'Refusing' to sell a player who wants to leave...

Discussion in 'Football Forum' started by Rozay, Jul 15, 2017.

  1. Jul 15, 2017
    #1

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    How do people feel about this practise?

    I know it might sound a bit dramatic and echo Blatter's infamous 'slave' speech about Ronaldo - but I can't agree with a club refusing to allow a player to leave, for any price, when he has stated that he wants to be elsewhere? I do appreciate that contracts have a purpose, but my opinion is that largely, they protect the financial interests of both parties. If a player under contract wants to go, ultimately, a price needs to be agreed to terminate that contract (this may have been pre-agreed by way of a clause), and then we get on with it. But there should never be a 'no price' situation, with the best solution a chairman can come up with is to refuse to entertain, and insist an unhappy player turns up in July and plays football here whether he likes it or not.

    Take our friend Daniel Levy. He has reportedly communicated to Manchester United that Eric Dier, who also reportedly really wants to join Manchester United, will not be allowed to leave for any price. Take Monaco with Mbappé. They have communicated that they really 'want' him to stay, and have used language like trying to 'convince' him to stay (in theory, he has a contract, they don't need to convince him) - but if his contract is to be broken, we have set an abnormally large termination price. For me, that's how it should work.

    Contract or not, I can leave almost any workplace in the world. It becomes a question of remuneration of course, but forcing an employee to stay at a job for perhaps another 3 years against his will seems ridiculous to me.
  2. Jul 15, 2017
    #2

    Barnslig New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Location:
    Norway
    Players need to stop being such pussies, they are paid massive wages and live an amazing lives. They do sign the contract of their own free will, and as far as contracts go they can be held to the terms agreed upon.

    Edit: however I do agree that the player and the current club can discuss terms of release, but if it's not satisfying for all parties concerned the original agreement stands.
  3. Jul 15, 2017
    #3

    Stack Leave Women's Football Alone!!!

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2006
    Messages:
    9,827
    Location:
    Auckland New Zealand

    Employment conditions change and people in other types of jobs with employment contracts who want to leave are also pussies?
  4. Jul 15, 2017
    #4

    nokillingmoths Full Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2013
    Messages:
    3,254
    Release clauses is the best way.

    You want £200k a week? Ok, five year contract and a £100million release clause.

    Not ok with the release clause? Then you can have lower wages, you little sod.
  5. Jul 15, 2017
    #5

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    Being 'pussies' is highly simplistic. Chances are, the club themselves bought that player, who was under contract elsewhere, because he wanted to leave at the time.

    If you sign a permanent contract at a job, you are not bound for life. Things change. If a player wants to go, sort out the money side and move on, buy another player who wants to come.

    I think clubs should be more concerned with convincing their player that this is still the place for him to work, rather than just refusing.
  6. Jul 15, 2017
    #6

    ChaddyP Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    7,574
    Location:
    Jamaica
    Supports:
    Banned from Pogba thread
    They should be able to move if they wish like just like in any other job in the world. it's not slavery.
  7. Jul 15, 2017
    #7

    Barnslig New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Location:
    Norway
    Comparing being paid to play football to a normal 9-5 job is also highly simplistic, the players today have enough power as it is, they can force clubs hands if they want, why should football clubs just roll over and let the players have their way? If you sign a contract there is a fair chance you're gonna be held to fulfill that contract, just as you might have to in a "normal job". Yes, there's ways to terminare contracts in a normal job, just as there is in football. If players were to join and leave as freely as they want, why even have contracts then? They would be worthless.
  8. Jul 15, 2017
    #8

    Barnslig New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2014
    Messages:
    930
    Location:
    Norway
    So being paid hundreds upon hundreds of thousand to play a game is slavery now?
  9. Jul 15, 2017
    #9

    Regulus Arcturus Black Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    4,573
    Agreed.
  10. Jul 15, 2017
    #10

    Regulus Arcturus Black Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2015
    Messages:
    4,573
    Hmmm.... if you hire a company on a contract for a 3 year project and pay them a huge fee, can they just walk away cause they don't fancy it anymore?
  11. Jul 15, 2017
    #11

    DiseaseOfTheAge wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,288
    If we offered Spurs £100m I'm sure he'd be ours. He's not unavailable, he just isn't realistic due to the circumstances, so there's no point Spurs pretending a deal can be done.

    Also, he can leave his job if he wants, can he not? It's just being involved in professional football that he can't do for anyone other than the club he's signed a contract with.
  12. Jul 15, 2017
    #12

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    Its not that simple, players are not exactly employees more like assets. They have a tradable value.
    Release clauses is probably the way to go, but even that gets tricky with transfer inflation etc
  13. Jul 15, 2017
    #13

    AndyJ1985 Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2016
    Messages:
    4,917
    It's not like other jobs though. In other jobs you don't sign 5 year contracts worth millions of pounds. If they want to be able to move around freely they should sign 1 or 2 year contracts.
  14. Jul 15, 2017
    #14

    ArditVula New Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2013
    Messages:
    301
    There is always the risk that the player will fail, his value will not be near 100 million and the team ends up paying 200k a week :lol:
  15. Jul 15, 2017
    #15

    RC89 Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    Agree
  16. Jul 15, 2017
    #16

    ChaddyP Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    7,574
    Location:
    Jamaica
    Supports:
    Banned from Pogba thread
    no, being bound to a job against your own will is slavery. If I work for X corporation and the board change management or the company just terns shady or I just get fecking board the money paid is irrelevant to my wish if wanting to change employer
  17. Jul 15, 2017
    #17

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    Rooney
  18. Jul 15, 2017
    #18

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    They are not just moving freely though, huge amounts of money is often involved. That is the point of having contracts. Everton wouldn't have just got £75m from us if there was no contract.

    And the comparison to 'normal jobs' is still valid, as it still involves a human being, who ultimately requires to be satisfied to continue his work.

    I'm sure Juve didn't want to sell Pogba either, but as they couldn't convince him to stay, they said fine, give us £90m and he can go. Everyone moved on.

    What is your view of the validity of a contract when it is the club who wants rid of a player by the way? Should every club be unable to sell players they want to sell because 'they signed a contract, they have to honour the terms'?
  19. Jul 15, 2017
    #19

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    If you quit you're job in certain markets, there are rules about when you can go and work for a direct competitor. This doesn't also account for the asset value of a player.

    The problem is if I buy a player for 70m on a 5 year contract, and after year 1 the player decides they have had enough and want to play for the team down the road, what happens to the 70m I just shelled out?

    Because of the asset part of it, that has to be taken care of because the club owns the players registration rights for the length of the contract. A player is free to walk away if they want to, they don't have to be a slave, they can go and work in a different field.

    For instance if I quit my job today I would have 12 months gardening leave I.E I couldn't work for a direct competitor for 12 months but I could go and work in another field if I want.
  20. Jul 15, 2017
    #20

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    This 'just walking away' thing is not valid. The company would presumably have to pay a suitable compensation, at which point, I'd imagine he'd then just go and hire a different company who are happy to do the work.

    The 'walking away' implies the absence of a contract at all.
  21. Jul 15, 2017
    #21

    RC89 Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 2010
    Messages:
    1,733
    You can still sell him below the release clause if the 200k player doesn't turn out so good.
  22. Jul 15, 2017
    #22

    ChaddyP Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    7,574
    Location:
    Jamaica
    Supports:
    Banned from Pogba thread
    maybe they should? Never saw it as fair to the player. Anything can happen. I should be able to leave with an agreed amount as to what my contract is worth
  23. Jul 15, 2017
    #23

    golden_blunder Dreaming of a return to 4-4-2

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2000
    Messages:
    76,876
    Location:
    Watching..
    I mentioned this in the morata thread.

    Good young player who wants to play football. His coach however would rather stick by his tried and trusted galactico front line.

    So young lad wants to leave but his club completely price him out of a move

    Why should football be different to any other industry? If you don't like your job you find a new one. Why would a club force a player to stay anyway when they want to leave?
  24. Jul 15, 2017
    #24

    yumtum DUX' bumchum

    Joined:
    May 10, 2009
    Messages:
    2,406
    Location:
    Wales
    Basically the same thing, to be honest I'm not a fan of keeping players if they don't want to be at the club I support (would have been gutted for De Gea to go, but you know he doesn't really want to be here).

    Every club seems to be pricing players out of a move these days, like VVD and Morata! I made a thread not so long ago about making release clauses mandatory, like the poster said above, if you want a lower release clauses then accept lower wages, if you want massive wages expect that clause to reflect your wage.
  25. Jul 15, 2017
    #25

    ChaddyP Full Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2011
    Messages:
    7,574
    Location:
    Jamaica
    Supports:
    Banned from Pogba thread
    I agree each player should have a release clause. to make buying out a contract easier.
  26. Jul 15, 2017
    #26

    King Eric 7 Full Member

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2014
    Messages:
    301
    Why is it fair for the club to be lumbered with a huge contract (like Rooney's) when they can't easily get out if it when it suits them yet the player should be able to kick up a fuss and just leave whenever they want to?

    It's not like it's a normal employment contract so you can't compare the two. With most employment contracts, there is a clause to terminate the contract with a much smaller notice period.
  27. Jul 15, 2017
    #27

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    We have seen the cases of Verratti and Virgil Van Dijk this summer too.

    Southampton are refusing to sell a player with a market value of £50m+, although we all know that players worth £50m+ don't want to play their football for Southampton. They couldn't even take the money and go and buy a new £50m centre half, because they wouldn't find one who wants to play for them. They should to either make their club more appealing to £50m players, like City and Chelsea did, or let them go.
  28. Jul 15, 2017
    #28

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    Another fair point
  29. Jul 15, 2017
    #29

    BBRBB Full Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2015
    Messages:
    1,988
    Supports:
    Paris Saint-Germain
    The bullying of the small clubs by the big ones is already strong enough.

    Maybe limiting contract length to 3 years could be a decent middle ground.
  30. Jul 15, 2017
    #30

    DiseaseOfTheAge wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,288
    In the circumstances, the amount of money it would take for us to compensate for the disruption to Spurs plans is considerably more than we ever would contemplate. It's not their fault that we don't want to overpay to such an extent and expecting them to do a deal that isn't in their interests is unreasonable.
  31. Jul 15, 2017
    #31

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    Works other way round too though, United and Rooney for instance. Club obviously have been wanting to get rid but couldn't for ages and in the end ended up having to pay him to leave.
  32. Jul 15, 2017
    #32

    Ødegaard formerly MrEriksen

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,787
    Location:
    Norway
    I take it you are all for selling De Gea for scraps because the player wants to go then?
  33. Jul 15, 2017
    #33

    PedroMendez Acolyte

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2013
    Messages:
    7,856
    Location:
    the other Santa Teresa
    This. You can't just join the competition in many highly paid jobs.
    Footballer can leave and work in another field without problem.
  34. Jul 15, 2017
    #34

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    I imagine you will be compensated, perhaps making a profit even. Use the money to buy a player who wants to be there.

    You didn't respect that very same player's contract with his previous club when you brought you £70m along to buy him anyway.
  35. Jul 15, 2017
    #35

    DiseaseOfTheAge wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,288
    I for one think he'd make an excellent postman.
  36. Jul 15, 2017
    #36

    Offside Euro 2016 sweepstake winner

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2012
    Messages:
    13,515
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    It always works. The player realises he situaton and comes round. Ronaldo for us is the classic case.

    The cases of players refusing to play or train are very rare.
  37. Jul 15, 2017
    #37

    DiseaseOfTheAge wants Amber Rudd to call him a naughty boy

    Joined:
    Jul 3, 2012
    Messages:
    15,288
    Because it doesn't tend to work out for the player, in the end.
  38. Jul 15, 2017
    #38

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    This is one of the things that annoys me most about the caf. You and I are both aware, that I have not implied players should be sold for 'scraps' in ANY post in this thread, in fact, quite the opposite - I have referenced huge sums of money that players go for. But it doesn't work well with your point to say '£80m' instead of 'scraps', so you have changed the narrative entirely.

    We were willing to let De Gea go 2 years ago, not because we wanted to, but because he wanted to, for a price that WE thought was fair. That's how it works. That's how we bought the same De Gea from Atletico in the fecking first place!
  39. Jul 15, 2017
    #39

    Cassidy Not to be confused with Cassady the Liverpool fan

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    Messages:
    11,896
    You get compensated because the player cannot just leave and join another club. That is how the market works, I do not have to release the player therefore if someone wants to take him, they have to pay the asking price.

    If the situation is that a player can dictate leaving fair compensation will be a myth. Even with release clauses, since market prices move you can set 100m release clause today and in 3 years time that may be below market value. Griezmann release clause for instance right now is looking cheap.

    The fact is for the length of the contract the player cannot play for another club without a transfer. Maybe lengths of contracts need to be looked at, but I feel like that is fair and also mirrors other highly paid industries and fields. An employee cannot simply up and leave to a direct competitor in many high paid fields of work. Contractually there is a period where they would have to sit out or the new firm/competitor would have to buy out the employees contract.
  40. Jul 15, 2017
    #40

    Rozay Not good at posting fixture lists

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2012
    Messages:
    8,501
    Location:
    #RojoPlusOne
    People seem to be forgetting that these high and mighty contracts they are proposing to uphold are usually players who they bought under contract themselves.

    Sporting didn't 'refuse' to let Dier join Spurs, Celtic didn't 'refuse' to let Van Dijk join Saints. So why play the 'he has a contract' card now? Set your price and move on.