Emiliano Martínez

[Djemba_Villan]

6 minutes ago, mikeyjavfc said:

Anyone know any good emergency free agent goalies?

Wonder if United would lend us Heaton 

[a m ole]

4 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Bottom line is we had the final say and we even had Premier League support and precedence set by all other clubs in the league

No we don’t, FIFA do. If we prevented them from going some how (financial or whatever) we’d be sanctioned.

[Czarnikjak]

As long as they are on a plane to Croatia tonight, as they promised they would, I don't care who's fault it is or who messed up.

[a m ole]

3 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Like all the other clubs who defied FIFA's edict have been sanctioned? Pull the other one.

They didn’t defy it, the respective countries FA agreed to not select the players based on discussions between FA, player and club. AFA are the only ones that selected players in this situation hence why we’re not also taking about Douglas Luiz.

Not pulling anything. That’s how it works.

[est1874]

3 minutes ago, a m ole said:

They didn’t defy it, the respective countries FA agreed to not select the players based on discussions between FA, player and club. AFA are the only ones that selected players in this situation hence why we’re not also taking about Douglas Luiz.

Not pulling anything. That’s how it works.

That is not at all what happened.

Read the Premier League statement released on the 25th August:

"Premier League clubs have today reluctantly but unanimously decided not to release players for international matches played in red-list countries next month.

"The clubs' decision, which is strongly supported by the Premier League, will apply to nearly 60 players from 19 Premier League clubs who are due to travel to 26 red-list countries in the September international window."

It goes on to say nothing about agreements involving players or international football associations. It was a decision agreed by all PL teams (which implies Villa also, of course) not to release players to red list countries.

[a m ole]

4 minutes ago, est1874 said:

That is not at all what happened.

Read the Premier League statement released on the 25th August:

"Premier League clubs have today reluctantly but unanimously decided not to release players for international matches played in red-list countries next month.

"The clubs' decision, which is strongly supported by the Premier League, will apply to nearly 60 players from 19 Premier League clubs who are due to travel to 26 red-list countries in the September international window."

It goes on to say nothing about agreements involving players or international football associations. It was a decision agreed by all PL teams (which implies Villa also, of course) not to release players to red list countries.

And Argentina said - no. Because they can. Because that’s FIFA rules. The other clubs aren’t sanctioned because the other FA’s said ok.

Edited September 5, 2021 by a m ole

[est1874]

Just now, a m ole said:

And Argentina said - no. Because they can. Because that’s FIFA rules.

Which brings us right back to my previous reply to you, before you dragged us down this other road.

We could have simply refused to release the players and referred back to our agreement with the other PL clubs - fully supported by League as a body - which FIFA have not attempted to challenge.

If they were to sanction us, they'd have to sanction the Premier League, which they are simply not going to do.

[Zatman]

Just now, est1874 said:

Which brings us right back to my previous reply to you, before you dragged us down this other road.

We could have simply refused to release the players and referred back to our agreement with the other PL clubs - fully supported by League as a body - which FIFA have not attempted to challenge.

If they were to sanction us, they'd have to sanction the Premier League, which they are simply not going to do.

but Argentina can go to FIFA and request our players get banned. The other countries respected the Premier League decision and didnt call players up

[a m ole]

2 minutes ago, est1874 said:

Which brings us right back to my previous reply to you, before you dragged us down this other road.

We could have simply refused to release the players and referred back to our agreement with the other PL clubs - fully supported by League as a body - which FIFA have not attempted to challenge.

If they were to sanction us, they'd have to sanction the Premier League, which they are simply not going to do.

No we couldn’t have. And no they wouldn’t. 

[a m ole]

Quote

Can football clubs stop their players from accepting international call-ups?

Not strictly. The regulations are explicit in stating that clubs are obliged to release any of their registered players to a national representative team if they are called up to a squad.

Annexe 1 of the 'Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players' lays out 11 principles for managing the issue of national team call-ups.

Principle 1.1. says: "Clubs are obliged to release their registered players to the representative teams of the country for which the player is eligible to play on the basis of his nationality if they are called up by the association concerned. Any agreement between a player and a club to the contrary is prohibited."

It is not compulsory, however, for clubs to release players outside of specified international windows and clubs do not have to release players for more than one major senior international tournament in a year.

If AFA complain to FIFA, which they would have done, we would have been sanctioned.

Edited September 5, 2021 by a m ole

[Adam2003]

Lot of people here who seemingly don’t understand the rules and that’s ok I guess, but also to those saying “well we should have expected the Argie FA to be dodgy”… well… I’m sure we did but there’s lots of FAs around the world where we would PREFER not to have our players playing for them because they are dodgy as hell, but international football doesn’t let us as a club make those ‘moral’ decisions. If you are called up the rules say you have to go, whatever shenanigans your FA gets involved in. If we had a Mauritian player we couldn’t refuse them playing just because there might be a camera in the toilets (weirdest football story of the summer?)

[est1874]

So in your view then - and Zatman's - the only appropriate course of action in October when the Emis inevitably get called up again is for Villa to once again accept it because the AFA are the special little boy who gets to do what he wants all the others on the street behave themselves?

[Sulberto21]

1 hour ago, DCJonah said:

I didn't say that. Doesn't mean we can't be annoyed with their decision and the situation it put the club in. 

They haven't put the club in any situation. The players want to represent their nations. "Global pandemic". Let's go back to lockdown then. Yet we're allowed to sit next to each other as part of crowds of 40,50,60k in the premier League each week. 

However I digress ; 

It's a combination of the Brazilian government's health officials - The Argentinians have allegedly been in the country (Brazil) for 2/3 days. They made a compromise they can play but gotta leave ASAP out of the country.

It's the Brazilian government's health officials and  Argentinian FA - the Brazilian health officials served them notice 3 hours before kick off and then The Argentinians tried to pull a fast one.

It's FIFA's fault. They said penalties will be handed out though I can't remember if it was against players themselves or clubs for not releasing players during an official sanctioned FIFA window.

It's the British government with their ridiculous rules. If elite sport is allowed to run then they should be exempt from the quarantine hotel and isolation rules if negative tests are returned. Elite sport is conducting regular testing of their staff - players included.

Players will want to play for their countries. It's a nuanced situation and I place no blame at the Emis' feet.

[Adam2003]

Just now, est1874 said:

So in your view then - and Zatman's - the only appropriate course of action in October when the Emis inevitably get called up again is for Villa to once again accept it because the AFA are the special little boy who gets to do what he wants all the others on the street behave themselves?

I suspect in October every country will follow Argentina’s example and call up their players whatever the PL say. So really the PL need to sit with the government and find a solution ASAP.

[Jbvilla909]

All a bit of a mess really. Hope they are both on a plane back tonight.

[est1874]

3 minutes ago, Adam2003 said:

Lot of people here who seemingly don’t understand the rules and that’s ok I guess, but also to those saying “well we should have expected the Argie FA to be dodgy”… well… I’m sure we did but there’s lots of FAs around the world where we would PREFER not to have our players playing for them because they are dodgy as hell, but international football doesn’t let us as a club make those ‘moral’ decisions. If you are called up the rules say you have to go, whatever shenanigans your FA gets involved in. If we had a Mauritian player we couldn’t refuse them playing just because there might be a camera in the toilets (weirdest football story of the summer?)

It's a global pandemic. Rules both domestic and international have been bent, broken, rewritten and otherwise flexed at a moment's notice in order to accommodate the unprecedented circumstances we're all living in.

This notion that the rules are the rules and that's that, no mitigating circumstances, no mediation and no legal recourse despite the fact that millions are dying in South America from a deadly disease is just not reflective of how any other sporting body has been operating over the last 18 months.

[a m ole]

4 minutes ago, est1874 said:

So in your view then - and Zatman's - the only appropriate course of action in October when the Emis inevitably get called up again is for Villa to once again accept it because the AFA are the special little boy who gets to do what he wants all the others on the street behave themselves?

It’s not my view. It’s the rules. Whether they come to a sensible agreement or not is another matter. The players of course can say no if they like, but the club can’t prevent the players from going.

[a m ole]

1 minute ago, est1874 said:

It's a global pandemic. Rules both domestic and international have been bent, broken, rewritten and otherwise flexed at a moment's notice in order to accommodate the unprecedented circumstances we're all living in.

This notion that the rules are the rules and that's that, no mitigating circumstances, no mediation and no legal recourse despite the fact that millions are dying in South America from a deadly disease is just not reflective of how any other sporting body has been operating over the last 18 months.

Exactly, so blame **** Argentina, not the Villa. That’s the point. We’re powerless.

[Adam2003]

1 minute ago, est1874 said:

It's a global pandemic. Rules both domestic and international have been bent, broken, rewritten and otherwise flexed at a moment's notice in order to accommodate the unprecedented circumstances we're all living in.

This notion that the rules are the rules and that's that, no mitigating circumstances, no mediation and no legal recourse despite the fact that millions are dying in South America from a deadly disease is just not reflective of how any other sporting body has been operating over the last 18 months.

You’re right in a way that the rules have been bent… but the rules have been bent in football to let international games and tournaments happen, not to obstruct them. The Euros. The Copa. World Cup qualifiers. The simple thing would be not to play them all, but if you think FIFA will let clubs use it as a precedent to block call ups if challenged I have a bridge I would like to sell you.

[WallisFrizz]

The Argentinian team, including the naughty 4, have flown back to Argentina so presumably all systems go for Croatia tomorrow.