No More Transfer Fees - It's Coming Soon Apparently!
Discussion
It'll have a bigger impact than the Bosman ruling if it wins in court and Fifpro is claiming it's illegal and will be testing it in court.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25418135
What we'll then have is players just handing in their notice like ordinary folk and walking out the door having terminated their contract.
Now I can see both the sense and fairness that this aims to achieve but what about the smaller clubs who only survive by selling their best players...
...Arsenal for instance.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/25418135
What we'll then have is players just handing in their notice like ordinary folk and walking out the door having terminated their contract.
Now I can see both the sense and fairness that this aims to achieve but what about the smaller clubs who only survive by selling their best players...
...Arsenal for instance.
perhaps they're suggesting usual terms of notice, say 3 months, in lieu of only having to pay them 5 grand a month ...Terminator X said:
I'm fairly confident though that mega salaried people in any industry are tied down to long notice periods. Footballers are simply mega mega salaried thus have very long notice periods ie 5 years or so! Keeping the huge salary albeit on a short notice simply won't work imho.
TX.
That's not quite correct though. Normally you would hand your notice in and work your notice period. If you don't hand your notice in you'll be working there indefinitely. Footballers contracts expire, it's a fixed term contract with a 100% notice period in effect.TX.
I can't see how this is workable as the contract will always create a value that can be realised on termination.
The amount footballers get paid isn't relevant.
1) We all sign contracts - we all resign from them
2) It's irrelevent if this move would make the clubs balance sheets poorer - its the courts it'll be tried in and they'll have to rule that footballers are the same as every other employed person I suspect.
3) Financially this will only affect the current players values - going forward it'll be a level playing field for all.
2) It's irrelevent if this move would make the clubs balance sheets poorer - its the courts it'll be tried in and they'll have to rule that footballers are the same as every other employed person I suspect.
3) Financially this will only affect the current players values - going forward it'll be a level playing field for all.
But teams won't be offering big wages to a player knowing he could walk out as soon as he is bored.
Surely if it's in the contract you can't 'work' for another club if you leave before the contract is up then that is what you abide by?
Like I said I agree but the commodity value of the sport will take such a big hit imo which I just don't think FIFA will let happen.
Surely if it's in the contract you can't 'work' for another club if you leave before the contract is up then that is what you abide by?
Like I said I agree but the commodity value of the sport will take such a big hit imo which I just don't think FIFA will let happen.
Boydie88 said:
Surely if it's in the contract you can't 'work' for another club if you leave before the contract is up then that is what you abide by?
Thats not the argument as I understand it. If a player of team X has 6 mnths of his contract left and wants to quit to play for Team Y then team Y only need compensate team X with the remainder of the players contract - 6 months salary.Not 6 months salary plus £25m.
Its the £25m thats seen as the (I suppose) 'restraint of trade' as far as the player is concerned.
Boydie88 said:
Like I said I agree but the commodity value of the sport will take such a big hit imo which I just don't think FIFA will let happen.
Let me know when FIFA are making the employment laws across Europe 
im said:
Team Y then team Y only need compensate team X with the remainder of the players contract - 6 months salary.
That isn't correct. Player would have to breach contract. Player would then be sued by club for breach. Non-competition clause in contract would still be enforceable, through injunction if necessary. Team X do not have to release the player from their contractual obligations.paulrockliffe said:
im said:
Team Y then team Y only need compensate team X with the remainder of the players contract - 6 months salary.
That isn't correct. Player would have to breach contract. Player would then be sued by club for breach. Non-competition clause in contract would still be enforceable, through injunction if necessary. Team X do not have to release the player from their contractual obligations.What I've described is a perfectly normal employment relationship, it's not open to challenge.
I suspect that the situation is that footballers aren't currently employed this way and there is scope to challenge. However, there's nothing stopping the club's employing the players properly and side-stepping any 'clarification'.
Obviously the elephant in the room is that current arrangements exist for tax reasons and the players will not want to be employed through the PAYE system that would come with a normal employment relationship. Not sure why that doesn't get much attention in the press.
I suspect that the situation is that footballers aren't currently employed this way and there is scope to challenge. However, there's nothing stopping the club's employing the players properly and side-stepping any 'clarification'.
Obviously the elephant in the room is that current arrangements exist for tax reasons and the players will not want to be employed through the PAYE system that would come with a normal employment relationship. Not sure why that doesn't get much attention in the press.
im said:
1) We all sign contracts - we all resign from them
2) It's irrelevent if this move would make the clubs balance sheets poorer - its the courts it'll be tried in and they'll have to rule that footballers are the same as every other employed person I suspect.
3) Financially this will only affect the current players values - going forward it'll be a level playing field for all.
Not sure it's quite as clear cut as that....footballers also enjoy more protection under their contracts then normal employees.2) It's irrelevent if this move would make the clubs balance sheets poorer - its the courts it'll be tried in and they'll have to rule that footballers are the same as every other employed person I suspect.
3) Financially this will only affect the current players values - going forward it'll be a level playing field for all.
e.g. Arsenal would have stopped paying Bentdner three years ago if they could and Spurs are currently continuing to pay AVB until he finds another job or his contract ends in 18 months time.
They also get loyalty bonuses etc just for staying with the same club.
So whilst the players might want more rights they will also I suspect have to give some up....yes Mr Footballer might want the ability to serve notice on his employer and move clubs freely but the quid pro quo will surely be clubs can do the same? Also if you're a player that gets injured you have a lot less protection than currently.
I think the current system probably suits both sides.
Gassing Station | Football | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff