1 month ago
8 THE outcome of the Lassana Diarra case has got everybody worried.
But one thing is for certain: if a player has the right to terminate their contracts because they want to go elsewhere, then so would their club.
GettyLassana Diarra’s transfer court case could change football forever[/caption]
GettyWest Ham CEO Karren Brady suggests that most footballers would suffer from an overhaul of the transfer system[/caption]
And the result of that would be complete chaos and anarchy.
It would make a mockery of any financial rules in the Premier League and it will crash the system.
The issue here that caused the problem is that Fifa’s rules were not thought through properly.
It’s ludicrous to suggest that it’s not a just cause to break your contract if you’re not being paid, which is what happened with Diarra and Lokomotiv Moscow.
No matter where you work, whether you’re a milkman or play for Manchester United, if you’re not getting paid you should be able to leave.
I guess it’s the typically Russian approach to things that they don’t believe that.
Most proper clubs wouldn’t dream of not paying their players. We have integrity and recognize that contracts work on both sides.
If players can simply break their contracts and move around the world the entire system will collapse.
FOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALS
Not just transfer fees. Wages will collapse because there won’t be enough money in the game.
Big clubs will hoard all the best players and some players will get really rich.
Transfer fees scrapped Q&A: How landmark ruling could mean NFL-style trades and stars suing for millions
FORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.
SunSport’s Martin Lipton explains what it was all about – and what it might mean for the future of football…
What was the case about?
Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.
Is that it?
No. Belgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money he was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed up.
Okay, so what does the ruling mean?
Theoretically players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.
Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?
Potentially, yes. Although players would have to want to move.
We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity.
Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.
Is everybody agreed about this?
Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations.
Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.
Read SunSport’s full Q&A with football on the brink of the biggest shake-up in 30 years…
But most players will be in the alternative situation, that clubs can get rid of them, wash their hands of a player they don’t want anymore.
The current system is designed to send money through the game.
When we bought Max Kilman from Wolves this summer, they had to give £4m to Maidenhead as part of the deal.
That’s life changing money for a non-league club but if there are no fees anymore that won’t happen and the impact will be incredible.
We’ve been here before with the Bosman ruling in the 1990s but I could see the logic of that. The idea that you could still get compensation for a player when he was no longer under contract was ludicrous.
Just as I told people, Bosman didn’t end the transfer system.
ReutersJean-Marc Bosman’s 1995 court victory changed transfers for out of contract players[/caption]
The reality is that if a player has two years left on their contract you either have to extend it or sell them because their value starts to diminish quickly.
Players can run down their contracts and get a free transfer.
Of course there’s nothing free about it. The money that would have gone in transfer fees instead goes to the player and their agent’s pockets.
This is the opposite of Bosman and if anybody should be worried I’d say it’s not the clubs but players.
I’d like to think that in the Premier League we’d have some sort of gentleman’s agreement to stop this happening.
But what could we do to stop clubs in Italy, France, Spain or Germany taking advantage?
GettyMax Kilman’s move to West Ham from Wolves earned non-league Maidenhead £4million[/caption]
I’m sure there will be some players and agents who are licking their lips but while this will be good for the few it will be bad for the many.
You might have one or two players who could go to a bigger club for a lot of money but you might think of getting rid of more and replacing them with players who are earning less to balance your books.
Currently I can pay £80m to sign a player over a five-year contract and put that into my accounts to make it sustainable.
But if that player can walk to Manchester City for free and I have to write off £80m every time we’d go bankrupt. So whatever we could have bought him for we can’t afford to pay that.
Bengali (Bangladesh) · 
English (United States) ·