Does nobody give a f**k that Chelsea may have part ownership of half the players in Portugal??

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

I've posted the link twice now with no reply.

I can't believe there isn't a bit of outrage. Unless y'all can't be arsed to read it, or read it and didn't understand.

[Classic Jorge]

Even mores that none of his players are even entertained as having a slight possibility of joining us. I'd like to know whose making that call.

[Brentwood]

Isn't it just where an investor sees potential in a player, buys a stake in them (like some clubs do) so that they get a nice return when they are then sold on? I didn't understand the argument about it leading to match fixing

[Mack]

You should realise that the average Awimb intellect is incapable of reading a story longer than 2 paragraphs. (except Jorge who avidly reads that Swiss Ramble dry ****e as if it matters)

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

You c**t.

[Classic Jorge]

Which is against UEFA/FIFA rules

[Classic Jorge]

[Brentwood]

to put him in the team so that they have more chance of getting a sell on profit you mean?

[Mack]

[redgunamo]

[Classic Jorge]

Either way the clubs will be the ultimate loser in all of this, which is why it's dodgy at best

[Classic Jorge]

[Classic Jorge]

Intl Governing Body > Continental Governing Body > National FA > Club > Player

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

Who gets a say in which clubs can buy the player?

Who might conceivably exert pressure on the player by having that sort of control?

We don't know, because the fund in question is probably registered in the Cayman Islands through some sort of front that doesn't provide transparency over actual ownership.

Hence if Chelsea are backing a fund for TPO they may have an influence on where the players part owned by it go, and how much they go for.

Arsenal want a Brazilian wunderkid playing for Benfica? Not happening if Chelsea don't want us to have him.

Of course, it also drives up transfer fees by making it possible for smaller clubs to buy players they couldn't otherwise afford, and pulls money out of the game by taking the profit when they're sold on.

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

Or forcing a player to move on so they get their cut.

[Mack]

[Luis Anaconda]

Might well go back to the Ronaldo thing

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

[Classic Jorge]

Or that Mendes represents so many competing players it might be worth his while to block his players coming to us - or just make it plain difficult - as an extra service.

[Brentwood]

[Luis Anaconda]

actually any reason given - but there does seem to be something in it. Mendes is bessie mates with Mourinho as well

[redgunamo]

It seems to me that the governing bodies cannot act without the clubs'/players' consent.

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

[Classic Jorge]

[Luis Anaconda]

whether we need him is a moot point but we have definitely steered clear of his players. Any called Jorge can't be trusted j

[Dr Headgear - Wannabe viking]

[Brentwood]

I don't know how they've done it, or why, but it will come out. Also, the Lampard situation (even though City say they are paying all of his wages) is strange.

This mess is why I can't see how they will be able to enforce FFP

[Classic Jorge]

[Steve Williams - gay for Mark Knopfler]

[redgunamo]

all this outside cash and the outside influence it brings.

Money is its own continent, I'm afraid. With its own conscience and is own rules.

[Classic Jorge]

Accords do need to at least attempt to be found though

['Neg]

[Classic Jorge]

[redgunamo]

just wants to make sure they get their cut.

[Classic Jorge]

[Luis Anaconda]

[redgunamo]

[redgunamo]