lady-isobel-barnett Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 Quote Coulibaly had suddenly fled Egypt No mention of the ten plagues beforehand! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Passenger Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 47 minutes ago, Legs Like A Spider said: Is this not maybe a good time for a club statement! I imagine the club will confirm if international clearance is granted or refused. I wouldn't expect a statement until that's settled. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 1 hour ago, MonehJags said: So......... Out of the two 'signings' not one is available for Saturday? Whoops Why isn’t Ntembwy available ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunnikierjag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 2 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: Why isn’t Ntembwy available ? Not fit enough 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sb1876 Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 (edited) It's a shame this has somewhat clouded a great signing and I wonder if we (through our own legal connections or staff) have provided Souleymane with the legal advice that he is free to sign for us? It may have been a part of our agreement that we would fight his case should there be any legal challenges? As stated elsewhere, hopefully the club will put an official statement out to clarify the position. Edited August 23, 2018 by sb1876 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TartanC4 Posted August 23, 2018 Author Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 Seems to be something in Al Ahly legal consultant Helmy Abdel-Razek claims the Dispute Settlement Court in FIFA have ruled in the favour of the the Egyptian team in their case against the runaway striker. Its breach of contract, A Professional Player, who leaves a Club in violation of his Agreement with that Club may be suspended and may be liable to sports sanctions and the payment of any compensation claims in accordance with the Judicial Panel Protocol and/or the FIFA Regulations, as appropriate. Surely with the press coverage and his history at Kilmarnock, the club and their legal team knew everything, done there homework. I think we are a professional outfit and surely not stupid enough to get involved in a bum deal Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fenski Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 Sorta tempted to be patient and see how this pans out as I know nothing about sport contract law. My only thought is that the level of compensation due is hard to believe - is it not normal to set a fine based on the ability to pay? Very, very few footballers would be able to pay $1million.... Unless of course that it is in effect meant to be a 'life sentence'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
potty trained Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 16 minutes ago, fenski said: Sorta tempted to be patient and see how this pans out as I know nothing about sport contract law. You've come to the right place. Seems there's plenty on here willing to take a punt on the eventual outcome. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legs Like A Spider Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 Any frustration over this should be taken out on the Arabs on Saturday!!!! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ironfist Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 https://www.pieandbovril.com/forum/index.php?/topic/230757-partick-thistle-201819-thread/&do=findComment&comment=12372807 this guys seems to know what he is talking about. In any case, why not trust the club- Gerry is an intelligent guy. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 22 minutes ago, potty trained said: You've come to the right place. Seems there's plenty on here willing to take a punt on the eventual outcome. What odds and stake would we need to get on him scoring on Saturday, to be able to pay off the fines? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roque Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 (edited) 45 minutes ago, fenski said: Sorta tempted to be patient and see how this pans out as I know nothing about sport contract law. My only thought is that the level of compensation due is hard to believe - is it not normal to set a fine based on the ability to pay? Very, very few footballers would be able to pay $1million.... Unless of course that it is in effect meant to be a 'life sentence'. I'd guess that the compensation due to be paid is at least partly linked to the transfer fee Al-Ahly paid for Coulibaly. They seem to have paid Kilmarnock around £1m, and it sounds like much of it was up front. If he's walked out of his contract a few months after it begins, I don't think it's unreasonable for Al-Ahly to expect a decent sum of that in return when they spent that kind of sum on a guy and expected him to be there for 3 or 4 years. The £800,000 or so he apparently owes would be a fairly logical settlement figure in that case. Pure speculation on my behalf here, but I'd assume that's why the compensation figure is set at such a seemingly unrealistic level. Edited August 23, 2018 by Roque Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 2 hours ago, dunnikierjag said: Not fit enough to play 90 mins was what he said Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 13 minutes ago, Roque said: I'd guess that the compensation due to be paid is at least partly linked to the transfer fee Al-Ahly paid for Coulibaly. They seem to have paid Kilmarnock around £1m, and it sounds like much of it was up front. If he's walked out of his contract a few months after it begins, I don't think it's unreasonable for Al-Ahly to expect a decent sum of that in return when they spent that kind of sum on a guy and expected him to be there for 3 or 4 years. The £800,000 or so he apparently owes would be a fairly logical settlement figure in that case. Pure speculation on my behalf here, but I'd assume that's why the compensation figure is set at such a seemingly unrealistic level. I am not sure I agree that this is logical. The fee deal was between Killie and Al-Ahly and nothing to do with Coulibaly. It doesn’t make sense that he is responsible for the amount they agreed to pay Kilmarnock. If Al-Ahly had to pay £1M more(transfer fee and wages)for his replacement, then there might be some logic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunnikierjag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 22 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: to play 90 mins was what he said Exactly he is not fit enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roque Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 12 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: I am not sure I agree that this is logical. The fee deal was between Killie and Al-Ahly and nothing to do with Coulibaly. It doesn’t make sense that he is responsible for the amount they agreed to pay Kilmarnock. If Al-Ahly had to pay £1M more(transfer fee and wages)for his replacement, then there might be some logic. Why would a replacement be in any way relevant? Coulibaly was subject to a transfer fee and signed a contract for x amount of years with Al-Ahly as part of this transfer deal. If he then walks out of the club and leaves the country, he is in breach of the contract that was signed based on the principle of a £1m transfer fee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Dastardly Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 2 hours ago, sb1876 said: It's a shame this has somewhat clouded a great signing and I wonder if we (through our own legal connections or staff) have provided Souleymane with the legal advice that he is free to sign for us? It may have been a part of our agreement that we would fight his case should there be any legal challenges? As stated elsewhere, hopefully the club will put an official statement out to clarify the position. I would be very surprised if there was any statement. This is a legal case which might need to go to a court of some sort. The club and player will not want to say anything which might prejudice their case, or give the other side any advance notice of our arguments. the lawyers will be giving advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 19 minutes ago, Roque said: Why would a replacement be in any way relevant? Coulibaly was subject to a transfer fee and signed a contract for x amount of years with Al-Ahly as part of this transfer deal. If he then walks out of the club and leaves the country, he is in breach of the contract that was signed based on the principle of a £1m transfer fee. A replacement is relevant as I explained ie if Al- Ahly were out of pocket. You are assuming that the transfer fee was included in any contract that Coulibaly signed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dunnikierjag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Lenziejag said: A replacement is relevant as I explained ie if Al- Ahly were out of pocket. You are assuming that the transfer fee was included in any contract that Coulibaly signed. They paid about 1m for Coulibally why would they not be entitled to their money back. If I bought faulty goods I would want my money back. They paid the transfer fee in good faith and are entitled to not be out of pocket because he doesn't like Egypt. Edited August 23, 2018 by dunnikierjag Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legs Like A Spider Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 55 minutes ago, Dick Dastardly said: I would be very surprised if there was any statement. This is a legal case which might need to go to a court of some sort. The club and player will not want to say anything which might prejudice their case, or give the other side any advance notice of our arguments. the lawyers will be giving advice. So why don't they say...... This is now a legal case which might need to go to a court of some sort. The club and player will not be saying anything which might prejudice our case or give the other side any advance notice of our arguments. Our lawyers are giving us advice! ........it would put an end to people speculating and quoting articles which may or may not be correct and the fans will know if Coulibaly is going to be available for games in the immediate future. I still find it very strange that they have announced the signing and presumably are paying him a wage if there is even a remote chance that he can never play for us. Right now I expect to see him on Saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roque Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 (edited) 1 hour ago, Lenziejag said: A replacement is relevant as I explained ie if Al- Ahly were out of pocket. You are assuming that the transfer fee was included in any contract that Coulibaly signed. But they are out of pocket. They're out of pocket by a million quid because the guy they spent that on decided to breach his contract and leave the country. If a club purchase a player, and the player signs a contract with that club, then of course his contract is based on the transfer fee. The contract wouldn't exist if the transfer hadn't happened. Coulibaly signed a contract on the basis of him being purchased by Al-Ahly from Kilmarnock. Okay, it probably wasn't written into his contract that he owes the value of the transfer fee if he decides he's going to quit having only served 10% of the duration of his contract - but that's been a judgment made by a governing body, and imo it makes perfect sense to link that fine to the transaction for a player who ended up being nowhere near that value to the club because he walked out on them. Edited August 23, 2018 by Roque Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 59 minutes ago, dunnikierjag said: They paid about 1m for Coulibally why would they not be entitled to their money back. If I bought faulty goods I would want my money back. They paid the transfer fee in good faith and are entitled to not be out of pocket because he doesn't like Egypt. You do realise that Kilmarnock Football Club and Souleymane Coulibaly are different legal persons, yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jags on tour Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 Hopefully the Jagzone interview with Archie will clear things up, hopefully he will be asked although I’m not counting on it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Woodstock Jag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 1 minute ago, Roque said: But they are out of pocket. They're out of pocket by a million quid because the guy they spent that on decided to breach his contract and leave the country. If a club purchase a player, and the player signs a contract with that club, then of course his contract is based on the transfer fee. The contract wouldn't exist if the transfer hadn't happened. Coulibaly signed a contract on the basis of him being purchased by Al-Ahly from Kilmarnock. Okay, it probably wasn't written into his contract that he owes the value of the transfer fee if he decides he's going to quit having only served 10% of the duration of his contract - but that's been a judgment made by a governing body, and imo it makes perfect sense to link that fine to the transfer purchased for a player who ended up being nowhere near that value to the club because he walked out on them. Sorry but this is horse manure. Souleymane Coulibaly is not Kilmarnock FC. He was not personally paid the transfer fee they paid. The purpose of a transfer fee is to get the other club to waive their existing right to hold the registration of the player. The player's legal obligations are not involved in that exchange of money. The player then negotiates a contract for personal terms with a club to agree to play for them. Unless a contract specifically otherwise states, the transfer fee has no bearing on any amount due by the player in the event they fail to perform the contract or purport to rescind it. Far more likely in this case is that the penalty clauses in this 3.5 year contract are related in some way to Coulibaly's wages and bonus structure for the period in which he has refused to play for the Club. A player could be bought for a billion pounds one day and shoot themselves the next day. Doesn't mean their new club get to bankrupt their estate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenziejag Posted August 23, 2018 Report Share Posted August 23, 2018 1 hour ago, dunnikierjag said: They paid about 1m for Coulibally why would they not be entitled to their money back. If I bought faulty goods I would want my money back. They paid the transfer fee in good faith and are entitled to not be out of pocket because he doesn't like Egypt. If they had paid the £1M to Coulibaly I would agree but they paid Killie. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.