I don`t know if transferred players still receive a percentage of the fee, or is it purely wages now?
As I understand it, if a player doesn't request a transfer he gets a %age of the total transfer fee, though of course this is dependant on the individual player/club relationship. Often you will see a player who isn't playing so much waiving his right to this %age in order to facilitate the move - there is often a wrangle between the buying and selling club as to who is due to pay this.
part of the player's percentage goes to his agent in addition to any introduction fees etc the agent may negotiate with the two clubs.
According to the new FIFA regulations, compensation payed due to contract breach can _only_ be payed directly from one club to the other, with NO third-parties involved. This means that neither a player nor an agent can get a percentage of the transfer fee. However, from what I've read, some players have a specific clause in their contract, saying that if the contract is breached due to a compensation (i.e. a transfer fee), the player must be paid a certain amount of money or a percentage of the compensation. (This clause is forbidden in Norway, btw). This is also known as a "sign-off-fee". So, technically a player _can_ get a percentage of the transfer-fee, but it has to be already specified in his current contract. Then there's always the better-known sign-on-fee, which is payed directly from the player's new club to the player. If the player used an agent to negotiate the contract, the agent typically gets 5-10% of the sign-on-fee and also of the monthly wages.
Interesting UEA so both the percentage and source of payment is negotiable. I don`t know if CJ requested a transfer or not - but this might be the source of the current problems, as say £325,000 could be more valuable than say an extra £5,000 per week on a 12 month contract (£260,000).
I think they can get a part of the transfer fee if the player didn't ask to go purely because they are under contract so the club are basically cancelling it and paying compensation. Thats what I make of it anyway.
Thanks for that very comprehensive - so theoretically in the case of Ash, as he has no agent, and has not requested a transfer it is possible he might get a sign off and a sign on fee of say 15-20% of £7-9 million. Not bad for a youngster with only a few months first team experience.;D
I think I read somewhere that someone in his familiy was acting as his agent? This would make sense, because apart from FIFA licenced player's agents, a relative to a player can also act as a player's agent. Bear in mind that the sign-on-fee usually isn't connected with the amount of transfer-fee, it's more likely to be connected with the wages agree in the contract. And I doubt that Ash has a sign-off-fee clause in his current contract. The £7-9 million is the buyer's club's compensation to _Watford_ for Ash breaching the contract (yes, in a transfer it's actually the player who breaches a contract, and usually the new club helps him pay the compensation, lol ), so unless he has a (somewhat rare) sign-off clause, he will see none of that (they pay to set him free, so to speak). I would guess that if such a deal goes through, Ash would get between £20k-30k in weekly wages and a sign-on fee of about £350k-500k, but that's a somewhat wild guess. Still, that's not bad either And with a relative representing him as an agent, all the money would stay in the familiy
To be honest, I think he is on his way, apparantly he has been acting differently around people he doesnt see that often... He really doesn't want to go because he wants first team football, but remembering we are in debt... will the board turn down the £5-9 mill that people have been suggesting?
Well, actually it doesn't matter what Watford are offered if Ashley Young really wants to stay. Any transfer is a two-part deal. First, the player and his current club must agree to breach the current contract and second, the player and the new club must agree on a new contract. Barcelona could offer Watford £100M for breaching the contract with Ash (or in this case, more likely, Villa offering £9M), but if Ash says "NO! I want to stay and fulfill my contract!" it doesn't really matter what the board says. Then again, he probably won't be that stubborn if offered a huge wage and fat sign-on-fee from his potentially new club
Ok, In that case then, could the club not force him out if they wanted the money that badly? Or could the player sue for damages ETC... (This isn't relating to Ash, just in general) Obviously cancelling his contract would make him a free agent...
Yes, cancelling his contract would make him a free agent, plus Watford would have to pay compensation to Ash, a compensation that I guess would be decided in the court room. Now, I guess Aston Villa could pay Watford £9M to breach the contract with Ash, but that would be rather stupid (and probably illegal), wouldn't it? Paying a club £9M to free a player just to see him sign with Man Utd the next day, lol
But if Watford want to sell and theoretically Ash wants to stay Watford could simple threaten to drop him until he complies. He has a contract to be paid but a footballer without football will soon come round!
That is very true, they could freeze him out. However, that would be risky: a) Let's say the player is stubborn and stays to the summer. Now his "value" will be much lower. Villa may not be offering £9M anymore, because they know there's a conflict between the player and the club. Maybe they just offer £4M. b) Even worse, the player could claim he has "Just Cause" for breaching the contract with the club (Claiming he is signed as a professional football, but not treated that way. Club obviously trying to force him to breach his contract, etc.). In this case the whole thing would be settled in the court room. c) Another thing is a new clause in the FIFA regulations which states that a player can breach a contract for Sporting Just Cause. This clause has not, to my knowledge, been tested yet. It states the following: An established Professional who has, in the course of the Season, appeared in less than 10% of the Offi cial Matches in which his club has been involved may terminate his contract prematurely on the grounds of sporting just cause. Due consideration shall be given to the player’s circumstances in the appraisal of such cases. The existence of sporting just cause shall be established on a case-by-case basis. In such a case, sporting sanctions shall not be imposed, though compensation may be payable. A Professional may only terminate his contract on this basis in the 15 days following the last Offi cial Match of the Season of the club for which he is registered. So.. I guess this clause is ment to protect players who are left out of the team, but what the "compensation" really means is not stated clearly anywhere.
So if the rumours of Clark Carlisle are true, what would be the situation there? As he is being left out due to a 'personal matter' are the club therefore no longer liable for leaving him out of the team OR terminating his contract? For legal purposes this is entirely theoretical, I am in no way shape or form suggesting Mr. C. Carlsile has an alcoholic beverages problem.
Well, like in any job, either the employer (i.e. the club) or the employee (i.e. the player) can breach the work contract if there's Just Cause. Say, if you're employed as a Computer Engineer but all you do is surf porn and don't contribute to your assignments, the employer can sack you based on Just Cause. The same way, if the employer places you in a pitch-black office with rats and +5 degrees celsius you can breach the contract based on Just Cause and claim compensation for your losses. So, if a player doesn't fulfill his work... he can be sacked. But, a player can not be sacked for a) being injured (at least not if it happened while working, i.e. training, playing) b) playing badly .. Edit: a couple of typos...
Based on that then you would have to say that the Carlsile injury is genuine (For legal purposes: Not that I ever mentioned it was not genuine)
Oh yeah definitely. I was simply trying to redress the balance and highlight the fact that players don't hold all the cards!
You're right, but they hold half of them, since a contract always has two parties (club and player) I guess what I was highlighting is that the club doesn't hold all the cards either
**************************************** Wow hartvix - you are an absolute mine of information. This is a `can of worms` eg. I wonder if the 10% of official matches is first team only - if not, taken to the extreme it could mean a Manager could no longer select & manage his team based on performance. It is amazing how the financing and structure of contracts can have a major impact on the success or failure of a football club. Increasingly the Board representative (in our case Ashton) deals with the contract details rather than Aidy - so it is no surprise that in general terms managers can `fail` without having much opportunity to influence signings.
As you say, it's a 'can of worms'. I was really surprised when I read this in the FIFA transfer rules, so I checked some articles about it and realised that this new regulation has never been tested. "Official Matches" does _not_ include reserve games, it's first team only. Then again, the amount of "compensation" is not specified anywhere so it will have to be tested before anyone knows the effects of this rule. I'm currently studying to take the FIFA Players' Agent exam. It's amazing how complex the football world seems from the outside and how simple it is on the inside. The whole regulations of "status and transfer of players" is just a document of 40 pages...
Thanks for that, that was one of the most interesting threads I have read in ages, and I was dissapointed when it came to an end.
Notwithstanding Fifa's guidelines on Sporting Just Cause it does not overide or replace international law. A contract is a contract in law and will have been drawn up, and be subject to, an agreed jurisdictions legal process. Basically a contract can not be abandoned unless there is proven just cause e.g. restraint of trade. Fifa does make me smile at times and Blatter is also culpable - he believes he is above the law! I think another interesting development will be if salary caps are instigated - this is just not enforceable and will be blown away if challenged in the European Courts.
Thing is Colin the courts are loath to get involved in sporting matters unless they absolutely have to - and many footballing organisations sanction members if they seek recourse outside of the traditional sporting avenues (of which the Sporting Court of Arbitration is the highest court). So it ends up being a trade off: if football 'legislates' it's own rules on the issue and a footballer signs up to those rules when he signs the contract (probably by way of a standard clause tying him to FIFA regulations) he has little recourse in the outside world. Salary caps though would be slightly different, as that would be a policy decision and would no doubt struggle in Europe.
Hope when you are accredited you can find us some fine Scandinavian players;D It would be really interesting to compare the relationship between various Managers and their Chief Executives eg. compare Harry at Pompey with Dowie at Charlton, and Allardice at Bolton to see whether successful managers have a greater control in the bidding and contract acquisition terms of their playing staff. My own hunch is that they do, and that if a club wants to `freeze a Manager out` without paying big compensation to him they just mess up his potential signings,sell his best players for profit - making it difficult for him to achieve success.
Seems odd to quote yourself...... but since this post, only this morning Benitez has berated the Liverpool board for reacting too slowly in the move to sign new players (Ash?). In addition Jose at Chelsea is quoted this morning that `he is not receiving the support he would expect from the club as he is desperate to improve his squad` (£300 million later). When you consider the gulf between `the spenders and the borrowers` in the Prem. it is amazing we have our current points tally!
