I mean from Madrid’s perspective would you want to pay another team a transfer fee (and see them strengthen) or pay it to the player instead. Madrid (and others) are figuring out they don’t want to play at the pyramid game with competitors.
To explain it better, bigger players are running down their contracts because
they make more money on a free
big fish clubs don’t want to feed almost big fish clubs big transfer fees that will enable further strengthening
Liverpool and Uruguay striker Darwin Nunez, 25, is one of a number of options being considered by Serie A leaders Napoli as they look to improve their attack. (Corriere dello Sport - in Italian)
Liverpool will discuss terms with Luis Diaz, 28, over a new contract in the summer, with the Colombia winger’s current deal set to expire in 2027. (TBR Football), external
Nottingham Forest have joined Newcastle and Inter Milan in the race to sign Liverpool and England centre-back Jarrell Quansah, 22. (Teamtalk)
Yes, it’s Teamtalk but still Inter being interested in Quansah came as something of a surprise.
It’s also being rumoured that Alonso will try to sign Huijsen once he takes over at RM. I doubt if it would take much persuasion for the kid to play for them. I think we might soon see a resurgence of rumours linking us to Guehi.
Similar to tapping up which is illegal, players can complain if they are forced to sign unfair clauses in the contract especially those that limit their career aspirations and options unfairly.
And even if you single out Real, you know that a player can transfer twice in one window. All they need to do is get a minnow club somewhere to sign player for free then loan to Real. Or are you going to keep signing clauses to cut out every possible loophole?
As @Limiescouse was saying, it’s probably illegal because that’s probably too broad for a non-compete.
Non-compete clauses are only enforceable if they are no wider than reasonably necessary to protect the employer’s legitimate business interests.
In this conversation, I do feel @YoullNeverWalkAlone request to have a source is not bad faith, as laws are seldom straightforward and it’s a given lawyers will try to strech them as much as possible. (Think Boelhy)
Like I said previously, it’s unlikely anyone can enforce a non-compete outside its territory, which is to me the main reason why it’s not feasible.
As a sidenote, gardening leave and non compete are not the same thing: the former is a time paid so you can’t join a competitor where the later is usually not.
The story so far with Huijsen is that he would love Real Madrid and it could be his first wish, but so far they haven’t made a move, possibly opting to strengthen in other positions. It’s been reported that they want a LB and a controlling midfielder (but not Zubimendi, who it seems is going to Arsenal). English clubs (us, Chelsea and Arsenal as the main trio) are much more willing to get Huijsen over the line now, even before the end of May if possible. I guess Bournemouth also want a quick resolution by someone activating that clause so they can move on with replacing and other plans they have. A bit like Mac’s clause at Brighton. Question remains whether Xabi would influence Real changing some of those plans what to do this summer or maybe it’s actually him that has agreed to go for a LB and a midfielder. Could be more in the next months.
b. A contract can only bind someone for the duration of the contract. A contract that attempts to bind someone after the contract is over would not be enforceable. It’s a paradox. You’re signing a contact that you agree never to sign for Real Madrid. You only agree with that for the duration of the contract.
c. If something like this were legally permissible, do you honestly think clubs with very bitter rivalries would not have tried it?
In different fields there can be these sort of deals in place where a person has insider knowledge of a company - e.g. intellectual property, planned patents, upcoming deals or plans which would be financially detrimental to the company they are leaving if the person took that information to a direct competitor in the same field. So tech is a field where you can see this applying. Football players, not so much.
The reason why you are getting all this aggression is because you’re advancing an utterly moronic suggestion without having done any research at all, and demanding that people spend their time and energy to refute it, including people who would probably otherwise be well-compensated for their time and expertise in the legal world.
And you are attacking anyone who dares to argue against you.
I suggest next time instead of spending time to argue that other people are not putting out sources, to either come with your sources, or walk in the sunset.
You can’t expect other people to do what you haven’t, it took me 5 minutes to find the link I shared, not with Google, but with an AI search.
This is even when I agree that asking the question you asked initially was not as nonsensical as some others people thought.
But if people are not reacting the way you want, it’s better to recalibrate your expectations rather than be agressive in the conversation because you believe you’re right.