Contractual Matters when a Player Leaves Early

Thats NFL you are thinking of, on a football transfer the old contract is void and a new one is created.

this is why personal terms are discussed. This wouldn’t need to be if its the same contract.

“Then the buying club must negotiate a fresh contract with the player they wish to recruit, endeavouring to meet the terms requested in respect of salary, bonuses, contract length and so on.”

https://www.goal.com/en-gb/news/how-does-a-football-transfer-work/130og8e76770l1dcqbne3jntx7#

 

Contract law can be a minefield and I'm no expert but if a player has signed a long term contract then unless there is a stipulation in that contract that is broken then the club is liable to pay out if the player has not asked to move. Usually the club and agent come to an agreement with the words 'mutual termination' where it is accepted by both parties.

 

General!!!

 

Or unless a club make an offer, and that offer is acceptable to the player. We should only have to pay up a contract if we force a player to move on against his will. At this point we have no evidence to suggest that Foulds isnt open and willing to a permanent move to Harrogate. In fact, I'd say if he goes then he is willing, as if he wasn't we would move him out on a years loan with them paying his wages and no need to offset any contractual payments against the transfer fee,

 

If it is accepted to cancel by mutual consent that is extremely generous of Foulds. More likely they have agreed a severance deal and the “fee” Harrogate are paying covers that.

 

If Foulds had agreed to cancel his contract by mutual consent then he would be free to sign for Harrogate for nothing.

 

But this is the point, MUTUAL consent simply means they have come to an agreement to cancel the contract. That agreement could be as you say, or it could include a MUTUALLY agreed pay off for the remaining term of the contract.

Does all this need a separate thread mods?

 

You dont pay a player a severance fee for a player to leave on a transfer.

99% of the time the player actually wants to leave themselves.

can you find a source to show that wages are also paid up in a player transfer? As then it would be simpler to run down contracts.

case in point, when a player signs a new contract at the same club, does the club pay up the remaining wages due? Or do they transfer onto the new wages immediately?

How does Doyles £1 transfer fee work then?

 

So answer this. If Harry Kane signs for Real Madrid, without asking for a transfer, will Spurs pay up his contract ? Course they won't. This thread is getting silly.

If a club sells a player to another club, and that player happily agrees to sign, he doesn't leave by mutual consent, he doesn't have his contract paid up in full. He agrees to waive the balance of his contract and signs a new one at the new club.

Foulds will be on peanuts at City. If we sell him, he will be getting more money there.

 

Where I think people are getting confused is that lots of players have signing on fees and loyalty bonuses agreed when a contract is signed, if a player doesn't request a transfer then the fees are owed to the player as they weren't the one to instigate the transfer and once an offer is accepted it could be deemed the player is being forced out.

 

Quickly skimmed through this thread and read various different opinions on the matter, and I recon pretty much all opinions have truth in them, as I'm pretty sure it go many ways and is all based on negotiation. So if a club want a player to move on but the club he's going to can only afford a lower wage then a sum of money from the selling club will probably be offered to the player based on his losses to help push the deal through in some cases. If the buying club are paying the same wages or more then I don't think the player would get any settlement.

 

Here is my take on it.

player signs deal and they are entitled to full payment of their contract as long as they fulfil their duties.

if a player leaves before the contract is up that can only be done with agreement of both the club and player. So that means a discussion has to be had, sometimes that will end with some sort of payment to the player, and sometimes nothing depending on the whole package including transfer fees etc.

the only bit that I think is different is signing on fees and loyalty fees as they will be paid in full if the player doesn’t request a transfer. Reason behind that is the loyalty fee is for exactly that, not asking to leave, and the signing on fee was due on the signing of the contract but is usually spread over the deal for the benefit of club/player for tax purposes

 

Harry Kane's agent will negotiate with the club as to what he leaves spurs with although with him probably wanting to move and almost certainly achieving a higher financial package at Madrid it would be much easier to reach an agreement I'd imagine.

 

I cant imagine any way in which if Foulds is getting sold for a fee and he wants to leave - why City would owe him anything.

I know one player who got 10% of their transfer fee (to the sum of about 700k) but that was foreign league into the prem. I have no idea how it would work at Citys level. I would be v surprised if Foulds was getting 10% - but who knows.