FIFA, after their transfer ban was lifted on Friday.
The Blues’ appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS)
was heard last month, with the London outfit contesting
FIFA’s two-window ban relating to the signing of overseas
youth players.
Chelsea had been sanctioned in February and were unable to
sign any new players during the summer.
But manager Frank Lampard is now free to sign new players
next month.
The club has now taken aim at FIFA, labelling their approach
“deeply unsatisfactory”.
Full Statement:
Chelsea Football Club has today been notified by the Court
of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) that its appeal has been
successful. The transfer ban imposed on Chelsea has been
reduced to one window, which has already been served, and
Chelsea is, therefore, free to sign players in the January 2020
transfer window.
Chelsea is grateful to the CAS for the diligent approach that
it gave this matter. The club has not yet received the written
reasons for CAS’s decision but wishes to make the
following clear:
1. The approach taken by FIFA to this case has been deeply
unsatisfactory, not least as FIFA chose to treat Chelsea
entirely differently to Manchester City for reasons that make
absolutely no sense to Chelsea.
2. FIFA accused Chelsea of having breached Article 19 of
the FIFA regulations in relation to 27 players, covering the
period from 2009 onwards. Of those, 16 players were
registered by Chelsea in exactly the same way as other
Premier League clubs registered players at the time.
Furthermore, Chelsea sought clarification from the Premier
League in 2009 about whether it needed to apply for
permission to register players in this category. The FA
subsequently liaised with FIFA and it was confirmed to
Chelsea that players in this category were entitled to register
and that no special application was required (and in fact no
special application process existed).
Accordingly, the fact that FIFA brought charges against
Chelsea for this category of player was perverse. We are
grateful that this appears to have been corrected by the
CAS.
3. In relation to the remaining 11 players, Chelsea’s position
was as follows:
a. Six players qualified for one of the exceptions set out in
the FIFA regulations. As a consequence, to the extent there
was any breach in relation to these players, the breaches
were of a procedural nature only.
b. With respect to the remaining five players, FIFA’s position
was that it “deemed” these players to have registered prior
to any application for registration being made. Chelsea
maintains, as was held by CAS in the Real Madrid case, that
the FIFA regulations do not cover a concept of “deemed
registrations” and accordingly it is not open to FIFA to
“deem” that registrations were made before they were in
fact made.
4. Chelsea respects the importance of the work undertaken
by FIFA in relation to the protection of minors and has fully
cooperated with FIFA throughout its investigation. However,
if FIFA continues to impose inconsistent and unequal
sanctions on clubs then it will not only undermine the very
purpose of the regulations, but it will also bring into doubt
the game’s confidence in FIFA being able to appropriately
regulate this important area.
Comments
Post a Comment