Sounds utterly deliciousImpeccable One said:Does this mean MCFC can SELL him to NYFC ? The FFP guardians will go f'in mental if that happens :)
Frank Lampard has been in the news quite a bit of late, and unfortunately for the player, it's been for all the wrong reasons. When Lampard extended his stay in the Premier League until the end of this season, MLS fans everywhere were rightfully furious about the situation.
MLS didn't do themselves any favors in dealing with the matter, by confirming that at no point was Lampard ever under contract with the league. Don Garber instead claimed that he had signed a deal with NYCFC's ownership group, with an agreement in place about where he'd be spending the two-year term of that contract decided by CFG. The Premier League followed up with some comments about the player's contractual situation today, via The Guardian:
"Frank Lampard is registered as a Manchester City player until the end of the 2014/15 season."
"The Premier League has sought and received assurances from Manchester City that there is no agreement in place between the Club or City Football Group with New York City FC relating to the player."
Why is this relevant to Chelsea? Let me direct you to this section of the FA's regulations banning third party ownership:
"Before registering a Player for a Club, The Association must be satisfied that there exist no agreements between the Club or the Player and a Third Party under which a Third Party will own or continue to own any registration or economic rights or the like in the Player following registration. "
The FA define third parties as follows:
"‘Third Party’ means a person or entity that is not a Club or an Overseas Club "
New York City FC would almost certainly qualify as an overseas club, meaning that Man City wouldn't be breaching any FA regulations by simply taking the player on loan. Initially, this appeared to be what had happened with the Chelsea legend, and Lampard himself has referred to the loan repeatedly since the start of the season.
NYCFC and MLS, however, are now insisting that there was never a loan, with MLS commissioner Don Garber going so far to suggest that Lampard was under contract with CFG , as opposed to either club, the entire time. CFG then registered the player with their Premier League club, with the intention of registering him with NYCFC at a later time*.
*This is not all that different from how Traffic used to operate in South America
This scenario, however, would almost certainly be in violation of the FA's regulations involving third party ownership. CFG can't possibly considered to be a club or overseas club, as defined by the regulations in question, and therefore Lampard would have to be under contract directly with Manchester City if he's got no ties to MLS. If that's not the case, City would almost certainly be looking at some pretty major sanctions, and rightfully so.
I'll be curious to see the CFG reaction to this FA statement, as well as the response from an expansion side looking to save a little bit of face with their angry fans. CFG seemed to have backed themselves into a corner though, where they either own up to lying to MLS supporters for the better part of six months, or leave their Premier League side exposed for violating a TPO ban.
Whatever happens though, it's just a shame that Frank Lampard is the player caught in the middle.
waspish said:Think our club are taking one for super frankie...
pheradin said:I think this might be more serious than everyone first imagined. Here's an article written today on the most popular Chelsea blog - don't let the fact that it's a Chelsea blog cloud your judgement. The authors are incredibly well informed about player and financial rules/regulations.
"The Premier League has sought and received assurances from Manchester City that there is no agreement in place between the Club or City Football Group with New York City FC relating to the player."
andrewmswift said:From a more intellectual American football mag:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.howlermagazine.com/real-farce-nycfc-frank-lampard-lampardgate/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.howlermagazine.com/real-farc ... mpardgate/</a>
THE REAL FARCE OF LAMPARDGATE
It's Not Him, It's Us
IMAGINE FRANK LAMPARD shuffling up to Manuel Pellegrini, doe-eyed, tear-stained sky blue jersey in hand – like a shinguarded Oliver Twist. His cushy “almost retirement” job wants him to report for work, move to the suburbs, and buy a mid-size luxury sedan. But he’s relishing the idea of one more run at the Premier League title. Because they’re nice people, Pellegrini and Jason Kreis honor the wishes of a soccer legend.
Now imagine Frank Lampard pleading with Sheikh Mansour to let him go to New York. Frank’s carrying Manchester City, which isn’t what he signed up for, and he’s dying to start his new life as New York’s newest sports hero. The Manchester City overlord’s eyes flash with rage. “No!” he shouts, “NYCFC is just another revenue stream! MLS is a joke and Landon Donovan is overrated.”
The truth of Lampard’s situation, like it so often does, lies somewhere between these extremes. There’s no doubting the Lampard loan/sale-thing is awkward for the City Football Group, and probably isn’t how they foresaw their start in New York. But the temper tantrum thrown by American soccer fans has been the real letdown.
One revelation from #LAMPARDGATE is that NYCFC has a supporters group. You’d be forgiven for not knowing about supporters of a team that has no stadium and has yet to play a match. They’re called the Third Rail. Last week, they sent out a press release to “publicly denounce the decision” to let Lampard stay in England. They had bought their tickets expecting to see Lampard, and now they feel duped.
Do Third Rail members support NYCFC or marquee signings? The tickets they bought were to see NYCFC, not Frank Lampard. And sure, it’s safer than hooliganism, but is there anything more lame than “Ultras” issuing a press release?
Let’s get some perspective: Frank Lampard will miss some early regular season games, sparing his knees the ordeal of Yankee Stadium’s turf-covered infield. But with new rules allowing more than half the teams to get into the playoffs, regular season games mean less than ever. All indicators are that Lampard will arrive stateside at some point, probably months before the postseason.
Soccer writers use words like “farce” and “travesty,” and type up fresh new hot takes whenever Lampard’s name is mentioned. PELLEGRINI SAYS HE DOESN’T KNOW WHEN LAMPARD WILL LEAVE, WHAT’S HE HIDING? There are actual “farces” in US Soccer: player allocation and contracts, Jurgen Klinsmann’s power-lust, Bofo’s haircut. The Lampard omnishambles is a minor bummer; a hiccup, not a travesty.
There’s no shame in admitting MLS is a step down from the Premier League. Frank Lampard and the global soccer community know this, and American denial doesn’t make it any less true. In fact, any conversation about growing the sport must start with an honest acknowledgment of where we are. This is new for a country that declares its best teams “World Champions,” but maybe, for once, we can just admit that we’re not the best. MLS may some day grow to rival the Premier league but, as other leagues demonstrate, success doesn’t have to mean superior to England.
NYCFC will, for the foreseeable future, play second fiddle to City Football Group’s orchestra. Say it out loud. Now breathe. See, it’s not so bad, is it?
Being second in line at Sheikh Mansour’s money trough – valued in the tens of billions – isn’t a hardship. City Football Group is pouring millions into soccer in America, and is involving MLS in an unprecedented international soccer partnership. Manchester City’s brand new academy is widely considered one of the best facilities in the world and yet NYCFC is derisively referred to as a “farm team.”
And what if it is, in some ways, a farm team? What if in the future, Manchester City sends some of its brightest young stars over to New York for a season’s seasoning? If that’s what it means to be downriver in this revenue stream, NYCFC shouldn’t resist the label.
That’s not to say the partnership is flawless. The CFG conglomerate is inherently murky and we may never know the extent of the shadiness in the Lampard deal. But the fact remains: Major League Soccer, despite its growth, still needs investment–we have been screaming that for years–and CFG is one of the biggest investors the league could have landed. If a billionaire decides he wants to throw a seemingly limitless pool of money at an American soccer team, is the league or its fans really in a position to refuse?
US Soccer leagues used to have to worry about folding completely. That was a crisis. #LAMPARDGATE is an inconvenience; a speed bump, not a spike strip. I hope we can avoid the short-sightedness of letting a few PR gaffes–and they are just gaffes–ruin what could be the biggest jackpot MLS has ever hit. Howler
Ryan Catanese is a producer for the Howler Radio and DUMMY podcasts. He also works in television, covering Texas politics. He tweets under the handle @rcatanese.
pheradin said:I think this might be more serious than everyone first imagined. Here's an article written today on the most popular Chelsea blog - don't let the fact that it's a Chelsea blog cloud your judgement. The authors are incredibly well informed about player and financial rules/regulations.
Frank Lampard has been in the news quite a bit of late, and unfortunately for the player, it's been for all the wrong reasons. When Lampard extended his stay in the Premier League until the end of this season, MLS fans everywhere were rightfully furious about the situation.
MLS didn't do themselves any favors in dealing with the matter, by confirming that at no point was Lampard ever under contract with the league. Don Garber instead claimed that he had signed a deal with NYCFC's ownership group, with an agreement in place about where he'd be spending the two-year term of that contract decided by CFG. The Premier League followed up with some comments about the player's contractual situation today, via The Guardian:
"Frank Lampard is registered as a Manchester City player until the end of the 2014/15 season."
"The Premier League has sought and received assurances from Manchester City that there is no agreement in place between the Club or City Football Group with New York City FC relating to the player."
Why is this relevant to Chelsea? Let me direct you to this section of the FA's regulations banning third party ownership:
"Before registering a Player for a Club, The Association must be satisfied that there exist no agreements between the Club or the Player and a Third Party under which a Third Party will own or continue to own any registration or economic rights or the like in the Player following registration. "
The FA define third parties as follows:
"‘Third Party’ means a person or entity that is not a Club or an Overseas Club "
New York City FC would almost certainly qualify as an overseas club, meaning that Man City wouldn't be breaching any FA regulations by simply taking the player on loan. Initially, this appeared to be what had happened with the Chelsea legend, and Lampard himself has referred to the loan repeatedly since the start of the season.
NYCFC and MLS, however, are now insisting that there was never a loan, with MLS commissioner Don Garber going so far to suggest that Lampard was under contract with CFG , as opposed to either club, the entire time. CFG then registered the player with their Premier League club, with the intention of registering him with NYCFC at a later time*.
*This is not all that different from how Traffic used to operate in South America
This scenario, however, would almost certainly be in violation of the FA's regulations involving third party ownership. CFG can't possibly considered to be a club or overseas club, as defined by the regulations in question, and therefore Lampard would have to be under contract directly with Manchester City if he's got no ties to MLS. If that's not the case, City would almost certainly be looking at some pretty major sanctions, and rightfully so.
I'll be curious to see the CFG reaction to this FA statement, as well as the response from an expansion side looking to save a little bit of face with their angry fans. CFG seemed to have backed themselves into a corner though, where they either own up to lying to MLS supporters for the better part of six months, or leave their Premier League side exposed for violating a TPO ban.
Whatever happens though, it's just a shame that Frank Lampard is the player caught in the middle.
Source: <a class="postlink" href="http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2015/1/8/7514099/chelsea-fc-manchester-city-new-york-city-football-club-frank-lampard-third-party-ownership-fa" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/ ... nership-fa</a>