-
! ! ! IMPORTANT MESSAGE ! ! !
Discussions about police investigations
In light of recent developments about a player from Premier League being arrested and until there is an official announcement, ALL users should refrain from discussing or speculating about situations around personal off-pitch matters related to any Arsenal player. This is to protect you and the forum.
Users who disregard this reminder will be issued warnings and their posts will get deleted from public.
Flamini trouble again
- Thread starter Denish
- Start date
- Replies 97
- Views 2,760
- Status
patrick42uk
Established Member
Adam said:
i dont think they do owe wenger anything. marsaille will try to distance themselves from the scandal of that season. and that is evident from the fact that the management of marsialle is completely changed from that period. the scandal is in the past for marsaille, and i'm sure it is the same for wenger. wenger can appreciate their frustration in losing a talented player in this case for next to nothing. it is quite frustrating though knowing that this flamini saga will take quite a long time to reach its conclusion.
- Thread starter
- #23
Split
Active Member
Mad Jens said:
I think that is the problem, we didn't do business with marseille we did it with flamini.
- Thread starter
- #25
Denish
Active Member
Thats perfectly legal though, right? Most players choose to sign their first pro contract with the club that developed them because of sentimental value and their love for the club, but I don't think they're obliged to. Same thing that happened with Cesc and Barcelona, and they were f**kin' pissed as well. If the player is scouted early enough its within a club's rights to offer him a contract. If he accepts, bonzer, tough **** for the parent club.
Split
Active Member
JazzG said:
The Marseille owner (can't remember name) 'bribed' opponent players ( I thought it was in the CL not the domestic league!? - against Valencia) the year they won the CL, 1993, they were striped of that title the day after they won it and were also relegated to the 2nd division.
Perhaps Brian France can explain more?
Split
Active Member
Denish said:
Well, that's where the mix up has occured, everyone thought it was legal, but apparently France passed a law this year that gives the club some sort of rights on the player they trained.
again, I gues Brianfrance well know more?
french clubs are c*nts metz are doing the same with a player newcastle just brought they cant hack it that they have lost a young talent they are a joke and their whinging is not going to get them anywhere. I have never heard this happen with an english club its just the french moaning again.
Split
Active Member
jamesnoza said:
That's because it is perfectly legal in every other country except france apparently. As it is a new 'law' (in france only) there is some confusion.
I don't think you can say french clubs are being c***s. I am sure Arsenal would want to do the same if the boot was on the other foot.
USArsenal
H.Y.I.C.
that is why FIFA has sided with Arsenal... why should France have their own contract/transfer policy and everyone else in the world goes by another standard? they shouldnt... sure, if they want compensation for him, thats one thing, but Im not really sure what they are looking to do with this injunction? didnt we actually GIVE THEM money already? if not, then lets give them their $1.5 million and be done with it... the kid isnt worth more than that, he played a total of 17 professional matches in his life... that does NOT entitle Marseille to ask for any more than that.. (i believe they are estimating he is worth at least $2.5 million?) if im wrong, correct me...
and Split, to your comment about Arsenal not dong that, no I dont think we would... if a player does not want to play here, we let him go... see Upson, see Richard Wright, see Volz... sure, we got money for them, but we let them go elsewhere and got back considerably less than we paid for them just because Arsenal dont want players here who dont WANT to be here.. Marseille should take a page out of that book... accept what your going to get and be done with it....
and Split, to your comment about Arsenal not dong that, no I dont think we would... if a player does not want to play here, we let him go... see Upson, see Richard Wright, see Volz... sure, we got money for them, but we let them go elsewhere and got back considerably less than we paid for them just because Arsenal dont want players here who dont WANT to be here.. Marseille should take a page out of that book... accept what your going to get and be done with it....
sienna
Active Member
Agree with this point. Why should France be the exception? The fact is Marseille screwed up and by the time they realized it, he had already signed for Arsenal. They don't want him back and are determined to drag this on for as long as possible. He can't be forced to sign a contract if he doesn't want to. Marseille just want to squeeze as much money out Arsenal as they possibly can.USArsenal said:
Why can't these guys just let us be.Split said:
brianfrance
Established Member
Split said:
Bernard Tapie paid Valenciennes Players to be sure to win the match (The players were Glassmann and another)
But those players were really, euh, shocked to do so. They said all the scandal to the police.
Marseille was retrograded....
brianfrance
Established Member
By the way, we shouldn't battle with Marseille. We have to remember somes great players played there (Pires, Papin, Desailly, Deschamps, Blanc...)
In the future I'm sure Wenger will be interested in another Marseille player.
Give them the money they want.
In the future I'm sure Wenger will be interested in another Marseille player.
Give them the money they want.
Split
Active Member
USArsenal said:
I'm not saying Arsenal would keep a player against his will, after all that's not what Marseille want(ed) to do!!! All I'm saying is that if a club is under the impression that they have 'rights' over a player, then that player just buggers off without the club being compensated for their 'asset', they are entitled to be cheesed off.
Now, if Arsenal have paid them appropriate compensation, then Marseille should not slag off Arsenal and accept what has happened. They should instead concentrate on having consultations with the FFF and Fifa to sort out the differences and determine appropriate, transparent 'laws' for this kind of situation.
AFrican_Gunner
Member
Brian..well said actually.But Marseille should bring the case to the players rather than the club they sign,i really find thiz Laws stupid.having said that we may solve this by Givin''em some kinda of compensation..i really don't want to c this to drag on!!
USArsenal
H.Y.I.C.
but the whole point is, why should Marseille be entitled to compensation when the rest of the world is NOT?? why can the FFF have their own set of rules? that is my biggest problem.. do they think they are special? a lot of countries lose their best players to the big 3 leagues... deal with it, accept it, move on....
Marseille screwed up on this by not offering him a contract sooner.. then there would have been no doubt that they were entitled to compensation.. but they didnt, and they shouldnt be... the other point is Marseille think he is worth more than he is at this point.. he is a PROSPECT... only 17 matches in his professional career.. how does that warrant $2.5 million? it's not like he's 18 and will be skyrocketing in value... isnt he 21 already?
Marseille screwed up on this by not offering him a contract sooner.. then there would have been no doubt that they were entitled to compensation.. but they didnt, and they shouldnt be... the other point is Marseille think he is worth more than he is at this point.. he is a PROSPECT... only 17 matches in his professional career.. how does that warrant $2.5 million? it's not like he's 18 and will be skyrocketing in value... isnt he 21 already?
brianfrance
Established Member
He's 20, march 7th 1984, like me :!:
We should pay, that's all !
We should pay, that's all !
USArsenal
H.Y.I.C.
sure, i have no problem with paying for him.. but not the price they are asking... fair market price for someone who has virtually no 1st team experience... (17 matches does not mean he is experienced).... and by fair market price, i mean fair market price, not Chelski Market Price... that is why $1.5 million is more than enough
brianfrance
Established Member
Considering his talent, 3$ is not expensive IMO
- Status
