Right and wrong do not come into it. It is a contract. The criteria were not met so we are not liable.Seathrun66 wrote:What exactly have RBL done wrong? Nothing I can see. If this was another English club we'd have paid up already and tried to cut our losses by selling Augustin on at a reduced price.corkleedsmot wrote:If it said only when we are promoted then i knew we would def lose any case going forward but the date makes it quite clear. Moral high ground in my view was lost when they tried to change the contract after the fact. An effort to make sure they caught Leeds out for a player they knew we wouldn't want. Moral high ground literally wont matter here anywhere it is quite clear. Leeds on June 30th were not promoted so not liable. It was RBL decision to not claim their player who is registered to them. Neither side is covered in glory here anyway. All situations played out to current contracts over covid. Players had to negotiate new deals etc. If they didn't there would now be thousands of cases and there hasn't been. It is my View that Messi would have lost too. The idea he didnt want to take Barca to court is nonsense.... he has already taken Barca to court. He knew he would lose.
When did Messi take Barcelona to court? No record I can find. He's aware that even with a legal victory it would spoil his peerless legacy with the club.
And it's not moral high ground in this instance, it's clear legal interpretation for which we are in the wrong. And very clearly so.
It has nothing to do with English or German. Talk to any lawyer besides RBL's and they will tell you the exact same thing.
It is the EXACT equivalent of RBL asking Leeds for 18 million if we were promoted the year after. They would be told to get stuffed then and rightly so.
The termination date is all that will matter which in this case was 30th of June.
Everybody else followed these rules and knew they had to renegotiate deals if they wanted. Leeds didn't want to. FIFA gave no directive which basically means they are saying contract dates too. (if they did otherwise the football world would have melted)
Ryan Fraser rejected a contract and refused to play with 3 months left. Berardi went the other way(here is where spirit of the game matters from a Leeds perspective). You need all parties to agree a contract. in this case you only had one.
I think you are not reading in between the lines. RBL are just gambling here. They want Augustin off their books either way as he is on 4.5 mill a year there. They should have taken their player back and sold him as you said but they dumped him to get out of his wages because Nantes would not be able to afford the deal for Augustin with a transfer fee and the player wouldn't leave if his deal wasn't solid leaving them liable for 18 mill over 4 years.
They will be cold and calculated about this and they are already prepared to lose. The morality nonsense to the press is just for show and believing multinational drinks corporations have souls is well... suboptimal thinking over time. That is not to say they won't be very angry. Bayern already lied to the press this week about Cuisance when suddenly sending him to France giving them 100% better terms. These are no angels and they are 100% trying to squeeze money out of English clubs who are rolling in TV money.
Leeds paid the staff with no redundancies, took care of Berardi to the best of my knowledge, kept Bielsa sweet and got us promoted after 16 years and then spent big on players.
Spirit of the game
) to Cuisance who turns up ready and raring to play for us, all terms and conditions agreed, only to be told "Sorry, there is a possible problem with your left foot. We don't think you'll last the pace". The similarities being 1) a very disappointed player who had already said his goodbyes to his former employer and now had to return somewhat sheepishly, and 2) being able to take hardnosed business decisions that will upset some people.
