Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
1: Sevilla v Valencia
2: Benfica v Juventus
1 vs. 2 in the final, so Juve would be the away team at their home stadium... should be a rule anyway IMO
CL up next
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
fingers crossed for madrid derby and repeat(/revenge) of 2012
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
1: Real Madrid vs. Bayern Munich
2: Atletico Madrid vs. Chelsea
Snooooooooooze 
1 vs. 2 in the final, Real/Bayern the home team
[Edited on 11-04-2014 by Robbo]
|
Conway563
Member
Registered: 7th Jun 06
Location: Yate, Bristol
User status: Offline
|
UEFA also overruling the agreement that Courtois can't play against Chelsea unless Athletico pay £5m
|
mwg
Member
Registered: 19th Feb 04
Location: South Lakes
User status: Offline
|
Wanted Real v Chelsea & Athletico v Bayern
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Conway563
UEFA also overruling the agreement that Courtois can't play against Chelsea unless Athletico pay £5m
quite right too!
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
Knowing Mourinho and Abramovich, if Athletico play Courtois against them, they can kiss goodbye any chance of signing him. Even if they do decide to sell  Unless of course it is for a deal with Costa.
[Edited on 11-04-2014 by Eck]
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robbo
quote:
Originally posted by Conway563
UEFA also overruling the agreement that Courtois can't play against Chelsea unless Athletico pay £5m
quite right too!
Why is it quite right? If it was agreed in his contract then both clubs were aware of it, and accepted it. I wonder if it would of been overruled had it been the other way round?
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
if the rules say loanees can play against their parent clubs then why should chelsea be able to exter any influence over the rules by sayign they have to pay? its a nonsense!
|
Ben J
Member
Registered: 31st Jan 05
Location: Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
quote:
Originally posted by Robbo
if the rules say loanees can play against their parent clubs then why should chelsea be able to exter any influence over the rules by sayign they have to pay? its a nonsense!
This x 1trillion.
|
Ben J
Member
Registered: 31st Jan 05
Location: Cheshire
User status: Offline
|
Bet Coutois get a mystery "injury" anyway!
Chavs will either tell AM that if he plays he won't be signing for them or if he has chance of th Chelsea No.1 spot, then his agent will be told to forget it if he plays.
[Edited on 11-04-2014 by Ben J]
|
Cavey
Member
Registered: 11th Nov 02
Location: Derby
User status: Offline
|
Always used to be able to put clauses in on FM 
Do the rules sy that? I assumed it was whatever was agreed upon in a contract
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
I'm pretty sure the clauses are still valid during PL games? Must not be for European games though.
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
dont need clauses in PL now, its a rule that you cant play against your parent club (nosnensical!)
|
Eck
Premium Member
Registered: 17th Apr 06
Location: Lundin Links, Fife
User status: Offline
|
What the fuck? Jesus wept.
|
Robbo
Member
Registered: 6th Aug 02
Location: London
User status: Offline
|
was because some clubs allowed and others didnt and they said it wasnt fair so they brought in a rule (contradictory to UEFAs own rule  )
|
