Champions League Watch

They can obviously do whatever they want behind closed doors but if they get caught they would be braking the rules and can be sanctioned.


"Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned accordingly."

 

catch 22 then maybe,

what i mean is i could see a phantom injury happening so he doesn't play, but then wouldn't that **** them up for a title challenge, as they are currently top, they blag about a goalie being injured as they have some backhanded agreement with cheslea, could **** them up.

unless his injury is only for a couple of days lol

could take it off the value of the sale of Costa i suppose, how would we ever know?

 

As I said; right noises but will they enforce it?

 

Yes, they've definitively said it contravenes both the rules and the spirit of the game.

He'll have to play now, simple as.

 

this is how i think they'll approach it. Knock £5m of the price and its done. UEFA can't question it either.

 

Oh come on Tobes, even you're not that naive

for the record, I think he will play but Chelsea won't accept what UEFA has said should the £2.5m per game thing be true.

 

well i can't say as i care frnakly.

but....

looking at the two ties.

Bayern v real. Last time they met at this stage bayern won but this season bayern just are not as good, not as direct, powerful fast, technically good. they can pass it but its too slow. I could see it going either way but the way real crumbled in germany would be indicative. Bayern to be favorites? it'll be close

Chavs v athletico. too much is being made of keeper, he's not the secret to athletico's success. I think over all cheslea should not get through but they could park the bus and play classic mourinho negative football which suits the two legged affair.

if i were athletico i would not want to concede that away goal!

 

Why would Athletico agree to that given that UEFA have deemed the agreement forcing them to pay anything is a flagrant contravention of the rules?

 

They have made a statement saying its against the rules.

 

Just in case anyone missed it, I want A.Madrid to win and so should every other Liverpool fan too. Not because you dislike Chelsea, Bayern or real but because all three of their managers have already won two CL trophies. Only one man as won three...Sir Bob Paisley!

 

Eh?

Chelsea won't have a ****ing choice.

Athletico will just not pay them and point to the UEFA ruling on the matter.

Chelsea have no hold over them, as they want Costa

 

If they don't then they don't get Courtois again next season and lose out a good existing relationship? Small price to pay mind.

 

Chelsea want Costa, so they can't use Courtois as a lever.

 

do we think this keeper is going to be the sole difference really? In case anyones failed to notice athletico have 11 players not 1.

chelsea might have 1 keeper and 10 defenders out... i think this is really not that important and the lad himself will probably be please cos it means if athletico win there's no cheslea waiting in the final.

 

They can but its only a small bartering tool considering the potential outcome of their CL matches. Courtois has been on loan to A.Madrid for three seasons now and Cech shows no signs of leaving anytime soon, therefore it is likely that the same deal would be in place next season. If Chelsea and A.Madrid have a verbal or written agreement that is not honoured (whether the UEFA statement is listened to or not) then it will effect any potential agreement for next season. If A.Madrid want Courtois again, they need to play ball with Chelsea and thats where the Costa deal would come in.

However, if I were A.Madrid, I'd tell Chelsea to do one too

 

well he wont be the only difference obviously, but who would you rather have on the pitch Migs or Jones?

 

I think a good keeper is a priority for a top side. Look how Man Utd struggled after losing Schmeichel, Arsenal after Seaman/Lehmann.

 

Chelsea cannot now be seen to be enforcing this agreement in ay way, shape or form, otherwise they'll be in deep **** - end of.

So there's no way they can risk trying to get the £5m offset against any fee agreed for Costa, as if it got out they'd be ****ed.

Imagine they agree a £60m fee and then City match it, but Chelsea only end up paying £55m.........there'd be hell on.

They'll just accept it and move on.

 

Interesting draws in the Champions League and the Europa. I shall be cheering on Atletico in the Champions and Benfica in the Europa! Vamos chicos. Good luck to you on Sunday against the "mighty" City

 

Personally, i do not think he should play. Imagine if he was to make a last minute clanger, the conspiracy theorists would have a field day.
Too much conflict of interests.
Where is the consistency, they have a rule that does not allow a player to play for two separate teams (cup-tied), but they do not have one for a player playing against their parent club.
Maybe Fifa just like the chance of bribery accusations.
Do AM pay all his wages, if not then surely a payment passing to a person playing for the opposition just isn't right!!