Winter Mercato

how do you know that silvio himself has 100m€ ready for ronaldinho? IMO, it's a pure speculation that many of you take for granted, just because of some rumours, ever since the last transfer window opened.

Originally Posted by Stitch

how do you know that silvio himself has 100m€ ready for ronaldinho? IMO, it's a pure speculation that many of you take for granted, just because of some rumours, ever since the last transfer window opened.

I think Berlusconi said it himself half a year ago !

Originally Posted by Tony29.

Zlat, i don't understand this 28 yo rule.
Can any player who's over 28 buy out his contract, or only those over 28 yo who have only 1 year left on the contract ?
And does this rule count in Italy ?

Because both Trez and Camo wanted to leave Juve last summer but they couldn't, eventhough they were over 28 yo.

I myself am not sure what exactly the rule states and if what was mentioned in the papers - a player, who's 28 and over and has been at the club on the same contract for 3 years (I think) can buy-himelf out by paying the club his wages for the remaining years on his contract - is true or not.

it does seem to exist though but is not used very often and if it wasn't for the Lampard case I guess we would still not be aware of it. From the looks of it though, De Sanctis used that ... and there is a good chance others have used it too but it probably was never made public that they left on that rule.

If it's indeed a FIFA rule then it would be applicable everywhere, in all countries that are members of FIFA that is.

As for why Trez and Camo couldn't/didn't use it, one possibility is that their last contracts - the ones active a year ago - had been renewed less than 3 years before that, which would not make them eligible for that rule (at least from what I remember reading in the papers about it) ... or, there is also the chance they didn't want to leave but only use that as an excuse to have their salaries improved, although I doubt that in Trezeguet's case.

Milan chief Silvio Berlusconi is ready to pay Ronaldinho’s £89m release clause to bring him to San Siro, according to reports.

The Rossoneri have been repeatedly paired with the 2005 Golden Ball winner after the European champions stated that they were in pole position to sign the Brazilian if he decides to leave the Nou Camp.

Ronaldinho has been in contract talks with the Blaugrana, but despite reiterating that he was not set to leave the Spanish giants he is once again being linked with a Serie A switch.

Reports suggest that Milan will make a new offer to Barcelona over the next few days, as President Berlusconi is willing to pay the player’s £89m release clause if the Azulgrana refuse his offer.

Spanish newspaper AS also claims that ‘Dinho has already agreed to a five-year contract with the Rossoneri, worth £6m a season plus his entire lucrative image rights.

The Brazilian is currently contracted to Barca until 2010 and talks to extend his deal until 2014 have stalled so far, fuelling Berlusconi’s dream of seeing a Ronaldo, Kaka and Ronaldinho trident next term.

Stars will buy into 'pay as you go' system
An obscure Fifa rule could revolutionise the way the transfer market operates. Nick Harris reports
Published: 13 February 2007

Offered the chance to sign Frank Lampard for £8m this summer, or Steven Gerrard for £5m next year (when 28, and in his prime), many of Europe's biggest clubs would jump at the opportunity. Theoretically, it could happen, and Chelsea and Liverpool would be powerless to stop it.

Why? Because a piece of legislation that is more than five years' old has recently started to alter the way the transfer system works.

In short, it allows players unilaterally to break a contract after a "protected period" expires. This is after three years if they signed when under the age of 28 or two years if they signed when 28 or over, regardless of how long their contract is. They have to pay compensation to do this, calculated using a formula based on wages and their original transfer fee, but it means they can effectively "buy out" their contract.

The rules that allow this are misunderstood across the industry. They are not new, as widely reported, having been in place since September 2001. They are not simple or risk-free to exploit, hence the first case of a player invoking them only arrived in summer last year, when the Scotland defender, Andy Webster, left Heart of Midlothian for Wigan Athletic.

But with that precedent set, the effects could be huge, not least in boosting player power further when negotiating deals.

Lampard is the most valuable and prominent player in England who could exploit the rules this summer, to cancel his Chelsea contract. Xabi Alonso could do the same at Liverpool this year and Gerrard next year.

Gabriel Heinze could invoke the rules to leave Manchester United this summer, as could scores of players from clubs at various levels around Europe.

In the future, players exercising their rights in this way will possibly be said to have either "done a Webster" or "done an Article 17", after the Fifa regulation that allows it. Equally, players may opt not to invoke the rule at all, but still use it as leverage to earn record-breaking contracts.

When and how did this rule come into force?

It had its genesis in a decade-old dispute between the European Commission, which frames laws across Europe, and Fifa, football's world governing body. In 1998, the EC told Fifa it believed the transfer system as it stood was a barrier that prevented players' enjoying anything like the freedom of movement that other workers had.

Fifa argued that football is a special industry that requires contract stability. The EC agreed, within limits, but still wanted a degree of flexibility for players to move, even when they had voluntarily entered into a contract. The EC's logic was that in almost all other walks of life, people can move jobs easily, and have the right to do so for many reasons: personal, professional, a dislike of a current job, a better offer elsewhere, and so on. To cut an extremely long and tortuous story short, Fifa, the EC and Fifpro (the international umbrella body for players' unions) negotiated a new framework for the transfer system, which balanced a large degree of contractual stability (ie: a club's right to force a player to honour his contract) with get-out clauses for players after certain periods, and on certain conditions.

Hence, players can unilaterally "breach" a contract when the "protected period" expires. The new system was enshrined in articles 21 and 22 of the 2001 Fifa Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players, which came into force in September that year. Subsequent revisions have not changed the rules, although the article now dealing with unilateral breaches of contract is Article 17.

What does Article 17 say?

Article 17 deals with the compensation that must be paid for a breach of contract, principally but not solely the value remaining on the contract, plus a pro rata sum towards the player's original cost, if applicable. For example, player X, age 25, joins club Y for £6m on a four-year deal in summer 2004, on wages of £50,000 a week. In summer 2007 he can breach his contract by paying his club compensation of £2.6m for the value of his remaining wages, plus £1.5m for the amortised value remaining on his original transfer fee, or a total of £4.1m. Lampard signed a five-year deal in 2004, so can breach this summer for two years' wages, or about £8m. (His original £11m price tag in 2001 has already amortised to zero).

Gerrard signed a four-year deal in 2005, so could breach in summer 2008 for one year's wages, or about £5m. As a Liverpool youth product, there is no transfer cost to factor in. He is also beyond the cut-off age (23) where Liverpool could claim development costs.

Is it that simple?

We are dealing with football contracts and politics, so no, obviously!

For a start, the compensation formula is not set in stone, and might include a discretionary element of increase in relation to the wages part of the equation. So Lampard or Gerrard might cost slightly more than their wages, say £10m and £6.5m, but still significantly less than their market value.

This would be assessed by Fifa's Dispute Resolution Chamber (DRC) - a three-man panel comprised of an association figure from the relevant country, a Fifpro rep, and an independent member - which crunches the numbers and arrives at a figure.

How does a player invoke a breach?

He must give his club formal notice within 15 days of the last match of his club's season (domestic or European, whichever comes later) in order to leave that summer.

What are the precedents?

Andy Webster was the first player in the world to invoke Article 17 and unilaterally breach his contract when he left Heart of Midlothian. Fifa has rubber-stamped his move to Wigan (and subsequent loan to Rangers), but the DRC has yet to announce how much compensation Hearts will receive, technically from Webster, in practice from Wigan. The DRC will decide the case on 23 February.

Fifpro expects the figure to be one year's wages under Webster's Hearts contract, amounting to £250,000. Hearts wanted £2m. Fifa says that "there are no final and binding decisions" in any of the "several" cases yet. This is mainly because so few have been brought forward.

Why is this?

One reason is the whole process is still a legal minefield, despite clear terms catering for player breaches within Fifa rules.

Technically, a club who hires a player who has "breached" might face sanctions for inducing a breach, although in practice, as in Webster's case, this is unlikely. The formula is not set in stone, so poses another element of risk.

Another reason is that many clubs have been wise to the rules for years, and make sure all their best (and especially younger) players never get near the end of the "protected period". They do this by regularly updating contracts to set the protected period back to zero. Manchester United are especially canny in this respect. It is less important with older players, because "buyouts" would in many cases be more expensive than a player's market value.

Is this player power gone mad?

No. It's the law. Every club should know it and negotiate accordingly. And think of it the other way round: clubs can theoretically "breach" too, if they pay a player the full value of the remainder of his contract.

Deal or no deal

Premiership clubs are nervously eyeing their biggest names to see who could make a cheap getaway Frank Lampard (Chelsea) Current deal Five-year, signed July 2004 Leaving date (under Fifa rule) At the end of this season Guide price Approximately£8m (two years' wages) Market value Approx £25m Stephen Gerrard (Liverpool) Current deal Four-year, signed July 2005 Leaving date End of 2007-08 season Guide price Approximately £5m (one year's wages) Market value £20m or more Xabi Alonso (Liverpool) Current deal Five-year, signed August 2004 Leaving date End of this season Guide price Around £10.3m - two years' wages (£6m) plus pro rata fee (£4.3m) Market value About £15m

Article 17: The precedent

Andy Webster: Now 24, the Scotland defender joined Hearts from Arbroath in 2001 for £70,000. In July 2003, he signed a new four-year deal, on £250,000 a year. In summer 2006, unhappy with the regime of the Hearts owner, Vladimir Romanov, he invoked Article 17 by handing in notice to break his contract unilaterally. He was entitled to do so because the three-season "protected period" of his contract had expired. He joined Wigan, and is now on loan at Rangers. Hearts had valued him at £2m on the open market. Fifa's Dispute Resolution Chamber is to decide on actual compensation. It is estimated it will be closer to £250,000 or the value of the one year remaining on Webster's Hearts contract.

Other players at major clubs who could pay to go soon

Arjen Robben (Chelsea) summer 2007, for two years' wages plus two-fifths of £12m fee.

Claude Makelele (Chelsea) summer 2007, for one year's wages.

Luis Garcia (Liverpool) summer 2007, for two years' wages plus two-fifths of £6.5m fee.

Gabriel Heinze (Man Utd) summer 2007, for two years' wages.

Gary Neville (Man Utd) summer 2007, for 18 months' wages.

Alan Smith (Man Utd) summer 2007, for two years' wages plus two-fifths of £7m fee.

Freddie Ljungberg (Arsenal) summer 2007, for two years' wages.

Jamie Carragher (Liverpool) summer 2008, for one year's wages.

Thierry Henry (Arsenal) summer 2008, for two years' wages.

----

The independent: http://sport.independent.co.uk/footb...cle2264652.ece

It's quite convoluted, but it is a very detailed explanation.

a bit off topic:

well, I guess we should just hand-in the scudetto, and the CL too, to Inter after Adriano's latest declaration of how he is gonna come back stronger than ever.

It's a good thing that for once he's been caught on camara in a parting athmosphere with a nice girl near him and ... lovehandles around his waste.
Now the public will see his "human" side and no longer think of him as a dead-serious professional who's turned into a robot.

Concerning the money question, I dont have anything against Berlusconi spending 100 mln on Ronaldinho. Its not like we are Arsenal or Bayern so we have certain budget. We do have certain budget that pays for wages and "normal" players, but Berlusconi said himself many times that the only player he is ready to breake the bank for is Ronaldinho. 100mln is a big amount of money, but not too bih for him. Also, with proper marketing, aldough Ronaldinho will have all the image rights in his contract, Milan will also profit from him. He is 27 years old and has 4 or 5 seasons on top level, so he is still a "young" player by our standards Just bring the man in, he can rediscover his fitness like 2 seasons ago. He is not injured, he is just exausted.

Hasan: I don't understand about two-fifths. Why some players have that and some others don't?

Originally Posted by Sleep

Hasan: I don't understand about two-fifths. Why some players have that and some others don't?

that depends on their current contract and if it involved a transfer fee.
for Instance Robben's contract is still the same one he signed when they bought him from PSV for 12 mil BP (on a 5 year deal) ... so, his buy out clause would include his remaning wages + the transfer fee for the remaining 2 years on the contract (2 years * 12 mil/5 years).

In other cases, like Henry for instance, the player was bought in say 2001 on a 5 year deal for let's say 15 mil euros. That makes his transfer worth to Arsenal 3 mil/season (3*5years = 15 mil euros) ...
so, the 15 mil ARsenal paid in transfer fees will depreciate by 3 mil for every new year he spends at the club, meaning that by the end of the first 5 years, that transfer fee would go to 0 i.e. Henry, by staying at Arsenal for 5 years, he would have "paid back" what they had gaven in transfer fees for him.

I still think that list is not entirely correct as in Heinze's case - he arrived at ManU in 2004, I think for around 13-14 mil - Heinze would still have to pay 2/5ths of those 13-14 mil in addition to his remaning wages.


btw, Hasan, thanks for the article

Originally Posted by Sleep

Hasan: I don't understand about two-fifths. Why some players have that and some others don't?

I will give you a more detailed response later on tonight. I am inundated with work currently.

In short:

1) If a player signs a deal UNDER the age of 28, he can rescind his contract after three years by paying out the rest of his contract (based on a system). So, for example, Gerrard signed a deal in 2005, and at that time he was 25. In 2008 (three years after he signed), he can rescind his contract. If Gerrard had signed in 2006, he would have to wait till 2009 because even though he would be 28 in 2008, his three year wait period would still not have expired.

2) If a player is 28 years or over when signing a contract, he has to wait 2 years before he can rescind it. I suspect that is the case with Trezeguet. He may have renewed in 2005, when he was 28. So then he would have to wait 2 years before he could rescind his contract. But now he just renewed (at the age of 29). So he cannot rescind his contract until two years from now.

Originally Posted by zlatanov

I myself am not sure what exactly the rule states and if what was mentioned in the papers - a player, who's 28 and over and has been at the club on the same contract for 3 years (I think) can buy-himelf out by paying the club his wages for the remaining years on his contract - is true or not.

it does seem to exist though but is not used very often and if it wasn't for the Lampard case I guess we would still not be aware of it. From the looks of it though, De Sanctis used that ... and there is a good chance others have used it too but it probably was never made public that they left on that rule.

If it's indeed a FIFA rule then it would be applicable everywhere, in all countries that are members of FIFA that is.

As for why Trez and Camo couldn't/didn't use it, one possibility is that their last contracts - the ones active a year ago - had been renewed less than 3 years before that, which would not make them eligible for that rule (at least from what I remember reading in the papers about it) ... or, there is also the chance they didn't want to leave but only use that as an excuse to have their salaries improved, although I doubt that in Trezeguet's case.

Thank you,
and thanx Hasan for the article

Don't mention it. My pleasure.

Out of subject, does anyone how we place in youtube how we place a photo in our proflie upwards to the left?

Originally Posted by Giorgos

Out of subject, does anyone how we place in youtube how we place a photo in our proflie upwards to the left?

Could you be more specific ?
You need to put a picture in your Youtube profile ?

Yes Tony.... upwords in the left in order not to be blank.