Jogada mais eficaz da nossa história

varandas até podia explicar a quem fez frete quando descredibilizou a defesa do clube em tribunal.

http://polarissports.pt/#who-we-are

Claro que anda bem informado… e bem relacionado.

Para muitos, pode haver até uma enorme surpresa nas próximas eleições.

Sem entrar no campo académico, diria que é um tipo muito inteligente e passou no Sporting numa fase muito delicada, sabe bem o que diz e quando diz.

Por isso… estas voltas ao estômago podem não ser inocentes.

https://www.sportslawandpolicycentre.com/Bulletin%20I_2011.pdf

página 33- estabilidade contratual

“Whether a just cause for the early termination of a contract signed
between a professional player and a club is given or not must, in case of a dispute,
be assessed while considering all specific and particular circumstances of the
concrete case. Consequently, it is not possible to provide a straightforward list of
occurrences that constitute just cause. Yet, in abstract terms, only a breach of the
contractual obligations by one party which is of a certain severity justifies termination of a contract without prior warning by the other party. Moreover, just cause is
generally to be considered as given when there are objective criteria which do not
reasonably permit expectation of a continuation of the employment relationship
between the parties”

“Consequently, should, for example, a player intend to prematurely terminate
his contract claiming that he has just cause, and should the club object to such
reasoning, it will be up to the competent deciding authority that will have to deal
with the specific dispute, to assess the matter, taking into account all particularities and specificities of the concrete case at stake, including, in particular but not
limited to, all given circumstances and the stance of the parties.

Bearing in mind the just mentioned considerations, one may conclude
that, as a general rule, for a party to have a just cause to early terminate a contract,
the other party needs to have seriously neglected its own contractual obligations.

”

Pagina 37 – responsabilidade conjunta

“Whenever a professional player has to pay compensation to a club for having
prematurely terminated a contract without just cause, the new club for which the professional player registers after the contractual breach will be jointly and severally
liable for the payment of the relevant compensation. According to the well established and constant jurisprudence of the DRC based on the current structure
of the chapter of the Regulations governing the maintenance of contractual stability
and the wording of the provision in question,34 this is an automatic consequence.
The new club will be responsible, together with the player, for paying compensation
to the former club, regardless of any involvement or inducement to breach the
contract.”
(…)

“Obviously, the pertinent provision is to the benefit of the players.
It takes into account that a club that is willing and ready to sign a contract with a player,
who has left his previous club prior to the ordinary expiry of his contract without
valid reason and without reaching a mutual agreement with said club, although
possibly not having directly influenced the player’s decision, was nevertheless all
set to acquire the services of the player. In other words, the new club was in any
case interested in the player.

Consequently, had it proceeded in accordance with
the appropriate and habitual course of action, it would have contacted the player’s
previous club in order to negotiate the transfer of the player,36 and would have had
to pay the transfer compensation agreed upon with the player’s former club, subject
to both clubs and the player finding a common understanding on the terms of the
player’s move to a new club prior to the end of his contract with his previous club.

Despite the abovementioned considerations, it appears essential to
emphasise that the main and primary debtor for the payment of the compensation
due for the committed contractual breach is and remains the professional player.

Equally, it needs to be pointed out that when establishing the amount of compensation
due, the DRC never takes into account the fact that the new club of the player will
in any case be jointly and severally liable for its payment. In other words, the
relevant compensation is and will always be exclusively calculated on the basis of
the damage caused by the professional player having terminated his contract
prematurely and without just cause and his behaviour in this respect”
Página 95, estabilidade contractual do ponto de vista do clube

“However it widely accepted and confirmed by jurisprudence of both the FIFA
Dispute Resolution Chamber, hereinafter “the DRC”, as well as the Court of
Arbitration for Sport, hereinafter “the CAS”, that a just cause, alike a just cause in
normal labour law, implies that the work relationship has been hindered so severally, that the parties have lost all faith in each other and that they could not reasonably be expected to continue their employment relationship.”

“If one wants the principle of pacta sunt servanda to be respected, then one must
ensure that the compensation payable following a breach of contract truly reflects
the damages the counter party suffers.”

É continuar a ler. A seguir fala de pressao do clube comprador para o jogador rescindir (no nosso caso, falamos de pressao do Jorge Mendes ou da própria empresa Gestifute, que deveria ser sancionada com a retirada da licenca FIFA – mas sobre isto o texto nao fala)

—-
Pagina 208 – A descricao do enquadramento legal portugues é do amigo Meirim. Vale a pena ler

________________

—–

Este livro também é bastante relevante, mas é preciso comprá-lo.

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=y0YsDQAAQBAJ&pg=PA119&lpg=PA119&dq=fifa+responsibility+of+club+when+player+rescinds+contract+unilaterally&source=bl&ots=n–AXoytF9&sig=ACfU3U220zxj3AEaRDEwRG8YDqKlsgEzhA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj28ZvD8OjoAhWGI8AKHUPaDZEQ6AEwCnoECA0QLA

O Sporting não vai ver um tostão duma forma ou de outra.

O problema não está na falta de dinheiro do jogador, do Milan, ou do Lille.
Está no facto de que qualquer que seja a solução encontrada, ela passar por jorge mendes, e pela lástima de presidente que temos.

Se houver acordo com rl, passará por uma verba inferior, que na realidade será 15 a 20% para jorge mendes, e traduzida em 3 “empréstimos” ou “compras” de jogadores que interessará na altura despachar ou colocar.

Se regressar, como propõe CV, joga uma época no máximo, para nossa vergonha (mas já não estaríamos na primeira, por isso…), e a seguir será “vendido” por um preço talhado para fazer parangonas de jornais, e mais uma vez, será imediatamente disparada em parte para bolsos alheios, e o resto num rúben amorim qualquer ou em 4 jesés.

Este é o modelo de negócio de jorge mendes, e quem não entendeu isto ainda, é muito ingénuo, ou estúpido como uma porta.
Ou o feduíco, ou seja as duas coisas, e ainda por cima vaidoso e mentiroso.