FIFA has announced it will scrutinise the Court of Arbitration for Sport’s decision to lift Chelsea’s transfer embargo.
Chelsea hit out at FIFA’s “deeply unsatisfactory” verdict for imposing a two-window transfer ban on them when CAS made their judgement on Friday.
The original sanction against the Premier League club related to the signing of overseas youth players but the Swiss-based CAS halved FIFA’s transfer ban to one window, leaving Chelsea manager Frank Lampard free to seek new recruits in January.
“FIFA has taken note of the award by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) in the case involving the club Chelsea FC, which was sanctioned by the FIFA Disciplinary Committee for breaches relating to the international transfer and first registration of players under the age of 18,” said a FIFA spokesperson.
“Despite the reduction of the original sanction, FIFA takes note that CAS has confirmed a breach of the regulations on minors and the imposition of a transfer ban and a fine.
“FIFA is now waiting to receive the grounds of the decision in order to fully analyse it.”
Chelsea reacted to the CAS findings by branding elements of FIFA’s approach “perverse”, warning that the global governing body risks undermining itself through “inconsistent and unequal sanctions”.
Manchester City avoided a FIFA transfer ban in August despite being found guilty of breaching rules on youth signings.
“The approach taken by FIFA to this case has been deeply unsatisfactory, not least as FIFA chose to treat Chelsea entirely differently to Manchester City for reasons that make absolutely no sense to Chelsea,” read a Chelsea statement.
“Chelsea respects the importance of the work undertaken by FIFA in relation to the protection of minors and has fully cooperated with FIFA throughout its investigation.
“However, if FIFA continues to impose inconsistent and unequal sanctions on clubs then it will not only undermine the very purpose of the regulations, but it will also bring into doubt the game’s confidence in FIFA being able to appropriately regulate this important area.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here