Lawley Wolf
Senior Member
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2016
- Messages
- 658
- Reaction score
- 598
Is he any good?
My thoughts exactly.TBF does anyone seriously think a sky 6 side will get any punishment what so ever.
Pre-contracts are for precisely the purpose of when a player is not a free agent (otherwise you'd just sign a standard contract). They're not a gentleman's agreement. By signing one a player is committing to be available to the club as of X date.Purely hypothesising and so I’m probably wrong.
Scenario I’m painting is that the pre-contract is only effective if he is a free agent. July 12th he’ll be a free agent according to article (3 years into contract) and we have agreed to sign him on July 14th.
If on July 1st he is sold to Arsenal (which he presumably can be as still owned by previous club) then he is (potentially) an Arsenal player.
So the questions are:
1) Can Arsenal sign him as they are doing so after his pre-contract agreement has been signed?
2) Is the pre-contract null and void as he will no longer be a free agent on July 12th?
3) Is there a penalty in the pre-contract if either party reneges?
If we have the relevant paperwork to show he signed a pre contract with us then we will be owed money!!He's officially joined Arsenal for £3m passed his medical and pre-signed yesterday. Considering he had a release clause of £42.5m getting him for £3m seems a bit strange but whatever happens we ain't getting him.
IF we have any paperwork we might get a small amount but the player would have been the better option.If we have the relevant paperwork to show he signed a pre contract with us then we will be owed money!!
I'm not sure about everyone being at fault but the rest is how i would see it. When players have 6 months left on contract they can speak to foreign clubs to agree a contract that would come into play when the current one ends. If a pre-contract agreement is signed then you would expect that player to be yours without having to check. As you said, if someone offered Saiss a contract and he signed it, Wolves would not be able to accept any transfer offers for him.The way I understand it, and i could be completely off base, is like this:
Saiss is out of contract with us this summer. If he had signed a pre-contract agreement with another club abroad back in January he would be scheldued to be their player when his contract with us ends.
If knowing this, aftewr January another club comes in and says we'll give you £X million for Saiss to join us when his contract ends with you and we agree, surely its everyones fault.
I'm probably waffling and making no sense.
I'm not sure about everyone being at fault but the rest is how i would see it. When players have 6 months left on contract they can speak to foreign clubs to agree a contract that would come into play when the current one ends. If a pre-contract agreement is signed then you would expect that player to be yours without having to check. As you said, if someone offered Saiss a contract and he signed it, Wolves would not be able to accept any transfer offers for him.
Sao Paolo have seemingly realised they could get some money instead of him leaving on a free. But that shouldn't be possible. A future transfer would have already been arranged. I imagine the player wanted to come to premier league, was given a route and took it. Then heard about arsenal and figured it a better deal.
Between Sao Paulo, the player and his agent they should have been aware that it wasn't possible.
How this can actually happen is beyond me.
Technically i would say that our agreement is the only legal contract and he should be our player when his contract expires. But would we want him now?
Surely, if arsenal are to have him they will have to pay us for a transfer or compo.
Hopefully he's not a future world beater
I am afraid then very reluctantly I would have to accept Arsenal having to pay us the 42.5mill.He's officially joined Arsenal for £3m passed his medical and pre-signed yesterday. Considering he had a release clause of £42.5m getting him for £3m seems a bit strange but whatever happens we ain't getting him.
Il settle for them just giving us William Saliba instead as the lad has huge potential but is seemingly not wanted by Arteta.I am afraid then very reluctantly I would have to accept Arsenal having to pay us the 42.5mill.
Most Gooners l know (l live in Islington) really don't understand that.Il settle for them just giving us William Saliba instead as the lad has huge potential but is seemingly not wanted by Arteta.
Someone once introduced themselves to me as the daughter of ex President of Nigeria - and she wasn’t joking !To be fair Wolves should have known something was fishy when the agent introduced himself as the son of the deposed King of Nigeria.
To be fair Wolves should have known something was fishy when the agent introduced himself as the son of the deposed King of Nigeria.
I'd say it will rumble onArsenal have confirmed his signing.
Does that mean they've settled with us, or is this one going to rumble on?
Poor Grasshoppers.
Wonder who we've got lined up to sign for them next?
Quite simply they acted and signed. Whilst , as usual , we faffed
Here's hoping but doubt it'll happen.Or does it double down on them being dodgy.
Why would they pay a fee for a player they could've had for free....
Arsenal knew he already signed a deal with us and tried to get around it.
If all aspects of the deal was agreed it's classed as binding. All depends if we can prove it in court.
Could be a transfer ban and them losing the player while having to pay us a fee.
Not in this case. It stinks of someone ignoring a contract and I’d drag them through the courts and make them regret it.Quite simply they acted and signed. Whilst , as usual , we faffed
I don't see how we faffed if we had a pre-contract agreement in place. In fact completely the opposite.Quite simply they acted and signed. Whilst , as usual , we faffed
Do we keep the player?Or does it double down on them being dodgy.
Why would they pay a fee for a player they could've had for free....
Arsenal knew he already signed a deal with us and tried to get around it.
If all aspects of the deal was agreed it's classed as binding. All depends if we can prove it in court.
Could be a transfer ban and them losing the player while having to pay us a fee.
Do we keep the player?
Now take legal action Wolves and make the ****s suffer....Arsenal fans on reading they beat us to his signature, are celebrating like they've won the league............again.
Lets put it this way. Arsenal have now confirmed they have signed this player. They would have to live on the moon to not know he has signed a pre contract. So unless someone can prove that this is not a pre contract Arsenal have broken contract law. So strictly speaking they have to deal with us unless it has been agreed already.Arsenal have confirmed his signing.
Does that mean they've settled with us, or is this one going to rumble on?
The problem with your last para is the precedent set. This time we might not care. Next time?Lets put it this way. Arsenal have now confirmed they have signed this player. They would have to live on the moon to not know he has signed a pre contract. So unless someone can prove that this is not a pre contract Arsenal have broken contract law. So strictly speaking they have to deal with us unless it has been agreed already.
One would think that Fosun being an international company would have top lawyers to advise them. My best guess is they will settle something with Arsenal otherwise they surely would have applied for an injunction to stop this transfer.
Or they might just not think the player is worth the fuss.
Lets put it this way. Arsenal have now confirmed they have signed this player. They would have to live on the moon to not know he has signed a pre contract. So unless someone can prove that this is not a pre contract Arsenal have broken contract law. So strictly speaking they have to deal with us unless it has been agreed already.
One would think that Fosun being an international company would have top lawyers to advise them. My best guess is they will settle something with Arsenal otherwise they surely would have applied for an injunction to stop this transfer.
Or they might just not think the player is worth the fuss.
I agree with you. It was a sarcastic comment as I feel that a number of decisions we have made have not been in the best interests of the club eg Traore's loan with no fee as opposed to Trincao.The problem with your last para is the precedent set. This time we might not care. Next time?
I dont feel so bad now knowing we'd never see him in a wolves shirt anyway.
Poor Grasshoppers.
Wonder who we've got lined up to sign for them next?