VVD hands in transfer request

nah on a serious note, meeting the release clause was just half of the story, arsenal had to get suarez to agree to come over,

not sure what happened communications wise between liverpool and suarez. either they convinced him to stay or didnt tell him that the release clause had been met.

either way, it looks like suarez's agents had only done half the job.

comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Wahl Icht¬ (U21581)
posted 9 seconds ago
Look everyone knows what happened. Liverpool screwed Suarez over and refused to let him go to Arsenal even though they met the release clause. Suarez didn't sue Liverpool because he got a move to Barcelona a year later.

Doesn't change what Liverpool did though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or, Suarez wanted to leave, we said don't be silly you can do better. So we laughed at arsenal, Suarez was amazing and we sold him for doing what Arsenal offered. Good stuff all round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly this is ridiculous

If I went into a shop and you had an item there to buy for £40 and I offered £41, are you saying you're not obliged to sell it me. Why wouldnt you sell it to me unless you have some kind of issue with me? You have to sell to anyone regardless of their age, race, skin colour etc. Game over.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Very poor example to use. Unless you had a legally enforceable contract, the shopkeeper can easily back out of any deal.

As with Suarez's "clause", it was legally unenforceable. Pretty basic stuff really.

Very poor example to use
-----

I was gna bring out a 'buying a pack doritos from a shop' example in a minute

comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 2 minutes ago
I was gna bring out a 'buying a pack doritos from a shop' example in a minute
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Racist

I'm sure Suarez didn't sue LFC because he would have lost (and have to pay the respondents costs in the process). The reason he would have lost was because of the term of his contract, as I've said before.

If an offer for him came in, as it did from Arsenal for £40M + £1, by the term LFC were contractually bound to 'consider' the offer. By all accounts they did consider it, and rejected it.

End of.

JimmyTheRed

comment by 🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆🏆 (U18355)
posted 12 minutes ago
If memory serves correctly, Liverpool met Gabriel Heinze's release clause at United who flat out refused to sell to Liverpool.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

There was no release clause with Heinze. United just refused to do business with Liverpool. Heinze handed in a transfer request, so if Liverpool had really met the release clause, his agent wouldn't have let it go that easily

comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Wahl Icht¬ (U21581)
posted 9 seconds ago
Look everyone knows what happened. Liverpool screwed Suarez over and refused to let him go to Arsenal even though they met the release clause. Suarez didn't sue Liverpool because he got a move to Barcelona a year later.

Doesn't change what Liverpool did though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or, Suarez wanted to leave, we said don't be silly you can do better. So we laughed at arsenal, Suarez was amazing and we sold him for doing what Arsenal offered. Good stuff all round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly this is ridiculous

If I went into a shop and you had an item there to buy for £40 and I offered £41, are you saying you're not obliged to sell it me. Why wouldnt you sell it to me unless you have some kind of issue with me? You have to sell to anyone regardless of their age, race, skin colour etc. Game over.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you don't

The seller ALWAYS has the right to refuse a sale, even though the price has been met.
Look up on Contract Law, specifically the clauses dealing with "Invitation to treat"
There is Case Law by the bucket load proving this exact point over & over again.
Please don't comment on things you know nothing about.

comment by Wahl Icht¬ (U21581)
posted 33 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 6 seconds ago
comment by Wahl Icht¬ (U21581)
posted 29 seconds ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 1 minute ago
Wahl don't expect them to admit guilt even when they're found guilty by a court of law.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Can you imagine how they'd react if someone did this to their club? It's unbelievable.
----------------------------------------------------------------------


----------------------------------------------------------------------
Exactly! That is exactly how you'd all react.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

comment by Keep It Greasy Fick mich, du (U1396)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Mr Chelsea. (U3579)
posted 22 minutes ago
comment by Greatteamswinit4times- a terrible enemy (U6008)
posted 9 seconds ago
comment by Wahl Icht¬ (U21581)
posted 9 seconds ago
Look everyone knows what happened. Liverpool screwed Suarez over and refused to let him go to Arsenal even though they met the release clause. Suarez didn't sue Liverpool because he got a move to Barcelona a year later.

Doesn't change what Liverpool did though.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Or, Suarez wanted to leave, we said don't be silly you can do better. So we laughed at arsenal, Suarez was amazing and we sold him for doing what Arsenal offered. Good stuff all round.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Honestly this is ridiculous

If I went into a shop and you had an item there to buy for £40 and I offered £41, are you saying you're not obliged to sell it me. Why wouldnt you sell it to me unless you have some kind of issue with me? You have to sell to anyone regardless of their age, race, skin colour etc. Game over.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No you don't

The seller ALWAYS has the right to refuse a sale, even though the price has been met.
Look up on Contract Law, specifically the clauses dealing with "Invitation to treat"
There is Case Law by the bucket load proving this exact point over & over again.
Please don't comment on things you know nothing about.
----------------------------------------------------------------------