Chelsea banned for TWO transfer windows

[Atomiswave 6,118]

According to SportsMail FIFA only recently 'updated' their rules which lead to City's more favourable outcome. An option not made available to Chelsea;

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7353203/Manchester-City-avoid-FIFA-transfer-ban-breaching-rules.html

 

But last month FIFA introduced a new regulation that states that sanctions can be reduced if a club accepts responsibility for breaking the rules and that was not an option open to Chelsea or other clubs, particularly in Spain, that have been hit with transfer bans in recent seasons.

Indeed Sportsmail understands that, while the case dates back to 2014, it was only last week that City's lawyers made their final submission, with a decision arriving on Tuesday afternoon.

Fifa said City had breached article 19 of its regulations, which states that 'international transfers of players are only permitted if the player is over the age of 18'.

'The Fifa disciplinary committee has sanctioned English club Manchester City FC for breaches relating to the international transfer and registration of players under the age of 18,' said football's world governing body in a statement.

 

 

How most convenient.......that Club is shady from top to buttom.

[Nicco 927]

23 minutes ago, Atomiswave said:

According to SportsMail FIFA only recently 'updated' their rules which lead to City's more favourable outcome. An option not made available to Chelsea;

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7353203/Manchester-City-avoid-FIFA-transfer-ban-breaching-rules.html

 

But last month FIFA introduced a new regulation that states that sanctions can be reduced if a club accepts responsibility for breaking the rules and that was not an option open to Chelsea or other clubs, particularly in Spain, that have been hit with transfer bans in recent seasons.

Indeed Sportsmail understands that, while the case dates back to 2014, it was only last week that City's lawyers made their final submission, with a decision arriving on Tuesday afternoon.

Fifa said City had breached article 19 of its regulations, which states that 'international transfers of players are only permitted if the player is over the age of 18'.

'The Fifa disciplinary committee has sanctioned English club Manchester City FC for breaches relating to the international transfer and registration of players under the age of 18,' said football's world governing body in a statement.

 

 

How most convenient.......that Club is shady from top to buttom.

Fucking rats.

[Atomiswave 6,118]

5 minutes ago, Nicco said:

Fucking rats.

They had 5 fucking years to punish these shady cunts......what the fuck is going on here. How much money they must have received under the table, not only for this but overall. I would jail anyone that had anything to do with it, anyone who was involved, anyone that profited etc. When platini and blater was bent to the core then many are and will be. Current regime is too, fa included. Its been bent for a long time at some level thats for sure. When big cash is involved, expect it.

[the wes 7,212]

I'm not shocked man city got off with a transfer ban Sheikh's and FIFA are best of buddy's the Sheikh's pay off FIFA to get the world cup in Qatar 

[Blue Armour 4,448]

Fucking bullshit again. Bunch of scumbags.

Hate FIFA. Hate Bayern

I hope both those entities go into fucking ruins.

[the wes 7,212]

[the wes 7,212]

Court of Arbitration for Sport release latest hearings list

https://www.football.london/chelsea-fc/news/cas-latest-chelsea-transfer-ban-16608914

[Laylabelle 9,536]

As if the ban will be lifted in January. Be lovely but doubt it

[OhForAGreavsie 6,077]

22 hours ago, Laylabelle said:

As if the ban will be lifted in January. Be lovely but doubt it

In a recent presser Frank specifically mentioned that the ban included January, which suggests that this is the club's working assumption.

I would love to know the thinking behind CFC's decision not to ask for the ban to be suspended. If it really is because we want to minimise the risk of an extension, then we must have very little confidence in the strength of our appeal. CAS will decide if the appeal is valid or frivolous on its own merits. Even if they ultimately uphold the ban, CAS can still decide that at least we had good grounds for the appeal. Only if they don't think that, only if they think we've just wasted everybody's time, will there be a risk of further sanction. Hoping that, in those circumstances, they'll take it easy on us because we didn't ask for a suspension, makes it seem like we don't have much faith in our case. Makes it seem we're more worried about the ban being extended, than we are hopeful it will be overturned.

[manpe 10,861]

46 minutes ago, OhForAGreavsie said:

In a recent presser Frank specifically mentioned that the ban included January, which suggests that this is the club's working assumption.

I would love to know the thinking behind CFC's decision not to ask for the ban to be suspended. If it really is because we want to minimise the risk of an extension, then we must have very little confidence in the strength of our appeal. CAS will decide if the appeal is valid or frivolous on its own merits. Even if they ultimately uphold the ban, CAS can still decide that at least we had good grounds for the appeal. Only if they don't think that, only if they think we've just wasted everybody's time, will there be a risk of further sanction. Hoping that, in those circumstances, they'll take it easy on us because we didn't ask for a suspension, makes it seem like we don't have much faith in our case. Makes it seem we're more worried about the ban being extended, than we are hopeful it will be overturned.

Because they know they're guilty. Hiring Lampard and resorting to youth was a deflection tactic by them to minimize bad press, no way would they have gone down that route if they hadn't fucked up.

[Jase 43,479]

TBF, even if we can buy in January, who can we realistically get? No clubs are sell their prized assets without asking for a big fee.

[Vesper 30,224]

26 minutes ago, Jason said:

TBF, even if we can buy in January, who can we realistically get? No clubs are sell their prized assets without asking for a big fee.

the only two of my prime targets that would be remotely available would be the superb winger Mikel Oyarzabal (Real Sociedad)  and the young 17yo potental superstar MF from Ajax, Ryan Gravenberch, who is playing with their junior team

and my wild card, AMF/Winger/CMF hybrid Talisca, from Guangzhou Evergrande which is apparently a deal only me and the now poofed UJ were the only people in football pushing, lolol

also a drop-down targets, RW  Samuel Chukwueze from Villarreal and RB Youcef Atal (OGC Nice)   

all the rest are on title chasers (League or Europe), other than Ben Chillwell (Leicester)  and NO WAY should we drop the 70 or 80m quid they will demand on him

and then possibly (and he is also overpriced and Palace may be in a relation battle and will not sell) Zaha

 Iñaki Williams would have been PERFECT, but he renewed for NINE years, and now has an insane 140m euro release clause

Ex-Chels nightmare mistake release (fuck the board in 2014, WHAT a disastrous year we had, KDB et al) Declan Rice and some backup keepers  and other positions not in critical need are the only others on non-chasers (and do not help us, I see o reason ATM for rice at the crazy £70-80m plus the Hammers will want (UNLESS we are looking at him as a CB, then that might get interstice)

 

 

[the wes 7,212]

Chelsea appeal transfer ban as chiefs plan to use Man City case to clear way for signings

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/football/1175477/Chelsea-transfer-news-Man-City-Court-of-Arbitration-for-Sport

[the wes 7,212]

Chelsea broke Fifa transfer rules by paying a 14-year-old Austrian and then “parked” him with another club until he was legally allowed to sign for them, according to Der Spiegel

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea/chelsea-broke-fifa-transfer-rules-to-sign-14yearold-thierno-ballo-a4235921.html

[Atomiswave 6,118]

52 minutes ago, the wes said:

Chelsea broke Fifa transfer rules by paying a 14-year-old Austrian and then “parked” him with another club until he was legally allowed to sign for them, according to Der Spiegel

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea/chelsea-broke-fifa-transfer-rules-to-sign-14yearold-thierno-ballo-a4235921.html

Stupid of us......but if one thinks we are the only one guilty of this then good luck to them. They all fucking do it.

[Vesper 30,224]

7 hours ago, the wes said:

Chelsea broke Fifa transfer rules by paying a 14-year-old Austrian and then “parked” him with another club until he was legally allowed to sign for them, according to Der Spiegel

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/chelsea/chelsea-broke-fifa-transfer-rules-to-sign-14yearold-thierno-ballo-a4235921.html

this is a new charge? 

ffs

[the wes 7,212]

1 minute ago, Vesper said:

this is a new charge? 

ffs

I hope not 

[Vesper 30,224]

6 minutes ago, the wes said:

I hope not 

it sure looks like it, grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

IF we get nailed again Roman HAS to sell the fucking club, as we are now a full-blown rogue entity

this is just breaking my heart 

[NikkiCFC 8,334]

Thank you FIFA! ❤️

[Atomiswave 6,118]

Now we may have done shady shit once again, but fifa and uefa are such corrupt entities. Does not matter who is in charge, they are still like an endless pit of darkness. LIke their pals in fa.