Heinze to Liverpool?

PHB

It's on rednews, which normally doesn't make up random stories.

Peyton Manning

Man Utd had previously warned Heinze to forget Liverpool
tribalfooball.com - July 26, 2007

Manchester United defender Gaby Heinze knew well in advance of this month's controversy that he wouldn't be cleared to join Liverpool, it has been revealed.

The Telegraph says while Heinze's agents have reportedly a letter from United chief David Gill agreeing to sell him if an offer of at least £6.8 million arrives, according to well-placed United sources, a number of letters were also written to the player and his agents outlining the club's condition that he could not be sold to one of their title rivals, such as Liverpool.

They say the message contained in the correspondence was reinforced in a number of face-to-face meetings with the player over the past few weeks.

---

Tut tut tut, silly boy Gabby.

zAbbo

looks messy, surely you can't put a condition in that he can't join another rival club ?

Peyton Manning

^Yes, you most certainly can.

NotWormBoy

Archimedes wrote:

a number of letters were also written to the player and his agents outlining the club's condition that he could not be sold to one of their title rivals, such as Liverpool.

Interesting, if true, looks like he's proper f*cked.

I wonder though, what he'd think about conditions "being tacked on later" as I'm sure people might see them as.

Mitch Connor

NotWormBoy wrote:

Interesting, if true, looks like he's proper f*cked.

I wonder though, what he'd think about conditions "being tacked on later" as I'm sure people might see them as.

well...... the apparent 'release fee clause' he seems to be clinging to was 'tacked on later' to his actual contract - so turn and turn about, eh.

zAbbo

http://www.thelawyer.com/cgi-bin/item.cgi?id=127498&d=122&h=24&f=46

Blackstone Chambers has scored its second instruction on a disputed football transfer, after being brought in to secure Argentine defender Gabriel Heinze's release from Manchester United FC.

Andrew Green has been instructed by Hill Dickinson partner Richard Green on behalf of Heinze.

Andrew Green is also part of the team acting for the agents of Carlos Tevez in their dispute with West Ham United FC.

The dispute is between Heinze and his current club Manchester United.

The club has refused to allow Heinze a transfer to rival club Liverpool FC, with the player instructing lawyers to push the move through before the transfer deadline at the end of August.

Green said that the dispute will be settled through arbitration, rather than the courts.

Brabners Chaffe Street is acting for Manchester United. Liverpool has not yet instructed outside counsel.

Mr Alan

Archimedes wrote:

Ferguson would not be denying it so assuringly if he knew that there was a chance that Heinze would go to Pool. Its not going to happen.

Could the same not be said for Rafa and Heinze?

mike65

So the real winners will be the lawyers again. They're doing quite well out of Man Utd matters these days.

Mike.

yom 1

Archimedes wrote:

....... according to well-placed United sources, a number of letters were also written to the player and his agents outlining the club's condition that he could not be sold to one of their title rivals, such as Liverpool.

If that was true, United would have come out at the start of all of this and said Heinze has a letter which allows him to leave if an offer of £6.8m comes in but not to any title rivals, and that would've been that.

Surely Liverpools lawyers have seen this letter and they are happy to still pursue it. Now they would hardly be wasting Rafa's time in the transfer market if it clearly said that he couldnt join the pool, chelsea or arsenal.

As for face to face meetings - it doesnt really matter what was said, he has a signed document from united to say he can leave. They can't verbally add a stipulation to this after it has been signed. They would need another one signed from Heinze to say he agrees that he cant go to a title rival.

zAbbo

If any of the 'not to arch rivals' clause was valid, Whiskeynose wouldn't be out playing the Loyalty card.

Hobart

Archimedes wrote:

^Yes, you most certainly can.

You can put what you want in a letter. They probably did state, at some stage, that he could not leave Man U for a top 4 club. They could also state in a letter that if he joined another club, he could only use his right leg to kick the ball and that he must change his name to Michael.

Like i said, you can put whatever you want in a letter, that does not necessarily mean that it is "legally" enforceable. I suspect that Heinze has initiated proceedings under the guise that Manu are restricting his ability to work for whomever he wants. He'll probably win.

You cannot (unless under very exceptional circumstances), under EU law, restrict who an employee can or cannot work for. There are numerous examples of cases won on this basis.

ROCKMAN

what's the problem they say " title rival " Chelsea and the Gunners are not interested in him . So let him go to liverpool that mid table team.

Mr Alan

good point rockman. cause Liverpool always finish midtable?!

did you get dropped on your head as a child?

ROCKMAN

No mate you got me wrong I was making a prediction

ROCKMAN

and before you say " this year "

ye have been saying this year for the 15 years

Mr Alan

oh right how foolish of me.

a team that comfortably finishes third while playing well below their level, then buys one of the most highly rated forward players in the world, a proven premiership winger, and two of the best young prospects in world football and now they are due to finish midtable?

they are some fortune telling powers you have?!
any chance ya know the lotto numbers for tomorrow?

ROCKMAN

jesus take it has it was meant a joke..
but if you want a real prediction .

THIRD IS WHERE LIVERPOOL ARE FINISHING NEXT SEASON , THE GAP TO THE TOP TWO WILL CLOSE A SMALL BIT, BUT THE TOP TOO AT LESS 8 POINTS CLEAR OF THE FIELD.
liverpool and the Gunners will fight all season for third with never more than a point or two between them but liverpool will shade it in the end

I know there is no big surprise there , but i can't see it playing out any other way.

Mr Alan

Think you might be wrong. But at least thats a more realistic prediction!

Sorry for jumping down your throat, not in the best of form today!

ROCKMAN

no prob
and if i am wrong and liverpool win it I will be the first on here to offer my congrat's to you personnally

Mr Alan

looking forward to it

Chardee MacDennis

ROCKMAN wrote:

BUT THE TOP TOO AT LESS 8 POINTS CLEAR OF THE FIELD.

i'll say this slowly...

YOU.... SPEAK.... ENGLISH.... ?

PHB

They can't verbally add a stipulation to this after it has been signed. They would need another one signed from Heinze to say he agrees that he cant go to a title rival.

Really? So wait, why is it ok to add a stipulation to a contract after it is signed? Can you only add one stipulation? Wait, are you saying United sent them a letter and Heinze wrote back saying, I agree? That's highly highly highly unlikely.

Realistically, unless the contract states in incredibly specific terms that he effectively has a minimun release clause it is useless.
Furthermore, it can be argued, quite easily, that since United never considered the possibility of it being to a domestic rival, then it really isn't implied in the contract. There's no way it's watertight, and even if it was accepted, it would be accepted on an assumption.

RE*AC*TOR

It depends I guess on how far Heinze is willing to push it. If its established that ManU were willing to part with the player, but not to a specific club, while this would not be against FIFA or UEFA rules, it would be against EU employment law.

Could set new (dangerous) precedents for football transfers.

~Rebel~

zabbo wrote:

If any of the 'not to arch rivals' clause was valid, Whiskeynose wouldn't be out playing the Loyalty card.

Christ its turning into Yu-Gi-Oh!
Ah ha, when you play loyalty card, it triggers my players special ability of release contract letter which i will now fuse with my expensive lawyer card!

..Im at home during the day a lot...

yom 1

PHB wrote:

Really? So wait, why is it ok to add a stipulation to a contract after it is signed? Can you only add one stipulation? Wait, are you saying United sent them a letter and Heinze wrote back saying, I agree? That's highly highly highly unlikely.

Thats not what I said.

Firstly the letter is not a stipulation to his contract with United, its an agreement he reached with the club to allow him to leave if an offer of £6.8m. Obviously United aswell as Heinze signed this to say they both agreed.

What I said about the stipulation is that they couldnt hand him the letter and a week later verbally say oh by the way the letter we gave you, we meant to include you cant go to rival but we didnt, but it still counts.

For the verbal stipulation to be recognised they would need to draw up a further letter/document which Heinze would have to agree to and sign. Obviously he is never goin to agree to that.

PHB

its an agreement he reached with the club to allow him to leave if an offer of £6.8m.

Does that supercede his contract? That's the real question. His contract is legally binding, end of. Does this letter count as altering his contract?

~Rebel~

Looks like this is gonna stretch out even longer..

Gabriel Heinze will not consider his Manchester United future until he returns from holiday.

The defender is looking to leave the Premier League champions due to concerns over his first-team chances and has been the subject of a bid from Liverpool.

United have rejected the offer, but legal advice has been sought from Heinze and Liverpool regarding a letter given to the Argentine's agent.

The former Paris Saint Germain full-back is currently on a break after playing in the Copa America and is trying not to focus on football.

"I am on holiday, but may return next week and say more," Heinze told the News of the World.

"For now I am a United player, but I am not saying anything else.

"I don't want to think about it and I don't want to think about football. I am on holiday and only want to think about the things I don't during the season."

At this point, with the season starting in 2 weeks i think i'd prefer we just move on. Plenty of other defenders out there who can provide decent cover.

el rabitos

prolly too involved in the whole saga now to drop out...

would rather have Chiellini tbh, juve seem willing to do business, he's captain of the italy u21's, seems like a good prospect and less hassle than chasing heinze.

nedward

Heinze is a pure slut, like.

~Rebel~

In other news, Daniel Pachecho and David Amoo have already scored their first goals for the club in an under 18 side against Plymouth Argyle. Both played 45mins. Pool won 4-1.

I cant wait to see how Pachecho developes, Barca's best youth striker, nabbed in a similar way to Fabregas.

<Edit> doh, forgot this wasn't the superthread. Nowhere to really put this anyway and doesnt really deserve a new thread so will just leave it. Mods feel free to move it to any more appropriate thread...

The Rooster

el rabitos wrote:

prolly too involved in the whole saga now to drop out...

would rather have Chiellini tbh, juve seem willing to do business, he's captain of the italy u21's, seems like a good prospect and less hassle than chasing heinze.

Juve have given Chiellini permission to speak to Man City, so if we're going to move, we need to move now.

I've only seen Chiellini play twice, once for Juventus and once for Italy U21. He was cack both times. A defender who doesnt like defending, was the overwhelming feeling I got from him. But maybe I've just been unlucky in I caught him on two bad days...