Reply With QuoteWe must be fast approaching the reported transfer fee.Originally Posted by jon1959
| + Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Paul Abbandonato's Wales Online piece this morning claims to lift the lid on the dispute.
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...court-23468688
Not sure it adds much to the previously discussed hints, snippets and informed speculation about the basis of the case. It is also confusingly written in places and light on analysis.
However, the key points:
1. Cardiff claim the Sala contract was not completed before his death because (although registered by the FAW) there was an outstanding clause to resolve about the signing on fee, and the transfer had not been registered with the EPL.
If Abbandonato is right the EPL registration formed part of the transfer and was not something Cardiff needed to do after the transfer. That seems odd to me but maybe right. Emiliano Sala was due to sign amended/corrected/compliant forms on this return to Cardiff.
2. Cardiff claim that at the time of his death Sala was (under French contract law) still a Nantes player - his Nantes contract had not at that point been terminated.
3. Abbandonato suggests (but doesn't provide corroboration) that Cardiff City's insurers also believe that Emiliano Sala was a Nantes player at the time of his death and he was not covered by the club's policy.
4. Cardiff regard the announcement of Sala's signing with all the photos and press release as a publicity event that is not relevant to the contract status at the time.
5. Abbandonato says (based on 'club sources') that Cardiff asked CAS to adjudicate on whether Nantes was a party to organising the fatal flight (through Willie and Mark McKays?) and has some legal and financial liability as a result.
6. If Cardiff lose the CAS case they are likely to take civil action against Nantes - suing them (in the French courts?) for financial losses on the transfer (fees and legal costs) and also for loss of income from the club's relegation from the EPL - making the impossible to prove claim that Sala would or might have kept us up. (Echoes of Boro and Wycombe against Derby). If Cardiff win they will let it rest.
Cardiff have employed 16 lawyers on the case; Nantes 18.
We must be fast approaching the reported transfer fee.
Billionaires don't care about money, it's all about power.
There’s only one winner here.
Thanks for the summary Jon
Or you could say 34!
An almost totally one-sided report, as you'd expect given the source of his information. Interesting note regarding the insurance, though. I've always felt that was the key to this situation. If Sala was properly insured by the club, I'm sure they'd have paid Nantes and claimed on the insurance. However, it seems likely the player wasn't properly insured, so the club are attempting to swerve the fee.
What an unsavoury business.
It is. And likely to drag on for a good while.
I wonder what happens if the insurers still determine that Emiliano Sala was a Nantes player when he died but CAS backs FIFA in saying that his transfer was complete (or complete enough)? I assume the insurers will accept the final judgement from CAS, but maybe not?
I don't like the way the contract status and the organisation of the flights are brought together - but it does look as if McKay (and therefore Nantes) didn't believe the transfer was all tied up when Cardiff did their publicity splash.
If it was all done why would they arrange and pay (who paid?) for a private flight at that time. McKay claims he did it because he's such a selfless and caring person and he wanted to do a favour to a young man left stranded at the mercy of commercial flights arranged by Cardiff. Does anyone believe that? I think he did it because he was concerned to get a revised and compliant contract signed as quickly and smoothly as possible so he could get his agent's fee paid. With tragic consequences.
Who was the player's agent?
The original contract between the club and sala was rejected by the premier league as sala had insisted on the signing on fee in one payment to which the club had agreed.
EPL rules allow that a signing on fee must be paid across the length of a contract so in salas case a 3 year contract meant 3 seperate annual payments.
Sala had not signed the new correct acceptable contract to the EPL prior to his passing although Nantes could argue that a football club with a decent football secretary would have known the rules and not produced the first contract.
the picture of sala signing his contract was a publicity stunt to placate the fans at the time.
That's interesting, Steve. I wonder if the contract would have been considered fine in France? It seems odd (to me at least) that a British club would consider a transfer null and void simply because the contract they had produced had been deemed unacceptable under their own league's rules. It sounds very one-sided if those are the only grounds for appeal. I'd have thought the transfer itself would be a separate issue to the player's contract, but it's all guesswork on my part of course.
https://www.theguardian.com/football...o-sala-cardiff
English FA rules insist clubs and players may deal on a transfer only with people registered or licensed as an agent - McKay wasn’t
Meissa N'Diaye
But I have never seen any suggestion that he was involved in arranging or paying for the flights. McKay claims he (or his son) paid for the flights but maybe in the expectation that they would recover their costs from their employer - Nantes?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-47626855
It depends entirely on what is specified in the contract between the clubs, e.g. if it states that the contract is only complete when the player is properly registered at the EPL.
No shit.
The FA is understood to be taking the same view based on what has been made public: that McKay was not acting for Cardiff but for Nantes, when he had all the dealings with Cardiff and so cannot be said to have engaged in “intermediary activity” for a club under its jurisdiction.
Indeed. Nevertheless, Warnock was flying back and forth to France with him and two of his sons were on the books at Cardiff City...
im looking back at the bits and pieces i have Jon and it also says that the paperwork received from the French Fa and lodged with the premier league to say he was no longer registered with Nantes was dated 4 days after his passing. All this to one side though and surely he must have been insured with one of the clubs?
That's the thing that amazes me, although I guess the insurance companies are taking the same stance as Nantes and Cardiff, ie: that the player wasn't connected to whichever club their insurance covers at the time of his passing. Also, perhaps the insurance values greatly differ from the transfer value. Who knows?
I agree Dave his £15 million price tag was i believe considerably over the insurance value Nantes would have had on him as I believe he had been valued at £1.5 million in the previous transfer window. i know in steve borleys time he had to have players insured on the day he signed them but back then the club had football secretarys who knew their jobs and the rules
There is no winner just tragic loss of life In a world of corrupt sport run by money enjoyed by all .
He did it because he gets a huge cut of the fee doesn’t he? Isn’t it something like 2 million? Makes you wanna puke
Wasn’t the breakdown £8 million Nantes Chairman approx, £3 million to Mckays approx and the remainder to the Club. Both City and Nantes shafted.
3. Abbandonato suggests (but doesn't provide corroboration) that Cardiff City's insurers also believe that Emiliano Sala was a Nantes player at the time of his death and he was not covered by the club's policy.
The above suggests that Cardiff City had insured the player. Isn't that new information? While the insurers have taken the view they have that is meaningless if the Courts rule otherwise.
Insurance companies are rarely wrong in their assessments, risk management is their business and they only employ the best.
Posting Permissions