Thibaut Courtois

[Namika 922]

Atletico should respect that clause and not play him against us or pay us if we meet.

[Thendo 1,088]

Uefa folding because of the media pressure much?

[Strike 6,996]

Clubs mutually agreed clause. Why should UEFA interfere?

[Sovieticus 743]

Clubs mutually agreed clause. Why should UEFA interfere?

Because they can

[Strike 6,996]

Because they can

read that UEFA said last year they can have no interference on contracts regarding Celtic player on loan at Elfsborg

[DH1988 1,206]

because its us and Uefa hates us.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

UEFA on a similar case about a Celtic player last summer:

"Any agreement between the two clubs that this player wouldn’t play against Celtic should Elfsborg be drawn against them is purely between the clubs.

"UEFA would not have any involvement or consideration of this agreement, it would be neither endorsed or enforceable by UEFA."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/233438-mo-bangura-could-feature-against-celtic-for-loan-club-if-elfsborg/

And people say it's all conspiracy theories when we say that UEFA hate us.

[Special Juan 27,113]

UEFAlona

[johnnythefirst 1,076]

I don't see the big issue about Courtois playing against Chelsea. He gets to experience a UCL Semi-final and we get to test ourselves against a solid defence which happens to include Courtois!

See, that's the spirit.

[didierforever 7,349]

Son of a bitch.

Lol at people saying we were the "unsporting" party here.Just fuck uefa. Corrupt assholes.

[kellzfresh 7,226]

I can't fanthom why pple hate us so much. Its beyond ridiculous

[johnnythefirst 1,076]

UEFA on a similar case about a Celtic player last summer:

"Any agreement between the two clubs that this player wouldn’t play against Celtic should Elfsborg be drawn against them is purely between the clubs.

"UEFA would not have any involvement or consideration of this agreement, it would be neither endorsed or enforceable by UEFA."

http://sport.stv.tv/football/clubs/celtic/233438-mo-bangura-could-feature-against-celtic-for-loan-club-if-elfsborg/

And people say it's all conspiracy theories when we say that UEFA hate us.

Out of the same statement:

I don't really see the inconsistency here to be honest, in fact the whole statement was made after the player was already proven eligible to play.

"As we, in line with the FIFA regulations on status and transfer of players, consider a loan to be a transfer, we do not have any regulations regarding players not playing against their parent club whilst on loan to another club," the governing body told STV.

"If a player is duly registered on the player list of IF Elfsborg then he can play against any team that Elfsborg are drawn against.

"Any agreement between the two clubs that this player wouldn’t play against Celtic should Elfsborg be drawn against them is purely between the clubs.

"UEFA would not have any involvement or consideration of this agreement, it would be neither endorsed or enforceable by UEFA. (meaning: you can agree on whatever you want, but UEFA rules are UEFA rules)"

[Kieran. 6,317]

Fuck off you dirty cheating bastards.

[kellzfresh 7,226]

Fuck, they knew they're giving us athletico that's why they canceled our clause just before the draw. Cheaters!!!

[yuvala 2,167]

I hope ATM would respect our deal

[ceefcee 7]

Well, it's confirmed, were drawn against a.madrid..

[HD3D 1,038]

Goddamn UEFA mafia.

Hopefully Abramovich will put Atletico on the ropes on this one.

We loaned them one of the best goal keepers in the world, who is one of the many reasons they are where they are now. Chelsea gave Atletico a HUGE boost and the only thing we asked in return was that they respect THEIR half of the contract which states the player can't be used against Chelsea. If they are unable to keep their part of the agreement, then this means there shouldn't be an agreement in the first place and the player must return to us next season.

Also, since this is a club that doesn't respect the contracts it signs, then Chelsea should abstain from loaning any other of its young stars to this club in the future. See how they like that.

[CHOULO19 24,332]

Out of the same statement:

I don't really see the inconsistency here to be honest, in fact the whole statement was made after the player was already proven eligible to play.

"As we, in line with the FIFA regulations on status and transfer of players, consider a loan to be a transfer, we do not have any regulations regarding players not playing against their parent club whilst on loan to another club," the governing body told STV.

"If a player is duly registered on the player list of IF Elfsborg then he can play against any team that Elfsborg are drawn against.

"Any agreement between the two clubs that this player wouldn’t play against Celtic should Elfsborg be drawn against them is purely between the clubs.

"UEFA would not have any involvement or consideration of this agreement, it would be neither endorsed or enforceable by UEFA. (meaning: you can agree on whatever you want, but UEFA rules are UEFA rules)"

No that's not what it meant. They said we do not get involved in clauses of this nature between the two clubs. Now they're getting involved and nullifying similar clause that was agreed on by both teams. They did not say that the clause is against UEFA regulations as they are saying now. They are doing the exact opposite even if the end result is the same.