Ho Say Liao, Chelski kenna ban!!

[Porfirio Rubirosa]

you still don't get it bro...its all about regulations and compliance...which are plain clear and simple to all clubs and the authorities...i suggest you go read my post (in particular the underlined bits) again...this is not just about a simple inducement to breach contract case...it goes further than that...all european clubs are or ought to be aware of these issues viz uefa and fifa regulations...

Porfirio
My point is that if the big club and the player have breached a contract, then let them pay whatever penalties are stated in the contract. Breach of contract happens all the time and the parties settle according to the terms of the contract. If there are insufficient clauses in the contract to "protect" the small club, then that's really too bad for them. The football authorities shouldn't make it out to be a "good" vs "bad" issue and punish the big club beyond what is in the contract.
What's your point?

 

[Gallego99]

Man United Threaten Le Havre With Legal Action Over Paul Pogba
Red Devils are taking an aggressive stance.

Manchester United have reacted strongly to recent reports that they could be next in line for the kind of FIFA sanctions suffered by Chelsea, in which the Londoners were banned from signing players for the next two transfer windows following their controversial signing of Gael Kakuta from RC Lens.

The Red Devils have asserted that everything relating to their signing of Paul Pogba from Le Havre was in order, after the French outfit claimed that the youngster, like Kakuta, was lured to Old Trafford with the help of financial inducements offered to his family.

United have maintained that they could not have induced the player to break his contract in France, as there was no contract in place for him. Le Havre had claimed that the matter was being referred to FIFA, but the world governing body is yet to confirm receipt of the complaint.

A statement on United's official website reads:

"In response to the wholly unfounded comments widely reported in the media of Le Havre AC President, Jean-Pierre Louvel, Manchester United wishes to categorically confirm that as a matter of club policy, and in accordance with the applicable football regulations, it does not offer inducements to the parents of players that sign for the club, such as monetary payments or the purchase of houses.

"Manchester United has today written to Le Havre AC to put it on notice that action will be taken if such allegations are repeated in relation to the transfer of Paul Pogba."

United have also affirmed that all documentation relating to the move has been verified by the game's governing bodies in England, and that they are ready to prove their case legally should the situation demand it.

The statement continues: "Manchester United is entirely satisfied that the transfer of Paul Pogba has been conducted in accordance with the regulations set down by the world governing body, FIFA. Manchester United is ready to defend any claim brought against it by Le Havre at FIFA.

"It is to be noted that all contractual documentation relating to the player’s registration with the club has already been fully ratified by The Football Association and the Premier League."

Goal.com

 

[jw5]

you still don't get it bro...its all about regulations and compliance...which are plain clear and simple to all clubs and the authorities...i suggest you go read my post (in particular the underlined bits) again...this is not just about a simple inducement to breach contract case...it goes further than that...all european clubs are or ought to be aware of these issues viz uefa and fifa regulations...

I understand your point.
What I'm saying is that the regulations are not clear. Neither are the penalties for breaching the regulations. When the regulations or the penalties are not clear, the issue becomes one which comes under common law. (or common sense or what a "reasonable" man would do). And the law may not have been broken, even though it may be deemed 'unethical" by some parties.

 

[Ramseth]

Break contract, pay damages for breaking contract, that's all. In this respect, FIFA breached that principle. It restricts young players from their opportunities to play with bigger clubs. But of course, FIFA come from the point that big financial muscles stifle the chance for smaller clubs to grow their own players.

On the balance, I think that a person's contractual duty to any club or any establishment or anybody, should be resolvable and revocable by sufficient financial compensation. We're living in an age of contract law, not slavery bondage. What the FIFA ruling and punishment suggest is that anyone under 16 signing a contract is under bondage, unredeemable even with sufficient financial compensation.