+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
https://www.theguardian.com/football...-emiliano-sala
Nantes demanded the fee after a few weeks.
Indeed they did. But how on earth does Nantes requesting a payment they believed they were legally overdue for a player they had sold to Cardiff equate to them attempting to involve City in 'tit for tat'? To me, it suggests they were attempting to get paid.
Remember, it was Cardiff City who announced to the world that they had signed Sala subject to international clearance, and there's never been any suggestion that the clearance wasn't forthcoming:
https://www.cardiffcityfc.co.uk/news...-is-a-bluebird
Until today, I honestly can't recall reading a single thing in the press from Nantes regarding the Sala business other than their initial statements after he'd gone missing. However, Cardiff have made plenty of noise about it. Indeed, the Chairman was talking to the French press within days.
Not a lot of point in pursuing Willie McKay for money as he is an unduscharged bankrupt under a bankruptcy restriction order until at least 2023.
The only hope of him being punished is in a criminal case under two options
1. He is due back in court shortly to try and defend a criminal claim against him for breaches of his bankruptcy
2. There may possibly in future be manslaughter charges relating to involvement in the plane crash
But isn't there also the problem of the usual add-ons to contracts like a part being payable after so many games and/or part payable if we didn't get relegated etc?
Things like this wiould affect the final cost shirley?
I would have thought it went without saying that any appearance bonuses would probably be null and void.
I’d be surprised if Nantes started asking for them aswell to be honest.
The crucial matter is who’s player he was, if he was ours then we have to pay Nantes the transfer fee. Even Cardiff seem to accept that as the point they seem to be arguing is he wasn’t our player when the flight took off.
So I presume FIFA's ruling [ or is it an opinion], hasn't taken the full contract details into consideration. Anyway, I don't think it's going to be a 'football' decision, more likely a point of contract law/ownership decided by lawyers specializing in this field, which is ultimately where any insurance underwriters will place their judgement..
First and foremost RIP Sala.
But what would have happened if he didnt die tragically like he did but played for us and in his first game he had an injury that ended his career.
Would we and he be insured for that ?
Would the club get an insurance pay out?
It can be weird, West Ham got nothing when Dean Ashton’s career was ended in England training.
West Ham did get money though - they sued the FA, Chelsea and Wright-Phillips.
So taking that into account we should sue the Pilot, the Firm the Pilot was working for and the People who arranged the flight ( which maybe the agent rather than the bankrupt McKay - let him sue his dad ).
Distancing themselves from McKay who was making disparaging comments about the club? The club were getting stick from the broadsheets and McKay who did his TV interview, so I don't think the club could have said nothing. They were reacting to Nantes' demands for payments while his body wasn't found, while McKay was throwing as much mud so his name wouldn't get tarnished.
This is a balanced and appropriate response that considers a wider array of variables. Unfortunately there are a few, apparently quite articulate, people on here who when they get into a debate (I’m being kind here) seem to find it rather difficult to see anyone else’s perspective no matter how rational.
I wish we'd paid it because of these
s2.jpeg
s.jpg
He was our player. If what happened hadn't happened any registration issues or paperwork issues would have been ironed out without any of us knowing and he would have played a week later. Saying "yeah but TECHNICALLY he wasn't wasn't ours" once he died is a bit tasteless in my opinion.
I understand the financial reasons and that the club would have been led by the insurers and that 10 million is 10 million but personally I don't like it. It's something about the club that I'm not proud of and that's not going to change.
By releasing official statements in answer to press reports, wasn't the club engaging in the exact kind of tit for tat that you accused Nantes (who actually said nothing publicly as far as I'm aware) of being guilty of?
We'll have to agree to disagree on this issue because I don't believe the club gained anything at all by releasing the statements they did. Indeed, it's looked to me like City have simply been desperately trying to publicly distance themselves from any blame for the Sala situation and point the fingers at others, but I cannot see the benefit of doing that. It's almost like the club has been protesting too much. When all is said and done, CCFC will or will not have to pay the transfer fee based on the legality or otherwise of the player's contract. Statements about the accident or the pilot or agents won't make a scrap of difference in reality, but I appreciate you see this differently and you are, of course, fully entitled to hold such an opinion.
I can't help wondering how you and others would have reacted had a rival club handled this situation in the way that Cardiff have, but given the unique circumstances it's thankfully something we'll never find out.
I think you are being very unfair to the club. As you say this was a unique situation and to a large extent the club has had to be guided by solicitors and insurance companies. I think they have done a decent job in these terrible circumstances.
From press reports the club has helped the family financially and were present at the funeral.