Simple question. How was he allowed to play yesterday? If his initial loan was up at the end of 2014 and the transfer window does not start until first Saturday or Monday in January wasn't he ineligible for the game? Or have I got it wrong?
Seems wrong doesn't it. Think the official line is they extended his deal before it expired (31/12) so it wasn't a transfer as such, more a new contract for their player. Unofficially, they can do what they like
Thanks for that, it explains it. Reading between the lines it means Manchester City and Chelsea with their mega riches can do what they like.
Just been on SSN that Lampard was signed on a short term contract with City up till 31st December and therefore was registered with the FA until the end of the season. The discussions were with the 2 clubs so I can only assume that he was due to join New York on 1st Jan and so City just needed to agree with NY that he could extend the contract beyond the 31st
Only relevant in that any extension had to be signed by the 31st, otherwise, beyond that date he was no longer their player.
So, effectively, they have signed him as a free agent? Sorry, that is bullshit and of the FA weren't such cowards it wouldn't happen.
No idea what the detail is, but to be realistic, if there were anything odd or disingenuous about it, every club at the top end of the table would be creating holy hell. And they're not.
My take is that the FA make the rules up as they go along. A business with this amount of incompetent ****s running it would last 5 mins. Look higher to FIFA and you can see why football is slowly getting fcuked up..
I've not seen one explanation which definitively validates the legality of this transfer. We should be talking to our lawyers instead of of just accepting that it must be legal because the FA say so.
Question the FA ??.... Are you mad ?!?! We'd be rewarded with Mr Mariner refereeing our games for the rest of the season!!
And the same people will turn over every stone to find that a smaller club have inadvertently signed on the wrong line when securing a loan deal... I'm surprised a 'big' club haven't challenged the deal!?
Agree with "home and away"........we don't Mariner ever again,he'll send us down!!Wuckin' Fanker that he is!
This says a lot ^. It wouldn`t help Bri. The club may be fined and even deducted points but they wouldn`t be given to us. The legal aspect will have been looked at by the other clubs in the mix. If they haven`t challenged it, it must be legal.
I suppose the red tape (as with Ki) is sorted as well, and did he ever play for New York ? and will he ever play for them ?
Nobody had 'ever played for New York' mate, it's a brand new team made up this year, the Arabs have introduced them to the MLS. This is an easy way of getting Lampard on board, for them, they're barely gonna have any fans, let alone fans who will protest this transfer. As far as I'm aware, Lampard was a free agent up until the window opened and then became a player who belonged to New York City, so if that's the case, City have done nowt wrong.