FIBA's Std Letter of Clearance Enforces Rights of National Teams

Well, at least the Rockets & Yao will only have to go through this once.

 

If Nash can bail based on injury, why can't Yao bail based on injury? NBA players are always injured. The only issue is if they can play with the injury or not. If Yao had a mind to, I'm sure he could plead injury (I know they can have a doctor look at him, but what will the doctor say when Yao howls every time the doc touches his back?).

I'm not suggesting this is FIBA vs NBA or FIBA vs CBA or CBA vs NBA. I think you might be locked into that perception (of my perception). Is there a provision in the FIBA rules that forbids additional agreements between leagues doing a player transfer? Why wouldn't you want to allow a little extra? Why would the NBA not want to consider it, even if it were a special dispensation?

As for what the Rockets have signed, will sign or won't sign: I don't know. I doubt it is public knowledge what agreements the Rockets have signed or not signed. They could have signed 10,000 documents in China and we wouldn't know, would we?

Finally, you mentioned previously that the Chinese officials have shown they are not versed in the intricacies of the FIBA agreements. You don't have evidence of this. There were many demands reported that were unreasonable, ridiculous, obviously unacceptable and obviously not allowed. However, it is not clear that those demands were ever accurately reported. We didn't hear anything like that when the Rockets went to China to talk. So I don't think you can use those reports as any evidence of what the CBAers might or might not know.

From those meetings, the Chinese have appeared to be very reasonable about the whole thing. Their biggest concern, in fact, seemed to be to get the Rockets to confirm what FIBA already enforces, as you pointed out. Obviously, they could rely on FIBA to extract cooperation from the Rockets, but wouldn't be more courteous and easy and clear if the CBA and the NBA addressed the issue specifically to be sure all parties were clear on their obligations and rights?

 

I think you are spot on! Good analysis of the situation.

-G'day-

 

HP:
There isn't real value in arguing over this. One thing is clear though, Wang zhizhi of Mavs does have a special clause that demand him going back to China as soon as season ends. And Wang is also under FIBA regulation! To me, "at least" means if the club allows, the player can report to national team early. Every national team can practice anytime they want, why FIBA wants to ban transfered player to practice for their NT earlier? This isn't NCAA foortball.

It is highly unlikely, if not absolutely unlikely, this is a situation of misquote. It's reported by Xinhua News, official Chinese government news agency to the rest of the world.

Let's read the quote again:
"We hope that NBA teams selecting Chinese players can guarantee they are </b>physically and mentally fit <b/>and have the right to serve the Chinese national team," Chinese Basketball Association Secretary Xin Lancheng told the official Xinhua news agency in an interview.

"This guarantee must be in official written form."

How in the world can a team guarantee a player is physically and mentally healthy? The only logical explanation is China wants the guarantee that Rockets won't use "injury" as an excuse for not releasing Yao practice with NT EARLY.

"It also comes amid confusion over whether Dallas Mavericks center Wang Zhizhi, the first Chinese player in the NBA, will return to play with the national team this summer or remain in Los Angeles for the NBA's summer practice league. "

So, why does Wang think he is fine with the NT? Apperantly he does not break the 14 days rule. He said he will join them in late July. However, China appearancely thinks more practice time may be needed.

 

And I forgot to mention there is rule 4.3.5 about bilateral agreement "to the satisfaction of both party" in the FIBA letter of clearancerule.

 

HP, I don't think you understand me at all. You say I'm saying that FIBA doesn't carry weight. I'm not saying that at all. Obviously they do since they will dictate whether Yao is eligible for the draft. What I'm trying to say is that it isn't incredible that the Chinese may want, for their own comfort, additional agreements between the CBA/Sharks and the NBA/Rockets (I don't care who signs). These may simply re-iterate what the FIBA Agreement says; they may go beyond the FIBA Agreement; they may leave some stuff out that FIBA covers. It is reasonable for them to ask for it anyway for the following reasons:

(1) Adds extra protection in case mediation is required,
(2) Makes the agreement a direct agreement and not solely reliant on a third party,
(3) Is customized to their needs,
(4) Makes it very clear for all concerned parties what their rights and obligations are because they've gone over how it relates to the particular case in question.

For these reasons, I don't think a request of additional promises is unreasonable or posturing or empty. It would serve a legitimate purpose; that's all I'm trying to say: additional agreements would serve a legitimate purpose.

It is good for the ChBA and the NBA and the Rockets that there is also the FIBA layer governing the issue. It protects all parties. But you're arguing that there must be nothing else to the process because FIBA is sufficient. I'm saying that, while FIBA may well be sufficient, there is a use for additional agreements.