Fifa

Subterms

    More stories

    • 275 Shares99 Views

      in Soccer

      World Cup 2026 will be battle of ex-Premier League stars with NINETEEN set to be managing countries – can you name them?

      by

      NINETEEN former Premier League stars could end up battling at the World Cup in 2026.The USA, Canada and Mexico will host the next edition of Fifa’s supreme tournament.New England boss Thomas Tuchel could be one of 19 ex-Premier League aces manager at the World CupCredit: APAnd there will be plenty of aces on display once qualification is sorted.Argentina are the current holders after victory in Qatar nearly two year ago.But Euro winners Spain will certainly fancy their chances.While the likes of France, Germany and Portugal are also likely to be challengers.READ MORE IN FOOTBALLEngland could even make a splash after securing Thomas Tuchel as their new manager.Of course, everything hinges on whether these nations make it to the finals.Other smaller countries are also ready to compete for a place in North America.And should realistic nations be in the group draw, there could be as many as nineteen former Premier League stars taking charge of World Cup teams.Most read in FootballFOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALSFirst and foremost is USA boss Mauricio Pochettino, whose side are already guaranteed to be there.He took charge this month after leaving Chelsea, and is best remembered in the Prem for his time at Tottenham.Five things you may not know about Thomas Tuchel from younger Brazilian girlfriend to former modelling careerInside FA’s thrilling chase for TuchelTHE FA’s path to securing Thomas Tuchel’s signature was not a straightforward one.They tried to lure Pep Guardiola from Manchester City over the summer.They even made contact with Real Madrid boss Carlo Ancelotti after deciding to target trophy-laden foreign gaffers.The FA’s determination to go international was summed up by their decision NOT to interview Newcastle boss Eddie Howe.Initial talks with Tuchel saw him express a slight interest in replacing Gareth Southgate.But he was waiting to see what would happen at Manchester United, with Erik ten Hag’s future under the spotlight.Man Utd owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe eventually decided to stick with Ten Hag – and that opened the door to the FA getting their man.Read the full story on England’s thrilling pursuit of Thomas Tuchel.England also have an ex-top flight ace at the helm, with Tuchel another former Chelsea manager.And the list of former Prem aces continues with France’s Didier Deschamps, who played for the Blues towards the end of his career.Netherlands boss Ronald Koeman once took charge of Southampton and Everton.While Portugal’s Roberto Martinez enjoyed spells with the Toffees and Wigan.Moving on, Scotland’s Steve Clarke had six months at West Brom.And Sweden’s Jon Dahl Tomasson played briefly for Newcastle.Elsewhere, Ukraine’s Sergei Rebrov turned out for both Tottenham and West Ham.Wales’ Craig Bellamy made a splash with a ton of clubs including Liverpool and Man City.Forgotten England stars could benefit from Tuchel appointmentWITH Thomas Tuchel announced as the next England manager, a few forgotten stars might be hopeful of a return to the international set up.The former Chelsea and Bayern Munich manager usually uses a 3-4-3 formation.That could provide an opening for Mason Mount, who’s not been involved in the England set-up since the World Cup in 2022.The now Manchester United star enjoyed his most successful spell under Tuchel while the pair were at Stamford Bridge.Tuchel could also offer lifelines to other previously capped players such as Ruben Loftus-Cheek and Eric Dier.RLC has excelled since his move to AC Milan and with England struggling to find a partner for Rice, he could be the surprise answer.Meanwhile, Dier played for Tuchel at Bayern Munich as part of a back-three last season.The defender did enough to convince the club to make his loan move permanent after he had fallen out of favour at Tottenham.Click here to see the full England XI who could play under Tuchel.While Austria’s Ralf Rangnick took charge of Manchester United on an interim basis.Norway’s Stale Solbakken had a short playing career with Wimbledon in the late 90s.And Turkey’s Vincenzo Montella spent time on loan at Fulham.Outside of the European nations, ex-Man City title winner Roberto Mancini will be hoping to qualify with Saudi Arabia.In Africa, former Reading man Emerse Fae leads Ivory Coast.While Senegal’s Aliou Cisse played for both Birmingham and Portsmouth.In North America, Jesse March is looking to lead Canada to the World Cup after his time at Leeds.While former Newcastle and England boss Steve McClaren is now in charge of Jamaica.READ MORE SUN STORIESFinally, South American fans have ex-Leeds boss Marcelo Bielsa in charge of Uruguay.While Argentina World Cup winner Lionel Scaloni was once on loan at West Ham. More

    • 250 Shares99 Views

      in Soccer

      Football transfers could be set for major change that will see some players under contract able to move for FREE

      by

      FIFA has launched its battle to ensure the transfer system remains – by asking the rest of football how the rulebook needs to be reworked.But world chiefs have conceded that clubs may NOT be able to ask for a fee for every player who wants to leave them.Fifa are desperate to ensure the current transfer system remains in placeCredit: GettyLassana Diarra’s landmark victory threatens to disrupt the marketCredit: GettyFormer Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra’s victory over the world body at the European Court of Justice saw a major threat to the current system.Diarra’s lawyer, Jean-Louis Dupont declared the only possible outcome will be the end of clubs being able to demand fees for players.The ECJ ruled that current regulations, which mean clubs can sue players for breaking contracts and prevent them being able to move to a rival in another country, “impede the free movement of professional footballers wishing to develop their activity by going to work for a new club”.It added: “Those rules impose considerable legal risks, unforeseeable and potentially very high financial risks as well as major sporting risks on those players and clubs wishing to employ them which, taken together, are such as to impede international transfers of those players.”READ MORE IN FOOTBALLDupont, who was also the successful lawyer behind the Jean-Marc Bosman case that upended European football in the 1990s, argued the decision would inevitably lead to US-style collective bargaining agreements between players and clubs and “trades” – swap deals – rather than transfer fees being paid.FIFA had initially reacted to the verdict by insisting that only a minor tweak of “two paragraphs of two articles” of the regulations needed to be amended.But now Zurich legal bosses have announced Fifa will “open a global dialogue on the transfer system, involving key stakeholders” to redraft the rules.Fifa legal boss Emilio Garcia Silvero insisted that the ruling “confirms the sanctity of contracts”.Most read in FootballFOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALSHowever, asked if the ECJ decision does “mean the end of transfers or transfer fees” his reply hinted at a recognition that some players will be able to move for nothing.Silvero said: “The Diarra decision does not question that employment contracts between players and clubs must be respected. Top 10 highest-paid Premier League stars“Consequently, if players wish to be released from a contract, there will be financial consequences. “If a club wishes to engage a player under a valid contract, this will often still mean that the transfer fee needs to be paid.”Using the word “often” rather than “always” was a significant change of position.Last week’s general assembly of the powerful European Club Association was dominated by behind the scenes discussions of the potentially “terrible” impact of the ruling, with serious fears the business models of clubs in “selling” countries like Portugal, France, Holland, Belgium and in Scandinavia could be destroyed.One prominent figure suggested every case where a player walks out of a current deal might see clubs having to sue for compensation in their local courts, creating a “law of the jungle” situation.Silvero confirmed that clubs, leagues and player unions will now be asked to comment on new proposals.He said: “The Diarra decision confirms it remains Fifa’s responsibility to establish, protect and enforce a robust regulatory system for international football, in particular to safeguard the regulations and integrity of a sports competition. “This includes rules related to the composition of teams, such as transfers, registration periods, contractual stability and many other important topics. READ MORE SUN STORIES“Fifa will now initiate a global dialogue with key stakeholders. “Together with them, Fifa will determine what conclusions must be drawn from the Diarra decision, and which changes are most appropriate and suitable.”Transfer fees scrapped Q&A: How landmark ruling could mean NFL-style trades and stars suing for millionsFORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.SunSport’s Martin Lipton explains what it was all about – and what it might mean for the future of football…What was the case about?Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.Is that it?No. Belgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money he was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed up.Okay, so what does the ruling mean?Theoretically players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?Potentially, yes. Although players would have to want to move.We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity.Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.Is everybody agreed about this?Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations.Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.Read SunSport’s full Q&A with football on the brink of the biggest shake-up in 30 years… More

    • 238 Shares99 Views

      in Soccer

      Serie A star slapped with TEN-MATCH BAN for racially abusing Wolves ace Hwang Hee-chan with vile ‘Jackie Chan’ comment

      by

      SERIE A star Marco Curto has been hit with a TEN-MATCH BAN for racially abusing Wolves ace Hwang Hee-chan.Fifa have found Curto guilty after he allegedly made a vile “Jackie Chan” comment towards the Premier League winger in a pre-season friendly.Italian footballer Marco Curto has been handed a ten-match ban from FifaCredit: GettyIt comes after Curto allegedly made a vile racist remark to Prem star Hwang Hee-chanCredit: GettyThe controversy erupted during a closed-doors friendly in Marbella which Wolves won 1-0.The clash was marred by an incident after 68 minutes when Hwang alleged he had been racially abused by an opponent.His furious team-mate Daniel Podence was so incensed he lashed out at a Como defender and was sent-off by the referee.Como said one of their players made a reference surrounding Hwang’s name and that the complaint was “out of proportion”.READ MORE FOOTBALL NEWSBut now Fifa have upheld the formal complaint made by South Korea’s national football association.A spokesperson for the world governing body said: “Marco Curto was found responsible for discriminatory behaviour and sanctioned with a 10-match suspension.”Serving of half of those matches is suspended for a probation period of two years.”The player is ordered to render community services and undergo training and education with an organisation approved by Fifa.”Most read in FootballFOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALSThe South Korea player’s national football association contacted Fifa in July to express “serious concerns” about the incident.SunSport asked Como for comment after the game on July 16.Mateus Mane shows of his goal scoring skills playing for Wolves Academy Wolves are understood to welcome the decision and held talks with the FA over how best to move forward with taking it to the relevant bodies.Uefa insisted it cannot look into the incident because it did not take place during a competitive Uefa match.The Molineux club are expected to issue a formal statement later.Curto is currently on loan with Italian second tier side Cesena.A Como spokesperson said Curto had told club chief’s he had told a fellow defender “ignore (Hwang), he thinks he’s Jackie Chan”.Mirwan Suwarso previously said: “Having spoken to our player at length, we are confident this was in reference to the player’s name.”And to the constant references of ‘Channy’ made by his own team-mates on the pitch.READ MORE SUN STORIES”As far as our club is concerned our player did not say anything in a derogatory manner.”We are disappointed that the reaction of certain Wolves players has seen the incident blown out of proportion.” More

    • 200 Shares199 Views

      in Soccer

      Fifa launch desperate mission to prevent transfer fees from being SCRAPPED after landmark Lassana Diarra case

      by

      FIFA will try to prove that the current transfer system is vital for smaller clubs – to prevent the Lassana Diarra ruling ripping up the footballing eco-system.Former Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Diarra’s victory at the European Court of Justice had his lawyer Jean Louis Dupont declaring the only possible outcome will be the end of clubs being able to demand fees for players.The Lassana Diarra ruling could rip up the football transfer systemCredit: GettyThe ruling could mean football clubs are no longer able to demand fees for their playersCredit: PADupont, who was also the successful lawyer behind the Jean-Marc Bosman case that upended European football in the 1990s, argued the decision would inevitably lead to US-style collective bargaining agreements between players and clubs and “trades” – swap deals – rather than transfer fees being paid.But while Fifa publicly insisted the defeat was a minor one relating to “only two paragraphs of two articles” of their transfer regulations, Zurich’s legal chiefs will now go all out to persuade the Euro Judges that they cannot afford to crash the system.West Ham vice-chairman Karren Brady warned in her exclusive Sun column of the potential for “chaos and anarchy” if the potential repercussions do lead to players walking out on their contracts for better deals elsewhere.Fifa insiders conceded that the ruling would force a rewriting of some of the current rules regarding players who fall out with their employers.READ MORE IN FOOTBALLThat would mean clubs engaging those players whose contracts were terminated would not be expected to pay any “fines” – with Diarra going to Court in 2014 after Belgian club Charleroi pulled out of a deal to sign him because they faced being hit by a demand for £8m from Lokomotiv Moscow.World chiefs also recognise that they can longer withhold processing International Transfer Certificate requests for players who are in conflict with a former club.But Fifa remains hopeful it can persuade the Court that its current rules are proportionate.The five Judges on the Court confirmed the need for “stability” in the football system, backing the existing two transfer registration windows which prevent players being able to move clubs at any time.Most read in FootballBEST FREE BET SIGN UP OFFERS FOR UK BOOKMAKERSIt is likely, though, that Zurich lawyers will attempt to argue that scrapping transfer fees wholesale would be a disaster for the entire economic fabric of the game.The business models of clubs in many European countries – especially France, Belgium, Holland, Portugal  and Scandinavia – are designed to develop and sell on talent to “bigger” markets.Top 10 highest paid footballers in the world revealed with no Premier League players making the top fiveIf those fees can no longer be demanded, with players free to simply break their contracts and move on, those clubs would no longer be capable of remaining solvent.The argument will almost certainly be that allowing players to tear up their deals without any sanctions or consequences would prove a death-knell for the sport outside the biggest and wealthiest markets.And Fifa will be backed by Europe’s most powerful clubs including the Prem Big Six.The Diarra ruling will now be a major topic of conversation when the European Club Association, which represents more than 700 clubs across the continent, holds its General Assembly in Athens this week.Transfer fees scrapped Q&A: How landmark ruling could mean NFL-style trades and stars suing for millionsFORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.SunSport’s Martin Lipton explains what it was all about – and what it might mean for the future of football…What was the case about?Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.Is that it?No. Belgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money he was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed up.Okay, so what does the ruling mean?Theoretically players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?Potentially, yes. Although players would have to want to move.We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity.Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.Is everybody agreed about this?Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations.Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.Read SunSport’s full Q&A with football on the brink of the biggest shake-up in 30 years…In a statement, the ECA said: “The ECJ did recognise the legitimacy of rules aiming at protecting the integrity and stability of competitions and the stability of squads.“It also recognised rules which aim to support such legitimate objectives, including the existence of registration windows, the principle that compensation is payable by anyone who breaches an employment contract and the imposition of sporting sanctions on parties that breach those contracts.“The football transfer system is designed to establish a balance between the rights of players to free movement and stability of contracts, together with the legitimate objectives of the integrity and stability of squads and competitions.READ MORE SUN STORIES“Crucially, the transfer system affords medium and smaller sized clubs the means to continue to compete at high levels of football, especially those who are able to develop and train players successfully.“The transfer system as a whole, and transfer fees and solidarity mechanism more specifically, are an efficient and effective means of wealth distribution from bigger clubs to smaller ones.”Inside Lassana Diarra’s legal case with FifaLASSANA DIARRA’S case with Fifa dates back to 2014 when he was playing for Lokomotiv Moscow.The former Chelsea and Real Madrid midfielder was in a dispute with Lokomotiv over wages – with the Russian side ultimately terminating his contract.The case was referred to Fifa’s Dispute and Resolution Chamber (DRC) which ruled against Diarra, fining him £16MILLION.During this time, Diarra received a new contract offer from Belgian side Charleroi.But Charleroi wanted clarification from Fifa that they would not be liable to pay any of the money owed to Lokomotiv.Fifa could not make that guarantee and the move never happened.As a result, Diarra brought new legal action against Fifa and the Belgian league claiming a loss of earnings.That started the long process that has led to this week’s groundbreaking judgment. More

    • 225 Shares149 Views

      in Soccer

      Football could be forced to adopt US-style transfer system with game becoming Wild West after Lassana Diarra ruling

      by

      FOOTBALL has always believed it did not have to follow the American model.But if the ramifications of the latest European Court ruling on the game are as claimed by the man who broke the system in the 1990s, we could be entering the Wild West.Lassana Diarra’s beef with Fifa’s rules could lead to the end of the current transfer systemCredit: GettyFootball could be entering a US-styled Wild West after the latest European Court rulingCredit: GettyFor players, it will be like walking into the casinos in Las Vegas with a massive pile of chips but knowing they have already been dealt a winning hand on a loaded table.Jean-Louis Dupont was the lawyer who beat Uefa over the treatment of Belgian player Jean-Marc Bosman.That landmark judgement meant clubs could no longer demand a fee for a player who was out of contract.But the secondary repercussions was the end of the “three plus two” rule demanding that clubs fielded a minimum quota of homegrown stars, turning European club football into a continent without borders.Read More on FootballAnd even if former Chelsea ace Lassana Diarra’s beef with Fifa’s rules was about his right to walk away from Lokomotiv Moscow when they stopped paying him in 2014, the final outcome could well be the end of the current transfer system.The ruling of the five senior Judges in the Luxembourg-based Court said: “The rules in question impede the free movement of footballers wishing to develop their activity by going to work for a new club.“Those rules impose considerable legal risks, potentially very high financial risks as well as major sporting risks on those players and clubs wishing to employ them.”No wonder a crowing Dupont claimed a “total victory”, adding that the Court had “severely censured the structurally illegal actions of the current regulations”.Most read in FootballBEST FREE BET SIGN UP OFFERS FOR UK BOOKMAKERSMore critically, he predicted: “This paves the way for a modernisation of governance, in particular through the use of collective bargaining between employees and employers.”And that was always Dupont’s end-game as he allied himself with the international players’ union Fifpro to take on Fifa.Transfer fees could be scrapped in biggest change to football in 30 years after landmark court case brought against Fifa If clubs cannot demand transfer fees for players who are under contract, then it is all about the package they are offered.Either their current club puts so much on the table, with US-style ten-year contracts including massive £100million-plus loyalty bonuses for seeing out the deal, that the player wants to stay.Or they simply jump when a higher bidder knocks on the door. And whichever is the outcome, the players and their agents win. Of course, Dupont would say that. He is not averse to exaggeration.On the other side, Fifa attempted to downplay its significance, claiming this was a very narrow ruling with no wider implications.Transfer fees scrapped Q&A: How landmark ruling could mean NFL-style trades and stars suing for millionsFORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.SunSport’s Martin Lipton explains what it was all about – and what it might mean for the future of football…What was the case about?Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.Is that it?No. Belgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money he was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed up.Okay, so what does the ruling mean?Theoretically players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?Potentially, yes. Although players would have to want to move.We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity.Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.Is everybody agreed about this?Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations.Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.Read SunSport’s full Q&A with football on the brink of the biggest shake-up in 30 years…A spokesman said: “Fifa is satisfied that the legality of key principles of the transfer system have been re-confirmed.“The ruling only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles of the Regulations on the Status and Transfer of Players.” Transfers could changeFifa insiders are pointing fingers at Fifpro, asking what the union hopes to gain.They do, though, concede the world body should have intervened to grant the International Transfer Certificate which would have allowed Diarra to join Belgian side Charleroi after his fall-out with Moscow and must now rewrite that aspect of its rulebook.Likewise, the rules that meant Charleroi would have been liable to pay Diarra’s fine from Moscow will also have to go.Yet many fear this could be a case of shutting the stable door after the entire herd has bolted.There are also concerns that the consequences will go way beyond the initial scope of the case.The judges did rule, specifically, that a “certain degree of stability in the squads of all professional football clubs” was a good thing during a season.They implicitly backed the current transfer registration windows that mean players can only move in the summer and in January.Likewise, if a club can be found, unquestionably, to have “incited” a player to walk out on a rival, then a sanction might be appropriate.Good luck in getting hold of those WhatsApp messages.READ MORE SUN STORIESBut with the current regulations now deemed to have breached EU law, the very fabric of the transfer rulebook will be in question.And nobody can be sure where it will end up. More

    • 213 Shares129 Views

      in Soccer

      Man City ask for Premier League season to be DELAYED as Pep Guardiola escalates fixture pile-up row

      by

      MANCHESTER CITY are on collision course with the Premier League again — after the champs’ plea for a DELAYED start to next season was rejected.City wanted their first two games of the 2025-26 season postponed to help them recover from playing in Fifa’s expanded four-week summer Club World Cup in America.Pep Guardiola weighed on Manchester City’s fixture pile-up row with the Premier LeagueCredit: GettyPlayers’ unions are worried about the Club World Cup causing burnoutCredit: ReutersBut City boss Pep Guardiola declared: “In the end, the Premier League has not allowed us to postpone the first two games for our recovery. Thank you so much!”The final of the revamped 32-team tournament, which also features Chelsea, takes place on July 13 — less than a month before the start of the next Prem season.Asked if he felt stars would be exhausted after the tournament, Guardiola added: “It’s going to happen for sure. It depends if we’re in the last stages of the FA Cup.“I don’t know if we will play more games than our Treble year before the States.”Read More on FootballRelations between City and Prem chiefs are already strained after the club were charged with 115 breaches of the League’s financial rules. City deny all the charges.Guardiola added: “For the first and second games, the club asked the Premier League to postpone them one, two or three weeks.“That would be one or two more weeks of holiday after the Club World Cup. But it’s absolutely not allowed.“The Premier League say ‘yes’ to us? Absolutely not.”Most read in FootballBEST FREE BET SIGN UP OFFERS FOR UK BOOKMAKERSThe Prem have yet to comment but sources indicated there were only initial, informal discussions — and no formal request from City.Prem boss Richard Masters is aware of the challenges domestic leagues will face as a result of Fifa’s expanded calendar.Pep Guardiola breaks silence on Phil Foden situation after fans’ conspiracy theory over England star’s absence Players’ unions, worried about burnout, have taken legal action against Fifa over the Club World Cup.And City’s crocked ace Rodri warned players were ready to strike to protect their welfare.Fifa chief Gianni Infantino insists the tournament will go ahead as planned.Guardiola’s City contract is up next summer, so he may not be around to see it — but he believes it will only become clear then how tired players are.He said: “They won’t postpone these games, so that will be the moment of, ‘Oh, what do we do?’“I don’t have an answer right now. We will see how the players are, the schedule, then we are going to decide.” More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in Soccer

      Lassana Diarra transfer case has everybody worried – the result could be complete chaos and anarchy

      by

      THE outcome of the Lassana Diarra case has got everybody worried.But one thing is for certain: if a player has the right to terminate their contracts because they want to go elsewhere, then so would their club.Lassana Diarra’s transfer court case could change football foreverCredit: GettyWest Ham CEO Karren Brady suggests that most footballers would suffer from an overhaul of the transfer systemCredit: GettyAnd the result of that would be complete chaos and anarchy.It would make a mockery of any financial rules in the Premier League and it will crash the system.The issue here that caused the problem is that Fifa’s rules were not thought through properly.It’s ludicrous to suggest that it’s not a just cause to break your contract if you’re not being paid, which is what happened with Diarra and Lokomotiv Moscow.READ MORE FOOTBALL NEWSNo matter where you work, whether you’re a milkman or play for Manchester United, if you’re not getting paid you should be able to leave.I guess it’s the typically Russian approach to things that they don’t believe that.Most proper clubs wouldn’t dream of not paying their players. We have integrity and recognize that contracts work on both sides.If players can simply break their contracts and move around the world the entire system will collapse.Most read in FootballFOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALSNot just transfer fees. Wages will collapse because there won’t be enough money in the game.Big clubs will hoard all the best players and some players will get really rich.Dream team Transfer Suggestions for Game Week 7 Transfer fees scrapped Q&A: How landmark ruling could mean NFL-style trades and stars suing for millionsFORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.SunSport’s Martin Lipton explains what it was all about – and what it might mean for the future of football…What was the case about?Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.Is that it?No. Belgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money he was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed up.Okay, so what does the ruling mean?Theoretically players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?Potentially, yes. Although players would have to want to move.We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity.Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.Is everybody agreed about this?Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations.Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.Read SunSport’s full Q&A with football on the brink of the biggest shake-up in 30 years…But most players will be in the alternative situation, that clubs can get rid of them, wash their hands of  a player they don’t want anymore.The current system is designed to send money through the game.When we bought Max Kilman from Wolves this summer, they had to give £4m to Maidenhead as part of the deal.That’s life changing money for a non-league club but if there are no fees anymore that won’t happen and the impact will be incredible.We’ve been here before with the Bosman ruling in the 1990s but I could see the logic of that. The idea that you could still get compensation for a player when he was no longer under contract was ludicrous.Just as I told people, Bosman didn’t end the transfer system.Jean-Marc Bosman’s 1995 court victory changed transfers for out of contract playersCredit: ReutersThe reality is that if a player has two years left on their contract you either have to extend it or sell them because their value starts to diminish quickly.Players can run down their contracts and get a free transfer.Of course there’s nothing free about it. The money that would have gone in transfer fees instead goes to the player and their agent’s pockets.This is the opposite of Bosman and if anybody should be worried I’d say it’s not the clubs but players.I’d like to think that in the Premier League we’d have some sort of gentleman’s agreement to stop this happening.But what could we do to stop clubs in Italy, France, Spain or Germany taking advantage?Max Kilman’s move to West Ham from Wolves earned non-league Maidenhead £4millionCredit: GettyI’m sure there will be some players and agents who are licking their lips but while this will be good for the few it will be bad for the many.You might have one or two players who could go to a bigger club for a lot of money but you might think of getting rid of more and replacing them with players who are earning less to balance your books.READ MORE SUN STORIESCurrently I can pay £80m to sign a player over a five-year contract and put that into my accounts to make it sustainable.But if that player can walk to Manchester City for free and I have to write off £80m every time we’d go bankrupt. So whatever we could have bought him for we can’t afford to pay that. More

    • 225 Shares169 Views

      in Soccer

      Transfer fees Q&A: How landmark court ruling could mean NFL-style player trades and stars suing clubs for millions

      by

      FORMER Chelsea, Arsenal and Portsmouth midfielder Lassana Diarra has won his landmark case at the European Court of Justice.And the decision could have major ramifications on the future of football transfers. Lassana Diarra won his landmark case against Fifa at the European Court of JusticeCredit: APThe ruling could spell the end of transfer fees entirelyCredit: GettyWill an NFL-style draft and the complete scrapping of transfer fees really come to pass? SunSport explains what it was all about – and what it might mean.What was the case about?Diarra argued Fifa’s transfer rules were illegal after the world body backed Lokomotiv Moscow’s claim that he had broken his contract by refusing to train with them.Is that it?No. READ MORE ON FOOTBALLBelgian club Charleroi wanted to sign Diarra but were told they would have to pay the money – which was halved from £16m to £8m after the player appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.He was fined by Moscow, while Fifa refused to issue an International Transfer Certificate unless they coughed upWhat did the Court say?Basically, a 3-0 victory for Diarra and his lawyer, Jean-Louis Dupont. Pointing to Moscow’s compensation claim after Diarra was deemed to have broken his contract, the proposed sanction against Charleroi and Fifa’s stance, the ECJ said: “All of those rules are contrary to EU law.”Most read in FootballFOOTBALL FREE BETS AND SIGN UP DEALSOkay, so what does that mean?Theoretically, if the ECJ ruling is now ratified by the court in Mons, Belgium, where the case began, players will have the right to break their contracts and switch clubs without a fee changing hands – just like any employee in any other industry.Hang on – does that mean the END of transfer fees?Potentially, yes. Transfer fees could be scrapped in biggest change to football in 30 years after landmark court case brought against Fifa Although players would have to want to move. We would basically end up with a US-style “collective bargaining” model where players would be free to move within transfer windows without impunity. Clubs might be able to “trade” players – swap deals – but with no extra cash changing hands.Is everybody agreed about this?Absolutely not. Fifa claimed the ruling “only puts in question two paragraphs of two articles” of its transfer regulations. Yet the Judges said the current rules were “prohibited” under EU law and “anti-competitive” as they “limit the freedom of action” of players to change employer.So what happens next?Fifa will try to find a way of tweaking its rules to meet with the approval of the Court. But that seems unlikely given the tone of the ruling.Inside Lassana Diarra’s legal case with FifaLASSANA DIARRA’S case with Fifa dates back to 2014 when he was playing for Lokomotiv Moscow.The former Chelsea and Real Madrid midfielder was in a dispute with Lokomotiv over wages – with the Russian side ultimately terminating his contract.The case was referred to Fifa’s Dispute and Resolution Chamber (DRC) which ruled against Diarra, fining him £16MILLION.During this time, Diarra received a new contract offer from Belgian side Charleroi.But Charleroi wanted clarification from Fifa that they would not be liable to pay any of the money owed to Lokomotiv.Fifa could not make that guarantee and the move never happened.As a result, Diarra brought new legal action against Fifa and the Belgian league claiming a loss of earnings.That started the long process that has led to this week’s groundbreaking judgment.Does that mean players will be able to move whenever they want?No. The Court confirmed the legitimacy of the current transfer window regulations which “ensure the stability of squad compositions during a given season” by banning “unilateral termination” of contracts during the campaign. Like other businesses, players seeking to move may have to serve notice periods, potentially up to 12 months.Anything else?If Dupont is right, the result will mean a large number of players who can claim they were restricted from moving clubs by the current rules will be able to make back-dated compensation claims, running into millions of pounds.And how soon could this all start to happen?Once the court in Mons ratifies the ECJ ruling, which might take a few months, it would come into effect across Europe.READ MORE SUN STORIESThat’s all right then. We’re not in the EU any more, are we?No. But English clubs, the FA and the leagues would have no option but to fall into line as Premier League clubs could argue any attempts to hold them to the current regulations breach competition law as they will be put at a disadvantage to their rivals in Europe.Former France international Diarra was at Chelsea for the 2005-06 title winCredit: GettyDiarra’s case was heard at the European Court of Justice in LuxembourgCredit: EPA More