• Manchester United Message Board

  • jim w jim w Jul 30, 2012 16:32 Flag

    Chevrolet and the FA/Rio

    Chevrolet replacing AON as shirt sponsor, no details of value yet.
    The FA are at it again, 'making an example' of a United player, this time Rio over his tweets. Maybe its me but I didn't realise the FA were somehow running a 'police state' in the UK.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Chevrolet deal is for seven years and according to The telegraph "Exact figures have not been disclosed by United or Chevrolet, but it is understood that the deal is worth in the region of £28m-a-year and that the deal was accelerated by General Motors following the impact of United’s visit to China last week for the Chevrolet Cup tie against Shanghai Shenhua in Shanghai.".

      FA/Rio - I'll leave that to the trolls that infect this board.

    • £28m is a great price today, but 7 years is a long time to commit to, even more so when the deal doesn't start for another 2 year. Will £28m still be great value in 2021?

      If they pay the same way as AON did, half of it upfront, its a good chunk of money coming into the club immediately though.

      As for Rio, his comments on twitter were daft and, whether you agree with it or not, its not surprising the FA have charged him. I just hope he gets nothing more than a fine.

      • 1 Reply to Steve
      • Stefan, the western world economy will not be better than now i 8/9 years time. So yes a good deal.
        Rio is many slices short of a full loaf, agreed. But I do not think that is the point. A football 'authority' cannot give itself the legality of patrolling a communication system. Whatever was said, and it sounds pretty silly, this cannot have anything to do with the FA. Otherwise this is fascism. This has to be thrown out for the good of society in general.

    • Actually his post made me laugh. It was *not* what I was expecting!


    • That depends on what has been signed by whom covering an issue like this. If there is something in the 'agreements' signed by football clubs to be allowed to enter into FA run competitions that covers this issue and that signing a contract with a club means a player is subject to those conditions, then I agree. However I would be surprised if the drafting of those agreements was so all inclusive to cover social media comments about a 3rd parties comments about another player. Its very unlikely in my opinion. The FA are relying on 'general acceptance' that they can impose 'club' rules just as you say.
      My personal opinion is that they are at risk from over-reach and that this could be exposed in common law if anyone felt sufficiently motivated to test the limits of their 'rules'. I feel very uncomfortable of a private body imposing 'behaviour' so far removed from their area of normal operation.
      None of the above supports any views expressed by Ferdinand in this matter, as I have previously said he is generally the sort of guy who opens his mouth to change feet.

    • Having seen (from both sides) a lot of contracts written by the big guy's lawyers for the little guy to just accept and sign I would bet a large amount of money that there is at least one all-encompassing clause along the lines of:

      - the club (and by extension its players) will abide by all rules of the association as passed from to time, and will accept sanctions decided by the association for breaches of those rules, subject to the rights of the club and players to appeal to the Court of Arbitration in Sport and their rights under the law of England and Wales.

      Or, in other words, "I'm the big guy with the lawyers and a monopoly on football in England, and I can do whatever the hell I like."

      Rather than being concerned about the FA and Ferdinand who is big enough, rich enough and certainly ugly enough to look after himself, I would be more concerned about this:


      Since when did it become right for the police to arrest a 17 year old kid in the middle of the night simply for writing an obnoxious tweet?


    • They charged Frimpong with something similar a few days ago. To me, Frimpong's looks at least as bad as Ferdinand's. If Ferdinand gets treated significantly worse than Frimpong I might end up agreeing with you. If they get similar punishments I wouldn't, and I don't think United fans should.

      Of course, Liverpool fans will be watching to see how these cases compare with Babel's punishment.


    • "certainly ugly enough" - why descend to that Robert? You normally like to give the impression you are above all that.

    • They don't compare at all to Babel's case.

    • Part of the same issue Robert. Makes no difference whether its a 17 yr old kid or Ferdinand, its smacks of 'police state'.

    • Why pick on that little throwaway comment Eric, when it was preceded by seventy eight sensible comments that you could comment on? It's hardly as if you were offended by it.

      I guess you must have agreed with everything else I have written.


    • View More Messages