Two Year Academy Transfer Ban Imposed On City

Depends when it starts - if it's 1 July 2017 then it's only one year
Actually yeah... so three years suspended means we are on some kind of probation for three years after it? Why do they bother saying it's 2years at all then, lawyers never say anything clearly do they?
 
So as stated in an earlier post ,all this does is punish English youth players who could have joined the CFA but now can't ,So potentially in theory the English national team could suffer somewhere down the line but other countries could gain due to us concentrating on overseas youth . But it's ok the FA have got 3 hundred thousand out of the cash point that is City .
 
Actually yeah... so three years suspended means we are on some kind of probation for three years after it? Why do they bother saying it's 2years at all then, lawyers never say anything clearly do they?
This was Liverpools ban: 'The ruling means Liverpool cannot sign players who have been registered to another Premier League or English Football League academy for two years. The second year of the ban is suspended for a three-year period.'

The same as us, 1 year ban as long as we don't do it again.
 
Well one English "wonderkid" this means we will probably miss out on is from the telegraph article I linked to a while back: Ben Knight from Ipswich, this could be why we never heard anything about it again?
 
I'm not surprised at all. The whole business of getting youth players seems shady as fuck. All clubs are up to dirty tricks and tactics to try and lure the exciting prospects to their clubs so as I said I'm not surprised we got done for it. Don't think we'll be the last club banned either. They're all up to it.
 
So we didn't offer any bribes or financial enticement... we only offered to take them on at our academy? Fair enough the rules are the rules but morally we haven't done much wrong in my eyes, except offer them a much better chance at making a good career for themselves with a much better academy, nothing shady about that.
 
Isn't Marwood nominally in charge of the academy? **** needs to pull his finger out, he's got more resources at hand than any person in an equivalent role at another club, no excuse for this shit.
 
Premier league judge jury and executioner. Isn't it amazing that the two major premier league rivals in the locality of the rags and in direct competition for local talent are the ones found guilty..,,
 
So we didn't offer any bribes or financial enticement... we only offered to take them on at our academy? Fair enough the rules are the rules but morally we haven't done much wrong in my eyes, except offer them a much better chance at making a good career for themselves with a much better academy, nothing shady about that.

Big clubs can exploit parents and children by giving them false hope (deliberately, or simply because parents themselves can get carried away with dreams etc). It's dangerous, because the best interests of a young player aren't just about the biggest club with the best facilities. It's also important for smaller clubs to be able to invest in, and develop young players without the threat of big clubs cherry picking players on a seeming whim, and in large numbers - before ditching them. Giving someone a 1 in a million chance of playing for a PL club is not always a better deal than a 1 in 1000 chance of playing for a championship or lower league club.
 
Not in the least suprised. Shameful. Even the most positive account of what's been going on shows It's been a game of how far you can stretch the rules. Total disrespect for the letter of the law, let alone the spirit.

We're not alone, and the rules could be better drawn up for the benefit of the kids (rather than the academies), but that doesn't excuse us.
 
Big clubs can exploit parents and children by giving them false hope (deliberately, or simply because parents themselves can get carried away with dreams etc). It's dangerous, because the best interests of a young player aren't just about the biggest club with the best facilities. It's also important for smaller clubs to be able to invest in, and develop young players with the threat of big clubs cherry picking players on a seeming whim, and in large numbers - before ditching them. Giving someone a 1 in a million chance of playing for a PL club is not always a better deal than a 1 in 1000 chance of playing for a championship or lower league club.
I disagree with that, I'm not defending the breaking of the rules(we know the rules or should do and we should follow them) but from a moral standpoint and the best interests of these kids the talk of "false hope" is just rubbish... we have one of, if not THE best setup around in the UK. Put it this way who'd have a better chance of making a success of themselves a player at ours or someone at a small club with less resources, worse coaches, less staff, less attention to detail, don't we have an on campus college now for our academy?

Also we aren't guaranteeing anything it's up to them to make the best of the opportunities they have, it's not immoral, if we were bribing parents and offering them paychecks you'd have a point but with regards to these kids themselves it's the exact opposite of we don't just dump them if they end up not being good enough either(we prepare them to be successful whether it's at our club or not, we try and find them clubs if they are being moved on) I don't know where you've got that idea from. The only people who lose out here are the smaller clubs who want a payday, that's all this is about money for smaller clubs(maybe there could be a clause when they take them on should he make it to the first team? One that all prem clubs have to agree to). I'm all for keeping smaller clubs afloat but do they really "deserve" it though? Most of the time it's just pot luck that they have them due to their location and nothing else.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top