UPDATED: ‘ Cardiff Accuse Nantes FC of Manslaughter ‘

I agree from day one this deal was very dodgy agents etc

Plus £5mill is what Sala was originally valued at.

But this is taking it way to far to try to get out if paying and now accuse Nantes FC as they had nothing to do with flight , Sala staying back .
I have read the book and spoken to French reporters for months.

We look bad enough and this for me will really hurt our reputation.


For me manslaughter is for the agents.

I agree that the involuntary manslaughter is down to the agents, but Nantes were vicarious liable and therefore negligent under French law because a contract existed between them and Mark McKay with regard to the Sala transfer.

The actions of agents acting on behalf of Nantes caused financial damage to CCFC and rightly we should seek compensation.

trouble is with this is that Mark Mckay was their agent. not Willie Mckay.
and its well documented that Willie Mckay { who is not an agent } organised the flight as a favour to the player.
its also pretty well documented that { A } we had offered ES a commercial flight { why if it was Nantes or their agents responsibility } which the player turned down..{B} ES was trying to organise his own alternative flight { again why if it was Nantes responsibility..}
Mark and Willie are not one and the same person, so which do you blame ? the one who did not organise any flight. or the one that is not even an agent ?

Mark McKay was the agent acting on behalf of Nantes (not ES) and there is documentary evidence to prove this (i.e. a contract).

Mark McKay then sub-contracted the flight arrangements to his Father Willie McKay. It was still the responsibility of Mark McKay to ensure the travel arrangements were safe and the pilot was qualified even if his Father made the arrangements and if something went wrong then he (Mark McKay) was responsible, this is known as vicarious liability. That vicarious liability would then extend to Nantes as Mark McKay was acting on their behalf in the ES transfer.

The fact we offered a commercial flight to ES is irrelevant because once Mark McKay got involved he took responsibility for the safety of the player and because of French Law that responsibility extended to Nantes.

This all boils down to contract law and who was working for who and vicarious liability. The 'excuse' of 'it's got nothing to do with me gov' doesn't wash as there are clear contracts between parties which designates responsibility.

Exactly why should Cardiff lose out on 15 million for negligence of others

In this case it is properly factusl that Nantes FC did not know the specifics of the flights however if they employed an agent to act on their behalf they become vicariously liable for his actions and that is where I think the situation is.

They employed him to complete the deal though, it was contract work based on commission not a salaried employee so once the deal was finalised he was no longer an employee of Nantes.

Was the transfer completed? ES playing contract was invalid as it had been rejected by PL. At the very least this would mean that the transfer would not be completed until ES had accepted the new terms and conditions & signed the amended contract (which sadly he never got the opportunity to do so).

The wording of the contract states "The Agent (Mark McKay) is therefore engaged to negotiate the FINAL transfer of the player to a football club in the Premier League football championship"

The club may of held his registration but that was subject to the PL accepting the players contract. In theory ES could have pulled out of the transfer at that point has he had no obligation to accept the amended playing contract (although almost certainly he would have).

Therefore the transfer was NOT FINAL and McKay was still within his contract with Nantes.

In this case it is properly factusl that Nantes FC did not know the specifics of the flights however if they employed an agent to act on their behalf they become vicariously liable for his actions and that is where I think the situation is.

They employed him to complete the deal though, it was contract work based on commission not a salaried employee so once the deal was finalised he was no longer an employee of Nantes.

Was the transfer completed? ES playing contract was invalid as it had been rejected by PL. At the very least this would mean that the transfer would not be completed until ES had accepted the new terms and conditions & signed the amended contract (which sadly he never got the opportunity to do so).

The wording of the contract states "The Agent (Mark McKay) is therefore engaged to negotiate the FINAL transfer of the player to a football club in the Premier League football championship"

The club may of held his registration but that was subject to the PL accepting the players contract. In theory ES could have pulled out of the transfer at that point has he had no obligation to accept the amended playing contract (although almost certainly he would have).

Therefore the transfer was NOT FINAL and McKay was still within his contract with Nantes.

Was definitely completed. Registration to the Premier League doesn’t make a difference to the contract. As it stood the contract was perfectly valid, however they couldn’t register him to play in the Premier League until there was an amendment. But having the amendment had no affect on the employment contract.

2. In accordance with its clause 2.1., the transfer agreement’s validity was “conditional upon” the fulfilment of the following requirements:

“2.1.1. the player completing successfully medical examination with Cardiff City FC; 2.1.2. FC Nantes and the Player agreeing all the terms of a mutual termination of FC
Nantes contract of employment with the Player;

2.1.3. the mutual termination of FC Nantes contract of employment with the Player is
registered by the LFP [i.e. the French Ligue de Football Professionnel];

2.1.4. the LFP and the FAW [i.e. the Football Association of Wales] have confirmed to Cardiff City FC and FC Nantes that the Player has been registered as a Cardiff City FC player and that the Player’s International Transfer Certificate has been released.”

In addition, pursuant to clause 3.2 of the transfer agreement, Cardiff undertook to pay
to Nantes the following “promotion bonus” (hereinafter: the bonuses):
Player Emiliano Raul Sala 2 (FC Nantes, France / Cardiff City FC, Wales)

(i) EUR 1,000,000 if Cardiff “participate and retains its Premier League Status following the close of the football season 2018/2019”;
(ii) EUR 500,000 if Cardiff “participate and retains its Premier League Status following the close of the football season 2019/2020” and
(iii) EUR 500,000 if Cardiff “participate and retains its Premier League Status following the close of the football season 2020/2021”.
6. More specifically, the “promotion bonus” was due to Nantes even in case the player “has not been registered with Cardiff City FC during the season which Cardiff City FC participates and retains its Premier League Status” [...] on 31 August following the football season in which the Promotion Bonus is due”.
7. Following the conclusion of the transfer agreement, on 21 January 2019, at 10.00 local time in Wales, the Football Association of Wales (FAW) requested the Fédération Française de Football (FFF) to deliver the international transfer certificate (ITC) for the player. On the same day, at 17.17 local time in France, the FFF delivered the ITC for the player and, subsequently, the FAW registered the player with Cardiff in the International Transfer Matching System (ITMS). In particular, the FAW entered the registration date in the TMS and confirmed receipt of the ITC on 21 January 2019, at 17.30 local time in Wales.
8. In the night between 21 and 22 January 2019, the player tragically passed away in a plane crash across the English Channel.

It’s pretty clear from the document that the deal was completed.

Being able to register him for premier league competition does not impact the validity of the contract and is an internal matter between club, player and the PL.

Was the transfer completed? ES playing contract was invalid as it had been rejected by PL. At the very least this would mean that the transfer would not be completed until ES had accepted the new terms and conditions & signed the amended contract (which sadly he never got the opportunity to do so).

The wording of the contract states "The Agent (Mark McKay) is therefore engaged to negotiate the FINAL transfer of the player to a football club in the Premier League football championship"

The club may of held his registration but that was subject to the PL accepting the players contract. In theory ES could have pulled out of the transfer at that point has he had no obligation to accept the amended playing contract (although almost certainly he would have).

Therefore the transfer was NOT FINAL and McKay was still within his contract with Nantes.

This last summary also explains it well:-

41. In this respect, the members of the Bureau firstly observed that the clause at stake did not require the player’s employment contract to be registered with the Premier League as a condition precedent. What it is more, the Bureau held that it was clear that it was always the intention of Cardiff to register the player with the Premier League and that the only reason why the contract was not approved was an omission of Cardiff itself.

42. Moreover, the members of the Bureau pointed out that the registration of an employment contract with the Premier League not only consists of an internal matter between Cardiff and the Premier League and/or the FAW, but it is also a formal requirement over which Nantes has no influence. As a result, from the Bureau’s point
of view, whether or not Cardiff and the agents representing the player had carried out the required due diligence in drafting an employment contract that was in conformity with the Premier League’s specific rules or not, can in no way affect the validity of the transfer agreement concluded between Nantes and Cardiff.

43. The foregoing having been established, the Bureau turned its attention to the question of whether the transfer of the player had been completed in TMS.

44. In this respect, the Bureau reverted to the specificities that govern the system of the international transfers through the TMS platform and first recalled that, in order for a transfer to occur on the TMS, a duly signed employment contract between the player and the ‘new club’ needs to be uploaded therein in the first place. Moreover, the Bureau highlighted that a transfer does not occur automatically in the TMS. On the contrary, the receiving association, i.e. the FAW in the case at stake, has to manually enter the registration date and confirm the ITC receipt from the former association, in casu the FFF. A transfer goes into the status “closed-awaiting payments” in TMS once the new association has entered the registration date and confirmed the ITC receipt. Considering the foregoing and the information contained in TMS, the transfer of the player was concluded in the system on 21 January 2019 at 17.30 local time in Wales, i.e. when the FAW entered all the necessary requirements in the system.

45. With all the foregoing in mind, the members of the Bureau could determine that the transfer of the player in TMS was completed and, therefore, that 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.

Dangerous Davies your posts look like you are very knowledgeable in this subject.



Wonder why that is

Dangerous Davies your posts look like you are very knowledgeable in this subject.



Wonder why that is

Because I have read the 21 page document released by FIFA that explains everything in minute detail.

It explains the arguments of both sides. The contract details. The conditions of completion. The employment contract validity having no bearing on whether he was able to be registered in a PL squad. The role of McKay and the wording of the clauses.

It’s all there for anyone to read, not just me.

https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload ... ydvrzqrqdw

Dangerous Davies your posts look like you are very knowledgeable in this subject.



Wonder why that is

Because I have read the 21 page document released by FIFA that explains everything in minute detail.

It explains the arguments of both sides. The contract details. The conditions of completion. The employment contract validity having no bearing on whether he was able to be registered in a PL squad. The role of McKay and the wording of the clauses.

It’s all there for anyone to read, not just me.

https://resources.fifa.com/image/upload ... ydvrzqrqdw

Obsessed.

Push the button Gov

The obsessed one is back, time to lock this post.

Push the button Gov

Why ? because he took the time to find and read the document

It’s pretty clear from the document that the deal was completed.

Being able to register him for premier league competition does not impact the validity of the contract and is an internal matter between club, player and the PL.

yes you've read the FIFA findings and based on that you are correct..
trouble is your involved in so many prolonged arguments about Swansea having 9k or people being racists.. back tracking and moving goalposts as you go , people switch off..

It’s pretty clear from the document that the deal was completed.

Being able to register him for premier league competition does not impact the validity of the contract and is an internal matter between club, player and the PL.

yes you've read the FIFA findings and based on that you are correct..
trouble is your involved in so many prolonged arguments about Swansea having 9k or people being racists.. back tracking and moving goalposts as you go , people switch off..

So hes right and deal was complete Can you explain why city are going to CAS ? Because from this explanation its signed sealed and delivered hes our player so no point in wasting CAS time is there? .. or is there something else.!

It’s pretty clear from the document that the deal was completed.

Being able to register him for premier league competition does not impact the validity of the contract and is an internal matter between club, player and the PL.

yes you've read the FIFA findings and based on that you are correct..
trouble is your involved in so many prolonged arguments about Swansea having 9k or people being racists.. back tracking and moving goalposts as you go , people switch off..

Yep

It’s pretty clear from the document that the deal was completed.

Being able to register him for premier league competition does not impact the validity of the contract and is an internal matter between club, player and the PL.

yes you've read the FIFA findings and based on that you are correct..
trouble is your involved in so many prolonged arguments about Swansea having 9k or people being racists.. back tracking and moving goalposts as you go , people switch off..

So hes right and deal was complete Can you explain why city are going to CAS ? Because from this explanation its signed sealed and delivered hes our player so no point in wasting CAS time is there? .. or is there something else.! [/quote


I cant explain it.

can you ?

yes you've read the FIFA findings and based on that you are correct..
trouble is your involved in so many prolonged arguments about Swansea having 9k or people being racists.. back tracking and moving goalposts as you go , people switch off..

I wasn’t arguing about Swansea having 9k, I said unless I had solid evidence then I wouldn’t believe it. Perfectly fair and entitled not to believe it, right?

I didn’t call anyone a racist. I said people should wait for the facts before demanding an apology and whether you were there or not, you cannot hear what every person says. Perfectly fair, right?

Anyway. It would probably be best that you don’t drag this one down too and stick to the topic. Fair too?

So hes right and deal was complete Can you explain why city are going to CAS ? Because from this explanation its signed sealed and delivered hes our player so no point in wasting CAS time is there? .. or is there something else.!

I have explained it previously and urged everyone to read the document, it’s public record.

Tan is a one man band. There is no chance on earth any legal team would recommend:-

1) The clumsy arguments they are putting together
2) Continue the fight after the FIFA hearing.
3) Make contradictory law suits that goes against their claim in the CAS hearing.

With this latest French law suit, it is based on the fact that they DID own Sala and that Nantes may have acted negligently with their asset (with regards to the flight that McKay arranged) and are looking to sue via vicarious responsibility (meaning a company being responsible for an employees actions).

In the FIFA appeal we saw that once the deal was completed McKay was no longer an employee of Nantes and he was employed to finalise the Sala deal. So if he was a Cardiff player, it was finalised. Meaning actions after that have nothing to do with Nantes.

So Cardiff have shot themselves in the foot with clumsy and frantic lawsuits.

The fact that this French law suit has been submitted automatically loses the CAS one (as it is an admittance if ownership). Also the fact the CAS appeal exists automatically loses the French appeal (because owenership means McKay and Nantes had nothing to do with eachother at the time of the flight).

Enough is enough!