Please clarify a point in this bizarre contract. Is it only if player leaves on a free at the end of the contract this 2 years kicks in. What happens if the player is sold does the 2 years still apply.
Does it only apply if the join Real on free or still applies if its a transfer after they have left Liverpool.
Iâve seen some dumb shit on fan forums over the years but congrats, this might well be the dumbest thing ever.
People have taken the time to explain it to you. Clearly you donât wish to listen but let me try one last time.
Ask yourself how a club could be allowed to have any control over where a player chooses to play once they no longer hold his registration? Because thereâs already a quite famous ruling to ensure that can no longer happen and itâs exactly why Trent is able to go off to Madrid for free this summer.
Precisely that, if the player is âsoldâ to Real or anybody else then the 2 years doesnât matter. Itâs only if the contract reaches the end of the registration period with Liverpool that they are obliged to compensate Liverpool should they join Real.
People have taken their time to tell me what they think, all whilst trying to belittle me. While at the same time, not providing a source as to why a contract, entered into willingly by two parties would be worthless.
Iâm aware of the Bosman ruling, in fact I think I mentioned it in my original post. This is completely different from a team holding a playerâs registration and blocking a move. This is saying you can join any team you like at the end of your contract, we wonât stand in your way. However, you did sign an agreement with us that stated youâd pay us x amount if you broke this agreement.
But you no longer hold the players registration which means the club cannot prevent or block a move by having that clause in the first place.
Essentially signing a contract saying he canât go to Madrid for free for two years is in contravention of the existing regulations and therefore would either not be allowed or unenforceable.
Honestly, I canât believe so many words have been wasted on this when itâs blatantly obvious why itâs entirely unfeasible.
By definition it imposes a restraint on the player abilityâs to work freely. There is no reason to think that a restriction is not a restriction because it is targeted to e.g. one specific football club. A player âwillingly and knowinglyâ agreeing to the restraint is immaterial, and the laws exist specifically to protect workers (players) from being taken advantage of in such a way.
I cannot enter into a five year contract, for example, and be bound for seven years. To be bound for seven years, I would need to enter into a seven year contract.
People get entrenched, and mean in the way they express themselves sometimes. I donât have any beef with anyone, but the line of inquiry you are entertaining is not feasible, sir.
When a contract ends, it ends. It cannot carry terms that apply beyond the contract. The player would be a free agent, free to do what they like with their labor in the marketplace, according to who will pay them, and what they would like to do.
Yes, I know the club no longer hold his registration.
Likewise, youâre not stopping him joining Real or anybody else.
But he has signed an agreement statement if he does choose to sign for Real, heâll pay a set amount to the club.
This is where I think it would sit outside the Bosman ruling, as youâre not stopping him going to Real. In fact, youâre not stopping him going to Real on a free⌠but if he chooses to do so, he must abide by his agreement to personally pay a set fee to the club.
Thatâs probably the most coherent argument yet. However, Iâve heard of other non-competr clauses in other industries, so Iâm not convinced there arenât ways and means if your lawyers are clever enough.
Thanks for taking the time to make a non aggressive contribution, makes a nice change.
I suppose what Iâm thinking is a 7 year contract so, the first 5 years states the player will be registered with Liverpool FC and the last 2 state they wonât register with Real Madrid.
Iâm guessing Iâm coming at it from an angle of separating the player registration from the contract. So the ânot joining Realâ portion is separate.
I would refer you back to @Limiescouseâs early contribution which was to point out that even in other industries such agreements must be based on a legitimate interest that goes beyond simply âwe donât want this person to work for a competitorâ.
