Luis Suárez

[Craig_H]

They should have signed up Suarez the first week of the window instead of trying to save a couple of millions.

They should have sacked Roy sooner than they did.

Two mistakes that pointed to that they wasn't better owners than G&H.

Torres' mind had been made up already - you've already posted why he felt he had to go THAT window. So signing Suarez earlier would've made no difference.

You're a walking contradiction mate

[Arn]

Torres' mind had been made up already - you've already posted why he felt he had to go THAT window. So signing Suarez earlier would've made no difference.

You're a walking contradiction mate

We could have changed his mind if we sacked Roy earlier and signed up a player like Suarez earlier than we did.

Players do change their mind you know

I said that he felt that he had to go at the end of the window, not at the start of it.

[Alex]

The club should have as a policy to never accept a transfer request that isn't put in at the start of a transfer window.

The club should tell the players that they will turn down every transfer request that isn't put in inside the first week of the window.

IMO we should have kept Torres and Meireles because they put in the transfer request to late.

I don't care if the player is unhappy.

Impossible, it comes down to human rights. As it is Uefa is sailing close to the wind as it is with the transfer windows. Its restriction of trade. Imagine if someone told you, that you could only ask to leave your company on two different weeks during the year.

[Craig_H]

We could have changed his mind if we sacked Roy earlier and signed up a player like Suarez earlier than we did.

Players do change their mind you know

I said that he felt that he had to go at the end of the window, not at the start of it.

Yeah but....

The bid from Chelsea may not been there six months later. You never know.

Maybe it was now or never when it comes down to Chelsea or another big club. Another long term injury could have meant that he could been forced to stay the rest of his contract because they wouldn't pay big enough money to get an injury prone player.

You're a brilliant parody

[Neil Young]

They should have signed up Suarez the first week of the window instead of trying to save a couple of millions.

They should have sacked Roy sooner than they did.

Two mistakes that pointed to that they wasn't better owners than G&H.

Sorry Arn but you really do talk **** at times. Even more than the rest of us.

It's not just that you have no idea of the circumstances lying behind the decisions they make. It's that you demand everyone (or almost everyone ) to get everything right all the time.

And then when they inevitably don't you use it as a stick to beat them with it. It's adolescent logic.

[Craig_H]

Impossible, it comes down to human rights. As it is Uefa is sailing close to the wind as it is with the transfer windows. Its restriction of trade. Imagine if someone told you, that you could only ask to leave your company on two different weeks during the year.

Erm....of course it's not impossible. A club can easily hold a player to their contract. There's no 'human rights' issues here, they arent sending him to work in a barn 20 hours a day, they're simply refusing a transfer request. It's not a restriction of trade, the player still trains and is available for matches, still earns his wages and thus, still 'trades'.

[Chrono]

They should have signed up Suarez the first week of the window instead of trying to save a couple of millions.

They should have sacked Roy sooner than they did.

Two mistakes that pointed to that they wasn't better owners than G&H.

I'm convinced you are a super troll.

Firstly, this isn't Football Manager, you can't just phone up and buy a player in 5 minutes there are so many potential mine fields and issues that need to be dealt with and I think they moved pretty quickly.

Not sacking Roy sooner might be a fault but they needed to know it was the right decision, they were new to the sport and finding their feet. Bowing to fan requests would have made them knee jerk reactionaries.

Neither of these were genuine mistakes and he chose to jump well before they could show their hand.

[Neil Young]

Erm....of course it's not impossible. A club can easily hold a player to their contract. There's no 'human rights' issues here, they arent sending him to work in a barn 20 hours a day, they're simply refusing a transfer request. It's not a restriction of trade, the player still trains and is available for matches, still earns his wages and thus, still 'trades'.

That's plausible but we have no idea of the effect of that policy on such issues as morale and possible divisions within the squad, how likely it is that players will want to join a club with such a policy, and so on.

[Alex]

Erm....of course it's not impossible. A club can easily hold a player to their contract. There's no 'human rights' issues here, they arent sending him to work in a barn 20 hours a day, they're simply refusing a transfer request. It's not a restriction of trade, the player still trains and is available for matches, still earns his wages and thus, still 'trades'.

General principles of law do not allow restrictions of trade such as the Transfer Window. The Football Authorities’ agreement with the Commission holds no legal standing and would not prevent a challenge in either a domestic court, under Restraint of Trade laws, or in the European Court of Justice under Article 81, Anti-Competitive Agreements. Therefore, in answering the question posed at the beginning, there is no legal reason why it cannot be challenged.

http://www.advocatemagazine.co.uk/ar...article_id=172

[Craig_H]

That's all well and good, but if it was really challengable successfully, why would Tevez still be at City?

Why have players, for generation upon generation, wanted out of their clubs but not been able to leave until a bid is accepted?

[Alex]

I dont know, but the Law is there. Plain to see.

Edit: There was a case recently where a player could buy out there contract and leave over the age of 25 I think. Could be wrong though.

[Craig_H]

There's something called the Webster ruling, but i dont know the ins and outs.

But clearly, if it was as simple as being able to leave a club that rejects a transfer request, plenty would've activated said law, but i havent heard of any.

[Alex]

That doesnt mean it wont happen. I'm sure if you throw enough money at it, contracts wont be worth the paper there written on.

[Icon]

A wise man once said-
"'Tis far better to look a fool than open ones mouth and remove all doubt"...

[Craig_H]

That doesnt mean it wont happen. I'm sure if you throw enough money at it, contracts wont be worth the paper there written on.

Fair play, but likewise, i'm sure if it was that realistic an option, more players would've used it.