Le Havre pissed with United

Mr. MUJAC

I have been doing quite a bit of research and come up with the following information.

Originally Paul Pogba played with Roissy-en-Brie before joining Torcy at 13 years old. The following year Le Havre took him from Torcy and he remained at Le Havre for two years......14-16.

So, Le Havre are all up in arms about us taking someone that they took from another club in the first place.

Pogba was only in their Academy for two seasons.

Here is a link to the Torcy article which says that Le Havre 'stole' Pogba from them and they are still in discussion for compensation.

Torcy are really pissed off with Le Havre and basically wish Pogba all the best at United.

Google Translate

All very interesting!

Decotron

Pot and Kettle so. Nice find.

Bit like a clueless West Ham fan I met recently, full of the knowledge he was. He forgot they didnt actually "make" Defoe

pillory

I think a bump is in order.

So, have Le Havre taken this further, or were they just mouthing off because they don't have a case? And what's a non-solicitation agreement (see OP)?

Doogie

No they have not, nothing to say they won't though.

kouroux

So what are the main differences in this case and the Chelsea one ?

datura

Chelsea induced him to break a contract by allegedly tapping him up. Pogba was not under contract with Le Havre, although it is likely that we will recompense them.

rotherham_red

Manchester United could face similar transfer ban to Chelsea | Football - Times Online

Havent got a leg to stand on really, especially considering Le Havre's conduct in getting Pogba in the first place, and also the firm denials of Pogba to the contrary...

Alex

Footballers cannot be treated as slaves -Sepp Blatter

or does that only matter when Real Madrid is involved

SecondFig

That all depends on whether or not Pogba really did sign a pre-contract agreement with Le Havre or not. If he did we could be in just as much trouble as Chelsea, if he didn't we just signed a free agent and won't even have to pay Le Havre anything of note as he was only at their academy for 2 years.

moses

Like with the Eduardo thing, I hope this Chelase thing is a precedent and the governing bodies actually govern instead of letting money etc dictate the games direction.

datura

This sounds like it could get messy. Might be a while til we see the lad in action.

Alex

ralphie will claim that it is a conspiracy by the Glazers and SAF so they dont have to spend any money on transfers

SecondFig

Yeah, which is unfair on a 16 year old who (hopefully) just wants to play football, he hasn't been granted international registration to play for us yet and likely won't be until this whole business has been sorted out. I hope it is cleared and his career isn't damaged, but it's cases like these that demonstrate the need for clearer guidelines on youth player transfers

Count Duckula

If we were to have the same punishment as Chelsea imposed, what would happen to Ljajić and Diouf, considering that their contracts with their old clubs would expire? Would they become free agents?

sincher

Ljajic and Diouf are already registered United players, on loan at their original clubs.

Starkie_1

Both Ljajic and Diouf are already registered as our players, just on loan at Partizan and Molde.

Count Duckula

Ah, ok then. Well, seeing as I doubt we'd be buying anyone in January or next summer anyway, it doesn't really matter if we do get punished for this!

The Caveman

Chelsea were already on a suspended sentence, it was only a matter of time before they got hit with the ban. We, however, are not and would not face the same consequences regardless of the outcome of the Pogba case.

HTH

Count Duckula

Untrue.

The suspended sentence was with the FA, and so did not come into consideration.

Someone here posted the exact subsection of the rulebook that details this sort of case, and the only punishment that can be distributed if found guilty is the one Chelsea received. They've not been given a particularly harsh punishment on the scale, because there is no scale. The rule explicity states that if you're found guilty you're banned from registering new players for two transfer windows.

So if we're found guilty we'll also be banned from registering new players for two transfer windows, regardless of prior conduct.

Alex

This is a clear attack on English football, quite sickening when you think of it really. Chelsea are no angles, but no big club with money is

Ringo 07

I sincerely hope we get cleared of any wrong doing as soon as possible as it will not be a good thing to have this hanging over the club! Le Harve though claim they have a similar document that was breached by Pogba to the one that was breached at Lens by Kakuta! The Glazer are probably secretly rubbing their hands at the thought of us getting a transfer ban like Chelseas!
I am sure the likes of Milan, Madrid and Barcelona are up to even worse tricks but FIFA (especially Blatter) will do their best to support them!

pillory

That was me. But it's the Court of Arbitration for Sport that decides the final punishment (everyone who's found guilty of this will of course appeal), and they could perhaps take prior conduct into consideration. Or maybe not. But they have been known to halve FIFA's bans, so they must take something into consideration.

Addis

Or perhaps they'll be furious because it could hinder the clubs ability to compete for trophies and sponsorship.

Players are investments, not a financial black hole. Otherwise, why would any clubs bother buying players?

Jesus sometimes I think it'll be better for my health to just give up on this forum.

devilish

Its ridiculous to first allow a system where players aren't given pro contract (ie no rights) then complain if anyone sign them up. Anyway with the Eduardo's ban (as if he is the only diver in Europe) and the Chelsea's ban it definately shows what FIFA/UEFA's opinion about EPL football is. It would be better for the EPL to join forces and try to put the right people in UEFA/FIFA, people who safeguard their best interests.

MadDogg

Just what is the deal with this 'pre-contract'?

Surely if they can legally only sign a contract once they hit 17yo, any binding pre-contract signed before this age is illegal. Otherwise what is the legal difference between a contract and a pre-contract?

Walrus

Im not so sure. This season really is something of a make-or-break one, especially for the likes of Foster, Nani and perhaps even Anderson. If they cant step up a level and prove they are worth a first team place - I wouldve thought we would look at replacing at least 1-2 of them next summer. There is also the central midfield "problem" (depending on which side you are on), I do reckon that next summer wouldve been the time to potentially get in a new CM if the likes of Carrick and Anderson are still not performing, and Giggs and Scholes start to decline a bit more or even retire.

Alex

True about Anderson, I just hope he gets his a lot of chances