Ferguson fumes with Chelsea

GuanYin

PHB wrote:

Rooney just last weekend was alledged to have slapped his girlfriend in a nightclub. He didn't refute it because that would make anotehr story. He ignored it because its better to ignore it.
So it wasn't refuted, challenged, disciplined, or sued. Does that make it true?
Nope!

Big difference between Rooney ignoring a tabloid and Fergie ignoring his club captains accusations of being tapped up by him.

But you carry on with that logic

The Muppet

PHB wrote:

While I accept that Fergie is guilty of tapping up, or Kenyon, whatever, I think there is a difference between what Fergie and the rest of the managers in the Premiership do, and what Chelsea have done.
Beatie was allegedly tapped up, but it was done on some roadside garage on the M47 or something. CHelsea have the gaul to do it in a top class hotel, and then come out and admit it openly, almost flounting it to the FA.

That's it in a nutshell PHB as I said from the outset of this thread the nature of the underhand dealings is unprecedented. I accept that all clubs {including United} are guilty of tapping players. Anyone that has read the whole thread will see that I said that on the very first page .

abccormac

So it's ok to tap up a player as long as you do it quietly and out of the public eye, but not if it's in a public place? I can't see the difference myself.

GuanYin

abccormac wrote:

So it's ok to tap up a player as long as you do it quietly and out of the public eye, but not if it's in a public place? I can't see the difference myself.

Nor can most people. Its just a ploy to avoid the hypcrit tag.

I'm more shocked that muppet has inferred Roy Keane is a liar! :eek:

The Muppet

abccormac wrote:

So it's ok to tap up a player as long as you do it quietly and out of the public eye, but not if it's in a public place? I can't see the difference myself.

Did you read the article I posted about the nature of the inducements offered to Cole. Assuming they are true it has to be a worrying developement . If United have used the same tactic my position remains the same. That sort of thing should not be allowed to happen no matter who does it..

MrJoeSoap

PHB wrote:

Beatie was allegedly tapped up

Beattie WAS tapped up.

Anyway, back to the issue at hand here...

PHB

psi, I was using it as an example, of course there is a difference, o hno wait there isn't. If fergie doesn't care about the allegations, which he doesn't, its the exact same situation.
The logic is perfect.

----

So it's ok to tap up a player as long as you do it quietly and out of the public eye, but not if it's in a public place? I can't see the difference myself.

To an extent yes. In the sense that it has always been accepted and done by all clubs in secrecy. Chelsea have ignored this, hence why all the hoo-rah.
I'd rather if tapping up was allowed completely, I don't see why it shouldn't be. That said I don't like the idea of people releasing confidental details like minimun release clauses, but that could easily be fixed by a confidentiality agreement that is sueable.

BaZmO*

The Muppet wrote:

I'll take your reluctance to answer properly as a a yes which I would safely say would be the answer of the majority of soccer fans

Reluctance to answer even though I said...

BaZmO* wrote:

I'll ignore the fact that the question you're asking me is a hypothetical one and I'll answer your question.

I don't really care if tapping goes on as it's impossible to police. It happens in all types of business in one way or another. I just think it's hypocritical to go on about the way somebody is being "tapped" when everybody does it, and especially when the person that's the most vocal about other people doing it has done it themselves in the past.

And I find it quite amusing that your have persistently stated that I haven't answered your hypothetical question, yet you, for some reason can't bring yourself to answer the question I've put to you several times.

The Muppet wrote:

Pity some contributors here can't see past their agendas and discuss these things properly. Do these thread always have to turn into anti united ones?

And what agenda would that be then? An agenda to point out to you when you are quite obviously talking BS?

And how the hell do you come to the conclusion that this thread has become anti-Utd.? Sure I'm a Utd. supporter myself.

Just because your are being called up on invalid points doesn't mean that it's anti-Utd.

The Muppet wrote:

It's getting more and more like the good old days here every day.

The good old days when you got banned for constantly arguing with people?

Hmmmm....actually yeah you're right, it has!

B.

The Muppet

I said earlier that I was sceptical that it was an accidental meeting between Kenyon and Ferdinand. Looks like I was right to be sceptical as Kenyon met Ferdinand in two seperate London restaurants that night and had a prolonged meeting with him in one of them.

United boss Fergie was said to be "hopping mad" over the Mirror's revelation yesterday that Ferdinand met Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon in two London restaurants on the same night.

The picture showing Ferdinand and Kenyon together blew a hole in Chelsea's claim that a meeting between the two - and the defender's agent Pini Zahavi - was a chance encounter and Fergie is determined to see Chelsea pay for what he sees as a deliberate attempt to undermine United and tempt Ferdinand away from Old Trafford.

Link

BaZmO*

Still haven't answered the question. Nice.

B.

BolBill

Ferguson is a hypocrite, hes been guilty of tapping up in the past - See Jaap Stam.

growler

this is far more likely to be a ploy engineered by Zahavi to put pressure on Utd to increase rio's wages , Kenyon may have played an unwitting (or indeed witting) part in it, which would have been mischievous but not unlawful under FA rules. Chelsea have stated they have no interest in Rio (thankfully).

After the Cole debacle I'd be amazed if Kenyon was so daft as to publicly meet Rio for a chat about a job, they know each other from Man U so I'd fully expect them to have a natter, the allegations that this was tapping up the player is purely speculation on the part of the papers.

The main beneficiary of this is Rio Ferdinand and his agent, no one else.

I love the Man U inspired logic that some here are spouting, it's ok for Man Utd to do it but not for Chelsea because they are now higher up the table than Man U. Presumably PHB the FA should make an example of Chelsea by docking them points so that Man U should regain their god given right to the premiership title? ( some spurious reason could then be found to dock Arsenal sufficient points also).

The Muppet

growler wrote:

this is far more likely to be a ploy engineered by Zahavi to put pressure on Utd to increase rio's wages , Kenyon may have played an unwitting (or indeed witting) part in it, which would have been mischievous but not unlawful under FA rules. Chelsea have stated they have no interest in Rio (thankfully).

After the Cole debacle I'd be amazed if Kenyon was so daft as to publicly meet Rio for a chat about a job, they know each other from Man U so I'd fully expect them to have a natter, the allegations that this was tapping up the player is purely speculation on the part of the papers.

The main beneficiary of this is Rio Ferdinand and his agent, no one else.

That is a distinct possibility but Kenyon should not be having meetings with other teams players.

growler wrote:

I love the Man U inspired logic that some here are spouting, it's ok for Man Utd to do it but not for Chelsea because they are now higher up the table than Man U. Presumably PHB the FA should make an example of Chelsea by docking them points so that Man U should regain their god given right to the premiership title? ( some spurious reason could then be found to dock Arsenal sufficient points also).

I dont think any Utd. Fan is following that logic Growler I certainly am not. We are just offering the opinion that the way Chelsea are doing it is more blatent than the other clubs do. The inducemnets offer to COLE if true would not be in the best interest of the game, I would have a problem with that no matter which club did it.

I would not like to see Chelsea deducted points as the League should be decided on the Pitch. I would like to see them stopped from offering to put players contracted to other Clubs on their payroll (assuming that to be the case).

abccormac

I Can't understand why teams actually go to the bother of meeting players face to face to tap them up anyway, surely they have telephones? Why take the risk of meeting them in the first place? Other than that I can't see the difference between tapping somebody in a motorway service station and doing it live on tv, both are equally against the rules.

this is far more likely to be a ploy engineered by Zahavi to put pressure on Utd to increase rio's wages

Agreed.

PHB

Growler, perhaps if you read my post, you'd actually understand what I was saying.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Regardless of what you have said since, how this thread started is that AF has been upset by the tapping up of Rio by Chelsea. The hypocrisy of this from the man who has been accused, in a number of cases by people who played for him at the time, of tapping up large numbers of players is what is at issue.

When this was pointed out I think the first fallback position for some members here was "Yeah well prove it" When links were brought up it became but it's all about the "way Chelsea have done it".

As has been said, either Ferguson is going to remain squeaky clean himself and complain about tapping up or he can just shut up about it as it is a ploy used by the man for years.

The Muppet

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

When this was pointed out I think the first fallback position for some members here was "Yeah well prove it" When links were brought up it became but it's all about the "way Chelsea have done it".

That is not an accurate reflection of my position. The point I was making initally was that the allegations against United were all unproven and not that United didn't tap players. That remains to be the situatiion as no charges were laid in any of the cases linked to. It remains to be seen if Chelsea will be found guilty but it's fairly likely they will.

I said "I assume all clubs tap players"link on the very first page of this thread yet five pages in my position is still being misrepresented. I never said united don't tap players as I assume they do. I have not altered my position at all in this thread as suggested.

Thanx 4 The Fish

Never mentioned you lad although you know what the say about hats and head sizes.

The Muppet

Thanx 4 The Fish wrote:

Never mentioned you lad although you know what the say about hats and head sizes.

No but I know the one about big feet.

I just though you may have been meaning me. AS you were not ignore my last post.