CHOULO19

Plenty of loopholes in that: 1. If he was not scheming, he would have actually signed for NYFC and then when the opportunity came up went on loan to Man City (or god forbid to some other club outside of England if all he wanted was to stay fit). 2. If he wasn't intentionally misleading and conning NewYorkers, he and Man City would not have explicitly said on several occasions that he was on loan at City and instead would have told the truth that he had a season long contract and that he might sign a contract with NYFC once he was done playing at City. 3. He held a hugely publicized press conference to say that he not only has become a NYFC player and signed a 2 year contract, but that he was there to lead the team by example and help the entire league grow when in fact he knew that he: a. Was aiming at not being there for half of the first season. b. He could and still can join any other team he wants including other MLS teams or teams outside the country or even retire if he wishes because he has nothing legally biding him to NYFC.

NewYork papers not very happy:

No idea, but just to be on the safe side I think I will be offended by it!

Cunts didn't even give us credit!!

This is as bad as the "guilty conscious" song when Eminem says that his wife is not cheating, she just tripped, fell and landed on his d**k

All the statements and interviews and even the unveiling PC are all "genuine mistakes"

Absolutely. I would never make such comics, but I would always defend anyone's right to express them. The only way to battle racism is through raising social awareness leading to social evolution. Was wondering when the Islamophobe was going to pop in

No idea, mate. Never actually checked the rule but have always seen many people say that the longest player contract allowed in the EPL is 5.5 years.

Copy of the contract Frank signed:

https://twitter.com/ChelseaFC/status/553531155371528192 "Nobody stays"! I want Messi here as much as the next Chelsea fan, but selling the entire squad to finance his move sounds a bit extreme, if I'm honest...

The one who maid claims of the third party ownership was not even from the NYFC board, but the director of the MLS or something like that who was 'defending' the reputation of his league in the media. Given that third party ownership is allowed in the US and various European countries, I'd think he likely didn't know it was not allowed in England. Probably just stupid, if you ask me. EDIT: They've backed themselves into a corner they were always going to end up in, imo. How they or Frank thought that the truth would not come out, is beyond me! Of course it's bullshit. If he was planing on just staying fit with City, he would have signed a contract with NYFC, not a "commitment" ( ). He also wouldn't have signed a year-long contract with City. The statement literally explains nothing.

Guys, it's not a loophole and it's not illegal. Let me break down how it happened and why you and others are confused: On December 31st, City and Frank removed the break clause in his one year contract with City thus allowing him to stay in Manchester till the end of the season. The already upset NYFC fans got even more upset when the BBC revealed that he never even had a contract with them and went looking for proof, only to find that he was never registered in the wage bill for NYFC to begin with. So, to try and save some face, the MSL and the NYFC claimed that he had signed for the MC franchise (the company that owns both teams) and that he was loaned by it to City. But the EPL does not allow third-party ownership and came investigating at City only to find out that Frank had signed with City, the club, from the beginning so there was no infringement of EPL rules. All City did was sign a (devious) free agent on a season long contract. The rest of the charade was simply a publicity stunt to sell some NYFC season tickets and Lampard shirts and for Frank to try to preserve his public image and marketability.

"signed a commitment"! WTF does that even mean?! The master manipulator strikes again!

Not saying it will happen, just that it could. My point was that you can't base a decision on hypotherticals like that. Most likely, neither Salah nor Schurrle will hit form because neither is getting regular football and both seem to be struggling with the "philosophy" of the team.

And if Salah suddenly finds his Basel form and Andre keeps on getting worse, the German does not play a single more game till the end of the season, his value plummets and we would have wasted 30m for absolutely nothing. Hypothetical is a two way street.

Btw, I don't think it will happen because quite frankly the figure sounds like bullshit. But even if that is true, I honestly doubt it'll happen unless Jose has some replacement lined up in this window.

And Andre is setting the world alight? Like I said, at worst, if we do not sign a replacement in this window, we lose a bit of quality on a squad rotation player. Might cost us a couple of points if we get lengthy injuries to the main 3 AMs, but self destruct? Come off it!

LOL The maximum allowed contract in the EPL is 5.5 years. But I guess facts are not important in a story like this....

Could even now hijack the City deal for Bony Don't over-exaggerate. At worst Salah takes his minutes and we would lose some quality on a squad rotation player. "self-destruct"

Coincidentally...erm...this is kind if awkward...but I was just reading today that Wisey's son has just signed a one year contract....with Arsenal! How about Chopper or Ossie? Pretty sure neither is going to join a rival soon

Hey, no one is talking about the fact that we shipped 5 against a painfully average Tottenham. Long live the Messi rumors!

Done. Log in remains the same.

No doubt the first step to fund the Messi transfer

Even a business can be legally punished for false advertisement of product!

I love the guy, but for 30m, I'd buy him the plane ticket to Germany myself!