Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Jimbo

Newcastle in court battle after 'bargain' signing Gutierrez comes with strings attached

Recommended Posts

Newcastle have been thrown into another cash controversy - this time over their 'bargain' summer signing of Jonás Gutiérrez.

Newcastle signed the Argentinian winger in good faith, believing he was a free agent.

 

But Gutiérrez's registration is now being disputed not just by his former club, Mallorca, who turned down a £8million bid for the highly rated player from Portsmouth as recently as January, but also by Argentine club Velez Sarsfield.

Officials at St James' Park have refused to pay a penny for the transfer, but now could face a multi-million pound transfer bill plus lawyers' fees as Mallorca has launched a legal appeal.

 

According to Gutiérrez, he was entitled to negotiate his own transfer without Mallorca’s permission as he had taken advantage of Fifa’s Article 17 which allows players under 28 to buy themselves out of a contract three years after the deal was signed.

The clause is called 'the Webster ruling' after the test case involving the Hearts defender Andy Webster.

 

Gutiérrez moved to Mallorca in 2005 after winning the Argentina league title with Sarsfield.

 

But despite this, Mallorca have gone to law and have been given a court date in February, and if the Spanish judge rules in their favour, Newcastle could be looking for at least £8m in transfer monies plus legal costs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't this all 4 months old?

 

I think that was the argument over his registration, as they have lost that and he's been seen to be a sucess, they feel they have a strong case for compensation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's Jimenez when you need him? Oh wait...

We'll probably hear that the Milner deal also isn't worth 12m itself but rather 2m + a further 10m depending on future international appearances, world footballer awards etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Where's Jimenez when you need him? Oh wait...

We'll probably hear that the Milner deal also isn't worth 12m itself but rather 2m + a further 10m depending on future international appearances, world footballer awards etc.

:jesuswept:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Newcastle have been thrown into another cash controversy - this time over their 'bargain' summer signing of Jonás Gutiérrez.

Newcastle signed the Argentinian winger in good faith, believing he was a free agent.

 

But Gutiérrez's registration is now being disputed not just by his former club, Mallorca, who turned down a £8million bid for the highly rated player from Portsmouth as recently as January, but also by Argentine club Velez Sarsfield.

Officials at St James' Park have refused to pay a penny for the transfer, but now could face a multi-million pound transfer bill plus lawyers' fees as Mallorca has launched a legal appeal.

 

According to Gutiérrez, he was entitled to negotiate his own transfer without Mallorca’s permission as he had taken advantage of Fifa’s Article 17 which allows players under 28 to buy themselves out of a contract three years after the deal was signed.

The clause is called 'the Webster ruling' after the test case involving the Hearts defender Andy Webster.

 

Gutiérrez moved to Mallorca in 2005 after winning the Argentina league title with Sarsfield.

 

But despite this, Mallorca have gone to law and have been given a court date in February, and if the Spanish judge rules in their favour, Newcastle could be looking for at least £8m in transfer monies plus legal costs.

 

Seeing as Gutierrez moved by the Webster ruling perfectly legally, I'm not sure what their actual grounds for appeal are.

 

If they declare you have to pay a transfer fee after all, then they've effectively overturned the ruling for no real reason.

 

But then again I suppose if it was one of our players (or one of yours) you could understand why Mallorca are pissed off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Newcastle have been thrown into another cash controversy - this time over their 'bargain' summer signing of Jonás Gutiérrez.

Newcastle signed the Argentinian winger in good faith, believing he was a free agent.

 

But Gutiérrez's registration is now being disputed not just by his former club, Mallorca, who turned down a £8million bid for the highly rated player from Portsmouth as recently as January, but also by Argentine club Velez Sarsfield.

Officials at St James' Park have refused to pay a penny for the transfer, but now could face a multi-million pound transfer bill plus lawyers' fees as Mallorca has launched a legal appeal.

 

According to Gutiérrez, he was entitled to negotiate his own transfer without Mallorca’s permission as he had taken advantage of Fifa’s Article 17 which allows players under 28 to buy themselves out of a contract three years after the deal was signed.

The clause is called 'the Webster ruling' after the test case involving the Hearts defender Andy Webster.

 

Gutiérrez moved to Mallorca in 2005 after winning the Argentina league title with Sarsfield.

 

But despite this, Mallorca have gone to law and have been given a court date in February, and if the Spanish judge rules in their favour, Newcastle could be looking for at least £8m in transfer monies plus legal costs.

 

Seeing as Gutierrez moved by the Webster ruling perfectly legally, I'm not sure what their actual grounds for appeal are.

 

If they declare you have to pay a transfer fee after all, then they've effectively overturned the ruling for no real reason.

 

But then again I suppose if it was one of our players (or one of yours) you could understand why Mallorca are pissed off.

 

I think they're suggesting he didn't buy himself out properly, he just walked out. So he doesn't qualify for the Webster ruling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Oh, I'd assumed he'd just invoked the ruling, and Newcastle had given him a signing on fee with his contract to buy himself out of Mallorca.

 

 

Coercion is an issue apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

Recent tweets

Toontastic Facebook

Donate to Toontastic

Keeping the lights on since... well ages ago
TT-Staff


×