Diego Costa

[Marvin123 530]

50m to Milan I'm reading today, evening standard so normally reliable

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

[xPetrCechx 13,570]

[Special Juan 28,124]

Funny how the use the word 'behavior' how fucking ironic.

[Jype 6,398]

If Atletico don't step up their game and make a serious offer, I say let this cunt rot with the U23s till next summer and then sell him for £20M with a year left on his contract. Would serve him right if he missed the World Cup because of his childish behavior. 

Would also set an example what he's doing is simply not acceptable. Costa made his bed with the numerous transfer requests in the past and now he has the nerve to play the victim card when the club finally gave up and told him he's not wanted in the team anymore. It's obvious that all this public 'I want Atletico and nothing else' stuff is just his way of doing what he can to lower the price because Atletico can't otherwise afford him. Giving in to such extortion would not set a good precedent. 

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

6 minutes ago, Jype said:

If Atletico don't step up their game and make a serious offer, I say let this cunt rot with the U23s till next summer and

And then his agent will fill up a formal complaint and he'll legally terminate Diego' contract, so Chelsea would receive nothing.

[Yeboii 1,844]

9 minutes ago, pHaRaOn said:

And then his agent will fill up a formal complaint and he'll legally terminate Diego' contract, so Chelsea would receive nothing.

There is precedence for clubs to alienate first team players in the youth squads. For example, Florent Malouda.

[Jype 6,398]

16 minutes ago, pHaRaOn said:

And then his agent will fill up a formal complaint and he'll legally terminate Diego' contract, so Chelsea would receive nothing.

On what grounds though? It's not a breach of contract to make a player train with the reserves and not play him, he'll still gets his paycheck every two weeks as long as he shows up for training and that's as far as the club's contractual obligations go. The club don't have to allow him join another team while still under contract and he's sure as hell not contractually bound to play with the first team, so I fail to see how they could 'legally terminate' the contract just because Chelsea are refusing to let him join Atletico unless the player's asking price is met. If that were the case, then Virgil Van Dijk would also be moving to Liverpool on a free after he 'legally terminated' his contract at Soton.

Wouldn't be the first time for a club to do that. Man United froze out Schweinsteiger last season for more than half a year before he finally left, also Man City told Yaya Toure he's banned from the training ground and only few months later welcomed him back after he apologized to Guardiola. Let's not forget Chelsea also had Florent Malouda sit out the last year of his contract with the youth players in 12/13 and I'm sure there are other cases too.

[RoyalBlues 4,050]

We will give him Malouda treatment then. Welcome to Chelsea Reserves.

[coolhead23 1,147]

13 minutes ago, pHaRaOn said:

And then his agent will fill up a formal complaint and he'll legally terminate Diego' contract, so Chelsea would receive nothing.

Formal Complaint ...  Against what? The services of Costa are owned by Chelsea solely for the remaining 2 yrs (I guess that is what is left), they can use Costa the way they like and no ones will have the balls to object it legally. 

Regarding the Behavior stuff, Ppl just want to have their 15 mins of fame and they will come up with any BS that is possible. I hope the board are strong about this one and should let Costa see out his contract with the reserves ... They shouldnt be running to make money out of it. 

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

16 minutes ago, Yeboii said:

There is precedence for clubs to alienate first team players in the youth squads. For example, Florent Malouda.

Yes, Florent Malouda, who then left next summer for free.

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

16 minutes ago, Jype said:

On what grounds though? It's not a breach of contract to make a player train with the reserves and not play him, he'll still gets his paycheck every two weeks as long as he shows up for training and that's as far as the club's contractual obligations go. The club don't have to allow him join another team while still under contract and he's sure as hell not contractually bound to play with the first team, so I fail to see how they could 'legally terminate' the contract just because Chelsea are refusing to let him join Atletico unless the player's asking price is met. If that were the case, then Virgil Van Dijk would also be moving to Liverpool on a free after he 'legally terminated' his contract at Soton.

Wouldn't be the first time for a club to do that. Man United froze out Schweinsteiger last season for more than half a year before he finally left, also Man City told Yaya Toure he's banned from the training ground and only few months later welcomed him back after he apologized to Guardiola. Let's not forget Chelsea also had Florent Malouda sit out the last year of his contract with the youth players in 12/13 and I'm sure there are other cases too.

Yes, it is. On ground of FIFA rules. Article 15.

"An established professional who has, in the course of the season, appeared in fewer than ten per cent of the offi cial matches in which his club has been involved may terminate his contract prematurely on the ground of sporting just cause".

[Jype 6,398]

Just now, pHaRaOn said:

Yes, Florent Malouda, who then left next summer for free.

Exactly, after his contract ran out. With Malouda that was the club's plan all along and it worked. There was no 'complaint' from Malouda that ended the contract earlier than agreed, he accepted his fate and happily trained with the youngsters while still getting paid £100K a week or whatever he was on. 

Costa on the other hand still has two years left in his deal. Atletico are offering £26M for his services while the club are asking for closer to £50M. If a deal can't be reached, it's not a breach of contract to sit him in the stands for one year, effectively ending his chances of making the World Cup, and then selling next year for that £26M or whatever would be on offer at the time.

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

10 minutes ago, coolhead23 said:

Formal Complaint ...  Against what? The services of Costa are owned by Chelsea solely for the remaining 2 yrs (I guess that is what is left), they can use Costa the way they like and no ones will have the balls to object it legally. 

Regarding the Behavior stuff, Ppl just want to have their 15 mins of fame and they will come up with any BS that is possible. I hope the board are strong about this one and should let Costa see out his contract with the reserves ... They shouldnt be running to make money out of it. 

No, they can't. This is not slavery. Players have their rights too.

[pHaRaOn 2,131]

1 minute ago, Jype said:

Costa on the other hand still has two years left in his deal. Atletico are offering £26M for his services while the club are asking for closer to £50M. If a deal can't be reached, it's not a breach of contract to sit him in the stands for one year, effectively ending his chances of making the World Cup, and then selling next year for that £26M or whatever would be on offer at the time.

 

3 minutes ago, pHaRaOn said:

Yes, it is. On ground of FIFA rules. Article 15.

"An established professional who has, in the course of the season, appeared in fewer than ten per cent of the offi cial matches in which his club has been involved may terminate his contract prematurely on the ground of sporting just cause".