Chelsea Team Talk/Gossip/Rumours

homer simpson

Other thread was closed for some strange reason? Well all i want to say on this is i blame one person and one person only, peter kenyon! Only thing angers me is why chelsea were picked on real madrid have been tapping up for years, but nothing done the them, the vendetta against english football continues...

Heres the link to that story

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2009/sep/03/chelsea-fifa-transfer-ban-gael-kakuta

eZe^

homer_simpson wrote: »

Only thing angers me is why chelsea were picked on real madrid have been tapping up for years, but nothing done the them, the vendetta against english football continues...

It angers me that you're absolutely clueless. What Madrid do may be unethical, but it isn't in direct violation of any laws, but what you did is DIRECT breach of UEFA rules, don't make it out to be big bad UEFA picking on Chelsea as if they have been doing the regular 'tapping up' protocol. Don't worry though, I'm sure we'll see the outrage and how unfair it is that this only happened to an English club. Typical I guess... That ref really was paid off by Platini in the Barca - Chelsea semi final right? :rolleyes::rolleyes::pac:

simonw

dooferoaks wrote: »

Boring transfer window for us this year

You thought this year was bad for ye's? :pac:

homer simpson

eZe^ wrote: »

It angers me that you're absolutely clueless. What Madrid do may be unethical, but it isn't in direct violation of any laws, but what you did is DIRECT breach of UEFA rules, don't make it out to be big bad UEFA picking on Chelsea as if they have been doing the regular 'tapping up' protocol. Don't worry though, I'm sure we'll see the outrage and how unfair it is that this only happened to an English club. Typical I guess... That ref really was paid off by Platini in the Barca - Chelsea semi final right? :rolleyes::rolleyes::pac:

what are you harping on about, the barca chelsea semi-final has nothing to do with this! And i have never spoken about any wrongdoing's against chelsea on here before! So are you saying that chelsea are the only team ever to have done this? Every team has breached transfer regulation's of some form every team from chelsea down to cambridge have done it! I think the punishment is harsh, do you not, and if not every single club should get a ban or fine so, and it always seems to be and english club getting punished, even the divin in champions league, it was an english team, every game you watch there is diving and very seldom do they bat an eyelid,
an don't go attacking people about things they have never said anything about, you wouldn't be a utd fan would you...

eZe^

homer_simpson wrote: »

what are you harping on about, the barca chelsea semi-final has nothing to do with this! And i have never spoken about any wrongdoing's against chelsea on here before! So are you saying that chelsea are the only team ever to have done this? Every team has breached transfer regulation's of some form every team from chelsea down to cambridge have done it! I think the punishment is harsh, do you not, and if not every single club should get a ban or fine so, and it always seems to be and english club getting punished, even the divin in champions league, it was an english team, every game you watch there is diving and very seldom do they bat an eyelid,
an don't go attacking people about things they have never said anything about, you wouldn't be a utd fan would you...

I wasn't attacking you in general, just the general attitude of Chelsea fans that have been expressed as recently as on the last page. It's all well and good saying every team has breached transfer regulations, but give me cold hard evidence and I'll agree with you. Having your club come out and state their desire to sign a player may not be exactly moral, but it doesn't breach any actual laws. However, getting a player to actively breach his contract so he can join another club is a violation. Chelsea are rightfully paying the punishment for a crime they committed.

Does it look from my signature that I support United.... :pac::pac::D

EDIT - and on one aspect of the whole England vs UEFA, UEFA have come out and officially said that Madrid's escapades in the transfer market were bad, they did condemn their actions. But I'm sure most people would happily dismiss that because it doesn't suit the whole conspiracy theory does it???

Kirnsy

homer_simpson wrote: »

what are you harping on about, the barca chelsea semi-final has nothing to do with this! And i have never spoken about any wrongdoing's against chelsea on here before! So are you saying that chelsea are the only team ever to have done this? Every team has breached transfer regulation's of some form every team from chelsea down to cambridge have done it! I think the punishment is harsh, do you not, and if not every single club should get a ban or fine so, and it always seems to be and english club getting punished, even the divin in champions league, it was an english team, every game you watch there is diving and very seldom do they bat an eyelid,
an don't go attacking people about things they have never said anything about, you wouldn't be a utd fan would you...

proof??

its not tapping up (like Ashley Cole remember?) , it's encouraging a player to break a contract.

homer simpson

I'm not saying that every team has made a player breach his contract, but have broken some sort or rule! How many times have you been watching ssn and they have said one team say player x has not been given permission to talk to any other clubs then they will show pictures of player x at other clubs, is that not evidence of breaking the rules? If we broke a rule fair enough, we'll get punished (thats why i blame kenyon) but if what chelsea done warrents a 1 year ban then tapping up warrents at least a heafty ban. Indeed chelsea would get loads of fines but then i wouldn't be a disgruntled because it'd be across the board.

P.s. Can't see signatures cos i'm using my phone, so if your not a utd fan sorry...

MementoMori

I think it's pretty clear why UEFA took action in this case

Lens lodged a complaint with world football's governing body after Chelsea had signed the winger two years ago.

I think in the majority of tapping up cases, the selling club doesn't end up complaining to the authorities because they end up charging the purchasing club slightly more or may want to remain relatively friendly with the other club. It's one thing to moan in the press, it's a different situation to actually going down the formal complaint route. Also in some cases while everyone may know tapping on has gone on, actually having hard concrete evidence is a whole other story.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/8236187.stm

Mitch Connor

MementoMori wrote: »

I think it's pretty clear why UEFA took action in this case



I think in the majority of tapping up cases, the selling club doesn't end up complaining to the authorities because they end up charging the purchasing club slightly more or may want to remain relatively friendly with the other club. It's one thing to moan in the press, it's a different situation to actually going down the formal complaint route. Also in some cases while everyone may know tapping on has gone on, actually having hard concrete evidence is a whole other story.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/c/chelsea/8236187.stm

Also, this isn't a case of tapping up.

This is a case of a player breaching his contract, not where a player has spoken to a club before getting permission and a transfer fee still being given.

selpher

Seems very harsh on the player. He was only about 15, its not like he'd have known better. Can his 4 month ban be appealed aswell?

MementoMori

selpher wrote: »

Seems very harsh on the player. He was only about 15, its not like he'd have known better. Can his 4 month ban be appealed aswell?

I don't think it's that harsh at all. At 15 he surely knew the morality of what he was doing was wrong, so he would have known better imo.
If it were an older player I would expect the ban to be longer.

A four month ban isn't that harsh. If it were a year ban or something I'd say it was harsh. Four months isn't that bad.

Also if he wasn't punished it would be sending a very bad message to players. If it were just a monetary penalty, Chelsea could simply bump up his wages in compensation when he came to renegotiate his next contract, in effect reimbursing him.

Barr

Even with the transfer ban , Chelsea have such a big talented squad its unlikely to hamper them massively

flahavaj

How long before transfer speculation for January 2011 surfaces in the tabloids?:pac:

greendom

Barr wrote: »

Even with the transfer ban , Chelsea have such a big talented squad its unlikely to hamper them massively

The ban will probably get reduced on appeal anyway but you will have to hope you don't get too many injuries to important players. Ancellotti's man-management skills will come to the fore to as you can do without too many transfer requests from players

JPA

Barr wrote: »

Even with the transfer ban , Chelsea have such a big talented squad its unlikely to hamper them massively

They are probably the team which would be least affected by a ban like this.

eddiehead

JPA wrote: »

They are probably the team which would be least affected by a ban like this.

This is true.

I've heard the same argument a few times tonight though "What if Drogba and Anelka both get injured" "What if Essien and Lampard and Ballack all get injured, what will ye do then eh?". People seem to be under the impression that when our players get injured we just go out and but new ones. Also, that there seem's to be some on coming wave of injuries to all of our first team players that we are now helpless against.

The other one is "What will ye do when the ACN comes around eh?".
What the **** were we gonna do anyway, with or without the ban? Just go and buy 2 players capable of covering for Essien & Drogba? NO. That was never going to happen. If we were going to bring in players capable of doing the same job as either of these players it would have been done by now.

Soby

Shame it doesnt work both ways and we cant sell anyone either:P

CHD

May is gona be even sweeter imo

eddiehead

CHD wrote: »

May is gona be even sweeter imo

Why so pessimistic? April!:pac:

Redsoxfan

This ban appears to apply to registering players.

Does this rule out loan moves?

eddiehead

Redsoxfan wrote: »

This ban appears to apply to registering players.

Does this rule out loan moves?

To be fair it wouldn't make sense if it didn't apply to loaning players also. If we wanted to sign somebody during either of the affected windows we could just say "Right, we'll pay the full fee after a year but we want him on loan first" or something to that effect. If it didn't apply to loans I feel it would be far to easy to work around it.

therecklessone

Redsoxfan wrote: »

This ban appears to apply to registering players.

Does this rule out loan moves?

IIRC, for the purpose of player registration a loan is considered the same as a proper transfer, to play for the new club a player must be registered with that club, whether ownership is transferred or not. Indeed, I don't believe FIFA recognise loans as a separate process.

Bubs101

therecklessone wrote: »

IIRC, for the purpose of player registration a loan is considered the same as a proper transfer, to play for the new club a player must be registered with that club, whether ownership is transferred or not. Indeed, I don't believe FIFA recognise loans as a separate process.

Then what about the likes of Di Santo and Mancienne for next season. Players we have already loaned out who are registered for a different club

mudokon

Bubs101 wrote: »

Then what about the likes of Di Santo and Mancienne for next season. Players we have already loaned out who are registered for a different club

The players we have already loaned out should be okay as they would still be registered as Chelsea players with the FA. According to Sky Sports Mancienne has a emergency recall clause in his loan contract so all our other players on loan probably have the same clause in their loan contracts.

Link

The CAS is saying that we should have received an answer on our appeal by December.

Linky

CHD

eddiehead wrote: »

Why so pessimistic? April!:pac:

I was very drunk posting that so it was a great guess considering my state.

blue-army

mudokon wrote: »

The CAS is saying that we should have received an answer on our appeal by December.

I'd be very very surprised if we don't get away with this.

I'd say they're just making an example of us. The ban will be "suspended" like the points deduction for Ashley Cole's tapping up.


If not, then FIFA will be very busy going after City (Lescott deal anyway!), Arsenal, Man Utd, Real Madrid etc...
It's amazing how Real get away with everything! Blatter is their #1 fan!

eddiehead

blue-army wrote: »

If not, then FIFA will be very busy going after City (Lescott deal anyway!), Arsenal, Man Utd, Real Madrid etc...
It's amazing how Real get away with everything! Blatter is their #1 fan!

When did those clubs do what Chelsea did?

Again, this is not a "tapping up" incident.

mudokon

blue-army wrote: »

I'd be very very surprised if we don't get away with this.

I think a reduction in the ban is the best we can hope for, get it down to the one transfer window in January which wouldnt be that bad.

blue-army wrote: »

I'd say they're just making an example of us. The ban will be "suspended" like the points deduction for Ashley Cole's tapping up.

Making an example of us is understandable as we are one of the biggest clubs that FIFA feel they have a strong enough case against.

beya2009

Surely the appeal should reduce it 2 like a year as the punishment is well harsh! Then again i'd imgaine if the appeal is unsuccessful..then the punishment might be increased.

Soby

Anyone see the video of him yet?Seems some player.Great skills around the 30second mark of the video

blue-army

mudokon wrote: »

I think a reduction in the ban is the best we can hope for, get it down to the one transfer window in January which wouldnt be that bad.

Im not so sure. I'd say a heavy fine will be what we end up with.
A transfer ban is like restriction of business really. I'm sure there are ways around this.
We'll see soon enough I suppose.

Jackobyte

This happened to a Swiss club before... While they were appealing the ban was temporarily suspended so they stocked up on players in that time... Then had it reduced to a single year (instead of two)

Soby

Just realised the kid is in fifa aswell

Panthro

just after reading this about the loaned out players.

growler

annoying, would have been good to get Di Santo and Mancienne back for some carling cup work

CHD

Top of ze league. Destroyed Stoke, happy days.

mudokon

blue-army wrote: »

Im not so sure. I'd say a heavy fine will be what we end up with.
A transfer ban is like restriction of business really. I'm sure there are ways around this.
We'll see soon enough I suppose.

In any simillar case that has been appealed the transfer ban as been upheld on a reduced basis as far as I know.

papagormo wrote: »

just after reading this about the loaned out players.

not too concerned about that as we felt we could do without the players for the season barring injury so nothing has really changed for this season.

FIFA still havent handed over their report on this to the club. Sky sports are saying that it should get to Chelsea by the end of the month. Why should it take so long if they have already completed the process & punished Chelsea.

LanceStorm

drogba is playing some great footy, brilliant goals all pre-season n he's keeping them coming in the league!!

total madness since this transfer ban was announced, we didnt buy any players in the summer so to be honest i didnt imagine us buying anyone in January, the african sup of nations is on sure, but we've a huge squad, we can easily handle that, we do have a reserve and youth team like!! im sure that on appeal we wont be banned from signing next summer either, even if we do, dya think we'd be aloud to sign younger players, leave them at their club, but have there contract start with us when the ban is over, therefore not missing out on the best up and coming talent??

CHD

We can agree deals all we like AFAIK we just can't register players to play for us til the next window where we can sign players

mudokon

LanceStorm wrote: »

drogba is playing some great footy, brilliant goals all pre-season n he's keeping them coming in the league!!

total madness since this transfer ban was announced, we didnt buy any players in the summer so to be honest i didnt imagine us buying anyone in January, the african sup of nations is on sure, but we've a huge squad, we can easily handle that, we do have a reserve and youth team like!! im sure that on appeal we wont be banned from signing next summer either, even if we do, dya think we'd be aloud to sign younger players, leave them at their club, but have there contract start with us when the ban is over, therefore not missing out on the best up and coming talent??

The fixture list during the ACN worked out okay for us. Hull & Burnley away, Sunderland & Birmingham at home.

If the appeal failed then we wouldnt be allowed to sign any players even if they were staying with the club we had signed them from as we would have to register them with the FA.

We could possibly try to get players on pre-contracts but I dont think they are legally binding in the UK so that might not work out either.

I think we'll get a transfer ban for one window so would rather get it out of the way in January. If the appeals process is still pending in January, we should be able to sign players then but we could be held to ransom for players given our predicament.

The_Hustler

We've already been signing new players and loaning them back to their club http://www.tribalfootball.com/chelsea-swoop-croatian-starlet-matej-delac-314971, but that may be an exception as this would mostly have been done before the ban came in.

LanceStorm

mudokon wrote: »

The fixture list during the ACN worked out okay for us. Hull & Burnley away, Sunderland & Birmingham at home.

thats brilliant to hear, surely we can still roll over teams like these with anelka and sturridge!! if katuta's ban is over by then id even bring him in for the games for some brilliant publicity, imagine if he grabbed a goal or two??

instant legend!!

Soby

Forgot all about the Champions League Tonight:DShould be good

mudokon

LanceStorm wrote: »

thats brilliant to hear, surely we can still roll over teams like these with anelka and sturridge!! if katuta's ban is over by then id even bring him in for the games for some brilliant publicity, imagine if he grabbed a goal or two??

instant legend!!

We should have Di Santo back by then as his was only a half season loan. It would be good to see Kakuta get some game time after all this.

Dozen Wicked Words

GOOD NEWS!!!!!

Peter Kenyon is leaving his position from 31st October!! On Sky News now.

Panthro

ohhh nooo!!!
(not)
sounds like hes taking a break but is leaving the door open for himself should he decide to return.
http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11095_5563194,00.html

growler

glad to (almost) see the back of Kenyon, don't think there was a single chelsea fan who was happy to see his inane UTD grin at CFC, cheerio....

anyway

Bit of a lacklustre performance from chelsea last night I thought, Porto looked quite good and Terry was shown up a few times, we really missed Drogba in that game, no one else seemed capable of holding the ball up. And with Madrid only managing a home draw with the cypriots , they may not be nailed on qualifiers I'm thinking. Porto have , in recent years, been good at home but crap away, if last night is anything to go by they'll be a tough side to beat for anyone. Their keeper made some great saves too.

Bring on Tottenham , but give the boys a red bull or something 15 minutes before kick off, they still take 30 minutes to wake up these days

Dozen Wicked Words

Kenyon has been replaced by Ron Gourlay, he joined from Man utd. at the same time Kenyon did. Promoted from Operations officer or something.

Soby

Why was Sky reporting JT was knocked out in the match.Clearly wasnt..I mean i know its JT but he wouldnt have played on if he was K.O'd