Self-detrimental release clause policy in Spain

[Barcaman]

Someone oughta abolish this moronic clauses.
As if it's not enough we can't offer pro contracts as soon as epl clubs. We are exposed to agents blackmail and poaching.

Who's in charge of it anyway?

 

[Martindn]

Seems to be a double edged sword, beneficial for sure where first team players are concerned. The only thing that is self detrimental is the whole number of games technicality, you guys got rammed with that on Thiago and possibly Pedro, are they required in every contract?

 

[pacp_96]

are they required in every contract?

Yep. Every professional football player in Spain is required to have a release clause in their contract.

 

[te amo barca]

Annoying as hell in FM, you forget about these clauses and some club steals your young star!

 

[khaled_a_d]

The problem that it isn't just mandatory ,but also it is wage related and you can't give big release clause to highly talented prospects without breaking wage structure
Both age situation and release clause need to be abolished if Liga want to be able to compete with EPL on the long run

 

[Martindn]

Yep. Every professional football player in Spain is required to have a release clause in their contract.

What about the match variable reducing the clause, are they mandatory too? Doesnt seem reasonable on the clubs at all, holding them to random practically.

 

[khaled_a_d]

What about the match variable reducing the clause, are they mandatory too? Doesn't seem reasonable on the clubs at all, holding them to random practically.

Nope ,that one is part of negotiation .unfortunately Zubi always lost that part with agents

 

[Luftstalag14]

Seems to be a double edged sword, beneficial for sure where first team players are concerned. The only thing that is self detrimental is the whole number of games technicality, you guys got rammed with that on Thiago and possibly Pedro, are they required in every contract?

I don't see how release clause benefits the club when it comes to first team players. Without such a release clause, every deal has to go through the club. So as far as the club is concerned, release clause is a lose clause.

 

[DennyCrane]

Someone oughta abolish this moronic clauses.
As if it's not enough we can't offer pro contracts as soon as epl clubs. We are exposed to agents blackmail and poaching.

Who's in charge of it anyway?

It stems from a Royal Decree by the Minister of Labour and Social Security, Real Decreto 1006/1985, there you go: http://www.boe.es/diario_boe/txt.php?id=BOE-A-1985-12313

The problem that it isn't just mandatory ,but also it is wage related and you can't give big release clause to highly talented prospects without breaking wage structure

Exactly. But the reasoning behind this rule makes sense: The player should be able to buy out his contract, turning himself into a free agent in the process; a massive buy-out clause that could never be met by the player due to his wage would therefore be an evasion of the rule. It's there to prohibit adhesion contracts. It's also only binding on a domestic level.

On the other hand, this decree was passed ten years prior to the Bosman ruling with all it's implications and is therefore not timely anymore. The LL clubs should consider to petition the Decree and/or make it an object to a judicial examination when such a case has surfaced.

 

[Galning]

Annoying as hell in FM, you forget about these clauses and some club steals your young star!

Keep posting stuff like this and Barto might offer your a spot at La Masia

 

[Beast]

Someone oughta abolish this moronic clauses.
As if it's not enough we can't offer pro contracts as soon as epl clubs. We are exposed to agents blackmail and poaching.

Who's in charge of it anyway?

Well allow me to be the devil advocate here... it helps the club in stopping the blackmail as well

players wants to leave the club refuse and want to force his way the club usually says if you want to go pay the release clause ..

the problem is when it's conditional as you lot have been doing for several years (I.E if you don't play that amount of minutes the release clause go down to 20 Mil or something ..like it happened with Thiago & possibly Pedro i'm not following it up ) ...Naturally it's symbolic like CR one or Messi but also makes sure the PSG will not go on and play dirty games.. notice that (i remember this well it's a FIFA rule ) at a certain age (i believe 28 or after 5 years in the same club ? ) the player can legally buy the remaining amount of his contract (Salary X the number of remaining years ) and move freely ..so say Messi falls out with Bart-man .. he can pay you the 17 Million X 3 years and move for peanuts to whatever sugar daddy is on the market.. the release clause overrule that weak point...

it's a good condition if the value is good as most clubs

 

[DennyCrane]

Well allow me to be the devil advocate here... it helps the club in stopping the blackmail as well

players wants to leave the club refuse and want to force his way the club usually says if you want to go pay the release clause ..

the problem is when it's conditional as you lot have been doing for several years (I.E if you don't play that amount of minutes the release clause go down to 20 Mil or something ..like it happened with Thiago & possibly Pedro i'm not following it up ) ...Naturally it's symbolic like CR one or Messi but also makes sure the PSG will not go on and play dirty games.. notice that (i remember this well it's a FIFA rule ) at a certain age (i believe 28 or after 5 years in the same club ? ) the player can legally buy the remaining amount of his contract (Salary X the number of remaining years ) and move freely ..so say Messi falls out with Bart-man .. he can pay you the 17 Million X 3 years and move for peanuts to whatever sugar daddy is on the market.. the release clause overrule that weak point...

it's a good condition if the value is good as most clubs

Yes, after the protected period (= a period of three entire Seasons or three years, if such contract was concluded prior to the 28th birthday of the Professional, or to a period of two entire Seasons or two years, if such contract was concluded after the 28th birthday of the Professional) the player is not sanctioned by FIFA for breach of contract due to Art. 17 of FIFA's Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players and only has to pay the compensation to the club. (For further reference, see Webster ruling). And FIFA actually recommends a buy-out clause to bypass this problem.

I see your point, keep in mind though that the scope of application for this is very limited, if you take into account that every so-called contract renewal is a new contract, which means that the protected period of 2 or 3 years starts over with every "renewal" in which the player could then be sanctioned for breach of contract.

My issue with the mandatory buy-out clause is mostly that it serves as a gateway for agents to turn the pressure up and force the conditions you described into contracts. Not sure how this is handled in the capital, but Barca surely doesn't have any positive experience with it.

 

[Beast]

Yes, after the protected period (= a period of three entire Seasons or three years, if such contract was concluded prior to the 28th birthday of the Professional, or to a period of two entire Seasons or two years, if such contract was concluded after the 28th birthday of the Professional) the player is not sanctioned by FIFA for breach of contract due to Art. 17 of FIFA's Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players and only has to pay the compensation to the club. (For further reference, see Webster ruling). And FIFA actually recommends a buy-out clause to bypass this problem.

I see your point, keep in mind though that the scope of application for this is very limited, if you take into account that every so-called contract renewal is a new contract, which means that the protected period of 2 or 3 years starts over with every "renewal" in which the player could then be sanctioned for breach of contract.

My issue with the mandatory buy-out clause is mostly that it serves as a gateway for agents to turn the pressure up and force the conditions you described into contracts. Not sure how this is handled in the capital, but Barca surely doesn't have any positive experience with it.

Thanks for the Webster ruling .. it was some years ago i forgot the name
I know , that has to do with the legal department & the negotiator you guys had/have.. frankly we had excellent experience and any agent who plays with it Perez has the "pay the release clause & take your player " motto .. so even now with Ramos United are unable to play that card.. we saw it was different with Thiago & now with Pedro... putting different figures conditioned with game time is wrong and that's where you went wrong IMO ...because the late Tito missed the point (or was not told ) and you let Thiago go for peanuts
Sure at the end you won't keep a player beyond his will and risk having an unhappy player however it doesn't mean you give him & his potential new club an upper hand in negotiation

I like what we usually do in our negotiations in general i may go as far as say it's a working model

1- high buyout clause not conditioned with game time
2- never leave a player you will keep go into his last 2 years in the contract (even now with Pepe there is words that we probably let him go next june as we already have Varane who needs regular time & Pepe will be 32 )
3- buy-back clause.. we used it a long time ago now you lot are also following the same pattern although we pick the correct club for the players and get them back improved for some reason i don't see that happening with you till now.. always picking the wrong club .. look at Soldado , Negredo , De La Red , Callejon , Carvajal , Casemiro , Cheryshev, Lucas Vasquez... and even Morata you can see how great he was during last season... i think you always pick the wrong club i don't recall you sending someone on loan or sold with a buyout clause and got him back improved or got him back at all .. even Pique & Cesc was outright purchase