TELEGRAPH: POTENTIAL OF THREE WINDOW CITY TRANSFER BAN?

Exclusive: Cardiff City face three-window transfer ban if they fail to comply with Fifa ruling on Emiliano Sala transfer fee
The Telegraph's Ben Rumsby

Fifa has told Cardiff they must pay for the transfer of Emiliano Sala


Cardiff City failed to convince Fifa to hold Nantes “liable” over the death of Emiliano Sala, the Daily Telegraph can reveal.

A month after telling the Welsh club to hand over the first instalment of Sala’s £15million transfer fee to Nantes, the governing body has issued the grounds for its decision in the bitter row over who owned the striker when he was killed in a plane crash in January.

Seen by this newspaper, those grounds also reveal that Cardiff face a three-window transfer ban if they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee (PSC) .


They have already announced plans to take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport – and potentially beyond – following that ruling, which they accused of being predicated on “a narrow aspect of the overall dispute, without considering the full document presented” by their lawyers."

The grounds confirm the four-strong PSC of chairman Raymond Hack, Roy Vermeer, Anna Peniche and Castellar Guimaraes Neto “decided not to take into account any arguments brought forward by Cardiff in front of Fifa in relation to the circumstances surrounding the tragic passing of the player”.


Those arguments included that Nantes be held “liable for the damages” caused to them by the death of Sala, whose fatal flight was booked by Willie McKay, the former agent and bankrupt who helped broker the Argentinian’s transfer to Cardiff and whose son, Mark, had been contracted by the French club to find a buyer.

The Welsh side contended that these damages should amount to the £15m transfer fee plus conditional bonus payments of up to £1.8m, thereby rendering Nantes’ own claim void.

The grounds read: “Cardiff maintained that, by hiring an unlicensed aircraft and employing an unlicensed and inexperienced pilot for the player’s flight of 19 January 2019, Mr Willie McKay and his company had grossly failed in their duty of care. This alleged negligence resulted in the crash of the aircraft that caused the player’s decease. Consequently, according to Cardiff, the individuals involved in the flight operations should be deemed directly responsible for the damage suffered by Cardiff, which includes, but is not limited to, the player’s market value as Premier League forward at the time of his decease.”


McKay has repeatedly stated he had no input into the selection of the relevant pilot or plane, which he booked via experienced light-aircraft pilot David Henderson.

Henderson was arrested in June on suspicion of manslaughter before being released on bail.

In its own submission to Fifa, Nantes disputed Cardiff’s interpretation of a French law which the Welsh club contended made them civilly liable for the actions of McKay.

The PSC also snubbed a request by Cardiff for its proceedings to be suspended pending the outcome of the criminal and civil investigations into the death of Sala – who would have turned 29 last week had he lived – and any legal action they might take as a result.


The grounds read: “Even though the circumstances surrounding the player’s tragic passing in a plane accident may activate criminal proceedings and civil actions regarding Nantes’ possible liability before local courts, the bureau was of the opinion that those proceedings should be settled by the local courts and not by Fifa. If the local courts would determine any criminal or civil liability on the side of Nantes, it is also for the local courts to determine the consequences of such liability. The bureau held that Cardiff had not been able to prove that the outcome of those local proceedings would be relevant for the outcome of the dispute pertaining to whether or not a transfer fee is due.”


Having refused to take the circumstances of Sala’s death into account, the PSC’s decision was based solely on whether his transfer was completed before he was killed.

It dismissed Cardiff’s contention that the fact his employment contract was rejected by the Premier League over a front-loaded signing-on fee – and that he died before a revised one could be put in front of him – should void the move.

The grounds read: “The only reason why the contract was not approved was an omission of Cardiff itself.”


The panel also rejected the club’s argument that clauses in the transfer agreement they struck with Nantes remained unfulfilled, ruling that the transaction had been concluded when the Football Association of Wales “entered all the necessary requirements” into its Transfer Matching System at 5.30pm on January 21, which was less than two hours before Sala’s fatal flight took off from Nantes.


The grounds read: “The player’s transfer from Nantes to Cardiff has to be considered as validly concluded between the parties. Hence, the player was a player of Cardiff.”

The Welsh club were given 45 days from the moment Nantes provided them with bank details to pay the French club an initial £5.3m, plus any interest accrued since January.

They were warned failure to comply would result in a transfer ban “for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods”.


Cardiff declined to comment on Sunday night on the grounds for Fifa’s decision but a source close to the club told the Telegraph they disputed its findings and were concerned by what appeared a failure to account for the fact the transfer agreement was to be interpreted in accordance with English and Welsh law.

Holly f**k.

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

If you want to sell newspapers, you need a good story to attract readers. Mundane run of the mill stuff is of no interest, and so everything needs to be spruced up and sensationalised as much as possible. Nothing new here, even posters on this forum suggested a long time back that Cardiff could face sanctions if they do not comply with Fifa's ruling. I don't think Cardiff have ever said they will refuse to pay, and ultimately they will do whatever they are legally bound to do. While I understand them seeking clarity on the legal situation, if I was a betting man, I would put money on them having to pay not only this first outstanding instalment, but the subsequent ones as well.

Lots of information in this article

It's getting messier

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

It's all about the clickbait

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

The appeal would be outside of football. As far as football is concerned (FIFA is the highest governing body) then Cardiff are liable to pay. Taking it to the arbitration of sport is an external process and not part of the footballing process at all. FIFA will of course impose their sanctions.

The appeal process (if won) will lift the sanctions, but it certainly won’t delay them. FIFA have delivered their ruling so failure to comply with the timeframe they have set will no doubt result in such instances as the embargo being applied.

Tan however is not stupid. He knows he won’t win any appeal and will not want to risk an embargo when the club is on the verge of going into transition (new manager requiring new squad) - so I fully expect the first instalment to be paid as late as possible with a full on PR drive to follow about how “he wants to do the right thing”. Bookmark it if you like

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

Of course it is and shared happily to somehow get a dig at Tan.

Reading that, I actually have more truck with City’s position now. The agents acting for Nantes sorted the flight on which he died and that meant that we didn’t have that player. Furthermore, as it was unlicensed there will likely be no compensation for us.

With that in mind I think we are right.

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

The appeal would be outside of football. As far as football is concerned (FIFA is the highest governing body) then Cardiff are liable to pay. Taking it to the arbitration of sport is an external process and not part of the footballing process at all. FIFA will of course impose their sanctions.

The appeal process (if won) will lift the sanctions, but it certainly won’t delay them. FIFA have delivered their ruling so failure to comply with the timeframe they have set will no doubt result in such instances as the embargo being applied.

Tan however is not stupid. He knows he won’t win any appeal and will not want to risk an embargo when the club is on the verge of going into transition (new manager requiring new squad) - so I fully expect the first instalment to be paid as late as possible with a full on PR drive to follow about how “he wants to do the right thing”. Bookmark it if you like

Makes sense city pay 5m to nante city win appeal nante pay city back 5m ? Never come across sanctions being implemented before an appeal is heard? Like said the sanctions are if city refuse ultimately to pay nante which they wont , yes fifa are governing body but CAS is final arbitrator of disputes in world sport! (Those sighned up with it of course) and fifa is

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

Of course it is and shared happily to somehow get a dig at Tan.

Reading that, I actually have more truck with City’s position now. The agents acting for Nantes sorted the flight on which he died and that meant that we didn’t have that player. Furthermore, as it was unlicensed there will likely be no compensation for us.

With that in mind I think we are right.

Allways been the case ,we shoukdnt pay

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

Of course it is and shared happily to somehow get a dig at Tan.

Reading that, I actually have more truck with City’s position now. The agents acting for Nantes sorted the flight on which he died and that meant that we didn’t have that player. Furthermore, as it was unlicensed there will likely be no compensation for us.

With that in mind I think we are right.

Fifa washed hands of it because of the complexity with outside people involved? So simple thing put it to CAS they make binding decision then either nante or city take legal action against agents ect ect depending upon if city win

Never be scared when someone threatens you. If you think you are right and have a case - then it is your legal right to take that to whatever court is legally permissible under the law.

Cardiff city as a business has a duty to it's shareholders to protect their investment , this is exactly what they are doing and should continue to do so until the matter is settle in court.

That's it in a nutshell basically. People can threaten transfer bans etc, we could possibly look at a restraint of trade counter action - but best to leave that to the clubs lawyers I think

Never be scared when someone threatens you. If you think you are right and have a case - then it is your legal right to take that to whatever court is legally permissible under the law.

Cardiff city as a business has a duty to it's shareholders to protect their investment , this is exactly what they are doing and should continue to do so until the matter is settle in court.

That's it in a nutshell basically. People can threaten transfer bans etc, we could possibly look at a restraint of trade counter action - but best to leave that to the clubs lawyers I think

Yes it's very easy for people to say do right thing ect ect but it's not their money and as you say city is a business and need to look after their interests? It's a messy business but will be sorted eventually by CAS regarding payments ....if city lose its upto city's insurers to make next move not the clubs as obviously the money comes from them! (Presuming he was insured by us?) But was talk of FA paying due to circumstances of his death..

Never be scared when someone threatens you. If you think you are right and have a case - then it is your legal right to take that to whatever court is legally permissible under the law.

Cardiff city as a business has a duty to it's shareholders to protect their investment , this is exactly what they are doing and should continue to do so until the matter is settle in court.

That's it in a nutshell basically. People can threaten transfer bans etc, we could possibly look at a restraint of trade counter action - but best to leave that to the clubs lawyers I think

Yes it's very easy for people to say do right thing ect ect but it's not their money and as you say city is a business and need to look after their interests? It's a messy business but will be sorted eventually by CAS regarding payments ....if city lose its upto city's insurers to make next move not the clubs as obviously the money comes from them! (Presuming he was insured by us?) But was talk of FA paying due to circumstances of his death..

I would add one other thing, as soon as someone becomes an 'employee' of a company they normally have a death in service policy. Who underwrites that policy Im not sure - is it the PFA , the FAW, the FA ?.
As said - leave it to the lawyers to argue over.

The main debate this week is Bogle or Madine against Brizzle ?

It has to be either this or a points deductions. Sad to think that in a few months time it will be the anniversary of the tragic death of Sala and this has yet to be resolved, i do think that this could be due to either Tan not wanting to lose his money or something else but if we do get the transfer ban then we could face relegation to league 1 due to how many transfer bans we are potentially going to get. thank god we have a solid team already.

Makes sense city pay 5m to nante city win appeal nante pay city back 5m ? Never come across sanctions being implemented before an appeal is heard? Like said the sanctions are if city refuse ultimately to pay nante which they wont , yes fifa are governing body but CAS is final arbitrator of disputes in world sport! (Those sighned up with it of course) and fifa is

You sound like you are talking about internal appeals? CAS has nothing to do with football, it’s a sporting body. The appeal process is therefor external meaning internal sanctions, as it stands, are final.

I remember when FIFA ruled that the Russian Federation were not to be removed from Euro qualification after fielding an illegible player against Wales in the play-offs. We appealed to CAS but the ruling was still the same UNTIL they were told otherwise, which of course they weren’t.

However should the Euros have happened prior to the appeal process being completed, FIFA’s ruling would be the one acted upon and Russia would be in the Euros, or indeed if FIFA had initially imposed sanctions on Russia excluding them from the tournament - they would remain excluded and the sanctions would remain until CAS said otherwise.

So it’s the same here. The ruling is the ruling and can be acted upon with impunity if there is failure to comply. This remains UNTIL stated otherwise. As far as I am aware there is no appeal anyway.

Last edited by rocketman on Mon Nov 04, 2019 10:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

It has to be either this or a points deductions. Sad to think that in a few months time it will be the anniversary of the tragic death of Sala and this has yet to be resolved, i do think that this could be due to either Tan not wanting to lose his money or something else but if we do get the transfer ban then we could face relegation to league 1 due to how many transfer bans we are potentially going to get. thank god we have a solid team already.

Sean, with all due respect that is all bollocks pal.

It has to be either this or a points deductions. Sad to think that in a few months time it will be the anniversary of the tragic death of Sala and this has yet to be resolved, i do think that this could be due to either Tan not wanting to lose his money or something else but if we do get the transfer ban then we could face relegation to league 1 due to how many transfer bans we are potentially going to get. thank god we have a solid team already.

I doubt it will come to that, although Tan is stubborn. But you are right, it will be a transfer ban and then points deduction if there is further failure to comply.

Pretty much a dramatic article to get people to read it. But daft really when the appeal hasn't been finalised.

Papers suggesting our failure to pay the first instalment of the Sala transfer will result in a 3 window transfer ban for the club

The article states (quote) "If they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee"; so surely that will depend on what City decide to do next (appeal or not)?

Think they are jumping the gun on this? We have right to appeal to CAS so sanctions cannot be brought before appeal heared? Theses sanctions are 'IF' city refuse after appeal very misleading story AGAIN!!

Of course it is and shared happily to somehow get a dig at Tan.

Reading that, I actually have more truck with City’s position now. The agents acting for Nantes sorted the flight on which he died and that meant that we didn’t have that player. Furthermore, as it was unlicensed there will likely be no compensation for us.

With that in mind I think we are right.

I dunno mate.
looks like our clubs stance is that it was an agent who had worked on the deal for Nantes arranged the transport so therefore Nantes are responsible.
but everything ive read points to the deal being complete and ES looking for ways to spend as much time back in France as possible.. HE chose this option.
the other option was not Nantes organised but was suggested by our club that we would arrange a commercial seat { for a Nantes player ? } . for me the argument falls apart here..
plus...was Willie Mckay working for Nantes or both clubs.?

Makes sense city pay 5m to nante city win appeal nante pay city back 5m ? Never come across sanctions being implemented before an appeal is heard? Like said the sanctions are if city refuse ultimately to pay nante which they wont , yes fifa are governing body but CAS is final arbitrator of disputes in world sport! (Those sighned up with it of course) and fifa is

You sound like you are talking about internal appeals? CAS has nothing to do with football, it’s a sporting body. The appeal process is therefor external meaning internal sanctions, as it stands, are final.

I remember when FIFA ruled that the Russian Federation were not to be removed from Euro qualification after fielding an illegible player against Wales in the play-offs. We appealed to CAS but the ruling was still the same UNTIL they were told otherwise, which of course they weren’t.

However should the Euros have happened prior to the appeal process being completed, FIFA’s ruling would be the one acted upon and Russia would be in the Euros, or indeed if FIFA had initially imposed sanctions on Russia excluding them from the tournament - they would remain excluded and the sanctions would remain until CAS said otherwise.

So it’s the same here. The ruling is the ruling and can be acted upon with impunity if there is failure to comply. This remains UNTIL stated otherwise. As far as I am aware there is no appeal anyway.

So whats point of city going to appeal to CAS If fifa as final say on payments? So hypothetically if city go to CAS and win an appeal then what fifa say sorry we dont recognise CAS You've still got to pay Or do you have a better answer?

:|

Makes sense city pay 5m to nante city win appeal nante pay city back 5m ? Never come across sanctions being implemented before an appeal is heard? Like said the sanctions are if city refuse ultimately to pay nante which they wont , yes fifa are governing body but CAS is final arbitrator of disputes in world sport! (Those sighned up with it of course) and fifa is

You sound like you are talking about internal appeals? CAS has nothing to do with football, it’s a sporting body. The appeal process is therefor external meaning internal sanctions, as it stands, are final.

I remember when FIFA ruled that the Russian Federation were not to be removed from Euro qualification after fielding an illegible player against Wales in the play-offs. We appealed to CAS but the ruling was still the same UNTIL they were told otherwise, which of course they weren’t.

However should the Euros have happened prior to the appeal process being completed, FIFA’s ruling would be the one acted upon and Russia would be in the Euros, or indeed if FIFA had initially imposed sanctions on Russia excluding them from the tournament - they would remain excluded and the sanctions would remain until CAS said otherwise.

So it’s the same here. The ruling is the ruling and can be acted upon with impunity if there is failure to comply. This remains UNTIL stated otherwise. As far as I am aware there is no appeal anyway.

So whats point of city going to appeal to CAS If fifa as final say on payments? So hypothetically if city go to CAS and win an appeal then what fifa say sorry we dont recognise CAS You've still got to pay Or do you have a better answer?

City have 2 wks to appeal fifa decision to CAS or got to pay money owed!

Exclusive: Cardiff City face three-window transfer ban if they fail to comply with Fifa ruling on Emiliano Sala transfer fee
The Telegraph's Ben Rumsby

Fifa has told Cardiff they must pay for the transfer of Emiliano Sala


Cardiff City failed to convince Fifa to hold Nantes “liable” over the death of Emiliano Sala, the Daily Telegraph can reveal.

A month after telling the Welsh club to hand over the first instalment of Sala’s £15million transfer fee to Nantes, the governing body has issued the grounds for its decision in the bitter row over who owned the striker when he was killed in a plane crash in January.

Seen by this newspaper, those grounds also reveal that Cardiff face a three-window transfer ban if they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee (PSC) .


They have already announced plans to take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport – and potentially beyond – following that ruling, which they accused of being predicated on “a narrow aspect of the overall dispute, without considering the full document presented” by their lawyers."

The grounds confirm the four-strong PSC of chairman Raymond Hack, Roy Vermeer, Anna Peniche and Castellar Guimaraes Neto “decided not to take into account any arguments brought forward by Cardiff in front of Fifa in relation to the circumstances surrounding the tragic passing of the player”.


Those arguments included that Nantes be held “liable for the damages” caused to them by the death of Sala, whose fatal flight was booked by Willie McKay, the former agent and bankrupt who helped broker the Argentinian’s transfer to Cardiff and whose son, Mark, had been contracted by the French club to find a buyer.

The Welsh side contended that these damages should amount to the £15m transfer fee plus conditional bonus payments of up to £1.8m, thereby rendering Nantes’ own claim void.

The grounds read: “Cardiff maintained that, by hiring an unlicensed aircraft and employing an unlicensed and inexperienced pilot for the player’s flight of 19 January 2019, Mr Willie McKay and his company had grossly failed in their duty of care. This alleged negligence resulted in the crash of the aircraft that caused the player’s decease. Consequently, according to Cardiff, the individuals involved in the flight operations should be deemed directly responsible for the damage suffered by Cardiff, which includes, but is not limited to, the player’s market value as Premier League forward at the time of his decease.”


McKay has repeatedly stated he had no input into the selection of the relevant pilot or plane, which he booked via experienced light-aircraft pilot David Henderson.

Henderson was arrested in June on suspicion of manslaughter before being released on bail.

In its own submission to Fifa, Nantes disputed Cardiff’s interpretation of a French law which the Welsh club contended made them civilly liable for the actions of McKay.

The PSC also snubbed a request by Cardiff for its proceedings to be suspended pending the outcome of the criminal and civil investigations into the death of Sala – who would have turned 29 last week had he lived – and any legal action they might take as a result.


The grounds read: “Even though the circumstances surrounding the player’s tragic passing in a plane accident may activate criminal proceedings and civil actions regarding Nantes’ possible liability before local courts, the bureau was of the opinion that those proceedings should be settled by the local courts and not by Fifa. If the local courts would determine any criminal or civil liability on the side of Nantes, it is also for the local courts to determine the consequences of such liability. The bureau held that Cardiff had not been able to prove that the outcome of those local proceedings would be relevant for the outcome of the dispute pertaining to whether or not a transfer fee is due.”


Having refused to take the circumstances of Sala’s death into account, the PSC’s decision was based solely on whether his transfer was completed before he was killed.

It dismissed Cardiff’s contention that the fact his employment contract was rejected by the Premier League over a front-loaded signing-on fee – and that he died before a revised one could be put in front of him – should void the move.

The grounds read: “The only reason why the contract was not approved was an omission of Cardiff itself.”


The panel also rejected the club’s argument that clauses in the transfer agreement they struck with Nantes remained unfulfilled, ruling that the transaction had been concluded when the Football Association of Wales “entered all the necessary requirements” into its Transfer Matching System at 5.30pm on January 21, which was less than two hours before Sala’s fatal flight took off from Nantes.


The grounds read: “The player’s transfer from Nantes to Cardiff has to be considered as validly concluded between the parties. Hence, the player was a player of Cardiff.”

The Welsh club were given 45 days from the moment Nantes provided them with bank details to pay the French club an initial £5.3m, plus any interest accrued since January.

They were warned failure to comply would result in a transfer ban “for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods”.


Cardiff declined to comment on Sunday night on the grounds for Fifa’s decision but a source close to the club told the Telegraph they disputed its findings and were concerned by what appeared a failure to account for the fact the transfer agreement was to be interpreted in accordance with English and Welsh law.

Sala s contract was refused by the premier league and sala had to sign another contract but never did ,he might have not signed the new one as his agent and sala wouldn't of had the signing on fee or the agents fee up front ,also for the sales contract to be completed between nantes and cardiff all stages must of been fulfilled this wasnt the case ,this is why cardiff have appealed to the court of arbitration because fifa overlooked the legal contract in law

So whats point of city going to appeal to CAS If fifa as final say on payments? So hypothetically if city go to CAS and win an appeal then what fifa say sorry we dont recognise CAS You've still got to pay Or do you have a better answer?

Because in rare cases CAS can, if there is clear valid grounds, overturn a final decision made by the head of that particular sport.

But the footballing final decision has been made, there is no footballing appeals. If the club wish to appeal then it isn’t part of the football sanction process and will be an external appeal. Which means internal sanctions continue as stated - UNTIL told otherwise.

So if the club wins an appeal to CAS, which is unlikely, it is only then that sanctions will be lifted or halted, not before. Think of it as you being convicted by the highest court in America, you get sentenced to prison. You then decide to show your case to the White House and appeal to the president for a presidential pardon and overturn the court... you will have to do that from your jail cell, sanctions will continue as normal until told otherwise.

Exclusive: Cardiff City face three-window transfer ban if they fail to comply with Fifa ruling on Emiliano Sala transfer fee
The Telegraph's Ben Rumsby

Fifa has told Cardiff they must pay for the transfer of Emiliano Sala


Cardiff City failed to convince Fifa to hold Nantes “liable” over the death of Emiliano Sala, the Daily Telegraph can reveal.

A month after telling the Welsh club to hand over the first instalment of Sala’s £15million transfer fee to Nantes, the governing body has issued the grounds for its decision in the bitter row over who owned the striker when he was killed in a plane crash in January.

Seen by this newspaper, those grounds also reveal that Cardiff face a three-window transfer ban if they continue to refuse to pay or otherwise fail to overturn a September ruling by Fifa’s Players’ Status Committee (PSC) .


They have already announced plans to take the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport – and potentially beyond – following that ruling, which they accused of being predicated on “a narrow aspect of the overall dispute, without considering the full document presented” by their lawyers."

The grounds confirm the four-strong PSC of chairman Raymond Hack, Roy Vermeer, Anna Peniche and Castellar Guimaraes Neto “decided not to take into account any arguments brought forward by Cardiff in front of Fifa in relation to the circumstances surrounding the tragic passing of the player”.


Those arguments included that Nantes be held “liable for the damages” caused to them by the death of Sala, whose fatal flight was booked by Willie McKay, the former agent and bankrupt who helped broker the Argentinian’s transfer to Cardiff and whose son, Mark, had been contracted by the French club to find a buyer.

The Welsh side contended that these damages should amount to the £15m transfer fee plus conditional bonus payments of up to £1.8m, thereby rendering Nantes’ own claim void.

The grounds read: “Cardiff maintained that, by hiring an unlicensed aircraft and employing an unlicensed and inexperienced pilot for the player’s flight of 19 January 2019, Mr Willie McKay and his company had grossly failed in their duty of care. This alleged negligence resulted in the crash of the aircraft that caused the player’s decease. Consequently, according to Cardiff, the individuals involved in the flight operations should be deemed directly responsible for the damage suffered by Cardiff, which includes, but is not limited to, the player’s market value as Premier League forward at the time of his decease.”


McKay has repeatedly stated he had no input into the selection of the relevant pilot or plane, which he booked via experienced light-aircraft pilot David Henderson.

Henderson was arrested in June on suspicion of manslaughter before being released on bail.

In its own submission to Fifa, Nantes disputed Cardiff’s interpretation of a French law which the Welsh club contended made them civilly liable for the actions of McKay.

The PSC also snubbed a request by Cardiff for its proceedings to be suspended pending the outcome of the criminal and civil investigations into the death of Sala – who would have turned 29 last week had he lived – and any legal action they might take as a result.


The grounds read: “Even though the circumstances surrounding the player’s tragic passing in a plane accident may activate criminal proceedings and civil actions regarding Nantes’ possible liability before local courts, the bureau was of the opinion that those proceedings should be settled by the local courts and not by Fifa. If the local courts would determine any criminal or civil liability on the side of Nantes, it is also for the local courts to determine the consequences of such liability. The bureau held that Cardiff had not been able to prove that the outcome of those local proceedings would be relevant for the outcome of the dispute pertaining to whether or not a transfer fee is due.”


Having refused to take the circumstances of Sala’s death into account, the PSC’s decision was based solely on whether his transfer was completed before he was killed.

It dismissed Cardiff’s contention that the fact his employment contract was rejected by the Premier League over a front-loaded signing-on fee – and that he died before a revised one could be put in front of him – should void the move.

The grounds read: “The only reason why the contract was not approved was an omission of Cardiff itself.”


The panel also rejected the club’s argument that clauses in the transfer agreement they struck with Nantes remained unfulfilled, ruling that the transaction had been concluded when the Football Association of Wales “entered all the necessary requirements” into its Transfer Matching System at 5.30pm on January 21, which was less than two hours before Sala’s fatal flight took off from Nantes.


The grounds read: “The player’s transfer from Nantes to Cardiff has to be considered as validly concluded between the parties. Hence, the player was a player of Cardiff.”

The Welsh club were given 45 days from the moment Nantes provided them with bank details to pay the French club an initial £5.3m, plus any interest accrued since January.

They were warned failure to comply would result in a transfer ban “for the maximum duration of three entire and consecutive registration periods”.


Cardiff declined to comment on Sunday night on the grounds for Fifa’s decision but a source close to the club told the Telegraph they disputed its findings and were concerned by what appeared a failure to account for the fact the transfer agreement was to be interpreted in accordance with English and Welsh law.

Sala s contract was refused by the premier league and sala had to sign another contract but never did ,he might have not signed the new one as his agent and sala wouldn't of had the signing on fee or the agents fee up front ,also for the sales contract to be completed between nantes and cardiff all stages must of been fulfilled this wasnt the case ,this is why cardiff have appealed to the court of arbitration because fifa overlooked the legal contract in law

I think FIFAs take on this is that.
his premier league registration was refused. not his registration as a Cardiff City player...in theory both ES and his agent could still have demanded the original terms and he not played in the EPL as I presume the original contract had been agreed and signed by all parties and the errors were all ours . players have signed for clubs but not been eligible to play in certain competitions for that club many times..