Unless I am reading it incorrectly I believe the FA did ultimately accept the paperwork for the Da Silva paperwork 14 secs late but because it was an international registration it was subject to FIFA approval.
It was FIFA who rejected the registration as too late. The FA appears to have actually argued Leicester's case with FIFA.
That appears to set a precedent.
Before we start questioning the club on this issue I assume all of this will have been under the control of Chris Parkes one of the longest serving most reputable and respected football secretaries in the game.
It would be exceptional for any delay to arise from an administrative error on his part.
Any delay will likely have revolved around the negotiations involved.
Was it a direct transfer or an agreed termination of contract between the player and Brighton? There are two or three possible scenarios but without crawling all over the detail of those the signing carries the hallmarks of an 11th hour deal involving negotiations between clubs, the paying up of his Brighton contract and the funding of a new contact no doubt involving several referrals.
These contracts need reading clause by clause - all within a matter of an hour or two. They are rarely simply rubber stamp jobs.
Cawley advises a 12 month deal but there may be an option to extend.
The delay is clearly a cause for concern.
However if for any reason the club and player are left in "limbo" I can see Duchatelet, depending on his mood, being happy to try and give the "the authorities" in this case the FA a bloody nose. If facing, in one scenario, the need to pay a player he cannot use he will not be happy.
He has the depth of pocket and access to the legal resources to argue;
a) whether the FA rules are fair and reasonable
b) whether the process of appeal and panel interpretation is fair and reasonable
c) restraint of trade.
I was surprised Leicester did not argue the latter point.
The transfer window is a restraint of trade.
In principle it could be another Bosman and thus a hornets nest the FA would be unwise to stir.
The FA can argue all it likes about its rules but such rules are subject to employment law.
In the case of Bosman where the club was refusing to transfer his registration for its purposes it is now the FA potentially refusing the transfer of registration for its own purposes.
The date of closing the transfer window has no standing in law. It is an arbitrary date.
It is flexible as evidenced by;
- the fact this year it is weeks ahead of previous years and those in place across the rest of Europe.
- Certain members under the jurisdiction of the FA (in League 1 & 2) being able to continue to register players
The FA can indeed argue Hemed can still play football but just not under a change of registration they are prepared to approve.
Hemed is being contracted to play at a certain level against which he will receive specific performance related remuneration. There is no guarantee he will be able to earn the same remuneration elsewhere.
Failure to accept his registration is depriving him of that opportunity.
I could see Roland having his employment lawyers all over it.
The original intent to restrict the wealthy clubs from hoovering up talent at any point in the season is fine in principle in structuring a transfer window but it is not fit for purpose in creating artificial employment barriers and a false market.
The challenge for the FA in sanctioning the deal is will "they create legal and operational precedent".
Common sense suggests the FA find an "exception" in the process which will allow them to approve the registration but the FA are not blessed with common sense.
Grapevine, I'm sure all your points on the legalities are just fine, we're sure Charlton's owner/chairman/president/whatever has the financial clout to take the FA to task over this. Sadly his track record suggests he'll ignore the sensible options open to him. He might have a clumsy rant at someone, in his usual detached way; mumbling to a smalltime radio hack with an audience of dozens, or a poorly proof read stream of consciousness published on Charlton's OS. Instruct a lawyer to build a case around all those football specific restraints of trade etc? Nah, can't see it. The paranoid humiliated old loser probably blames Airman, CARD and EFL. Mr Parkes, LB, SG & JJ will have to tackle this one themselves, as far as they are able, without running up any further costs.
If we end up a striker light, turns out Wilfried Bony is training with Newport County, after being let go by Swansea. Hopefully there'd be enough buttons left in Bow's piggy bank to gazzump a Div 2 side for the signing of a very capable forward. He's a bit younger than Tyrone Mears too, which is good.
If we end up a striker light, turns out Wilfried Bony is training with Newport County, after being let go by Swansea. Hopefully there'd be enough buttons left in Bow's piggy bank to gazzump a Div 2 side for the signing of a very capable forward. He's a bit younger than Tyrone Mears too, which is good.
I saw the article yesterday saying he was training with Newport, he knows were the goal is.
If we end up a striker light, turns out Wilfried Bony is training with Newport County, after being let go by Swansea. Hopefully there'd be enough buttons left in Bow's piggy bank to gazzump a Div 2 side for the signing of a very capable forward. He's a bit younger than Tyrone Mears too, which is good.
He's shite, he could be the new Jimmy floyd hasselbaink I suppose
If we end up a striker light, turns out Wilfried Bony is training with Newport County, after being let go by Swansea. Hopefully there'd be enough buttons left in Bow's piggy bank to gazzump a Div 2 side for the signing of a very capable forward. He's a bit younger than Tyrone Mears too, which is good.
He's shite, he could be the new Jimmy floyd hasselbaink I suppose
At the end of the day, you don't win appeals against the FA unless you are one of the big clubs. Right or not. I don't think any of us are holding our breath anymore.
16 - A Roman army of 50,000 men commanded by Germanicus gains a great victory at Idistaviso, defeating the German war chief Arminius and recovering the lost eagles of Varus' legions.
Would be amazing if a cash rich club from the premiership would be treated in the same way. Amazing how they can suspend players, revoke cards within 48 hours but cant see if a submitted transfer with a time and date can be approved.
Unless I am reading it incorrectly I believe the FA did ultimately accept the paperwork for the Da Silva paperwork 14 secs late but because it was an international registration it was subject to FIFA approval.
It was FIFA who rejected the registration as too late. The FA appears to have actually argued Leicester's case with FIFA.
That appears to set a precedent.
Before we start questioning the club on this issue I assume all of this will have been under the control of Chris Parkes one of the longest serving most reputable and respected football secretaries in the game.
It would be exceptional for any delay to arise from an administrative error on his part.
Any delay will likely have revolved around the negotiations involved.
Was it a direct transfer or an agreed termination of contract between the player and Brighton? There are two or three possible scenarios but without crawling all over the detail of those the signing carries the hallmarks of an 11th hour deal involving negotiations between clubs, the paying up of his Brighton contract and the funding of a new contact no doubt involving several referrals.
These contracts need reading clause by clause - all within a matter of an hour or two. They are rarely simply rubber stamp jobs.
Cawley advises a 12 month deal but there may be an option to extend.
The delay is clearly a cause for concern.
However if for any reason the club and player are left in "limbo" I can see Duchatelet, depending on his mood, being happy to try and give the "the authorities" in this case the FA a bloody nose. If facing, in one scenario, the need to pay a player he cannot use he will not be happy.
He has the depth of pocket and access to the legal resources to argue;
a) whether the FA rules are fair and reasonable
b) whether the process of appeal and panel interpretation is fair and reasonable
c) restraint of trade.
I was surprised Leicester did not argue the latter point.
The transfer window is a restraint of trade.
In principle it could be another Bosman and thus a hornets nest the FA would be unwise to stir.
The FA can argue all it likes about its rules but such rules are subject to employment law.
In the case of Bosman where the club was refusing to transfer his registration for its purposes it is now the FA potentially refusing the transfer of registration for its own purposes.
The date of closing the transfer window has no standing in law. It is an arbitrary date.
It is flexible as evidenced by;
- the fact this year it is weeks ahead of previous years and those in place across the rest of Europe.
- Certain members under the jurisdiction of the FA (in League 1 & 2) being able to continue to register players
The FA can indeed argue Hemed can still play football but just not under a change of registration they are prepared to approve.
Hemed is being contracted to play at a certain level against which he will receive specific performance related remuneration. There is no guarantee he will be able to earn the same remuneration elsewhere.
Failure to accept his registration is depriving him of that opportunity.
I could see Roland having his employment lawyers all over it.
The original intent to restrict the wealthy clubs from hoovering up talent at any point in the season is fine in principle in structuring a transfer window but it is not fit for purpose in creating artificial employment barriers and a false market.
The challenge for the FA in sanctioning the deal is will "they create legal and operational precedent".
Common sense suggests the FA find an "exception" in the process which will allow them to approve the registration but the FA are not blessed with common sense.
I don't see Roland getting involved, would take up more than 2% of his time
Any delay will likely have revolved around the negotiations involved.
Was it a direct transfer or an agreed termination of contract between the player and Brighton? There are two or three possible scenarios but without crawling all over the detail of those the signing carries the hallmarks of an 11th hour deal involving negotiations between clubs, the paying up of his Brighton contract and the funding of a new contact no doubt involving several referrals.
.....
I obviously don't know for certain, but I would be extremely surprised if Albion agreed to simply terminate his contract. Hemed was actually out of contract at the end of the 2018-19 season but the club held a one-year option. We only discovered the option had been activated when the PL Retain and Transfer list was published in May; there had been no announcement from club or player before that. It is abundantly clear that there was never any intention that Hemed would be involved in Albion's squad this season - the option was only activated to enable the club to secure either a transfer fee or a loan fee in 2019-20. So, I would be 99% certain that this transaction was a "direct transfer" (as you refer to it) with a fee involved.
Why would they option his contract for a loan though? All that does is risk that they might have to pay him for no reason if no-one wants to take him. They probably did activate it in the hopes they would get a fee and then when no-one was interested they may have just terminated it rather than pay him for the rest of the year.
Comments
Unless I am reading it incorrectly I believe the FA did ultimately accept the paperwork for the Da Silva paperwork 14 secs late but because it was an international registration it was subject to FIFA approval.
It was FIFA who rejected the registration as too late. The FA appears to have actually argued Leicester's case with FIFA.
That appears to set a precedent.
Before we start questioning the club on this issue I assume all of this will have been under the control of Chris Parkes one of the longest serving most reputable and respected football secretaries in the game.
It would be exceptional for any delay to arise from an administrative error on his part.
Any delay will likely have revolved around the negotiations involved.
Was it a direct transfer or an agreed termination of contract between the player and Brighton? There are two or three possible scenarios but without crawling all over the detail of those the signing carries the hallmarks of an 11th hour deal involving negotiations between clubs, the paying up of his Brighton contract and the funding of a new contact no doubt involving several referrals.
These contracts need reading clause by clause - all within a matter of an hour or two. They are rarely simply rubber stamp jobs.
Cawley advises a 12 month deal but there may be an option to extend.
The delay is clearly a cause for concern.
However if for any reason the club and player are left in "limbo" I can see Duchatelet, depending on his mood, being happy to try and give the "the authorities" in this case the FA a bloody nose. If facing, in one scenario, the need to pay a player he cannot use he will not be happy.
He has the depth of pocket and access to the legal resources to argue;
a) whether the FA rules are fair and reasonable
b) whether the process of appeal and panel interpretation is fair and reasonable
c) restraint of trade.
I was surprised Leicester did not argue the latter point.
The transfer window is a restraint of trade.
In principle it could be another Bosman and thus a hornets nest the FA would be unwise to stir.
The FA can argue all it likes about its rules but such rules are subject to employment law.
In the case of Bosman where the club was refusing to transfer his registration for its purposes it is now the FA potentially refusing the transfer of registration for its own purposes.
The date of closing the transfer window has no standing in law. It is an arbitrary date.
It is flexible as evidenced by;
- the fact this year it is weeks ahead of previous years and those in place across the rest of Europe.
- Certain members under the jurisdiction of the FA (in League 1 & 2) being able to continue to register players
The FA can indeed argue Hemed can still play football but just not under a change of registration they are prepared to approve.
Hemed is being contracted to play at a certain level against which he will receive specific performance related remuneration. There is no guarantee he will be able to earn the same remuneration elsewhere.
Failure to accept his registration is depriving him of that opportunity.
I could see Roland having his employment lawyers all over it.
The original intent to restrict the wealthy clubs from hoovering up talent at any point in the season is fine in principle in structuring a transfer window but it is not fit for purpose in creating artificial employment barriers and a false market.
The challenge for the FA in sanctioning the deal is will "they create legal and operational precedent".
Common sense suggests the FA find an "exception" in the process which will allow them to approve the registration but the FA are not blessed with common sense.
If she represented the FA.
I've just read Rick's War and Peace (brilliant btw) on VOTV in response to the Douchbag's diatribe so Grapevine's latest post is on hold ftb 😉.