Awful wum attempt.


Have 5 stars

Liverpool played it smart. They have shown everyone a lesson in how to keep your best player.

And they are reaping the rewards. More than likely going to win the league with Suarez being their main man.

Arsenal fans need to stop crying over the Suarez saga and focus on where the real fault at our club is, Wenger and the board.

I don't know any lawyers that could help you but here is the link for MENCAP.

http://www.mencap.org.uk

'illegible player'

Luis Saurez

The sheer stupidity of Liverpool is astounding. Yes, you pulled a fast one and you managed to keep a player in spite of a contract agreement... but don't come out in the press and gloat about how you got away with it.

so we can transfer Luis' goals to us??

Would that make us top ??

Disqualified and join Rangers in Scottish div 2

comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 5 minutes ago
The sheer stupidity of Liverpool is astounding. Yes, you pulled a fast one and you managed to keep a player in spite of a contract agreement... but don't come out in the press and gloat about how you got away with it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Doesnt sound stupid to me....as you state we got away with it!!!

I'm a law student.

As Al said, they played it smart. Sure, they broke Suarez's contract, but because the contract's between him and the club, only he can bring any action on it, not any potential suitor such as Arsenal, and he chose not to - which is a gamble Liverpool took that paid off. He's now signed a new contract, replacing the old one, so that option to sue no longer exists even for Suarez, and so Liverpool are safe to come out and say they broke the contract without any fear of problems. Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.

Even if Arsenal had had standing to sue they wouldn't have got anywhere since from a legal viewpoint they haven't lost anything bar the opportunity to negotiate with Suarez (since meeting the price is no guarantee that he would have joined) so they would have got maybe £1 million tops to compensate for that lost opportunity to negotiate. But like I say, they couldn't sue anyway. As for the 'verbal contract' between Suarez and Arsenal, that's complete ballacks.

The sheer stupidity of Liverpool is astounding. Yes, you pulled a fast one and you managed to keep a player in spite of a contract agreement... but don't come out in the press and gloat about how you got away with it.
__________

And it that's true and Arsenal decided not to do anything against it then that shows we as a club do not have enough ballllls. These bunch of people at club who make decisions and get paid millions need to get a grip.

comment by Whyalwaysme (U9900)
posted 25 seconds ago
The sheer stupidity of Liverpool is astounding. Yes, you pulled a fast one and you managed to keep a player in spite of a contract agreement... but don't come out in the press and gloat about how you got away with it.
__________

And it that's true and Arsenal decided not to do anything against it then that shows we as a club do not have enough ballllls. These bunch of people at club who make decisions and get paid millions need to get a grip.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
what exactly can you do??

Another law student pitching in, Ocelots is right. The real gamble they have taken here is that they have shown that they do not operate on good faith. I would certainly advise someone not to get involved with a company that does not only act against its word, but then gloats about it afterwards.

If this weren't football, the damage to their company would be severe.

comment by Ocelots (U3893)
posted 2 minutes ago
I'm a law student.

As Al said, they played it smart. Sure, they broke Suarez's contract, but because the contract's between him and the club, only he can bring any action on it, not any potential suitor such as Arsenal, and he chose not to - which is a gamble Liverpool took that paid off. He's now signed a new contract, replacing the old one, so that option to sue no longer exists even for Suarez, and so Liverpool are safe to come out and say they broke the contract without any fear of problems. Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.

Even if Arsenal had had standing to sue they wouldn't have got anywhere since from a legal viewpoint they haven't lost anything bar the opportunity to negotiate with Suarez (since meeting the price is no guarantee that he would have joined) so they would have got maybe £1 million tops to compensate for that lost opportunity to negotiate. But like I say, they couldn't sue anyway. As for the 'verbal contract' between Suarez and Arsenal, that's complete ballacks.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ocelots, this is how I understood it and I'm wondering if you could confirm if I've got it right or I'm barking up the wrong tree.

Obviously, the CPS and civil court would have nowt to do with this where Arsenal are concerned, as they are classified as a third party with no tangible interest in the contract - however, is it possible Suarez himself could take civil action over breach of contract? And Arsenal could raise a case with the Court of Arbitration for Sport?

Comment deleted by Site Moderator

Wenger said the deal had to be amicable... we were never going to sue them

Disgusting that we just let them get away with it but a court case between two of the biggest clubs in the country would have been a media circus the game can do without.

Gordon Taylor though... either corrupt or inept. Should resign from the PFA

I should qualify that by saying that I don't expect either to happen, but I'm asking if those options are theoretically possible?

comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 3 seconds ago
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ocelots, this is how I understood it and I'm wondering if you could confirm if I've got it right or I'm barking up the wrong tree.

Obviously, the CPS and civil court would have nowt to do with this where Arsenal are concerned, as they are classified as a third party with no tangible interest in the contract - however, is it possible Suarez himself could take civil action over breach of contract? And Arsenal could raise a case with the Court of Arbitration for Sport?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I haven't covered employment law, let alone stuff specific to the football industry etc (my answer above was mainly based on general contract law), but I'd imagine Suarez probably couldn't sue, since he's signed a new contract and thus ended the old one. Although some rights to sue can extend beyond the end of the obligations in the contract (e.g. stuff in the Sale of Goods Act meaning you can claim if you buy a product and it later turns out to be unfit for purpose or whatever) I'd imagine there is probably some provision in Suarez's new contract saying that it completely supersedes all rights and obligations under the old one. And even if he can sue, what would he gain? The fact that Liverpool breached his old contract doesn't affect the new one that he's signed, so he couldn't get a specific performance remedy to force them to let him negotiate, since that would go against the new contract. All he'd get would be some figure of damages, and again since there was no guarantee that he'd come to an agreement with another club, they'd only be for the lost chance to negotiate, so again maybe a couple of million max.

As for the CAS, again I'm afraid I don't know any of the specific rules but I'd imagine that Arsenal would again lack standing. Their only real interest in this is that they happened to be the only club that bid the amount to trigger the clause, but any other club could have come along and done the same - if you had a similar situation but 20 clubs had all met the release clause, what would happen then if you allowed them all to sue? It'd be havoc, and I'd imagine they'd barely get enough from it each to cover their legal fees. As I say, I know barely anything about how the CAS operates, but it would be odd for them to let a club sue based solely on a breach of a contract that they have nothing to do with.

(Giroulski, if you do know about any of this stuff better than I do, feel free to correct me!)

Fantastic article

" If there is any lawyers here your advice will be welcome".
--

I suggest you Slaughter and May in London...

Ocelots, I'm in a similar position to you. I've only studied Contract law before and I'm not going into Labour Law or Sports Law so any answer I give is on basic contract principles. Ask me about Negligence, Nuisance, Trespass, co-ownership of land etc and I'll give a good answer.

I think what you've said seems right to me.

One thing to KPPR, there's no way the Crown Prosecution Service would be involved. They are concerned with criminal, not civil, matters. This case would only be settled in the High Court at first instance. If there was a case to be settled, that is.

That's why I gave a fuzzier answer which, while true, focuses on business ethics rather than substantive law.

good god!

Bitter !

Here comes the cavalry.

How embarrasing and desperate are some of them becoming