Cavani chatting shít........ Again!

I didn't say it wasn't Bayern FSB. You came into this article talking about Cavani knowing more about Suarez' contract despite the Premier League being quoted showing he's wrong and then you said Gerrard said something he didn't. That's all i was saying. I like to deal in quotes as the media make up a lot as I'm sure you're aware of.

I said that Cavani had mentioned Suarez's claim to have turned down Juventus. Have you proved that wrong?

I said that Cavani would probably know more about Suarez's contract than Fred or the OP. Have you proved that wrong?

I then said that Gerrard claimed to have turned down a top club last summer. Have you proved that wrong?

The Premier League proved Cavani wrong.

I didn't prove you wrong about Gerrard turning down a move to a top club as I have no intention of doing so, Gerrard is quoted as saying it himself. I doubt anyhow that the club would have accepted an offer, Gerrard was just trying to convince Suarez.

So can you please explain exactly what you meant by the following?

What are you blabbering on about now? You were wrong, accept it and move on. Gerrard didn't say what you claimed he did.

you can't prove that cavani knows anything about suarez contract as much as anyone else can't prove that he does know all about suarez contract.

However, the claims that cavani is making appear to be about this verbal contract that no one can prove did/didn't happen and the clause as we all know doesn't exist in the form those morons think it does.

I wonder if cavani understands mercenary? Suarez didn't stay out of loyalty, he stayed for the extra money, he's a cashwhore. How about suarez stops biting and abusing people and actually puts in a full year for us? That'd be showing some loyalty.

Reggie, the article was mainly about Cavani saying that Suarez showed loyalty last summer by turning down a move to Juve. Does he mention Suarez's contract in the quotes attributed to him? He talks about an agreement but that was supposedly a verbal agreement, not part of the contract.

I simply stated that I'm sure Cavani knows more about Suarez's contract than the OP or Fred. As a footballer himself he will undoubtedly have more knowledge of contracts generally and the clauses that are inserted into specific contracts than Fred or the OP. I can't prove this but I'd be very surprised if this was not the case.

I read that the type of clause inserted into Suarez contract is common in Spain as a buyout clause but is not so common over here because it has not been properly tested in a court of law over here. As a footballer who has played in Spain I'm sure Cavani is familiar with these clauses. Obviously he may not be aware of the the fact that the clause may be interpreted differently in England. But that would be more of a lack of understanding of english law than a lack of knowledge of footballers contracts.

Why would staying this year show loyalty but staying last year doesn't? What's the difference?

It's nothing to do with how it's interpreted. It's there in black and white and the Premier League confirmed it. It does not say Liverpool must accept an offer above £40m.

You seem to be very confused on this topic. Did you get your information from a newspaper? Have you read what the Premier League have said after seeing the contract?

Cavani has never played in Spain.

TOOR, my point is that Cavani will know more about Saurez's contract than Fred or the OP. Do you disagree with that?

Of course the interpretation of a contract is important. Contracts are disputed in court every day. Despite the fact that the contract is 'there in black and white' the parties can have have different interpretations of their obligations under that contract.

The FA and PFA can offer an opinion and that will clearly carry some weight. However, if the Suarez camp insist that their interpretation is correct then the ultimate arbiter of any such contract dispute is a court of law. The court's ruling will over-ride the interested parties interpretations of the contract. This is how contract law works. On what grounds do you disagree with this?

Righteous, I know. I thought he had. I still think he probably knows more about footballers contracts than Fred or the OP though

TOOR, the judiciaries of England and Spain are fully autonomous. Their interpretation of many legal issues (including contract law), can and probably will differ in many respects. Are you saying that contract law is fixed for every judicial system on the planet?

An article from the EU website (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/contract/) about the differences in contract law among member countries states the following

Among the main barriers that hinder cross-border trade are differences between the national contract laws.

A clause that is commonly used in Spain to mean one thing may be interpreted differently in the UK or anywhere else.