The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
Arthur Wedge said:
www.theguardian.com

Nottingham Forest complain to Uefa over Crystal Palace’s European place

Nottingham Forest have written to Uefa, arguing their Premier League rivals could be in breach of multi-club ownership rules
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com

Unsurprisingly your owner got your club involved in the situation

It will be excused like all his actions
Click to expand...

Show me exactly what he wrote in the letter. Not just what the media are reporting was in it or what you want to believe was in it.

And then prove to me that without the letter, UEFA magically just wouldn’t have realised Palace were in breach of their rules.

Until you can do that, it’s irrelevant.
 
Don Barzini said:
Show me exactly what he wrote in the letter. Not just what the media are reporting was in it or what you want to believe was in it.

And then prove to me that without the letter, UEFA magically just wouldn’t have realised Palace were in breach of their rules.

Until you can do that, it’s irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Why was he writing to them in the first place

As I said he got your club involved in it

If it’s nothing to do with Forest then no need to speak to UEFA about anything

Everyone wlll know why he did it
 
Don Barzini said:
Show me exactly what he wrote in the letter. Not just what the media are reporting was in it or what you want to believe was in it.

And then prove to me that without the letter, UEFA magically just wouldn’t have realised Palace were in breach of their rules.

Until you can do that, it’s irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Facts of the matter is, he did write a letter and got Forest involved whether you like it or not!

However, if my club was on the up id want my owners doing the same, its a big different in money coming in playing in the higher tiers of European football
 
Arthur Wedge said:
Why was he writing to them in the first place

As I said he got your club involved in it

If it’s nothing to do with Forest then no need to speak to UEFA about anything

Everyone wlll know why he did it
Click to expand...

Because he wanted clarification on what competition we would be playing in.

Is it just possible that the answer to that question might have a huge effect on the players we could retain and attract in the summer window?

Does anyone know for a fact that the words “Crystal Palace” were even mentioned in the letter?

But nah, that doesn’t make for good enough headlines does it? “Marinakis nasty bad man” is far more interesting isn’t it?
 
Don Barzini said:
Because he wanted clarification on what competition we would be playing in.

Is it just possible that the answer to that question might have a huge effect on the players we could retain and attract in the summer window?

Does anyone know for a fact that the words “Crystal Palace” were even mentioned in the letter?

But nah, that doesn’t make for good enough headlines does it? “Marinakis nasty bad man” is far more interesting isn’t it
Click to expand...

Surely if the media don’t know what was put in the letter then that’s the same with fans ?

www.skysports.com

Crystal Palace in the Europa League: Nottingham Forest write to UEFA to say Eagles are in breach of multi-club ownership rules

Nottingham Forest have written to UEFA warning that Crystal Palace could be in breach of multi-club ownership rules; Palace have been in talks with UEFA about whether they can compete in the Europa League alongside Lyon, who have links to Eagles investor John Textor
www.skysports.com www.skysports.com

The simple fact is he got involved when he should have waited and the optics just smack of someone wanting to ensure that his club weren’t benefiting

That letter got Forest involved
 
Don Barzini said:
And as has been revealed since the incident, the “smaller” club was 100% in the right because Levy did not fulfil the terms and conditions of the release clause.

Tell me, when Crystal Palace did EXACTLY the same to Chelsea over their Michael Olise approach, did you or many others accuse them of “spitting their dummy out”? Doubt it, but happy to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...
In all honesty, for me personally, you have drawn this particular incident more to the front of my mind that other incidents involving other clubs. So I can't really offer an opinion either way on Palace and what they did at one point.

For me, the Forest incident was reported on the BBC website one day (where I could have noticed it), and maybe was still there for a day or two. I may have bypassed it completely if that was my only exposure to it. But on this thread, the constant talk and "you must feel sorry for poor wee Forest....", along with other discussions about poor Forest not being able to get into the "Top 6" while other clubs, that have built their clubs up over many years seem to get an unfair advantage today, has meant that I've paid a bit more attention to it. And I ask myself "Do I feel sorry for Forest based on the reported information". And the answer I still give myself is "absolutely not"

As for MGW, I still believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with another club finding out the details of a release clause, and any Club that thinks there is an issue with that are morons (well, the people on the board that think that, not everything and everyone associated with the club). Just my opinion, and based on zero experience in drafting player contracts.
 
Swango1980 said:
As for MGW, I still believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with another club finding out the details of a release clause, and any Club that thinks there is an issue with that are morons (well, the people on the board that think that, not everything and everyone associated with the club). Just my opinion, and based on zero experience in drafting player contracts.
Click to expand...
Man City were supposedly talking about £80-100M for him before Spurs got involved and the £60M release clause was revealed. Ridiculous money but it suggests that the release clause was not common knowledge to everyone.
 
Swango1980 said:
As for MGW, I still believe there is absolutely nothing wrong with another club finding out the details of a release clause, and any Club that thinks there is an issue with that are morons (well, the people on the board that think that, not everything and everyone associated with the club). Just my opinion, and based on zero experience in drafting player contracts.
Click to expand...

You know earlier, when I referred to people farting out their ill-informed opinions on contract law?

Nobody knew the finer details of what the terms of his contract were. I said at the time that the devil would be in the detail and got sneered at. Then lo and behold, it was shown that Levy ballsed up the approach and didn’t fulfil the terms of the release clause correctly.

Yet still, people are using words like “morons” about the club who own the player.

🤷‍♂️

As for me drawing your attention to it, if you go back and read the comments here when it was happening, you’ll find that while plenty of people here were discussing it (and mostly condemning Marinakis/Forest), I said very little about it until AFTER MGW signed his contract extension.
 
Last edited:
RichA said:
Man City were supposedly talking about £80-100M for him before Spurs got involved and the £60M release clause was revealed. Ridiculous money but it suggests that the release clause was not common knowledge to everyone.
Click to expand...
I'm sure it isn't necessarily common knowledge to start with. When the contract is signed, it isn't something that is necessarily released to the world.

However, the player and the agent will know what the release clause is. And, if there ever comes a time that the player fancies a move away, it is a certainty that the release clause will become known to people the player/agent want to know. At minimum, all a player needs to do is be sitting to a mate from another club, and mention his release clause, and like magic, that is passed on.

And, if the club ever fancy getting rid of a player before the contract ends at the release clause price, I wouldn't be naive enough in thinking that the club will happily disclose to other clubs what the clause is.

Btw, in relation to Man City wanting to spend £80-100 million on him, how does this even work? If Forest let MGW to speak to City, are we supposed to believe that his release clause will be kept a secret at all times? If MGW and his agent speak to City, they might find all agree that is City knock their offer down by £20-40 million, Forest still have to accept the offer and MGW can earn a higher salary. In fact, I think I would feel guilty as a player going to a new club, keeping that info a secret, and costing my new employers up to £40 million. Especially if the info is ever leaked once the deal is done
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

road2ruin
Fantasy Footie 25/26
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
2K
Orikoru
Orikoru
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
jim8flog
Golf or football
2
Replies
33
Views
5K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
SaintHacker
The EFL Thread
33 34 35
Replies
682
Views
45K
Lucifer MorningStar
Lucifer MorningStar
Crazyface
Out Tonight
Replies
9
Views
1K
Pin-seeker
Pin-seeker
Top