First Signing

Trone

Registered
Apr 25, 2014
301
247
43
42
Looks like the first signing or at least of the first players will be godsway donyoh, MCFC player on loan in Sweden, originally from Ghana , 19 years old
 

DiRoma

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 23, 2014
454
612
93
33
Looks like the first signing or at least of the first players will be godsway donyoh, MCFC player on loan in Sweden, originally from Ghana , 19 years old
Do you have any sources...btw Donyoh was born in 1994, goddamn that makes me feel old.....
 
  • Like
Reactions: einwindir

Leo Glickman

Registered
Mar 26, 2014
39
6
8
57
Does anyone know how these "signings" would work? Will there be a contract? If he loaned out, will it be for a committed period of time, or will MCFC be able to simply pull him back if there is a need and he has a good spell for you guys? It seems strange to "sign" a player away from the same legal entity, I'm not sure how this would work.
 

Slick Rick

Registered
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Apr 18, 2014
380
419
113
Upper East Side
Does anyone know how these "signings" would work? Will there be a contract? If he loaned out, will it be for a committed period of time, or will MCFC be able to simply pull him back if there is a need and he has a good spell for you guys? It seems strange to "sign" a player away from the same legal entity, I'm not sure how this would work.
Was there precedent with Chivas/Chivas USA? TBH,I am not familiar with MLS that far back.
 

Falastur

Registered
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 20, 2014
3,389
4,580
353
35
Herts, UK
There has to be a contract. Without a contract, nothing is technically legal, or enforceable. The players would be signed as if on a one-year contract, and would have to be within the salary cap according to MLS rules. They couldn't be recalled by MCFC as FIFA (and UEFA) treat international loans as equivalent to transfers and don't allow recall clauses in the transfer documents.
 

Leo Glickman

Registered
Mar 26, 2014
39
6
8
57
yeah, but you can't enforce a contract with yourself. That's the issue. If there is a written agreement between MCFC and NYCFC, and for whatever reason MCFC wanted the player back before the end of the contract, could Claudio Reyna or Jason Kreis really say "no, we have a contract"?
 

Falastur

Registered
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 20, 2014
3,389
4,580
353
35
Herts, UK
yeah, but you can't enforce a contract with yourself. That's the issue. If there is a written agreement between MCFC and NYCFC, and for whatever reason MCFC wanted the player back before the end of the contract, could Claudio Reyna or Jason Kreis really say "no, we have a contract"?

I think you're missing the point. Aside from the fact that Andy is right - all MLS players are technically employed by the league, not the club, and so it's the league who would hold the contract - you're completely forgetting about player registration rules.

When a player is transferred to another club - whether internationally or nationally, permanently or on loan - the transfer must be approved by the national Football Association which holds the registration of the club. The player is then registered to play with that Association. The FA involved is responsible for ensuring that the terms of the contract are adhered to. If one club had loaned out a player to another club which specified "no recall clause", and then the parent club managed to persuade the loanee and his new team to recall him, simply put the FA of his parent club would then step in and say "nope, you're registered with a different team, you aren't allowed to play for your parent this season". If City tried to recall a player and use him, they'd be hit with fines and points deductions in the Premier League.

The exact same thing happened this season, I believe, with Sunderland, who have caused a right situation. If I recall this correctly, they loaned out a player on only a temporary loan to a German side, but for reasons I can't remember, the German FA refused to hand over the player registration for him when they brought him back. Thus, when Sunderland played him in four PL matches, he was technically ineligible and Sunderland have been hit with a fine, and the relegated teams are taking the FA to court in the hopes of hitting Sunderland with a further points deduction which might save one of them from relegation.

Anyway, yes, you can hold a contract with yourself. It's perfectly possible for a company to bind itself to a contract that can result in punishment if broken. Besides, the two clubs are separate entities, so there's even further reason to believe that they can hold each other to contracts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinkladze

413Blue

Registered
Seasoned Supporter
Apr 23, 2014
3,873
6,477
303
MA
Just another thing to point out. MLS made a special rule recently which states that if a club (in this example NYCFC) has any shared ownership with a foreign club (ManC), any player loaned from the foreign club will be counted at his full salary. So Man C can't loan a player to MLS/NYCFC with a huge salary, have Manchester pick up most of the salary and only hit NYCFC with 150k against the salary cap. This was done to eliminate any unfair advantage.
Just an example of when this has happened, Julio Cesar of TFC is loaned to TFC at something like ~150k salary this season. So he is not counting as a DP spot or for his full salary which is WAY higher. The club which owns his rights is paying his remaining salary.
 

Trone

Registered
Apr 25, 2014
301
247
43
42
Just another thing to point out. MLS made a special rule recently which states that if a club (in this example NYCFC) has any shared ownership with a foreign club (ManC), any player loaned from the foreign club will be counted at his full salary. So Man C can't loan a player to MLS/NYCFC with a huge salary, have Manchester pick up most of the salary and only hit NYCFC with 150k against the salary cap. This was done to eliminate any unfair advantage.
Just an example of when this has happened, Julio Cesar of TFC is loaned to TFC at something like ~150k salary this season. So he is not counting as a DP spot or for his full salary which is WAY higher. The club which owns his rights is paying his remaining salary.
Thats a really stupid rule. Parity is good and all but when you are trying to build a league and grow it the idea should be to get the best possible players in the league for as little cost as possible. This rule totally undermines that idea. I cant believe MLS would be stupud enough to have made this rule. having Julio Ceasar here for $150K is great for the league. MLS has a cap and everyone understands that the cap is important now but finding ways to get top players here despite the cap should be the focus not the opposite as this rule seems to do.
 

Falastur

Registered
Donor
Seasoned Supporter
Mar 20, 2014
3,389
4,580
353
35
Herts, UK
I think it's designed to stop people from buying a second team which is not restricted by wage caps and then loaning enough players to a team to allow an MLS side to play with 20, or even a good 6-8, DPs. If any team could muster that then they'd be in a position to control the league, permanently.
 

Trone

Registered
Apr 25, 2014
301
247
43
42
I think it's designed to stop people from buying a second team which is not restricted by wage caps and then loaning enough players to a team to allow an MLS side to play with 20, or even a good 6-8, DPs. If any team could muster that then they'd be in a position to control the league, permanently.

again, if it makes the quality of the league better but falls within the leagues fiscal constraints then that is fantastic for the league. What they are trying to prevent is teams from spending more than they make which result in the league going under. Its a difficult balance to not spend too much and improve quality. If there are ways to do so such as this, then that is fantastic. Get top players to the US while staying fiscally responsible = Brilliant. Any rule that hinders this = foolish. I would like to read more about this rule, I really have my doubts that MLS would put restraints on good players coming in for min $