Samuel Umtiti

MTL_Barca said:

If you like it or not, whenever he is healthy he still gets his chances. He still got invited to NT in 2019 and is 3rd CB for Barca, so as of now he isn't completely out of it yet. He probably still believes in recovery and coming back, and if he is injured it doesn't matter if he is injured in China or Barcelona. So why should he follow your advice and to go to China or something? He can just stay injured in Barcelona with his contract until 2023.

No matter how hard you try to talk it into reality it's not that easy to move players, we've seen this time and time again at Barca. If it was easy to sell everyone you want to get rid of Umtiti or Rakitic would be long gone, Arda would've been sold ages ago, Coutinho wouldn't be on loan etc.

I hope he leaves as well, but it might be difficult depending on his expectations for his next club.

Click to expand...

Look. I agree with the most you have said, but there should be some kind of human responsibility from his side. His age means absolutely nothing. Dembele is four years younger, but always and still injured. I mean, what is about keeping these kind of players till their contract run out in 3 years? That is totally unfair to me. A lot of it comes from the fact that for more than 30 years I am living in California and in the USA sport, this kind of cases are simply impossible.Human rights of EU are one thing, this is like abusing the laws. If both players injuries are chronic, same as Neymar's, there is no way to heal them. But, if they are not, there is a World leading medical institution in Kohln, Germany where they can undergo the necessary surgeries, then have a full recovery and if doctors approves their return they can continue their career in Europe.I don't see anything wrong for Umtiti to move for 1-2 seasons to China or Qatar which will allow him to get his full wages and play under a lot less pressure than in Barcelona.

LABarcaFan said:

Look. I agree with the most you have said, but there should be some kind of human responsibility from his side. His age means absolutely nothing. Dembele is four years younger, but always and still injured. I mean, what is about keeping these kind of players till their contract run out in 3 years? That is totally unfair to me. A lot of it comes from the fact that for more than 30 years I am living in California and in the USA sport, this kind of cases are simply impossible.Human rights of EU are one thing, this is like abusing the laws. If both players injuries are chronic, same as Neymar's, there is no way to heal them. But, if they are not, there is a World leading medical institution in Kohln, Germany where they can undergo the necessary surgeries, then have a full recovery and if doctors approves their return they can continue their career in Europe.I don't see anything wrong for Umtiti to move for 1-2 seasons to China or Qatar which will allow him to get his full wages and play under a lot less pressure than in Barcelona.

Click to expand...

MTL_Barca and i have already tried to explain you why it is unlikely.

Why would Umtiti agree to move 1 or 2 seasons in China or Qatar ? Think about it, Demb?l?, while staying at Bar?a, did go to Qatar to try and heal his injuries. He was treated in Aspetar facilities but, unfortunately for him, it wasn't really successful.
Why would they need to leave Bar?a to do what you are thinking ? Also, no way they keep their wages if they go in Qatar or in China (with the new rules) and no club in these leagues can afford the transfer fee.

I understand you are an american but players are not a commodity like in North American leagues who can be swapped, traded, forced into a move. They are people with a contract and are free control over their own body. You can't force them to chose a specific treatment, a specific physician, a specific space to be treated. You can't force them to go anywhere unless you are ready to pay an hefty compensation for unilaterally breaking the contract between the club and the player. Now that it is said, Demb?l? and Umtiti are not going anywhere if they don't want to and they are not showing any will to leave so far.

Newcomer said:

MTL_Barca and i have already tried to explain you why it is unlikely.

Why would Umtiti agree to move 1 or 2 seasons in China or Qatar ? Think about it, Demb?l?, while staying at Bar?a, did go to Qatar to try and heal his injuries. He was treated in Aspetar facilities but, unfortunately for him, it wasn't really successful.
Why would they need to leave Bar?a to do what you are thinking ? Also, no way they keep their wages if they go in Qatar or in China (with the new rules) and no club in these leagues can afford the transfer fee.

I understand you are an american but players are not a commodity like in North American leagues who can be swapped, traded, forced into a move. They are people with a contract and are free control over their own body. You can't force them to chose a specific treatment, a specific physician, a specific space to be treated. You can't force them to go anywhere unless you are ready to pay an hefty compensation for unilaterally breaking the contract between the club and the player. Now that it is said, Demb?l? and Umtiti are not going anywhere if they don't want to and they are not showing any will to leave so far.

Click to expand...

What a world are you living in dude. Sometime I feel sorry for you.Honestly.

This has nothing to do with the human rights. It is simply employer/employee relationship. I understand that there are contracts signed from both of them, but is it fair your employer to pay 100% of your salary when you are not working for him? And I mean from long, long time.This is a simple question. Can you answer with yes or no? If you are business owner and one or two of your workers are consistently out for long amount of times, I am 200% sure that you are going to look for ways to get rid of them. But, because you are not the one who pays their salary... so it is OK, right? As long as you don't pay them, they can stay for another 3 years without even training and collect their fat checks.
Maybe that is one of the reasons Barca is in this situation right now.

LABarcaFan said:

What a world are you living in dude. Sometime I feel sorry for you.Honestly.

This has nothing to do with the human rights. It is simply employer/employee relationship. I understand that there are contracts signed from both of them, but is it fair your employer to pay 100% of your salary when you are not working for him? And I mean from long, long time.This is a simple question. Can you answer with yes or no? If you are business owner and one or two of your workers are consistently out for long amount of times, I am 200% sure that you are going to look for ways to get rid of them. But, because you are not the one who pays their salary... so it is OK, right? As long as you don't pay them, they can stay for another 3 years without even training and collect their fat checks.
Maybe that is one of the reasons Barca is in this situation right now.

Click to expand...

You know very well that the contracts between a football club and a player is not comparable to the ones between your regular salaryman and his employer.
Those contracts are worth millions, this is why players have so much leverage. Bar?a can decide they are fed up with Umtiti and Demb?l? and not to pay them but then the players would be free to sign wherever they want as the contract could be nulled. They could ask compensation since Bar?a is the one to break unilaterally the contract. Why do you think clubs keep loaning unwanted players ?
If Bar?a don't want to pay full wage to players like Demb?l? and Umtiti they should have made contracts with clauses related to the number of games played. It is entirely possible but players and their agents would obviously fight against it.

And i know you are a Bar?a fan but this situation happens in every club. Bayern had Ribey and Robben often injured, let alone Coman who is Demb?l? 2.0 injury wise. PSG paid even more money on Neymar (wage + transfer fee) than Bar?a on Demb?l? + Umtiti and Neymar missed half of the games. What about Oxlade Chamberlain at Liverpool ?

It sucks for the clubs but the risk is more than often worth it, reason why clubs keep doing it and don't go bust even with two players "stealing" a living.

I agree with you about the regular employee/employer : if the employee is not doing what he is paid for, you better get rid of him.

Moises Llorens had an article earlier saying Umtiti showed up to training in worse shape than the rest of the team and the 2nd training he ended up getting injured.

Newcomer said:

You know very well that the contracts between a football club and a player is not comparable to the ones between your regular salaryman and his employer.
Those contracts are worth millions, this is why players have so much leverage. Bar?a can decide they are fed up with Umtiti and Demb?l? and not to pay them but then the players would be free to sign wherever they want as the contract could be nulled. They could ask compensation since Bar?a is the one to break unilaterally the contract. Why do you think clubs keep loaning unwanted players ?
If Bar?a don't want to pay full wage to players like Demb?l? and Umtiti they should have made contracts with clauses related to the number of games played. It is entirely possible but players and their agents would obviously fight against it.

And i know you are a Bar?a fan but this situation happens in every club. Bayern had Ribey and Robben often injured, let alone Coman who is Demb?l? 2.0 injury wise. PSG paid even more money on Neymar (wage + transfer fee) than Bar?a on Demb?l? + Umtiti and Neymar missed half of the games. What about Oxlade Chamberlain at Liverpool ?

It sucks for the clubs but the risk is more than often worth it, reason why clubs keep doing it and don't go bust even with two players "stealing" a living.

I agree with you about the regular employee/employer : if the employee is not doing what he is paid for, you better get rid of him.

Click to expand...

To be honest, I am not aware of UEFA's contract rules and regulations, but I believe as you have mentioned in your post that the clubs can annul any contract if the player has not participated in certain amount of games in the calendar year. In that case of course the player has the right to choose where he will play next. In that case, here is how the American professional sport clubs resolve this problem.

Lets just say (for example) Umtiti's weekly salary with Barcelona is 13 000. After the annulment of his contract with them, he signed with Newcastle Utd. But the EPL club is willing to pay him 10 000 per week. That difference of 3000 goes to Barcelona. They have to pay the difference till the end of their previous contract with Umtiti, which I believe was June 6, 2023. That is fair. Barcelona will freed an roster spot and save 40 000 a month. Umtiti will have the chance to play more regularly and eventually regain his previous form. That is how it should be.

Now. "You know very well that the contracts between a football club and a player is not comparable to the ones between regular salary-man and his employer."

Exactly. They are not comparable. A regular salary worker gets 100 times less than a football player per week. Exactly for that reason, it should be a lot easier for a club president to get rid of always injured players because that cost the club millions. Can you sense my point? The loses for that football club from two players like Umtiti and Dembele would be 100 time more than the owner of a company where two injured salary employees work. And for that reason the Spanish Royal Federation and UEFA have to rewrite all this rules that concern situations like this one.

Bottom point is. No matter if you are a football player or regular salary worker in a company, when you don't work, you don't get pad. Every professional player in Europe or USA is very well insured. In cases like Umtiti, Dembele or whoever else you want to name, that Insurance Company has to cover about 75-80% of his salary. If Barcelona have to pay 100% of their wages without getting any contribution from them, then why all this players pay for insurance?

Some good news coming from Italy.

Inter Milan bosses have informed their colleagues in Barcelona that they are showing interest in the defender Samuel Umtiti, writes Calciomercato. They don't look for the Frenchmen to be used as a bargaining chip in the conversations for Martinez and Skriniar. The desire of the Italians is to take him on loan for one season with option to buy in the next year.

Lets hope this deal can happen, so we would have to deal with one problem less.

Classic Shinter. Get player on the loan and then decide to not buy him.

But I would love to get rid of this idiot more then Dembele.

This buyout loans are shit. It is like loaning a car. If uou van afford it you would buy it. This way you just want to get cheap in neccessity and dish it to the owner whwn you actualy need to show some money.

JerseyAddict said:

This buyout loans are shit. It is like loaning a car. If uou van afford it you would buy it. This way you just want to get cheap in neccessity and dish it to the owner whwn you actualy need to show some money.

Click to expand...

I am not sure if this comparison is correct, but in our case, it will be a big relief, at least for one year. I understand that the player has to agree to be sold to another team. How it works for the loans? Is it the same rule?

vuji_31 said:

Classic Shinter. Get player on the loan and then decide to not buy him.

But I would love to get rid of this idiot more then Dembele.

Click to expand...

Look. Shinter or not, it will help Barcelona. They know Umtiti is injury prone and don't want to take a risk to pay big money for him. Of course, in a year he will come back, same as Coutinho or Dembele ( if we loan him this summer ). But that is still better than keeping him here and paying 100% of his salary. Not to mention that we can get something like 10 mil. from this loan. The real problem for Barcelona will be after that. If Inter decide not to keep him, I doubt any other team will be willing to take him on loan after 2021.

LABarcaFan said:

I am not sure if this comparison is correct, but in our case, it will be a big relief, at least for one year. I understand that the player has to agree to be sold to another team. How it works for the loans? Is it the same rule?



Look. Shinter or not, it will help Barcelona. They know Umtiti is injury prone and don't want to take a risk to pay big money for him. Of course, in a year he will come back, same as Coutinho or Dembele ( if we loan him this summer ). But that is still better than keeping him here and paying 100% of his salary. Not to mention that we can get something like 10 mil. from this loan. The real problem for Barcelona will be after that. If Inter decide not to keep him, I doubt any other team will be willing to take him on loan after 2021.

Click to expand...

I agree that Barca is in trouble with high salary count. But to let all the players on loan is also double edged sword. It will end up with players leaving for free. Players that were payed for.

Barcelona has to get its shit together.

Present new cut contracts.
Present new loans.
Make sales. Even for less.
Who is "for sale" is "for sale". Not some lausy loans.

Get rid of all deadweight.
The club will sink in debt and bancrupcy.

All the players are on high money and their fat asses look to sit down the contract and enjoy warm climate

JerseyAddict said:

I agree that Barca is in trouble with high salary count. But to let all the players on loan is also double edged sword. It will end up with players leaving for free. Players that were payed for.

Barcelona has to get its shit together.

Present new cut contracts.
Present new loans.
Make sales. Even for less.
Who is "for sale" is "for sale". Not some lausy loans.

Get rid of all deadweight.
The club will sink in debt and bancrupcy.

All the players are on high money and their fat asses look to sit down the contract and enjoy warm climate

Click to expand...

I agree with you that selling the dead weights is the best case scenario, but.... who is going to buy them? Have you read any club having real interest in our player(s)? So far only rumors, nothing more.

I am very doubtful that this board and president are capable of doing any successful trade or sale. So, we have to wait till next summer and hope the new board will start cleaning the house, starting from the "amigos". Sure, there will be a negative balance in the first 1-2 years till we get rid of all big contracts. That is why I see loaning some players here and there as the only option for now.

LABarcaFan said:

I agree with you that selling the dead weights is the best case scenario, but.... who is going to buy them? Have you read any club having real interest in our player(s)? So far only rumors, nothing more.

I am very doubtful that this board and president are capable of doing any successful trade or sale. So, we have to wait till next summer and hope the new board will start cleaning the house, starting from the "amigos". Sure, there will be a negative balance in the first 1-2 years till we get rid of all big contracts. That is why I see loaning some players here and there as the only option for now.

Click to expand...

Nobody wants to buy them because of the high contracts. They won't go anywhere and they rather sit in Barcelona enjoying the sun.
No one even wants to loan them. Because they don't want to go anywhere for less pay and move from the sun.

it is a circle of neverending story. It will force new management to "dig" in shit...

I wonder how many clubs in top flight football around the world have as many dead weights (often high paid ones in our case) in the squad consistently for so many years.

Neeraj said:

I wonder how many clubs in top flight football around the world have as many dead weights (often high paid ones in our case) in the squad consistently for so many years.

Click to expand...

United gives us a run for our money, but otherwise I'm not sure..