Lionel Messi has told Barcelona that after nearly two decades in Catalonia, he wants to leave. The news sent shockwaves around the world, in football and beyond.
It broke in Messi’s native Argentina, where major broadcaster TyC Sports reported that he had sent a faxed letter to the club stating his intention to leave.
Quickly, multimillionaire owners were called into emergency meetings with directors of football and started asking questions like “can we?”, “would he?” and “how much?”.
The first major meeting took place at Barcelona HQ where the resignation of president Josep Maria Bartomeu was considered in an effort to placate the player who has become synonymous with the Blaugrana over the last 19 years. Even then though, Messi seemed determined to leave.
Walking free
Messi reportedly told Barcelona that he would be exercising a clause in his contract that would allow him to leave for free this summer, an astonishing move given that the club can expect to receive upwards of £500m for his services if he is sold to another club.
However, the timing of his letter to the club is likely to cause some consternation. The clause is believed to have stated that Messi could leave for free if he gave his notice within a certain number of days of the date initially proposed for the Champions League final, as good a point as any to regard as the “end of the season”.
The spread of Covid-19 though delayed Europe’s premier club competition to the point that the final, in which Bayern Munich beat PSG 1-0, was not played until last Sunday. (Somewhat significantly, Barcelona had been thrashed 8-2 by the eventual champions 8-2 in the quarter-finals.)
Such difficulties in contract law first came up earlier this year when players were asked to play beyond 30 June, the usual date for the end of football contracts.
Stephen Taylor Heath, head of sports law at JMW Solicitors, said: “The generally accepted position was that in law the player could argue his contract had expired on the calendar date stated even though when the contract was entered into the mutual assumption was that the season would have ended by then. In other words the suspension of the season made no contractual difference.”
Instead, clubs were forced to negotiate contract extensions with players whose contracts had expired on 30 June 2020, rather than just continue to run their existing deals.
“Applying this principal in reverse to Messi the club would argue the date in May that Messi had to give notice of leaving was independent of the season finishing. Therefore by giving notice now he could not leave until next May,” Taylor Heath added.
“Also the club will argue that the reason they needed notice in May was so that they had enough time to recruit a replacement during the close season and given the transfer window has also shifted they would have less time to do so in the current circumstances.
“Messi will argue the whole purpose of the clause is to allow him to assess what he wants to do at the end of a season and so in the circumstances the application of the May date is not in the spirit of the agreement.
“Also such a clause allowing a player to break his contract without a transfer fee is only available for superstars of Messi’s stature as such clauses normally involve a ‘buy out’ for a minimum/fixed transfer fee.”
Uncertainty reigns
Barcelona would likely find it harder, although not impossible, to recoup an astronomical transfer fee in the current post-Covid economic climate. Messi’s personal brand though is so valuable that he perhaps transcends such trifling concerns as a global recession.
A dispute over the status of his contract and the circumstances of his leaving, that might lead to a tribunal and a transfer fee his next club had not initially thought they would have to pay, could put the brakes on the summer move that he currently wants to effect.
“If Messi leaves without being able to rely on the clause mentioned, the stakes are obviously high and the club and Messi may prefer to reach a solution rather than litigate,” Taylor Heath said.
“The club that acquires Messi will wish to have certainty as to the basis on which they are acquiring Messi rather than have the fee determined by a tribunal given the stakes are so high.”
The difference between covering Messi’s wages alone and covering his wages as well as a nine-figure transfer fee is significant. Not many owners will want to take a chance on that. The lawyers will have their say on this long before the footballing people do.
Follow i sport on Facebook for the latest football news, interviews and features
More on football
- When does the Premier League re-start?
- Preece: Kepa has become a problem for Chelsea – but £30m Onana could be the solution
- Storey: Failed takeover could be good news for Newcastle’s long-term future
- Premier League kits ranked: A welcome return to form for Arsenal but that Tottenham kit…
- An apology to Man Utd’s Jesse Lingard
from Football – inews.co.uk https://ift.tt/3hvZFSl
Post a Comment