Farrelly and Healy Hearings Rejected by FIFA

**kdjaC** · 03/04/2007, 7:05 PM

The rule is there for a reason and works if all leagues are in same season but the EL isnt, that to me suggest its wrong.

While i agree with the rule for leagues in the same season , we should be exempt from it.

And ridden rock solid never gets old.

kdjac

**paudie** · 03/04/2007, 7:32 PM

Originally Posted by Celdrog

But they are not being stopped from working. They are still picking up their wage packets.

The point long term (even if the 2 players can't play till July) is that it cannot be legal under EU law for players who are not under contract to be prevented from signing a contract with another club.

This rule will have to be changed eventually, even if it is too late for City.

**jebus** · 04/04/2007, 10:28 AM

Originally Posted by pete

I am sorry that our club tried to add better players to the league.

Again are we not talking about Colin 'Not even League 2 clubs will touch me' Healy and Gareth 'I was once in a Premier League sticker album don't you know' Farrelly. That's beside the point anyway, Cork went it alone, took on FIFA and lost, end of story

Originally Posted by SUB of the day

so much anti Cork through the thread.In every country there is a region that excels, in Ireland that happens to be Cork...get over it, move on, etc etc

Jesus and to think I have to put with this attitude day in, day out. Almost makes me hope the global warming doom merchants are right and Cork is buried under a sea of melted polar icecaps

**razor** · 04/04/2007, 11:10 AM

Originally Posted by monutdfc

Hynes played in the UK (Newry City) (Yes, yes, same island blah blah, but as far as FIFA are concerned what should be the difference between him playing for Dundalk - Newry - Derry and Farrelly playing for Bohs - Blackpool - Cork?)

In speaking with Derry fans this morning it looks like Hynes isn't cleared either, so this could very well be the case.

**Celdrog** · 04/04/2007, 11:31 AM

Originally Posted by paudie

it cannot be legal under EU law for players who are not under contract to be prevented from signing a contract with another club.

They were not prevented from signing a contract. They both have two year deals (afaik) with Cork and are earning a wage. Nothing wrong there under EU law or Irish employment law.
Can Cork fans not understand that these guys are earning (a very) nice wage at the moment.
If we follow your logic then it was illegal for Cork not to play Georgie last season. He wasn't allowed the chance to earn appearance money, bonuses etc becasue the manager refused to play him. Maybe the EU will take Cork to court.

Having said all that its still a very strange rule but Healy and Farrelly's contracts with their previous clubs were up to the summer transfer window so either way they would be getting wages. Am I right here?

Also have Cork divulged why they were refused permission to play? It would help to clear up the confusion.

**DannyInvincible** · 04/04/2007, 12:48 PM

Wouldn't it have made more sense to allow those who crossed jurisdictions to play? Is the purpose behind the ruling not, in essence, to prevent players from playing with more than two clubs within the one season of one jurisdiction, or at least within the one season of those jurisdictions that operate a Winter schedule?

Shaun Holmes was cleared to play even though he crossed jurisdictions - he is now at Finn Harps, having moved from Derry, whom he joined from Glentoran. Why is his case any different from Hynes'?

Something doesn't add up.

**Lim till i die** · 04/04/2007, 1:26 PM

Originally Posted by pete

I am sorry that our club tried to add better players to the league.

LMAO

**passerrby** · 04/04/2007, 1:38 PM

Cork you go it wrong well done all at the FAI or the way in which they handled the matter. first class leadership long may it last

**Mr A** · 04/04/2007, 1:57 PM

Shaun Holmes was cleared to play even though he crossed jurisdictions - he is now at Finn Harps, having moved from Derry, whom he joined from Glentoran. Why is his case any different from Hynes'?

For one thing I'm not sure Hynes has been cleared and the two cases are very different. Holmes contract with Glentoran ended in the close season, and he had spent the last part of that contract on loan at Derry City, he had played only one match for Glentoran since July, and that right at the start. Hynes meanwhile moved from Dundalk to Newry- where he had a contract until this summer- and then on to Derry City, so there's no question of denying him the right to earn a living- it appears to be exactly the sort of thing FIFA are trying to stop.

**headtheball** · 04/04/2007, 4:19 PM

http://www.derrycityfc.net/season/07...php?storyid=74

Hynds has been cleared today to play for us today.

Absolutely disgraceful for Fifa to continue with this rule as surely no court in any EU country would deny EU citizen's the right to work and earn a living for their families.

**adamcarr** · 04/04/2007, 4:47 PM

Originally Posted by headtheball

http://www.derrycityfc.net/season/07...php?storyid=74

Hynds has been cleared today to play for us today.

Absolutely disgraceful for Fifa to continue with this rule as surely no court in any EU country would deny EU citizen's the right to work and earn a living for their families.

Yet he played in a winter league with Newry. Disgrace altogether by FIFA, sort it out!

**paudie** · 04/04/2007, 5:16 PM

Originally Posted by Celdrog

They were not prevented from signing a contract. They both have two year deals (afaik) with Cork and are earning a wage. Nothing wrong there under EU law or Irish employment law.
Can Cork fans not understand that these guys are earning (a very) nice wage at the moment.

Having said all that its still a very strange rule but Healy and Farrelly's contracts with their previous clubs were up to the summer transfer window so either way they would be getting wages. Am I right here?

Also have Cork divulged why they were refused permission to play? It would help to clear up the confusion.

Obviously City will have to honour whatever contracts were signed with Healy/Farrelly.

However if City knew that Healy and Farrelly would not get clearance they (or any other club) would never have signed them. I'm almost certain that neither player was contracted to any club when they signed for City. No fees were certainly paid.

Therefore in future players in the same position as Healy/Farrelly will not be offerred contracts even though they are not contracted to any other club. That IMO must untenable under EU law.

I agree that City should say how those 2 cases are different from the other cases. If City messed up in some way that obviously changes everything.

**pete** · 04/04/2007, 5:39 PM

If the contracts are pay for play then they will not be earning any money.

**Celdrog** · 04/04/2007, 6:34 PM

Originally Posted by pete

If the contracts are pay for play then they will not be earning any money.

They are not. Farrelly is on €70k per season and Healy is on €80k. Plus they have received their pay up until July from their previous clubs. They are all right so no need to worry about them.
If they were on a pay for play then their contracts can be cancelled by them due to frustration of contract and they are free to go back to their original contracts (which have already paid up)

**Brendan** · 04/04/2007, 9:18 PM

Originally Posted by Celdrog

They are not. Farrelly is on �70k per season and Healy is on �80k. Plus they have received their pay up until July from their previous clubs. They are all right so no need to worry about them.
If they were on a pay for play then their contracts can be cancelled by them due to frustration of contract and they are free to go back to their original contracts (which have already paid up)

the specifics regarding these two are quite irrelevant. it is hardly inconceivable that there would be players who, as the rule stands, could be prevented from earning a living: the point has been made quite well above. the rule therefore must be illegal.

what baffles me is what exactly the rule sets out to achieve. anyone?

**Brendan** · 04/04/2007, 9:24 PM

Originally Posted by Celdrog

They are not. Farrelly is on �70k per season and Healy is on �80k. Plus they have received their pay up until July from their previous clubs. They are all right so no need to worry about them.
If they were on a pay for play then their contracts can be cancelled by them due to frustration of contract and they are free to go back to their original contracts (which have already paid up)

Originally Posted by robbiesdrogs

brendan,

id imagine its to stop teams bringing in a load of players if they are in a promotion/relegation scrap id imagine

but Roddy's not managing any more

**RedX** · 05/04/2007, 1:10 AM

Why do Cork City fans bother posting on this forum?...i read through this thread and the amount of typical sarcastic Irish begrudgery is stomach turning..if this was happening at any club in the country i would support those players to play whether there club or the FAI dealth with the situation..why are some of you people so fecking bitter?...there are a lot of fans that really need to take a look at themselves from some of the comments they are leaving here...no wonder the eircom league has been stuck in the doldrums for years..because of some of the bitter people above are involved in it...you should be fecking ashamed of yourselves...arseholes

**Mr A** · 05/04/2007, 1:43 AM

Meh, you reap what you sow.

Anyway- I'm totally baffled that Hynes has been cleared and the two Cork lads haven't. Makes no sense to me- maybe my understanding of the Hynes situation was wrong though. What we now need from this are a set of clear guidelines as to what is and what is not going to be permissible that enable this issue to be administered at a local level, and enable clubs and players to know exactly where they stand, because currently it's as clear as mud.