Welcome Notice

Hello and welcome to Molineux Mix a forum for Wolves fans by Wolves fans.

Register Log in

Marquinhos

Hanbury_Wolf

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2016
Messages
650
Reaction score
1,226
This reminds me of Jon Obi Mikel

He signed for Utd, reneged, signed for Chelsea and it went to court

Chelsea had to pay Utd £20m

Which was the exact amount Utd needed to keep their star player at the time Nuben Reves. They kept, him, built a team around him, won the league then the UCL within 2 years and built a massive new stadium on their current site with cheap tickets for all.
 

SakosRightFoot

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Oct 30, 2016
Messages
4,561
Reaction score
3,956
Think the most likely scenario is it’s agents fault. We go to one agent who says yeah I represent the player, they put a contract to him and he signs it. Another agent comes along and says I’ve got Arsenal wanting you so sign this instead and he does, with agent number 2 thinking they can deny all knowledge of the previous contract as they are his new representatives. I mean it’s possible we’re the ones who introduced a new agent to him given our obvious connections

Either way we’ll have to prove the people we dealt with were licensed to represent him and that he knew what he was signing. For a move like that you’d have hoped we’d have been in touch arranging flights and accommodation for him so should be easy to prove a chain of communication
 

Kcb92

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2015
Messages
781
Reaction score
644
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?
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.
 

Wednesbury Wolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
16,077
Reaction score
5,419
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.
 
Last edited:

Mile End Wanderer

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
9,031
Reaction score
6,934
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 the relevant paperwork to show he signed a pre contract with us then we will be owed money!!
 

Notsoslimshady

Groupie
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
245
Reaction score
598
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
 

SakosRightFoot

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Oct 30, 2016
Messages
4,561
Reaction score
3,956
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 think there’s likely multiple agents involved. The legal side will be proving who had the right to represent him
 

Oldgold Wolfcub

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
21,483
Reaction score
8,064
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.
I am afraid then very reluctantly I would have to accept Arsenal having to pay us the 42.5mill. :cool::D
 

jwolfie91

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Aug 8, 2018
Messages
12,518
Reaction score
16,074
Pre-contracts are extremely hard to enforce, sounds like we tried to get him as a free agent and Arsenal brought him first (because if you rate a player a few million isn't worth losing them over...)
 

WolfLing

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
12,054
Reaction score
19,427
Arsenal have confirmed his signing.

Does that mean they've settled with us, or is this one going to rumble on?
 

RosehillWolf

Faffety faff faffing
Joined
Jun 20, 2012
Messages
14,175
Reaction score
9,753
Quite simply they acted and signed. Whilst , as usual , we faffed
 

Dan G WWFC

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Aug 27, 2013
Messages
13,820
Reaction score
6,360
Quite simply they acted and signed. Whilst , as usual , we faffed

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.
 

Rhoswolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Sep 22, 2020
Messages
2,225
Reaction score
3,327
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.
Here's hoping but doubt it'll happen.
 

Notsoslimshady

Groupie
Joined
Dec 28, 2020
Messages
245
Reaction score
598
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.

As someone above said, why wouod arsenal pay for a player they could have got for free.

The whole deal seems dodgy to me. As far as i am concerned if there was 100% a pre-contract agreement in place then he was not eligible for transfer.

People love to knock Wolves on here, but i can't see what they've done wrong in this case
 

hollo

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Apr 10, 2007
Messages
4,330
Reaction score
2,817
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?
 

Sussex Wolf

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
17,291
Reaction score
18,601
Do we keep the player?

Think that depends on how good we think he is, and how much of this debacle was his doing vs his club and Arsenal. If he’s just an investment player, and knowingly tried to screw us over, then in the words of some Ukrainians, “go **** yourself”, pocket the compensation, and leave his old club and/or Arsenal as transfer pariahs! Not that I’m vindictive or anything!
 

Oldgold Wolfcub

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
21,483
Reaction score
8,064
Arsenal have confirmed his signing.

Does that mean they've settled with us, or is this one going to rumble on?
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.
 

WickedWolfie

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Oct 26, 2018
Messages
31,221
Reaction score
30,600
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.
The problem with your last para is the precedent set. This time we might not care. Next time?
 

WolfLing

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jun 29, 2016
Messages
12,054
Reaction score
19,427
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.

It’s a really odd situation this one.

When he first signed for Sao Paulo in 2019, he signed a 5 year contract (until June 2024). The Brazilian equivalent of the FA were fine with this.

But FIFA doesn’t recognise any professional contracts over 3 years long for players under 18. So as far as FIFA (and the player) we’re concerned, his contract was up this summer, so he signed the pre-contract agreement with us.

São Paulo (and Arsenal) will argue that he was still under contract, so the pre-contract with us is nul and void, and he was bought with time still left on his contract.

So why the rush? Why the reduced fee?

São Paulo are probably just trying it on to get some cash back for a player they would have lost for free.

Arsenal’s Brazilian DoF Edu has probably tapped up the youngster and turned his head with a move to London and European football.

The whole thing stinks.
 

Oldgold Wolfcub

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Jul 2, 2005
Messages
21,483
Reaction score
8,064
The problem with your last para is the precedent set. This time we might not care. Next time?
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.
 

Wagstaffe Was Magic

Just doesn't shut up
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
8,738
Reaction score
6,736
We had the advantage of Portuguese (his native language) being spoken freely in Wolverhampton whereas they’re not as fluent in Ashburton Grove and around Islington :cool:
 
Top Bottom