Heinze set to buy out united contract....

[Brutus the barber]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...amp;ito=newsnow

[Guest JV]

Thought you could only buy your contract out when moving to another country.

Edited July 14, 2007 by JV

[RafaShanks]

To piss off Slur, it'll be worth every single penny.

Edited July 14, 2007 by RafaShanks

[Sion]

God could you imagine his reception at OT if this went through. Not just moving to us, but they receive little if anything for him. So we'd basically give him a signing on fee the same as what he'd pay out to release himself.

[Guest Kaizer]

Thought you could only buy your contract out when moving to another country.

 

I read somewhere that you had to do it 14 days after the season ended if you were going to do it, that actually makes some sense to me, but if its true I really dont know.

 

I`ll do a search.

[Guest JV]

I read somewhere that you had to do it 14 days after the season ended if you were going to do it, that actually makes some sense to me, but if its true I really dont know.

 

I`ll do a search.

read that aswell

[Sion]

I read somewhere that you had to do it 14 days after the season ended if you were going to do it, that actually makes some sense to me, but if its true I really dont know.

 

I`ll do a search.

Im a drunk idiot, ignore

Edited July 14, 2007 by Sion

[Falconhoof]

I wouldn't have thought it'll happen anyway, sounds like he's just threatenting United into accepting our offer.

 

Slur would surely realise he wants to come to us and accept our offer? - therefore receive something for him rather than nout? If not how stubborn can you get. I know he's a bit of a stubborn queen, but that would set a new level.

 

He wouldn't receive 'nowt', he'd be getting the £6.8 million when Heinze buys his contract out. Who did you think Heinze would be paying for his contract ?

This deal sounds better for United than the transfer fees that had been mooted in the papers.

[Rimbeux]

Sounds like a load of made up b******s.

 

I've no deep knowlegde of this but I'm sure there is more to it than sending a cheque, are there not windows and conditions to satisfy.

 

Also he's never on that much as a salary, coming from France as he did three years ago, I doubt he's on more than half that. He's not re-negotiated since he's been there has he?

[Sion]

He wouldn't receive 'nowt', he'd be getting the £6.8 million when Heinze buys his contract out. Who did you think Heinze would be paying for his contract ?

This deal sounds better for United than the transfer fees that had been mooted in the papers.

 

sorry ignore me. Methinks i've had a few too many Calsbergs

[Rimbeux]

He wouldn't receive 'nowt', he'd be getting the £6.8 million when Heinze buys his contract out. Who did you think Heinze would be paying for his contract ?

This deal sounds better for United than the transfer fees that had been mooted in the papers.

 

He could sit out the last two years, but at his age that's not likely. Dont believe that figure for a second

[Falconhoof]

He could sit out the last two years, but at his age that's not likely. Dont believe that figure for a second

 

If this deal is possible then I agree with you, the wage figure is unlikely, we'll probably get him for a lot less.

[Guest Cyador]

He can definately buy out his contract, partly why we signed up Alonso and co. so hastily. Once they've two years left and there over the age of 23, they can buy out their contract these days.

[realtarragona]

He can definately buy out his contract, partly why we signed up Alonso and co. so hastily. Once they've two years left and there over the age of 23, they can buy out their contract these days.

 

Only if he goes to a club in a different country though.

 

It is article 17 of Fifa's rules governing transfers. Players can buy out their contracts after the third year of a longer fixed-term contract, or just two years if they are aged over 28. There are two stipulations: the player must hand in his notice in the 15 days following his club's last official match of the third season, and he may not move to a club in the same country.

[Guest Alpha]

Only if he goes to a club in a different country though.

He can sign for MTK Hungaria and they can loan him to us.

 

[SkippyjonJones]

he could sign for Kia Joorabchian and then we could loan him.....

[floyd]

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.

 

link to article

 

According to that article Neville could also be bought of of his contract.

Edited July 15, 2007 by floyd

[Guest spk]

link to the actual fifa regulations for transfers (pdf) ... don't worry, it's only eight pages long!

 

ok so to get things straight. i think the '15 day' rule you're on about is from article 15 (page 289) which defines the rules for terminating a contract for sporting just cause. heinze is looking to invoke the clauses defined in article 17 (page 289) - consequences of terminating a contract without just cause.

 

article 17 in full:

 

Article 17 Consequences of Terminating a Contract Without Just Cause

The following provisions apply if a contract is terminated without just cause:

 

1.

In all cases, the party in breach shall pay compensation. Subject to the provisions ofArt. 20 and annex 4 in relation to Training Compensation, and unless otherwiseprovided for in the contract, compensation for breach shall be calculated with dueconsideration for the law of the country concerned, the specifi city of sport, and anyother objective criteria. These criteria shall include, in particular, the remuneration andother benefi ts due to the player under the existing contract and/or the new contract,the time remaining on the existing contract up to a maximum of fi ve years, the feesand expenses paid or incurred by the Former Club (amortised over the term of thecontract) and whether the contractual breach falls within a Protected Period.

 

2.

Entitlement to compensation cannot be assigned to a third party. If a Professional isrequired to pay compensation, the Professional and his New Club shall be jointly andseverally liable for its payment. The amount may be stipulated in the contract oragreed between the parties.

 

3.

In addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall also beimposed on any player found to be in breach of contract during the Protected Period.This sanction shall be a restriction of four months on his eligibility to play in Offi cialMatches. In the case of aggravating circumstances, the restriction shall last six months.In all cases, these sporting sanctions shall take effect from the start of the followingSeason of the New Club. Unilateral breach without just cause or sporting just causeafter the Protected Period will not result in sporting sanctions. Disciplinary measuresmay, however, be imposed outside of the Protected Period for failure to give duenotice of termination (i.e. within fi fteen days following the last match of the Season).The Protected Period starts again when, while renewing the contract, the duration ofthe previous contract is extended.

 

4.

In addition to the obligation to pay compensation, sporting sanctions shall be imposedon any club found to be in breach of contract or found to be inducing a breach ofcontract during the Protected Period. It shall be presumed, unless established to thecontrary, that any club signing a Professional who has terminated his contract withoutjust cause has induced that Professional to commit a breach. The club shall be bannedfrom registering any new players, either nationally or internationally, for twoRegistration Periods.

 

5.

Any person subject to the FIFA Statutes and FIFA regulations (club officials, players’ agents, players etc.) who acts in a manner designed to induce a breach of contractbetween a Professional and a club in order to facilitate the transfer of the player shallbe sanctioned.

 

Hopefully that clears things up!

[Guest rookie]

I think this from Wikipedia will give a good example. Andy Webster cancelled his contract and moved from Hearts to Wigan. A season after he got suspended because FIFA found out he had cancelled the contract "without just cause".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Webster

[Andy @ Allerton]

To piss off Slur, it'll be worth every single penny.

 

I Concur

 

[Guest spk]

I think this from Wikipedia will give a good example. Andy Webster cancelled his contract and moved from Hearts to Wigan. A season after he got suspended because FIFA found out he had cancelled the contract "without just cause".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Webster

 

well that kind of implies he was fined for invoking the clause which isnt the case. in fact it was due to him not providing 15 days notice as required.

[Guest Kaizer]

Here is an article from the Independent on the issue back from February.

 

Stars will buy into 'pay as you go' system

Published: 13 February 2007

An obscure Fifa rule could revolutionise the way the transfer market operates. Nick Harris reports

 

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.

 

http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/co...icle2264652.ece

Edited July 15, 2007 by Kaizer

[Guest spk]

Here is an article from the Independent on the issue back from February.

 

Stars will buy into 'pay as you go' system

Published: 13 February 2007

An obscure Fifa rule could revolutionise the way the transfer market operates. Nick Harris reports

 

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.

 

http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/co...icle2264652.ece

 

even the independent can make mistakes:

 

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.

i posted the full details of 'article 17' on the previous page including a direct link to fifas documentation hosted on the fa's website. the 15 day ruling is in relation to article 15 which deals with terminating a contract for sporting just cause. rtfm

[Earl Hafler]

The media get it wrong all the time. The BBC said we couldn't sign Morientes but we could.

 

Personally, i'd rather we not make anymore signings. 5 weeks to bed the squad in is more than i hoped for when the season finished. I think we've had an excellent summer

[Extraordinary Swindle]

Ayala has bought himself out of his contract at Valencia to move to Zaragoza (link), so it looks like Heinze can do so too.