You probably heard Alexander its Saga. The standout of the newcastle is forward – possibly to force a trick – later His club got stuck Transfer of £ 110 million from bid LiverpoolYou may be less familiar Lasana Dyre’s decision And interim turns into something Article 17 FIFA rules on transfer and position of players. But perhaps you should be familiar with them, as they are potentially very large in its case and can determine their future.
Quick Disclaimer: I have no idea that it or his representatives have knowledge of Article 17 and the power gives them. But I suspect that they do, because it helps explain that, thus, so far, they have been so aggressive in trying to make a step out of the club.
Such situations are about the leverage. In favor of Newcastle is the fact that it is subject to contract until 2028, meaning that if he is going to move to another club, they meet to interact on a fee (and apparently £ 110m is not sufficient). Once the transfer window closes on 1 September, it will have very few options: either play for Newcastle or sit out for four months, which is not a good option for a player ever, especially with the World Cup in America, Mexico And Canada next summer.
, Premier League Weekend’s Best Tiffos
, Response: Arsenal defeated Man United in Clash of Depth, Arors
, Liverpool crossed emotional night to defeat Bornemouth
In its favor, the fact is that when they can stop it, train and even play, an unhappy player will usually be less productive. (The less productive he is, the more its transfer price will be reduced.) Of course, if its productivity decreases, it will also be wages that he can command and he can attract clubs. So as soon as the leverage goes, it is a little meh.
Enter Article 17. It came into effect 20 years ago when FIFA, under the pressure of the European Commission, admitted that the transfer system banned the freedom of the players to change jobs like the common people, with a mechanism, to effectively allow them to walk on the clubs. They had to fulfill some criteria, and had to pay a certain amount of compensation. The problem was, while some were high profile cases, the conditions were so restrictive and the payment of compensation amount was so uncertain that very little some successfully called Article 17.
Last October Dyre verdict forced FIFA to rewrite its rules in double-federation. Current laws are still restrictive According to FIFPROThe union of world players, but they are definitely more player compared to the previous ones.
For a beginning, many significant obstacles have been removed. Earlier, FIFA could stop the transfer certificate of the player until the case was resolved. No more. The club, which signed a Article 17 player, was to prove that he did not collide with them to cause contracts violations. He has also gone. Now, the burden of evidence rests with the club that loses the player.
In severe, it has been well deployed to take advantage of this and has become a free agent in less than 12 months, which also indicates less payments as half of the £ 110 meter Newcastle with the new club.
Article 17 can only be applied by the final match of the season (on the latest in June 2026) and only by players who had full three years under the contract in the club (two if they are 28, which is not: that is only 25). Once this happens, it is considered a unilateral violation of the contract by it, which means that it is free to sign with any other club as soon as the market opens again on 1 July.
Of course, Newcastle will be entitled to compensation. FIFA rules say that according to the “positive interest” theory, compensation will be calculated based on the “damage caused” by the newcastle, taking into account the personal facts and circumstances of each case. Practically, a fancy way to say that FIFA’s Football Tribunal controversy takes into account the combination of chamber factors, such as the veg must have earned it in its last two sessions (about £ 12.5 m), the cost of signing its residual value (around £ 20 meters) on nuclear books.
There is no fixed amount, but a sports lawyer I said that it would not be more than £ 50-60m. He explained that FIFA, after the Diara verdict, does not want him to be punitive to restrict the freedom of the player’s freedom. Newcastle, of course, will be able to appeal to the court of arbitration of sports and ask for more compensation. Either way, they are difficult to see what they reject from Liverpool, and the risk is that they will be reduced. Way less. FIFPRO has filed a lawsuit, looking at European courts and the direction of the journey is completely on low restrictions, not more.
There is another wrinkle in all this. The wheels of the compensation tribunals gradually grind: A final decision may take 18 months to 2 years, but under the rules made by FIFA, the player will be free to play directly to their new club. For a person like it, no transfer fee for two years, it may be worth the uncertainty to know well what will be compensated if you signed it.
1:22
MCMANAMAN: Gwi should have priority for liverpool on it
Steve Mcmanmans assess Liverpool’s transfer plans before the start of the Premier League season.
Some people disagree that it will be quite straightforward. Alex Clarke, a sports lawyer, Tells He Premier League The rules will still apply and they will make such a unilateral expiration very difficult. But it only opens another can of the legal insects – especially if it was to leave it England For, say, Spain Or GermanyYou will not return the Premier League in a legal squall with FIFA on an international transfer.
Here, in any event, it is that the danger of Article 17 is present in its case, and the threat alone, who has adopted the player and his agents at this point.
From the nuclear’s point of view, the danger of Article 17 is overcome only when they transfer it to Liverpool (or any other club) in the next 12 days or if they receive it to sign a new contract with a reasonable release clause. The east is not possible rapidly; The latter may seem fictionary given the current relationship, but this is possibly the only way for both sides.
Newcastle moved his star center back and forth (perhaps some prodigy son Katha spinning) and if he wants to leave in the next summer then a pre-minimum minimum fee. This will probably be less than the Liverpool dialect, but Article 17 more than compensation and, significantly, without uncertainty. (In addition they will get their money directly.) It actually gets to play football for a season, protect a little more money and to know that he can proceed to more manageable fees.
