is there anything to point that he's a UTD fan? i guess he's not even a football fan

Why tottenham copied our glory glory song?

They changed it to "Glory glory tottenham hotspurs"??? LOL?

come on , enough of man utd,

lets move on to a much bigger picture here...

The chelsea case.. Is gael kakuta really worth that 2 years ban? =/

Hahhaha..okey....look like their lovers also know the habit of their player..

back to the topic..look like several english club reported to FIFA now...left Pool and Arsenal now from the top 4...

okay let's get something straight. there are people here who actually believe french/italian/spanish/german clubs have NEVER poached a youngster from other smaller teams before? u actually think they're all angels?and platini/blatter is the saviour of football? wow..u guys deserve an award. and its not the good kind. 

okay let's get something straight. there are people here who actually believe french/italian/spanish/german clubs have NEVER poached a youngster from other smaller teams before? u actually think they're all angels?and platini/blatter is the saviour of football? wow..u guys deserve an award. and its not the good kind. 

okay let's get something straight. there are people here who actually believe french/italian/spanish/german clubs have NEVER poached a youngster from other smaller teams before? u actually think they're all angels?and platini/blatter is the saviour of football? wow..u guys deserve an award. and its not the good kind. 

Dude asking Mutu to pay 17mil to Chelsea...was not even a help..they complicated a lot of things...dont look everything direct..try to think the other side of it..

I mean the player himself..begging former club to reduce the 17mil...asking from club to split the bill...now look like Mutu career in trouble...

It is just the same of Kakuta case...Fifa should not limit his earning...he play and train harder so that he can earn a good money...did his former club can give him the salary Chelsea give it to him? No..so we pay for what we done....simple..Why Ronaldo cost nearly 80mil...cuz he play hard to impress the world....to make sure he earn a gud salary..

Sometimes is not just about Club...sometimes it is about players...

Wenger against ban on signing Under-18s

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger has become a rare voice against blocking the trade of Under-18 footballers, defending his club's policy of signing the best young players from around the world and claiming the rules should actually be relaxed.

The French coach criticised the current rules which make it difficult for English clubs to sign youths from Asia, South America and Africa.

Wenger claims that stopping a practice that Leeds chairman Ken Bates has described as "baby farming" would actually put the players at more risk and they would likely fall prey to unscruplious agents.

FIFA are determined to clean up the game after last week banning Chelsea from signing any players until 2011. Since the Gael Kakuta ruling a whole host of offended clubs have come out to demand action.

Most of Europe's top clubs have stated they would support a ban on any transfers for under-age players, but Wenger strongly disagrees claiming there are many advantages to joining big clubs with a professional infrastructure.

Arsenal have one of the most cosmopolitan academies in Europe with players from all over the globe.

"People think that we take 30 players every year and you get them into your academy," he said. "No, it's not like that. When we take one or two, we give them a top level education, we give them a top level scholarship, and we look after them socially.

"Look at the alternative. If you ban players from moving before the age of 18, you know what will happen? The player will be sold anyway,'' he said. "To whom? To agents. At what age? At 13, 14. Where will they go? Not to top-level clubs with top-level education.

"They will go to clubs who have been bought by business people, of a very low level, and will stay there until the age of 18 waiting to be sold. The money will go out of the game. You have always to look if you make one decision, what kind of alternative?

"If your players cannot move to the best clubs, I believe they will not improve. At the end of the day, to be a top-level player is to be with the best. You can speak bout the compensation level, is it right or not. I am open to that.

"I am against the process of stopping the players moving to the top level. If you have a child who is a good musician, what is your first reaction? It is to put it into a good music school, not in an average one, so why should that not happen in football?

"If a player goes to Chelsea, Arsenal, Manchester United, it is all clean and he gets a good education. That is why I am very sharp on cases like that. We have to respect the rules that are in place.

"England is, at the moment, in a weak position for taking young players because they inflict a big handicap on themselves by the fact that they have no access to Asian players, no access to South American players, no access to African players.

"On top of that, if it was impossible to take European players then you will have a big handicap in the future for English football. What is happening now is a case that I have fought for a long, long time against - people with regressive ideas.

"To expose your local players to top-world class players does not harm your players, it improves your players because it respects one basic rule - the best to become better have to play better. If you have a good national team today, it just proves it conforms to what I have preached for a long, long time - don't hide the best players in England from being exposed with the best ones, because that will make them weaker.

"Get them to be confronted with the best and make them stronger."

sos soccernet

what do u guyz think??? 

Until there are some minor clubs report any french/italian/spanish/german club to FIFA of trying to poach their youngster, you have to accept that only the English have been really greedy.

If you are going to accuse FIFA of being anti-English, well, maybe you didn't read yet about Roma's similar 2 years ban.

In fact, I believe, FIFA have been really biased toward Chelsea recently, when they asked Mutu to pay 17 million euros to Chelsea. Huh, they are indeed 'anti-English'.

Honestly, I think Mr Wenger is being selfish and ignorant. Read the article, young kids are being sold like cattle even now. Is it really that hard to establish feeder clubs or have links with clubs all around the world and help them train those kids locally so they do not have to be uprooted and sent somewhere far from home.

Good for the club, good for the community and also good for the kids.

@Kerplunk: Innocent until proven guilty. European clubs in general tend to bring in youngsters at a far younger age (ard 8-13). And for players that are older normally a fee is involved. What the English clubs are criticised for now are for bringing in players just before they can sign professional contracts by offering them a lucrative pro contract (because it's allowed in England) and without compensating a fee. It may be legal but to me it's unethical. That is what I want to see being cracked down. Chelsea may have been unlucky because Kakuta had signed a pre-agreement with Lens but that doesn't mean that all the other European clubs practice the same way mainly because there is no loophole for them to exploit. The whole thing would have been a non-issue if the clubs that trained these players since they were 8 yrs old were being compensated in the first place.

How much do you compensate them when there's no contract involve. What is the amount that seems fair to both sides? Reluctant seller will quote sky high price while buyer will find ways to nick those youngster for free since there's practically no contract binding them. What if seller determine to hang into their prized asset & buyer determine to get their hands on the said asset while the asset himself determine to move on to better things? Do we need to consider the opinion of the youngster since there's no contract? If not, then buyer & seller is equally guilty for treating the youngster like a piece of meat.

Trouble is determining the amount of compensation. For pro, their transfer fee mostly based on their income/year. If this approach are used to compensate those small clubs, it's practically nil.
On the other hand, do the buyer just pay whatever the figure quoted by seller? It's a no brainer since, why would they pay the seller asking price when they know they can get it for far less if its decided by tribunal.

BTW bet all those big clubs across Europe would like to have a youth policy like the English. Its just that government policy prevented them from signing contracts with youngster like the English