- Oct 17, 2008
- 15,019
There was Adrian Mutu?There was a player in Italy that was suited by the club for the transfer fee. Ex Chelsea? I think they won a well.
There was Adrian Mutu?There was a player in Italy that was suited by the club for the transfer fee. Ex Chelsea? I think they won a well.
No due to the amortisation of his fee. They would need to recoup some back.This might be a blessing in disguise unfortunately for Chelsea, surely if he's been found positive for a banned substance they can tear the contract up?
That would presumably have been a player that failed a drug test before he was signed? The article says that the test was taken in August, so Chelsea can hardly sue Shaktar given that the transfer was done 18 months previously.There was a player in Italy that was suited by the club for the transfer fee. Ex Chelsea? I think they won a well.
Surely they have another couple of hotels to sell to themselves, to offset that.No due to the amortisation of his fee. They would need to recoup some back.
No, they sued Mutu for £14.3mThat would presumably have been a player that failed a drug test before he was signed? The article says that the test was taken in August, so Chelsea can hardly sue Shaktar given that the transfer was done 18 months previously.
Ah ok. Well they aren't going to be able to sue Mudryk for his transfer fee. Whilst he's undoubtedly very rich; he won't be worth 70m.No, they sued Mutu for £14.3m
And won, and never saw a penny of it back apparently.No, they sued Mutu for £14.3m
No the club sued the player not the previous club.That would presumably have been a player that failed a drug test before he was signed? The article says that the test was taken in August, so Chelsea can hardly sue Shaktar given that the transfer was done 18 months previously.