super_city_si
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2007
- Messages
- 48,881
What UEFA said though would nullify that agreement. Meaning Atleti can play Courtouis wihtout having to pay anything.des hardi said:
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
This weeks Champions League matches.
- Thread starter carlos tevez is a blue
- Start date
super_city_si
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2007
- Messages
- 48,881
Sneijder and Thiago. Kroos in the summer.samharris said:Sorry have been on the moon...who did the Scum get??
super_city_si said:What UEFA said though would nullify that agreement. Meaning Atleti can play Courtouis wihtout having to pay anything.des hardi said:super_city_si said:Just read that. Interesting wording too in that it states any private contract that attempts to exert influence is null and void too. I take it this should include any fiscal agreement CHelsea had to say Atleti must pay for Courtois to play?
yeah@3 million per tie/leg.
Not sure that's what is being said at all.
All that is being said is that any agreement to stop him playing would be nullified. Chelsea have confirmed he is free to pay . Its surely down to AM if they decide to play him or not. If they do hen they surely would be required to pay what they agreed in the loan agreement
super_city_si said:Sneijder and Thiago. Kroos in the summer.samharris said:Sorry have been on the moon...who did the Scum get??
no...semi final??
super_city_si
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 29 Dec 2007
- Messages
- 48,881
The way I read/understood it was that 'exerting influence' was not allowed no matter what agreement was in place. By demanding Atleti pay a fee, which they may not be able to afford, Chelsea are exerting influence on whether Courtois plays or not.terraloon said:super_city_si said:What UEFA said though would nullify that agreement. Meaning Atleti can play Courtouis wihtout having to pay anything.des hardi said:yeah@3 million per tie/leg.
Not sure that's what is being said at all.
All that is being said is that any agreement to stop him playing would be nullified. Chelsea have confirmed he is free to pay . Its surely down to AM if they decide to play him or not. If they do hen they surely would be required to pay what they agreed in the loan agreement
I don't know how people come to overrate R.Madrid every year?! I kmow Bayern has a fair share of defensive problems but R.Madrid is probably much worse. Varane is probably their best defender cause what Pepe and Ramos do is more like wrestling. Xabi Alonso is losing his luster as he is nit able to support the midfield defensively properly anymore. All they have to rely on is BBC and that is where they can falter vs Bayern who dont rely solely on individual brilliance but team play. Bring it on R.Madrid, La Bestia Negra is back!!! :D
IrelandSuperman
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Messages
- 1,690
This is what UEFA are saying. They mention influencing squad selection which quite clearly means no fees because 3M would influence Atleti's decision.super_city_si said:The way I read/understood it was that 'exerting influence' was not allowed no matter what agreement was in place. By demanding Atleti pay a fee, which they may not be able to afford, Chelsea are exerting influence on whether Courtois plays or not.terraloon said:super_city_si said:What UEFA said though would nullify that agreement. Meaning Atleti can play Courtouis wihtout having to pay anything.
Not sure that's what is being said at all.
All that is being said is that any agreement to stop him playing would be nullified. Chelsea have confirmed he is free to pay . Its surely down to AM if they decide to play him or not. If they do hen they surely would be required to pay what they agreed in the loan agreement
super_city_si said:The way I read/understood it was that 'exerting influence' was not allowed no matter what agreement was in place. By demanding Atleti pay a fee, which they may not be able to afford, Chelsea are exerting influence on whether Courtois plays or not.terraloon said:super_city_si said:What UEFA said though would nullify that agreement. Meaning Atleti can play Courtouis wihtout having to pay anything.
Not sure that's what is being said at all.
All that is being said is that any agreement to stop him playing would be nullified. Chelsea have confirmed he is free to pay . Its surely down to AM if they decide to play him or not. If they do hen they surely would be required to pay what they agreed in the loan agreement
That's one take on it just as another would be both parties entered into an agreement which clearly mapped out what would be paid and when and yes that could alter as the term of the loan moved forward.
Chelsea have not said he cant play, in fact they are saying little other than he can play. Sometimes you strengthen your position by saying nothing.
In this case UEFA have made a statement that is a direct contradiction of what they said earlier and in truth the legal agreement was freely signed by both clubs . UEFA is a governing body and not a court of law.Chelsea in reality don't need to say anything more . AM then have a big decision to make.
If they play him them they have no idea how Chelsea will react Chelsea probably wont bother going via UEFA they will go direct to either the Spanish courts or CAS .
sam-caddick
Well-Known Member
I think the winner of the Chelsea - Atletico tie will win it, both teams are set up to be the perfect cup team.