I find it funny how Liverpool fans cannot understand that the flagrant flouting of the law annoys others. Nobody is above the law, and the way your club behaved is offensive. But naturally football fans see their passion as entirely removed from reality.
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely curious.
Here comes the cavalry.
--------------------
you look in to the small matters of as many contracts as you like but the op is going on about Liverpool being disqualified from the title race because the club had an internal dispute with an employee. off which no complaint was made to the governing body's and there for is of no importance to anybody else. Suarez and Liverpool have over come any difference of opinion and the player was happy enough to sign a new contract.
in fact I'm waiting for the next absolute Bèllènd Arsenal fan (not all because you've got some top posters) article suggesting Suarez should be freed from the injustice of us forcing him to sign a new contract!
one thing that I believe should have been looked into is the way in which Arsenal formulated the £40m +£1 bid, because never has there been a more blatant case of a club going behind the back of another club and talking to an agent!
comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 7 minutes ago
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely bi-curious.
____________
I thought this was about contract law?
comment by KnottyAshTaxDodger (U8934)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 7 minutes ago
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely bi-curious.
____________
I thought this was about contract law?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blimey, who knew Oscar Wilde was a Liverpool fan?
Here comes the cavalry.
--------------------
you look in to the small matters of as many contracts as you like but the op is going on about Liverpool being disqualified from the title race because the club had an internal dispute with an employee. off which no complaint was made to the governing body's and there for is of no importance to anybody else. Suarez and Liverpool have over come any difference of opinion and the player was happy enough to sign a new contract.
in fact I'm waiting for the next absolute Bèllènd Arsenal fan (not all because you've got some top posters) article suggesting Suarez should be freed from the injustice of us forcing him to sign a new contract!
one thing that I believe should have been looked into is the way in which Arsenal formulated the £40m +£1 bid, because never has there been a more blatant case of a club going behind the back of another club and talking to an agent!
----------------------------------------------
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
so scousers think breaking the law is a laughing matter????
Imagine a judge handing us victory (and suarez) in a the hottest courtroom saga since that hacking thingy..
It would be just like winning a trophy
comment by Shoots (U6220)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I genuinely can't tell if he's on the WUM or not.
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
---------------------------------
the simple matter of the whole thing is this!
if Suarez did have a £40m clause (which has been confirmed) and arsenal activated that clause (which they did) then Suarez had the perfect opportunity to force a move but he didn't. He didn't even hand in a transfer request! which points to the fact that he never actually wanted to go to arsenal.
I think if Real Madrid had been the club doing the biding then we may have seen a more determined attempt at moving from Suarez.
that's my opinion anyway!
comment by Englishmen~Always~Land~Upright (U4080)
posted 12 seconds ago
so scousers think breaking the law is a laughing matter????
It would be just like winning a trophy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you know ???
Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Shoots (U6220)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I genuinely can't tell if he's on the WUM or not.
-----------------------------------
Feel free to enlighten me how I'm trying to wind people up...
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
---------------------------------
the simple matter of the whole thing is this!
if Suarez did have a £40m clause (which has been confirmed) and arsenal activated that clause (which they did) then Suarez had the perfect opportunity to force a move but he didn't. He didn't even hand in a transfer request! which points to the fact that he never actually wanted to go to arsenal.
I think if Real Madrid had been the club doing the biding then we may have seen a more determined attempt at moving from Suarez.
that's my opinion anyway!
------------------------------------
Well it was a question of risk for Suarez. He saw Arsenal as a step up, but no so big a step up as a club like Real Madrid could provide. He publicly stated his intention to leave, but was intimidated by Liverpool's tactics and the failure of the PFA to support him when they should. In effect, you forced him into playing it safe.
the whole attempt from him wanting out was that he didn't want out of Liverpool, he wanted out of England due to the media and his behaviour.
this season we've seen a total turn around in his temperament and he's turned himself in to some what of a media darling and is a shoe in for POTY and FWPOTY. he's also signed the biggest contract in LFC history and will play CL next season!
Giröulski Alt-153 forever (U14971)
posted 8 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
---------------------------------
Fully aware of what I'm saying thanks. You clearly have a different view, so feel free to 'educate' me.
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
---------------------------
it was a contract dispute between employer and employee, if the player felt his contract had been broken he could have disputed it in a civil court or court of arbitration of sport but he didn't. he carried on working for his employer and negotiated a new contract with them.
in no way does any of it involve arsenal!
Giröulski Alt-153 forever (U14971)
posted 8 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
---------------------------------
Fully aware of what I'm saying thanks. You clearly have a different view, so feel free to 'educate' me.
--------------------------------
If you insist. A manager's sacking is covered by the terms of the contract which he signed. Large payments usually result from a sacking as stipulated by his own contract. It is not breaking the law.
However, refusing performance of the contract that you have signed is breaking the law.
Understand now?
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
That all happened early last summer and we still managed to attract players in the summer window!
If you insist. A manager's sacking is covered by the terms of the contract which he signed. Large payments usually result from a sacking as stipulated by his own contract. It is not breaking the law.
However, refusing performance of the contract that you have signed is breaking the law.
Understand now?
------------------------------------------
Brilliant
So you think that a manager's contract covers what happens if he is sacked? You have no idea of employment law.
To protect employees, it's actually extremely difficult to sack someone on the spot (barring gross misconduct).
To get around this, employers use compromise agreements (google it). Which, once agreed, effectively prevents the employee from taking the employer to court for unfair dismissal.
Basically employees get paid off to keep schtum.
But I'm guessing you know all of that already
comment by Kolo's Long Schłong - KLS! (U1695)
posted 8 minutes ago
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
---------------------------
it was a contract dispute between employer and employee, if the player felt his contract had been broken he could have disputed it in a civil court or court of arbitration of sport but he didn't. he carried on working for his employer and negotiated a new contract with them.
in no way does any of it involve arsenal!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Suarez signed the verbal contract when the release clause was met so he belongs to Arsenal..
Sign in if you want to comment
LIVERPOOL SHOULD BE DISQUALIFIED
Page 2 of 4
posted on 31/3/14
Brilliant
posted on 31/3/14
I find it funny how Liverpool fans cannot understand that the flagrant flouting of the law annoys others. Nobody is above the law, and the way your club behaved is offensive. But naturally football fans see their passion as entirely removed from reality.
posted on 31/3/14
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely curious.
posted on 31/3/14
Here comes the cavalry.
--------------------
you look in to the small matters of as many contracts as you like but the op is going on about Liverpool being disqualified from the title race because the club had an internal dispute with an employee. off which no complaint was made to the governing body's and there for is of no importance to anybody else. Suarez and Liverpool have over come any difference of opinion and the player was happy enough to sign a new contract.
in fact I'm waiting for the next absolute Bèllènd Arsenal fan (not all because you've got some top posters) article suggesting Suarez should be freed from the injustice of us forcing him to sign a new contract!
one thing that I believe should have been looked into is the way in which Arsenal formulated the £40m +£1 bid, because never has there been a more blatant case of a club going behind the back of another club and talking to an agent!
posted on 31/3/14
comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 7 minutes ago
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely bi-curious.
____________
I thought this was about contract law?
posted on 31/3/14
comment by KnottyAshTaxDodger (U8934)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 7 minutes ago
Thanks for the info lads, I was genuinely bi-curious.
____________
I thought this was about contract law?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Blimey, who knew Oscar Wilde was a Liverpool fan?
posted on 31/3/14
Here comes the cavalry.
--------------------
you look in to the small matters of as many contracts as you like but the op is going on about Liverpool being disqualified from the title race because the club had an internal dispute with an employee. off which no complaint was made to the governing body's and there for is of no importance to anybody else. Suarez and Liverpool have over come any difference of opinion and the player was happy enough to sign a new contract.
in fact I'm waiting for the next absolute Bèllènd Arsenal fan (not all because you've got some top posters) article suggesting Suarez should be freed from the injustice of us forcing him to sign a new contract!
one thing that I believe should have been looked into is the way in which Arsenal formulated the £40m +£1 bid, because never has there been a more blatant case of a club going behind the back of another club and talking to an agent!
----------------------------------------------
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
posted on 31/3/14
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
posted on 31/3/14
Aww bless 'em!
posted on 31/3/14
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
posted on 31/3/14
so scousers think breaking the law is a laughing matter????
Imagine a judge handing us victory (and suarez) in a the hottest courtroom saga since that hacking thingy..
It would be just like winning a trophy
posted on 31/3/14
comment by Shoots (U6220)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I genuinely can't tell if he's on the WUM or not.
posted on 31/3/14
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
---------------------------------
the simple matter of the whole thing is this!
if Suarez did have a £40m clause (which has been confirmed) and arsenal activated that clause (which they did) then Suarez had the perfect opportunity to force a move but he didn't. He didn't even hand in a transfer request! which points to the fact that he never actually wanted to go to arsenal.
I think if Real Madrid had been the club doing the biding then we may have seen a more determined attempt at moving from Suarez.
that's my opinion anyway!
posted on 31/3/14
comment by Englishmen~Always~Land~Upright (U4080)
posted 12 seconds ago
so scousers think breaking the law is a laughing matter????
It would be just like winning a trophy
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How would you know ???
posted on 31/3/14
Koscielny Patented Proof Readers (U7373)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Shoots (U6220)
posted 2 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Wow. I genuinely can't tell if he's on the WUM or not.
-----------------------------------
Feel free to enlighten me how I'm trying to wind people up...
posted on 31/3/14
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
posted on 31/3/14
Well you have built your league campaign off the back of a player you shouldn't even have. It's perfectly understandable why those with little legal knowledge might wonder if your success can be considered all that legitimate.
I do agree Arsenal should be looked into for tapping up. But I'd happily take a fine if we got Suarez off you, as we should have done.
---------------------------------
the simple matter of the whole thing is this!
if Suarez did have a £40m clause (which has been confirmed) and arsenal activated that clause (which they did) then Suarez had the perfect opportunity to force a move but he didn't. He didn't even hand in a transfer request! which points to the fact that he never actually wanted to go to arsenal.
I think if Real Madrid had been the club doing the biding then we may have seen a more determined attempt at moving from Suarez.
that's my opinion anyway!
------------------------------------
Well it was a question of risk for Suarez. He saw Arsenal as a step up, but no so big a step up as a club like Real Madrid could provide. He publicly stated his intention to leave, but was intimidated by Liverpool's tactics and the failure of the PFA to support him when they should. In effect, you forced him into playing it safe.
posted on 31/3/14
the whole attempt from him wanting out was that he didn't want out of Liverpool, he wanted out of England due to the media and his behaviour.
this season we've seen a total turn around in his temperament and he's turned himself in to some what of a media darling and is a shoe in for POTY and FWPOTY. he's also signed the biggest contract in LFC history and will play CL next season!
posted on 31/3/14
Giröulski Alt-153 forever (U14971)
posted 8 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
---------------------------------
Fully aware of what I'm saying thanks. You clearly have a different view, so feel free to 'educate' me.
posted on 31/3/14
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
---------------------------
it was a contract dispute between employer and employee, if the player felt his contract had been broken he could have disputed it in a civil court or court of arbitration of sport but he didn't. he carried on working for his employer and negotiated a new contract with them.
in no way does any of it involve arsenal!
posted on 31/3/14
posted on 31/3/14
Giröulski Alt-153 forever (U14971)
posted 8 minutes ago
Ocelots (U3893)
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
Not going to be an issue at all - contracts are publicly broken in football all the time e.g Manager's get sacked (which is also unfair dismissal), but does it stop other managers being interested?
It's a nothing issue
------------------------
I'm not sure you're entirely aware of what you're saying.
---------------------------------
Fully aware of what I'm saying thanks. You clearly have a different view, so feel free to 'educate' me.
--------------------------------
If you insist. A manager's sacking is covered by the terms of the contract which he signed. Large payments usually result from a sacking as stipulated by his own contract. It is not breaking the law.
However, refusing performance of the contract that you have signed is breaking the law.
Understand now?
posted on 31/3/14
Biggest issue for them will be attracting new players now they've admitted they broke a player's contract and got away with it.
-------------------------------------------------
That all happened early last summer and we still managed to attract players in the summer window!
posted on 31/3/14
If you insist. A manager's sacking is covered by the terms of the contract which he signed. Large payments usually result from a sacking as stipulated by his own contract. It is not breaking the law.
However, refusing performance of the contract that you have signed is breaking the law.
Understand now?
------------------------------------------
Brilliant
So you think that a manager's contract covers what happens if he is sacked? You have no idea of employment law.
To protect employees, it's actually extremely difficult to sack someone on the spot (barring gross misconduct).
To get around this, employers use compromise agreements (google it). Which, once agreed, effectively prevents the employee from taking the employer to court for unfair dismissal.
Basically employees get paid off to keep schtum.
But I'm guessing you know all of that already
posted on 31/3/14
comment by Kolo's Long Schłong - KLS! (U1695)
posted 8 minutes ago
Liverpool fans I have no bitterness, I have respect for you but you broke his contract and this should deserve a punishment. -3 points for every game where the illegible player played and Liverpool would be fighting against relegation.
---------------------------
it was a contract dispute between employer and employee, if the player felt his contract had been broken he could have disputed it in a civil court or court of arbitration of sport but he didn't. he carried on working for his employer and negotiated a new contract with them.
in no way does any of it involve arsenal!
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Suarez signed the verbal contract when the release clause was met so he belongs to Arsenal..
Page 2 of 4