Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Chelsea Football Club has been cleared of any wrongdoing !

  • 04-02-2010 6:08pm
    #1
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭


    http://www.chelseafc.com/page/LatestNews/0,,10268~1955578,00.html

    weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
    Chelsea Football Club has been cleared of any wrongdoing regarding the transfer of Gael Kakuta and has had all sanctions lifted.
    Today's announcement from the Court of Arbitration for Sport can be read below.
    Chairman of Chelsea FC Bruce Buck said: 'We are pleased to have come to an amicable resolution of the matter and that it has been ratified by CAS and recognised by FIFA.
    'It was always our intention to work together with Lens to reach this end, and both clubs have strengthened their relationship as a result of resolving this case to everyone's satisfaction.
    'In an act of good faith and with a view to the possibility of future collaboration with Lens, and without recognising any liability, Chelsea has agreed to pay compensation costs for the training given to the player while at Lens, as mandated by FIFA in its original ruling.'
    Chelsea FC chief executive Ron Gourlay added: 'Naturally, we are pleased Chelsea has been cleared of any wrongdoing and that the matter is now closed.'
    The Court of Arbitration for Sport statement reads:
    Lausanne, 4 February 2010 - The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has issued an award today ratifying the agreement reached by Chelsea FC, Racing Club de Lens and the French football player Gaël Kakuta, putting an end to this arbitration procedure which also involved FIFA. The CAS has noted that, in the agreement, the two clubs and the player have recognised that the contract between the player and RC Lens was not valid. Accordingly, the player could not have terminated it prematurely and without just cause and FC Chelsea cannot therefore be liable for inducing a breach of contract. As a consequence, in light of these new circumstances, the sanctions imposed upon Chelsea FC and the player by the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber had to be lifted.

    In accordance with the parties' request, the entire proceedings, including the arbitral award and the agreement shall remain confidential and the CAS will not comment on this matter any further.
    On 25 September 2009, the FIFA Dispute Resolution Chamber imposed, inter alia, a restriction of four months' ineligibility on Mr Gaël Kakuta, and Chelsea FC was banned from registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for the two complete, consecutive registration periods following the FIFA decision. The sanctions were stayed by the CAS until the award was issued.


Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,638 ✭✭✭Iago


    so they basically paid Lens off then?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    Iago wrote: »
    so they basically paid Lens off then?
    In accordance with the parties' request, the entire proceedings, including the arbitral award and the agreement shall remain confidential and the CAS will not comment on this matter any further.

    Suggests so, doesn't it?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭CHD


    Iago wrote: »
    so they basically paid Lens off then?
    Yeah, a amount they deserve and not a crazy amount they were looking for originally that they didn't get and had them run crying to FIFA.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,349 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    "In an act of good faith and with a view to the possibility of future collaboration with Lens, and without recognising any liability, Chelsea has agreed to pay compensation costs for the training given to the player while at Lens."

    Here - have a truck full of money and stop whinging about 'rules'.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭CHD


    :pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,617 ✭✭✭✭PHB


    Seems like Lens dropped the case, because they were bought off. I'd be pissed off at them if United hadn't done the exact same thing with the Obi Mikel case.

    Ultimately, if the case is dropped if the team that brings it is bought off, how do you expect to enforce rules regarding transfers. In football, everyone has a price eventually in this sort of matter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    CHD wrote: »
    Yeah, a amount they deserve and not a crazy amount they were looking for originally that they didn't get and had them run crying to FIFA.

    Who found in the their favour, yeah?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    PHB wrote: »
    Seems like Lens dropped the case, because they were bought off. I'd be pissed off at them if United hadn't done the exact same thing with the Obi Mikel case.

    Ultimately, if the case is dropped if the team that brings it is bought off, how do you expect to enforce rules regarding transfers. In football, everyone has a price eventually in this sort of matter.

    Spurs done the same with Frank Arnensen.

    Seems to be a common theme doesn't it?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭CHD


    Who found in the their favour, yeah?
    No.

    ''Chelsea Football Club has been cleared of any wrongdoing regarding the transfer of Gael Kakuta''

    See?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    CHD wrote: »
    No.

    ''Chelsea Football Club has been cleared of any wrongdoing regarding the transfer of Gael Kakuta''

    See?

    I was referring to the original ruling of FIFA, not today's CAS ruling. I thought that was obvious enough, hey ho.


  • Advertisement
  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭CHD


    I was referring to the original ruling of FIFA, not today's CAS ruling. I thought that was obvious enough, hey ho.
    FIFA's ruling was wrong. Justice has been served.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    CHD wrote: »
    FIFA's ruling was wrong. Justice has been served.

    Sense of humour, I like that...:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,772 ✭✭✭✭Paul Tergat


    money talks, no big surprise really


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭DazMarz


    Delighted, I have to say... even if we did bribe everyone from the top down... Hahaha:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,831 ✭✭✭✭Panthro


    WHOHOO!!!!...dat is all


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,252 ✭✭✭✭stovelid


    CHD wrote: »
    weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

    Here:

    Pampers_diapers.jpg


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 15,238 ✭✭✭✭Diabhal Beag


    They will hardly be fair to one of the biggest clubs in Europe. They should at least have been banned in January (they made no signings anyway!)


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,555 ✭✭✭Gillington


    Cue Ancelotti saying, despite this decision,they will not need to buy anyone


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,956 ✭✭✭CHD


    stovelid wrote: »
    Here:

    Pampers_diapers.jpg
    You thanks whoring picture posting has dropped down a few levels recently, get back in the game.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 21,235 ✭✭✭✭flahavaj


    million-dollar-man.jpg

    The Million Dollar Man ALWAYS gets his man.:pac:


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,625 ✭✭✭✭Johner


    Ah it was always going to happen.


  • Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 4,726 Mod ✭✭✭✭Gonzovision


    So Kalou got a contract for nothing...... :o


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,526 ✭✭✭m@cc@


    CHD wrote: »
    Yeah, a amount they deserve and not a crazy amount they were looking for originally that they didn't get and had them run crying to FIFA.


    Surely it's the selling club who decide a transfer fee, the buying club can choose whether or not to pay it.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 8,493 ✭✭✭DazMarz


    Johner wrote: »
    Ah it was always going to happen.

    That's what everyone said to me... I was still nervous as hell that FIFA would follow through on something for once.

    Thankfully, as usual, they've made a complete arse of things and Chelsea get away with it...:D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 19,432 ✭✭✭✭Liam O


    PHB wrote: »
    Seems like Lens dropped the case, because they were bought off. I'd be pissed off at them if United hadn't done the exact same thing with the Obi Mikel case.

    Ultimately, if the case is dropped if the team that brings it is bought off, how do you expect to enforce rules regarding transfers. In football, everyone has a price eventually in this sort of matter.

    what happened there? I thought it was Chelsea in the wrong there...


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,625 ✭✭✭✭Johner


    United went straight to Mikel.

    Chelsea went through his agents.

    Or something to that effect.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,213 ✭✭✭✭therecklessone


    DazMarz wrote: »
    Thankfully, as usual, they've made a complete arse of things and Chelsea get away with it...:D

    FIFA could do nothing, once Lens rolled over to let Chelsea tickle their belly the case was null and void. Lens were paid off, simples.
    Liam O wrote: »
    what happened there? I thought it was Chelsea in the wrong there...

    I think PHB was referring to the fact that United settled for a payoff rather than pursuing Chelsea through legal means.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,441 ✭✭✭✭jesus_thats_gre


    It's amazing that it went this far considering Chelsea seemingly have done nothing wrong............................


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 39,012 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    All the big clubs are at all sorts, didn't Dario Gradi have a swipe at Liverpool last year over something to do with youth players. United too have had troubles in the past, there was tapping up accusations that were swept under the carpet. Arsenal have been involved in plenty of controversy over the years when picking up young players from abroad.

    I'm surprised the Chelsea thing became such a big deal.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement