So, Chelsea got banned from transfers for "child trafficking" as FIFA and UEFA morons call it (i.e. a 16 year old decided he wanted to go to a club that mattered instead of a club no one gives a shit about and said fuck this contract). Man U is in trouble. Man City is in trouble. Arsenal is in trouble because of Arsene Wenger's cheeky smile and how he uses his whole team to be a pedophile. You guys getting the similarities with the teams? Fifa and UEFA hate the EPL. Real Madrid rapes teams of youths and star players. No one says shit, but that's another story. Here is a time for me to gloat:
The European Club Association (ECA) stated “The FIFA panel which last week banned Chelsea from signing players until 2011 is too slow in making decisions”.
So what is the timescale for ruling on such disputes? Uefa lay this down as part of the Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players in Article 25:
“The Players’ Status Committee, the Dispute Resolution Chamber, the single judge or the DRC judge (as the case may be) shall not hear any case subject to these Regulations if more than two years have elapsed from the event giving rise to the dispute”.
Irrespective when RC Lens made a complaint to Fifa about the transfer, the event giving rise to the case is 1st July 2007 - the effective date of Kakuta’s signing with Chelsea.
The announcement from Fifa of the DRC’s decision states that they met on August 27th 2009. A date that is 2 years, 1 month and 26 days after the event giving rise to the dispute.
In accordance with Fifa’s published rules, the DRC “shall not hear any case subject to these Regulations if more than two years have elapsed from the event giving rise to the dispute”.
An open and shut case. -CFCNET
Suck my fucking dick, Hitlers. EPL 4 life.