Swans in Court

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/35438556

 

Interesting that FIFA have already sided with us. But that's not saying much.

 

Not sure if I saw Huw treating Sepp to a fish supper in Rossi's a few months ago......

 

You probably heard him say "sausage in batter" and came to the wrong conclusion. Too much reading between the lines, Taff.

 

Epic - Lol

 

Posters keep saying this reflects badly on the Club and rightly so if we're found guilty but otherwise it'll be forgotten about in a couple of days .

 

Not if we want to sign a player from Utrecht.

 

like this you mean.

http://www.just-football.com/2016/0...rs-swansea-city-aston-villa-sebastien-haller/

 

Well that's unfortunate

But I don't see why we should have to pay money to keep other clubs sweet if we've got right on our side - and it certainly looks that way at the moment.

 

Agreed if we walk away from this with out any sanctions then we I suppose have got nothing to be ashamed of, I would imagine Spurs will have a big part to play in this as their evidence will be crucial. However, Vorm going on a free is a bit stinky though.

 

In fairness, we had signed Fabianski who was clearly going to be number 1. Additionally, we had Tremmel who had proven to be a more than adequate number 2.

So, by letting Vorm go for free we were effectively "receiving" a fee - in the shape of avoiding the salary payments due on the remaining period of his contract.

 

If we win this court case I will be still ashamed at the club searching for " Loopholes " to keep money from where it rightfully belongs . O J Simpson won a court case , but .........

 

OJ was acquitted despite overwhelming evidence because of police dishonesty and a dodgy jury. You can't compare the two cases Breezy. Where is the evidence we've "searched for loopholes"? UEFA & FIFA seem to think we are right here. If we've done nothing wrong why should we pay up? It sets a terrible precedent. **** 'em. If it turns out that we are in the wrong then I agree with you.

 

I wonder if a Spur representative will be there , would seem unfair to make any decision without their imput .
There is only wrong and wronger in my book Aussie , no other options .The club took a big risk for a microscopic gain hoping that trying to find proof of any wrongdoing would be hard to find . No matter how it turns out , we've clearly taken the low road .

 

Spurs are represented.
"There is only wrong and wronger in my book" No - there's right. So you're wrong.

 

so based on that concept anyone accused of any crime / offence is guilty regardless if found innocent .You do know hanging Judge Jefferies died in1689

 

I guess so , I wouldn't have known what I was thinking if you didn't tell me Matt . All I'm saying is our club has been tarnished whatever the outcome , less if we aren't sanctioned but tarnished all the same .

 

This is very similar to the tax evasion by google, Google played by the rules and did nothing wrong but morally it's plain to see they have used the system to pay less tax, The club have also used the system as it is written but again morally we look like we have robbed the club of their share of the sell on clause. What the court has to decide is Did we act honestly or did we know we were acting dishonestly as we used a loophole to not pay........My feelings are that we should pay the club their whack of the sell on clause as its right and proper and a deal was done, After all we would not like it if we were ripped off if one of our sell on players went to another club for a profit, We would want our share.....Pay them what they are due and get on with it i say....

 

Although we were morally wrong imo , I think we will lose this case in court . I hope not because of the possible repercussions.

 

Might be why we've delayed the signings? Use their arrivals as a smokescreen if we are guilty? Tbh I could care less, we exploited a contractual loophole. FIFA, UEFA and the FA sanctioned the move.