Cardiff have to pay for Sala

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 3:56 pm

Cardiff have refused to pay the agreed fee for Emiliano Sala but Fifa has ruled that they must pay Nantes the first instalment of the agreed fee which is €6m

bobinho · Post by **bobinho** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:03 pm

Can’t understand why they don’t think they should pay for him.

They have grieved for him like he was one of theirs...

Tricky Trevor · Post by **Tricky Trevor** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:21 pm

Despicable behaviour from Cardiff. He wouldn’t have even been on the plane but for them.

frankinwales · Post by **frankinwales** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:32 pm

Welshing on a debt....

Up the Clarets......

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:34 pm

Great news..

ClaretAndJew · Post by **ClaretAndJew** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:35 pm

They can’t print a eulogy of him all over their programmes, have him with their shirt and announcing his signing and then not pay anything for him.

Hibsclaret · Post by **Hibsclaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:42 pm

Surely the welsh FA can concoct the result they want...

Unbelievable behaviour but perhaps not.....

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:47 pm

I can't believe this lot ever remotely thought they wouldn't be liable for this. Surely their lawyer can't be advising them otherwise.

Rowls · Post by **Rowls** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 4:50 pm

Regardless of the complications Cardiff have acted without grace in their actions.

Bosscat · Post by **Bosscat** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:02 pm

They had signed the lad.... They should pay end of story

tarkys_ears · Post by **tarkys_ears** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:09 pm

How's it even up for question?

Surely there is a contract and if it's signed and dated there can be absolutely no argument????

Does anyone know what Cardiff are claiming?

AndrewJB · Post by **AndrewJB** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:10 pm

Isn't this what insurance is for?

Cleveleys_claret · Post by **Cleveleys_claret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:16 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Isn't this what insurance is for?

Yes but their problem is that on top of the 18m (?) Fee they agreed to pay 5 agents who were doing the deal 9m. This 9m will not be covered by insurers I would bet and this is the reason they tried to nullify the deal

jrgbfc · Post by **jrgbfc** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:18 pm

I'd like to think we'd behave with a bit more dignity if we found ourselves in a similar position.

Devils_Advocate · Post by **Devils_Advocate** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 5:19 pm

tarkys_ears wrote:How's it even up for question?

Surely there is a contract and if it's signed and dated there can be absolutely no argument????

Does anyone know what Cardiff are claiming?

Not sure on the accuracy but this article explains the basis of the dispute
https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/foo ... t-15941596

FCBurnley · Post by **FCBurnley** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:01 pm

Would have thought they would have paid when they signed the deal which clearly was pre accident. Any further payments/installments would surely be covered by insurance ?

Wile E Coyote · Post by **Wile E Coyote** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 6:24 pm

they need to sort this out speedily to avoid embarrassment, not a case for lengthy legal disputes.
Disrespectful otherwise.

mdd2 · Post by **mdd2** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:19 pm

If that article is correct from D_A hard to see why Cardiff should pay as Sala had not signed a contract with Cardiff acceptable to the Premier League and no one can know if he would have signed an acceptable contract where his fee for signing would be paid in instalments.
And if he wasn't a Cardiff player where does the compensation come from?

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 7:51 pm

Cleveleys_claret wrote:Yes but their problem is that on top of the 18m (?) Fee they agreed to pay 5 agents who were doing the deal 9m. This 9m will not be covered by insurers I would bet and this is the reason they tried to nullify the deal

If that's true then they're stupid, not just classless, in this transfer

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:19 pm

AndrewJB wrote:Isn't this what insurance is for?

And what if your insurer points out that technically the signing wasn't complete and it's Nantes who are insured?

It's unseemly this has all played out publicly but it's not edifying reading the musings on the legalities of this from people who clearly don't know anything.

bobinho · Post by **bobinho** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:33 pm

Quite right. Most, if not all of us on here don't know anything.

Big difference to what is legally right and what is morally right.

Most people on here at least get that...

Most.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:39 pm

If Cardiff aren’t contractually obliged to pay for the player then they are well within their rights to dispute this. This was a business transaction after all.

But the way that the club (and I seem to remember it was the club and not just the fans) publicly claimed that ‘he’ll always be a bluebird’ etc. now puts them in a very bad light. Considering the huge sums of money in football these days I would like to think had this have been Burnley we would have acted differently.

Dark Cloud · Post by **Dark Cloud** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 8:53 pm

The trouble is that with £17 million at stake, what's morally right will never take precedent over what is legally right. (Sadly)

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:19 pm

I'm not sure what's "moral" about one corporate entity giving another one £15million for fun. Just a chance for football fans to pretend they're taking a moral stance while sticking the boot into a club they don't like. Morals have f*** all to do with it.

Rileybobs · Post by **Rileybobs** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:23 pm

thatdberight wrote:I'm not sure what's "moral" about one corporate entity giving another one £15million for fun. Just a chance for football fans to pretend they're taking a moral stance while sticking the boot into a club they don't like. Morals have f*** all to do with it.

Whilst I agree generally, saying ‘you’ll always be a bluebird’ and then denying that he was ever a bluebird is pretty tasteless.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 9:42 pm

Rileybobs wrote:Whilst I agree generally, saying ‘you’ll always be a bluebird’ and then denying that he was ever a bluebird is pretty tasteless.

You're right. They jumped the gun. They didn't figure on the 1 in 10,000 chance that something would happen to stop the transfer. Neither did Nantes stop it. Nor any of the various professional advisors. Not the player, a very wealthy man paying handsomely for that professional advice.

In the context of his death, that lack of forensic diligence seems to me unimportant. It looks like FIFA have found the transfer was concluded. Good. Or good if it's the other way. The financial and administrative loose ends just need tidying up.

Ilkley claret · Post by **Ilkley claret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:06 pm

Suspect Cardiff hadn't got the insurance in place in time or only valid if he was registered with PL, which he wasn't

Bin Ont Turf · Post by **Bin Ont Turf** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:10 pm

Rileybobs wrote: Considering the huge sums of money in football these days I would like to think had this have been Burnley we would have acted differently.

Definitely would have done.

1HappyClaret · Post by **1HappyClaret** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:37 pm

I also think that the insurance will have been declared null and void because of the circumstances around the flight.

Spike · Post by **Spike** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:43 pm

Why does everything that Cardiff touch turn out to be so nasty?

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Mon Sep 30, 2019 10:43 pm

1HappyClaret wrote:I also think that the insurance will have been declared null and void because of the circumstances around the flight.

Why?

1HappyClaret · Post by **1HappyClaret** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 6:32 am

thatdberight wrote:Why?

Because they hired a pilot who was not allowed to fly at night and and a pilot who was not allowed to carry fee paying passengers.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:20 am

1HappyClaret wrote:Because they hired a pilot who was not allowed to fly at night and and a pilot who was not allowed to carry fee paying passengers.

I suspect they hired a company to fly him rather than a pilot, big difference

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:27 am

1HappyClaret wrote:Because they hired a pilot who was not allowed to fly at night and and a pilot who was not allowed to carry fee paying passengers.

Even if Cardiff's insurance stipulated that their players mustn't act recklessly (which is possible) it's hard to see how Cardiff or Sala breached that. If he'd died in a taxi where it turned out the driver was actually an unlicensed driver standing in for the licensee, no-one would claim a life insurance policy was invalid.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 7:30 am

Vegas Claret wrote:I suspect they hired a company to fly him rather than a pilot, big difference

They (Cardiff) didn't hire anybody. It's sometimes easy to forget that this was a man making his way to his new job and not a child in a push-chair.

Billy Balfour · Post by **Billy Balfour** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 9:18 am

Is it a case that he was a Cardiff player, but one that wasn't registered with the Premier League. Have I got this right?

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:29 pm

thatdberight wrote:They (Cardiff) didn't hire anybody. It's sometimes easy to forget that this was a man making his way to his new job and not a child in a push-chair.

yeah I think they offered a flight didn't they but his agent booked the fatal one ?

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:49 pm

Vegas Claret wrote:yeah I think they offered a flight didn't they but his agent booked the fatal one ?

I believe they're on record as having offered to pay for a commercial flight. The player decided he wanted to spend more time saying goodbye in Nantes and then he / his representatives booked the fatal private flight.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:51 pm

Billy Balfour wrote:Is it a case that he was a Cardiff player, but one that wasn't registered with the Premier League. Have I got this right?

I don't think any of us know all the detail but it has been surmised that the transfer wasn't to be deemed complete until all adminstrative and registration elements were fulfilled. Whether it was EPL registration or another element, I'm not sure what Cardiff's point is but FIFA don't appear to accept it.

Steve1956 · Post by **Steve1956** » Tue Oct 01, 2019 1:53 pm

Pay up.....

ClaretTony · Post by **ClaretTony** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:20 am

Cardiff are appealing the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport

conyoviejo · Post by **conyoviejo** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:32 am

ClaretTony wrote:Cardiff are appealing the decision to the Court of Arbitration for Sport

What a horrible horrible club they are.!!

Lord Beamish · Post by **Lord Beamish** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:34 am

This is, if anything, an object lesson in the need to keep payments to agents to an absolute minimum.

Bfcboyo · Post by **Bfcboyo** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:46 am

I never could make out the words to the Sala tribute song , I wonder what their own fans make of it all. They seemed passionate and genuinely upset.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 9:58 am

A lot of things to learn. Often, when you buy skiing insurance the cover is limited to skiing on piste. If you go off-piste your insurance may no longer apply. Similarly, if you have drunk alcohol - and, maybe not even "a lot" of alcohol.

I've not seen any mention of Cardiff's insurance. It could be that there were things incomplete to make the insurance apply. It could be the cover didn't extend to flights in small aircraft or some other matter relating to the flight taken.

It could even be that Cardiff are required by their insurance to take the steps they are taking.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:17 am

Paul Waine wrote:I've not seen any mention of Cardiff's insurance. It could be that there were things incomplete to make the insurance apply. It could be the cover didn't extend to flights in small aircraft or some other matter relating to the flight taken.

It could even be that Cardiff are required by their insurance to take the steps they are taking.

I find it hard to believe, given footballers' salaries and lives, that private/small aircraft flights could be an issue.

But I'm sure proof of the completion of the transfer would be a requirement for their insurance. This is just them running their club properly.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:22 am

Lord Beamish wrote:This is, if anything, an object lesson in the need to keep payments to agents to an absolute minimum.

It is if one takes as read a string of conjectures about what's gone on so far. We have no idea about that and there's no reason to think Cardiff wouldn't have been doing the same if no agents' fees had been involved.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:24 pm

thatdberight wrote:I find it hard to believe, given footballers' salaries and lives, that private/small aircraft flights could be an issue.

But I'm sure proof of the completion of the transfer would be a requirement for their insurance. This is just them running their club properly.

Hi tbr, think of it from the insurer's point of view. Would you include cover for the passenger of a small plane, flying at night, with - if reports were accurate - a pilot who was not licensed for this activity?

Agree, insurance may also be an issue for the proper status of the transfer. Again, from the insurer's point of view, would you include in the insurance policy someone who may not have completed all the transfer requirements - even if they had reached the stage where the transfer fee has become due to the selling club?

Anyway, not my issue either way. It will get sorted in the usual way these disputes get sorted.

thatdberight · Post by **thatdberight** » Wed Oct 02, 2019 11:55 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Would you include cover for the passenger of a small plane, flying at night.

Yes, they would. Any high net worth individual is likely to take such flights. Any corporate life insurance policy I've dealt with would have paid out on an accident in this circumstance.

The status of the pilot is another matter but, as I said above, there wouldn't necessarily be anything to stop the employer's policy being valid if they and the employee had acted reasonably. They might then seek to recoup from someone else if there was fraud or misrepresentation.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Thu Oct 03, 2019 12:15 am

thatdberight wrote:Yes, they would. Any high net worth individual is likely to take such flights. Any corporate life insurance policy I've dealt with would have paid out on an accident in this circumstance.

The status of the pilot is another matter but, as I said above, there wouldn't necessarily be anything to stop the employer's policy being valid if they and the employee had acted reasonably. They might then seek to recoup from someone else if there was fraud or misrepresentation.

OK, Sounds as though you've got more experience than me. And, I agree, if a helicopter flight can be covered a lot of small aircraft will be covered.