Luis Suárez

[Gibbo]

Cheers all - in that case I agree, it's a moot point. Thought he might've meant Kroenke's team almost challenged.

On another point, if it's true we've prevailed in the contract dispute...is anyone gonna give Ian Ayre/the club any credit? Handled it - so far - brilliantly, and made mugs of Arsenal and Suarez. 1-0.

I heard they got Fowler in to look it over.

[ChesterDave]

Wonder if this is the 10pm Telegraph story. If it is i bet they're ****ing fuming that The Mirror has gotten this out before them.

Would be unlikely to be the same story. Surely the Telegraph would not be so secretive if Taylor was briefing the Press Association. Hardly a scoop or an exclusive!

[S-RED]

Mr.Happy Today

In LFC stuff today??

[Assassin]

The fella should not be paid while he serves a suspension for biting like a toddler. Well employment law might take a different view but he should be find heavily

Fully agree

[Leyton388]

Mr.Happy Today

I hope that was coming out of melwood. Would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he walked through the door this morning.

[rodo]

In LFC stuff today??

yeah he was at melwood

[Frenchie]

I heard they got Fowler in to look it over.

Fowler out-negotiates Chuck Norris....

[Chazza]

I hope that was coming out of melwood. Would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when he walked through the door this morning.

Erm Luis, a quick word.......

[Bender]

In LFC stuff today??

he was at melwood in his training kit today

[Cormack74]

Is there actually a foot injury then?

[AnfieldForever]

yeah he was at melwood

Making him train with the kids, serves him right!

[Cormack74]

Making him train with the kids, serves him right!

[Leyton388]

Would anyone take Modric and £20m if Madrid offered it? That foot injury appears to have healed quickly.

[Shaggy]

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2013/aug/07/luis-suarez-premier-league?CMP=twt_gu

Luis Suárez: verbal assurances legally irrelevant in Premier League

Briefed by the top sports lawyer Ian Lynam, Louise Taylor examines the legalities around Luis Suárez's contract dispute

• The Guardian interview with Luis Suárez
• Daniel Taylor's verdict on the Suárez controversy

Louise Taylor
The Guardian, Wednesday 7 August 2013 18.46 BST

Q So who is telling the truth? Do Liverpool have to sell Luis Suárez because they have received an offer in excess of £40m or is that figure simply a trigger to begin, or merely consider, negotiating?

A We have not seen the contract so we are speculating and we do not know how much posturing is going on, possibly from both sides, but it is possible that it could contain a clause which is not legally enforceable. As players are such valuable assets, clubs really need to use specialist sports lawyers and Liverpool may well have done so but, equally, there have been cases of club secretaries drafting clauses at 11 o'clock at night that turn out to be not legally enforceable. Such clauses will not stand up in court.

What about the verbal assurances that Suárez believes he received from Liverpool, agreeing to let him leave if someone offered more than £40m?

Any such assurances are legally irrelevant as Premier League contracts contain something called an "entire agreement" clause which excludes, or overrides, all prior verbal agreements. Morally it is a different matter, of course.

Could things have literally become lost in translation?

If Suárez was relying on advice given in Spanish while Liverpool were working in English, it is not impossible that there has been a misunderstanding although, if specialist lawyers were employed, there should not have been.

Are these types of clauses common?

No, not in England. They are rare here – Demba Ba reportedly had one at Newcastle before joining Chelsea – but it is very different in Spain where every player has to have a buy-out clause in his contract based on market value.

Can Luis Suárez force his way out by submitting a transfer request?

It would not make any difference. The press always make a big thing of players potentially submitting transfer requests but they actually are a non-factor in football. In Suárez's case it all depends on a specific clause in his contract but generally, if a player is under contract, it is up to the club whether they sell or keep him. If a transfer request is issued, a player might lose part of a signing-on fee – these are usually paid in annual instalments – but, in the wider scheme of things, the amount of money forfeited would be relatively small and cancelled out by the financial benefits of being transferred.

So is talking to the press and telling a journalist you want to leave a more effective tool than a transfer request?

Yes, the interview Luis Suárez has given to the Guardian is a more devastating tool than any transfer request. Wayne Rooney and Gareth Bale may also find doing similar interviews to be much more effectiveweapons.

Could this end up being decided by a Premier League tribunal?

Yes, possibly. Premier League standard form contracts make provision for dispute resolution by the Premier League board and then, potentially, by an independent panel.

Do you think Luis Suárez will end up an Arsenal player?

Yes. Although in some ways players have fewer rights than the majority of employees, they do possess a lot of power – and particularly after the Bosman ruling. If a player makes it clear he wants to leave, there is little point in clubs holding on to someone who may, potentially, begin performing badly. In such instances it's better to cash in.

Do you think Sarb is too pumped up over all this?

Almost certainly, yes.

Louise Taylor was talking to Ian Lynam, head of Sports Law at Charles Russell LLP in London

[Cormack74]

Would anyone take Modric and £20m if Madrid offered it?

I'd rather have Contreao.