Last night the classy Jean Kevin Augustin tweeted to Leeds fans who were pleased he had signed for Nantes. Big Kev wished Leeds luck and when one fam wished he had made it at Leeds he replied “ I wish” today Big Kev tweeted his thanks to all the Leeds fans who had sent him messages throughout this ordeal. Then today we hear that Leipzig are pursuing Leeds legally And on top of that FIFA are now involved too. Proves how much the YEP know because yesterday Graham Smyth told the world Leeds were now off scott free.... Big Kev had 2 years to run on his original contract with Leipzig but signed for Nantes on loan as a free agent for 12 months? This can only mean that an agreement had been reached between Leipzig and the player whereby the player is released from his contract and he doesnt get the wages he would have got. So the player takes a hit but obviously we dont know his package with his new club, but we do know he was free so possibly a good salary. So YEP said yesterday that the ordeal is over? Leipzig are never going to walk away from this as they may have saved 2 years wages by making an agreement with JKA, but what about the value of the player who still had 2 years to run but became worthless after the issue with Leeds? At best they are out £20m plus the wages JKA has received on his contract since June which would be circa £1m. I can only see an out of court settlement here and not sure if FIFA can sanction Leeds? in reality this is a “Faulty Goods” claim because the product didnt do what it said on the tin.
Really puzzled that FIFA are involved. Surely that can only happen if UEFA call them in? This is not an international affair as such - it's European. Next question I have is how can Leipzig 'give away' an asset that they believe belongs to Leeds? Surely if it is found that we owe them £20m, they owe us the asset they've already given away?
I posted this mate because its full of holes, full of things that dont happen but in this case have. FIFA, could it be to do with player contracts or agreements between football clubs? Until Yesterday Big Kev was stuck between Leeds and Leipzig in limbo, but Leipzig were holding his contract not Leeds. He will have been paid and if Leipzig did nothing would have had to carry on paying his wages so obviously agreed to a deal whereby JKA gets his career back and allows him to play again for another club. Leipzig would be out of pocket for the value of the player.
FIFA are involved because they regulate all international transfers, and transfers must be registered with them. Players registered at one association may only be registered at a new association once the latter has received an International Transfer Certificate (hereinafter: ITC) from the former association. The ITC shall be issued free of charge without any conditions or time limit. Any provisions to the contrary shall be null and void. The association issuing the ITC shall lodge a copy with FIFA. The administrative procedures for issuing the ITC are contained in Annexe 3, article 8, and Annexe 3a of these regulations. This was one of the issues with Cardiff and the French club over the Salas transfer, in that the French club claimed that the ITC had been registered with FIFAby the French FA, so he was now a Cardiff player (More complex than that in reality.) The reason FIFA regulate this is because of the restriction that you cannot be registered with more than 3 clubs in one season and not play for more than 2 clubs in one season for any of the national football associations, especially given the different start and end dates that various leagues have. The whole situation with JKA is a bit of a mess, and one I think we would lose, as if it hadn't been for COVID we would have been stuffed, thus our reliance was upon a technicality that no one could have foreseen. The argument against that is the issue with players contracts as a whole, whereby obviously some players extended their contracts by a couple of months and other's didn't, thus making themselves unavailable to play the final few games of last season, thus potentially setting a precedent for our situation If we ignore the technical argument about not being promoted when the loan deal terminated , the faulty goods argument would also probably not work, because he passed our medical (hence why maybe we were more wary this time with Cuisance), and also Bielsa stating in an interview that we wouldnt have been able to agree the deal for the fee involved if JKA was fully fit, as it would have been a lot higher. We were aware there were issues which is why we were getting him cheaper than expected (as at that time). However with JKA moving to a different club makes it even messier. Leipzig can argue that because of the deal with ourselves in January, they had made commitments to sign players on the basis of the fee they would receive from ourselves. As it is fairly obvious that we don't want him, financial circumstances have meant that they have had to move him on for the best deal they can get, and their argument now will not be so much we owe them a transfer fee, but that we owe them compensation due to the financial loss from the deal not being completed. Leipzig will obviously try and get the full amount of the agreed transfer, plus the additional wages they had to pay JKA between June and now. We will argue that we are not able to mitigate that cost due to JKA signing for another club, in that we get no benefit from the player being available for us or being able to sell him. Presuming that we lose the technical argument regarding the termination date of 30th June we may get a small benefit from the residual value argument and probably come away having to pay £10m in compensation. If we dont get any benefit then I could see the sum being around £14m/15m. Obviously if we win the technical argument then we have nothing to worry about until Liepzig file an appeal, and it all starts again Whilst all of the above is just an opinion, the one thing I will guarantee is that solicitors for both clubs will make a lot of money out of this, no matter how it concludes
The fact that he has moved on must mean that there is no case to answer. How can we pay for a permanent deal when he is playing for someone else? If Leipzig were serious they would have kept the lad and gone for some compo over Leeds failing to meet payments. I think Leipzig have ****ed any chance up. Its ridiculous!
Aski Feasible explanation although if your theory is correct I suspect the compo would be much less. If Leipzig had kept the player they would have been paying him £8m in wages for the remaining 2 years. They got out of paying that so in effect saved themselves £8m they were contracted to pay. In effect by allowing him to leave they reduced the value of their asset. i know, smelly as hell but obviously Leeds have taken legal, advice and so too would Leipzig before they released him from his contract. Could bet messy and expensive so common sense required by someone?
It's a fair point Doc, although playing devils advocate, if Leeds had purchased JKA, then Leipzig, wouldn't have had to pay those wages out either, the majority of the compensation they will be seeking will relate to the transfer valuation. I am guessing if I can come up with that argument then Leipzig's legal team will be able to say it a lot more eloquently
