Thanks for that, assume this is from Wikipedia regarding the Bosman ruling?
Probably the closest to a definite end to my suggestion. Which is all I was looking for, see, no need for the aggression.
I would still be intrigued to see how that would stand up if a player willingly agreed to something that contradicts that ruling… Guess we’ll never know.
On a related note to all this, I believe something else is coming and it will rock the current system just as much as Bosman. Real Madrid, by foul means due to their size, are doing their utmost to avoid paying transfer fees. They are probably representative of a future to come. Football is a strange industry, with its transfer fees, and I would imagine that will be tested at some point and free agency will become more commonplace.
Fair enough, this would be far from my area of expertise.
I was a member of a club with somebody who liked to boast they had a deal (some sort of golden handshake) not to work for a rival tech company after taking redundancy, but maybe they were talking bollox… or maybe they did have such an agreement but, in reality, it’s not worth the paper it’s written on.
I don’t think it’s lazy. We need to replace TAA and Frimpong’s talent and attractive release clause make him a good candidate for replacement.
Historically we signed current Liverpool midfielder Alexis MacAllister for what’s considered a bargain now for his 35m release clause.
Also I heard Frimpong’s contract allows for the release clause to be paid in 4 installments so it’s a very attractive deal financially.
And I also have signed and seen restraint of trade clauses when leaving a company
Yeah it’s almost as if the poster is the nemesis of @kopstar and its trying to get him to return from the dead.
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
Is it over now?
Good. Here are some rumours.
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.
Joyce suggesting that Frimpong is a leading transfer candidate if we dip into the market at rb
https://www.reddit.com/r/LiverpoolFC/s/2rGr42SiMW
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)
So here’s one: Sports Q&A: Non-competes
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.
Fuck me. Don’t you lot have anything better to do?
That’s fine and one aspect of the deal, but question remains whether he’s the right fit for us.
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.
a. It would be considered a restraint of trade.
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?
Do you even understand the basics of contract law?
Very insightful read, thanks for digging this one out.
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.