Fri Apr 05, 2019 2:42 am
Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:36 am
Sven wrote:Emiliano Sala transfer not included in FA list of transactions involving agents
Friday 5th April 2019
Emiliano Sala's ill-fated transfer from Nantes to Cardiff has not been included by the Football Association in its annual list of transactions involving agents.
The 28-year-old Argentinian striker became the Premier League club's record signing on January 19 but then died in a plane crash with his pilot David Ibbotson over the English Channel two days later.
Since then the two clubs have been locked in a bitter dispute over the £15m fee, with the French side demanding payment and Cardiff claiming the deal was not completed.
World governing body FIFA have given the two sides until April 15 to settle the row amicably or it will have to intervene.
Under FIFA rules, the FA has been publishing the total payments made by clubs in England's top five divisions to football agents for the last three years.
It also publishes every transaction - loan, transfer or renegotiated deal - that involved an agent, listing who represented the player and the clubs. That list runs to 17 tightly-typed spreadsheets, with around 600 transactions for Premier League clubs alone, including 23 for Cardiff.
One of Cardiff's 'intermediary transactions' involved manager Neil Warnock's son James, who works for Unique Sports Management and represents Bluebirds forward Rhys Healey.
But it is understood that the Sala transfer has not been included in the list because it is under dispute and being reviewed by FIFA.
Fri Apr 05, 2019 11:48 am
Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:13 pm
2blue2handle wrote:Many twists and turns to come in this matter that's for sure.
I'm glad we didn't just chuck over the money out of the kindness of our hearts like some wanted. This needs to be fully investigated and then for the correct people to pay.
Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:58 pm
bluesince62 wrote:2blue2handle wrote:Many twists and turns to come in this matter that's for sure.
I'm glad we didn't just chuck over the money out of the kindness of our hearts like some wanted. This needs to be fully investigated and then for the correct people to pay.
Spot on mate,lots to come out on this,also glad we didn't hand over any payment,as that would be seen as liability for the full sum.correct decision from the club imho
![]()
Fri Apr 05, 2019 6:42 pm
Steve Zodiak wrote:bluesince62 wrote:2blue2handle wrote:Many twists and turns to come in this matter that's for sure.
I'm glad we didn't just chuck over the money out of the kindness of our hearts like some wanted. This needs to be fully investigated and then for the correct people to pay.
Spot on mate,lots to come out on this,also glad we didn't hand over any payment,as that would be seen as liability for the full sum.correct decision from the club imho
![]()
I have always said if the club are liable, they will pay. Easy for fans to come on here saying just hand over £15m when it is someone else who has to pay. Why should the club fork out millions if they are not liable for the money? I think a lot of people base their decisions on what they read in the press and on social media. I would tend to pay more attention to those who are actually involved, as well as solicitors and a court of law if necessary.
Sat Apr 06, 2019 9:23 am
2blue2handle wrote:Many twists and turns to come in this matter that's for sure.
I'm glad we didn't just chuck over the money out of the kindness of our hearts like some wanted. This needs to be fully investigated and then for the correct people to pay.