packoman Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Haven't UEFA said that Courtois can play? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CardiffGreens Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 On the soon-to-be-ongoing-saga that is "will he, won't he play" - Saw this link on the guardian's minute-by-minute update to the draw - One of Celtic's players was on loan at Elfsborg - UEFA flunkies didn't seem too put out by the thought of having him playing against his parent club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Rev Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) Haven't UEFA said that Courtois can play? The Atletico chairman implied there was a cause in the terms of the loan which means Atletico have to pay Chelsea €3m if they play Courtois against them. Over two legs this will be €6m, Atletico say they can't afford it. Maybe they will cut a deal but at the moment Chelsea seem to have a lot of leverage. If the deal is unenforceable as far as UEFA are concerned that is still no reason why Chelsea can't be shits about Courtois to Atletico if they want to buy him or extend his loan period next season. I'm sure Chelsea have politely reminded Atletico of that fact. **edit** It's only in England where we seem to have a problem with on loan players playing against their parent club, and that only happened because Lua Lua scored a 90th minute equaliser for Portsmouth against Newcastle a few years ago and the papers had a field day with it. The loan system is **** from top to bottom, it only serves to aid the richest clubs as the current situation with Courtois highlights. The fact that Chelsea use it to stockpile players stinks. Edited April 11, 2014 by The_Rev 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Haven't UEFA said that Courtois can play? I read somewhere (can't remember where) that Chelsea wanted a fee. UEFA said jog on, meaning he is free to play. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest av1 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) UEFA have confirmed that their regulations would not forbid Thibaut Courtois from facing his parent club. Pic: SNS Group UEFA have confirmed that Atletico Madrid's on-loan goalkeeper Thibaut Courtois would be free to face Chelsea under their rules, in this year's Champions League. The clubs had previously agreed that a fee, believed to be in the region of €3 million per match, would be required if the Belgian international was to face his parent club. However, UEFA have stated they would begin disciplinary proceedings if Chelsea attempted to enforce this clause. The European governing body have released a statement, clarifying this position, and explaining that such private agreements are not enforceable in the Champions League. The statement reads: "Both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations contain clear provisions which strictly forbid any club to exert, or attempt to exert, any influence whatsoever over the players that another club may (or may not) field in a match. "It follows that any provision in a private contract between clubs which might function in such a way as to influence who a club fields in a match is null, void and unenforceable so far as UEFA is concerned. "Furthermore, any attempt to enforce such a provision would be a clear violation of both the UEFA Champions League and the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations and would therefore be sanctioned http://m.stv.tv/sport/football/271279-uefa-say-thibaut-courtois-eligible-to-face-chelsea-in-champions-league/ Edited April 11, 2014 by av1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Madrid derby Champions League Final? I think Bayern will beat Real quite easily over two legs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 best type of loan was when Morientes scored to help knock out Real after the president treated him shabbily Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 If I was Roman I would say he isn't playing. He doesn't need the money and would much rather have his club in the final (or a better chance of it). TBH, I am really surprised it is allowed. Imagine if the keeper has a howler and ends up making a gaff that costs A. Madrid a goal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 He won't intentionally though. Why wouldn't he want to win the trophy for himself and his teammates he's been with for 3 years? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) He won't intentionally though. Why wouldn't he want to win the trophy for himself and his teammates he's been with for 3 years? I also think it is very unlikely butif he did make a huge mistake people would start asking the questions. Especially if he goes into the Chelsea starting 11 next season. It just seems a little odd that UEFA is poised to ban footballers from betting on any other football matches worldwide, yet a loanee is allowed to play against his parent club. Take out the issue and ban it. Edited April 11, 2014 by Tamuff_Villa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFCforever1991 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Diego Costa fits into this as well. He will probably be at Chelsea next season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Diego Costa fits into this as well. He will probably be at Chelsea next season. Yes, this was discussed last night on TS. There is potentially a deal to be done here if Chelsea want to agree a fee for him now. But I guess it'll come down to Roman. Would he rather save a few quid on a player he wants to sign or give his club the best chance of another European Cup final. As he's already got s**tloads of money I expect the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 ballague was on SSN talking about it last night (i know) apparently chelsea asked for x amount for him to go there on loan for the year, atletico couldnt afford it so they wrote in a couple of clauses in to the loan instead, this is one of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isa Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Madrid derby Champions League Final? I think Bayern will beat Real quite easily over two legs. Bayern weren't particularly impressive in the last two rounds so I wouldn't be so sure. Real will really need to work on the defensive contribution from their midfield though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulC Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Madrid derby Champions League Final? I think Bayern will beat Real quite easily over two legs. Bayern weren't particularly impressive in the last two rounds so I wouldn't be so sure. Real will really need to work on the defensive contribution from their midfield though. I think they have another gear but yes there are faults with both teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rovers13 Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 (edited) He won't intentionally though. Why wouldn't he want to win the trophy for himself and his teammates he's been with for 3 years? I also think it is very unlikely butif he did make a huge mistake people would start asking the questions. Especially if he goes into the Chelsea starting 11 next season. It just seems a little odd that UEFA is poised to ban footballers from betting on any other football matches worldwide, yet a loanee is allowed to play against his parent club. Take out the issue and ban it. It's not unlikely, it flat out won't happen. Why would a player blow their chance to win the champions league, which is a rare chance, to help a club that they haven't been at for 3 years? Also, if you ban loanees playing against their parent club, do you ban players like lewandowski from playing against the club they've agreed to join? Edited April 11, 2014 by Rovers13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted April 11, 2014 VT Supporter Share Posted April 11, 2014 He won't intentionally though. Why wouldn't he want to win the trophy for himself and his teammates he's been with for 3 years?I also think it is very unlikely butif he did make a huge mistake people would start asking the questions. Especially if he goes into the Chelsea starting 11 next season. It just seems a little odd that UEFA is poised to ban footballers from betting on any other football matches worldwide, yet a loanee is allowed to play against his parent club. Take out the issue and ban it.It's not unlikely, it flat out won't happen. Why would a player blow their chance to win the champions league, which is a rare chance, to help a club that they haven't been at for 3 years? Also, if you ban loanees playing against their parent club, do you ban players like lewandowski from playing against the club they've agreed to join?I don't think tamuff is saying that the player WOULD blow it on purpose. Just suggesting that if courtois, in this example, made a monumental (and genuine) **** up and Chelsea won as a result, a lot of people would ask questions, valid or not. FWIW I don't agree, I think players should be allowed to play against their parent team. But I can see the point tamuff is making Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Two cracking ties... Real v Chelsea final is what I want. But any combination is going to be a cracker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 He won't intentionally though. Why wouldn't he want to win the trophy for himself and his teammates he's been with for 3 years? I also think it is very unlikely butif he did make a huge mistake people would start asking the questions. Especially if he goes into the Chelsea starting 11 next season.It just seems a little odd that UEFA is poised to ban footballers from betting on any other football matches worldwide, yet a loanee is allowed to play against his parent club.Take out the issue and ban it. It's not unlikely, it flat out won't happen. Why would a player blow their chance to win the champions league, which is a rare chance, to help a club that they haven't been at for 3 years? Also, if you ban loanees playing against their parent club, do you ban players like lewandowski from playing against the club they've agreed to join? I don't think tamuff is saying that the player WOULD blow it on purpose. Just suggesting that if courtois, in this example, made a monumental (and genuine) **** up and Chelsea won as a result, a lot of people would ask questions, valid or not. FWIW I don't agree, I think players should be allowed to play against their parent team. But I can see the point tamuff is making Cheers Stevo, I'm just saying it brings the whole arrangement into disrepute if he makes an uncharactoristic error. I'm surprised UEFA/FIFA allow it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts