - the person Mikel hired to advise him and represent his interests on contractual issues - was deliberately excluded from the entire process by those who have resorted to forgery to get him to sign for United. No contract can be valid under these circumstances. United and Lynn have both benefited by many millions of pounds as a result of criminal activity. All the money must be repaid.

It all depends if United's contract with Mikel was valid despite Lynn's forgery. Personally I think they are on thin ice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


Assuming Mikel's pro contract with Lynn was forged, I think the Manc defence against refunding the money to us might go something like this:

We didn't know the contract was forged. We want any money we paid to Lynn refunded to us. As the contract was a forgery, Mikel had no pro contract and was actually a free agent. He signed with us. Then we agreed a settlement with Chelsea. If Chelsea want to go and try to get their money back off Lynn then that is a metter for them. But Chelsea agreed a fee with us for our legally contracted player to move to them.

Our case for a refund probably goes something like this:

Mikel signed for United as a result of forgery and coersion. His agent - the person Mikel hired to advise him and represent his interests on contractual issues - was deliberately excluded from the entire process by those who have resorted to forgery to get him to sign for United. No contract can be valid under these circumstances. United and Lynn have both benefited by many millions of pounds as a result of criminal activity. All the money must be repaid.

It all depends if United's contract with Mikel was valid despite Lynn's forgery. Personally I think they are on thin ice.

send your text to m.glazer@mufc.com and abra_the_man@chelsea.com and the whole process will go faster. Their lawyers can just copy-paste it and show up in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...
Please Sign In

Well, this is awkward!

Happy Tech GIF by Atlassian

The Shed End Forum relies on revenue to pay for hosting and upgrades. While we try to keep adverts as unobtrusive as possible without pop ups, we need to run ad's to make sure we can stay online and continue to keep the forum up, as over the years costs have become very high.

Could you please allow adverts on this domain by switching it off. Some of the advert banners can actually be closed to avoid interferance of your experience on The Shed End.

Cheers now!

Sure, let me in!