Gabriele Marcotti
@marcotti.bsky.social
ESPN Senior Writer and Corriere dello Sport Correspondent
One half of the Gab + Juls Show http://smarturl.it/gab-juls-show
"Leges sine Moribus vanae" - Proud Penn alumnus
Go BIRDS!
(That's not me in the profile pic, that's Paul Robeson)
One half of the Gab + Juls Show http://smarturl.it/gab-juls-show
"Leges sine Moribus vanae" - Proud Penn alumnus
Go BIRDS!
(That's not me in the profile pic, that's Paul Robeson)
Whatever the source is, it’s not the RTSP.
August 20, 2025 at 7:56 PM
Whatever the source is, it’s not the RTSP.
Yes, but if he doesn't sign a new deal with a release clause there are risks for him:
- he won't get a pay rise
- he might end up being frozen out, which means his appeal to potential clubs might diminish
- he could get injured
- he won't get a pay rise
- he might end up being frozen out, which means his appeal to potential clubs might diminish
- he could get injured
August 20, 2025 at 11:30 AM
Yes, but if he doesn't sign a new deal with a release clause there are risks for him:
- he won't get a pay rise
- he might end up being frozen out, which means his appeal to potential clubs might diminish
- he could get injured
- he won't get a pay rise
- he might end up being frozen out, which means his appeal to potential clubs might diminish
- he could get injured
That’s what some sports lawyers argue. Others say the opposite. It may take a test case. But would seem obvious that an FA that wants to be part of FIFA has to abide by FIFA laws
August 20, 2025 at 8:17 AM
That’s what some sports lawyers argue. Others say the opposite. It may take a test case. But would seem obvious that an FA that wants to be part of FIFA has to abide by FIFA laws
Very good point. Which may explain why a lot of those guys got extensions. That said, long contracts means residual amortisation still very high
August 20, 2025 at 6:44 AM
Very good point. Which may explain why a lot of those guys got extensions. That said, long contracts means residual amortisation still very high
Maybe. But…
1. If you’re a football club, the only legal recourse is via FIFA and CAS
2. PIF owns a bunch of clubs in Saudi that might actually benefit from this. Not sure they’d prioritise NUFC over those teams
1. If you’re a football club, the only legal recourse is via FIFA and CAS
2. PIF owns a bunch of clubs in Saudi that might actually benefit from this. Not sure they’d prioritise NUFC over those teams
August 20, 2025 at 6:43 AM
Maybe. But…
1. If you’re a football club, the only legal recourse is via FIFA and CAS
2. PIF owns a bunch of clubs in Saudi that might actually benefit from this. Not sure they’d prioritise NUFC over those teams
1. If you’re a football club, the only legal recourse is via FIFA and CAS
2. PIF owns a bunch of clubs in Saudi that might actually benefit from this. Not sure they’d prioritise NUFC over those teams
Not saying he's definitely invoking Art 17 next June. All I'm saying he has leverage thanks to Art 17. If he didn't he'd be mad (or a moron) to take the stance he had.
August 19, 2025 at 11:08 PM
Not saying he's definitely invoking Art 17 next June. All I'm saying he has leverage thanks to Art 17. If he didn't he'd be mad (or a moron) to take the stance he had.
I'm not sure they can stop it. But it doesn't need to be a move to LFC to provide the leverage Isak has.
August 19, 2025 at 11:07 PM
I'm not sure they can stop it. But it doesn't need to be a move to LFC to provide the leverage Isak has.
3. Plus, he'll be a year older. And there's a fair chance he won't have the same kind of season he had last year.
August 19, 2025 at 11:06 PM
3. Plus, he'll be a year older. And there's a fair chance he won't have the same kind of season he had last year.
So AFAIK, LFC haven't confirmed they made an official offer.
But it would likely be significantly less because:
1. The criteria for comp isn't based on offers received
2. It's based mostly on residual amortization and years/wages remaining. A year from now that's around 40m in Isak's case.
But it would likely be significantly less because:
1. The criteria for comp isn't based on offers received
2. It's based mostly on residual amortization and years/wages remaining. A year from now that's around 40m in Isak's case.
August 19, 2025 at 11:05 PM
So AFAIK, LFC haven't confirmed they made an official offer.
But it would likely be significantly less because:
1. The criteria for comp isn't based on offers received
2. It's based mostly on residual amortization and years/wages remaining. A year from now that's around 40m in Isak's case.
But it would likely be significantly less because:
1. The criteria for comp isn't based on offers received
2. It's based mostly on residual amortization and years/wages remaining. A year from now that's around 40m in Isak's case.
Well, if that happens (which I doubt it will), clubs will save on transfer fees..
August 19, 2025 at 11:02 PM
Well, if that happens (which I doubt it will), clubs will save on transfer fees..
And, BTW, I'm not a social media account. I'm a journalist who actually talks to people who work in football, at FIFA and in sports law. Doesn't mean I'm right - or they're right - but don't be a child and talk about "social media accounts".
August 19, 2025 at 10:33 PM
And, BTW, I'm not a social media account. I'm a journalist who actually talks to people who work in football, at FIFA and in sports law. Doesn't mean I'm right - or they're right - but don't be a child and talk about "social media accounts".
Hindsight is always 20/20 so it's easy to say they should have given him a new deal in 2024 after he had such a good season. If you recall, the CEO was unwell, the new DoF, Mitchell, didn't get along with Howe, a lot of stuff went down. And the rules were only changed in January.
August 19, 2025 at 10:31 PM
Hindsight is always 20/20 so it's easy to say they should have given him a new deal in 2024 after he had such a good season. If you recall, the CEO was unwell, the new DoF, Mitchell, didn't get along with Howe, a lot of stuff went down. And the rules were only changed in January.
Right. And judges have weighed on this matter. And it's pretty clear.
August 19, 2025 at 10:30 PM
Right. And judges have weighed on this matter. And it's pretty clear.
Thing is, already very few players are in this position, with 3 (de facto 4) years on the same contract.
August 19, 2025 at 10:29 PM
Thing is, already very few players are in this position, with 3 (de facto 4) years on the same contract.
Yikes! Have a good night and sorry to have kept you on this...
August 19, 2025 at 10:29 PM
Yikes! Have a good night and sorry to have kept you on this...
In its current form, not really. Because it has to be invoked at the end of the season and vast majority of players sign after July 1 in practice it only applies to guys with 4 years on the same deal (3 if they're over 28). Not many fit that bill.
Isak is an anomaly.
Isak is an anomaly.
August 19, 2025 at 10:16 PM
In its current form, not really. Because it has to be invoked at the end of the season and vast majority of players sign after July 1 in practice it only applies to guys with 4 years on the same deal (3 if they're over 28). Not many fit that bill.
Isak is an anomaly.
Isak is an anomaly.
As for compensation, there are guidelines. And risk works both ways. What's not in doubt is that the players remaining contract and residual book value are two key considerations. In Isak's case, in a year's time, that will be around £40m total.
August 19, 2025 at 10:15 PM
As for compensation, there are guidelines. And risk works both ways. What's not in doubt is that the players remaining contract and residual book value are two key considerations. In Isak's case, in a year's time, that will be around £40m total.
They're an interim measure because the court found the previous laws restricted player movement. If they change, they'll get less restrictive, not more.
Legal costs at the DRC and CAS aren't particularly significant when you're talking a 5m transfer, let alone one this large.
Legal costs at the DRC and CAS aren't particularly significant when you're talking a 5m transfer, let alone one this large.
August 19, 2025 at 10:14 PM
They're an interim measure because the court found the previous laws restricted player movement. If they change, they'll get less restrictive, not more.
Legal costs at the DRC and CAS aren't particularly significant when you're talking a 5m transfer, let alone one this large.
Legal costs at the DRC and CAS aren't particularly significant when you're talking a 5m transfer, let alone one this large.
Not sure it will. Very few players meet the criteria.
August 19, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Not sure it will. Very few players meet the criteria.
of players who reach the end of Year 4 on their contracts without renewing is tiny. (Other than some youngsters, I doubt it's more than 10 in the PL)
6. Like I wrote, reality is that this ends with either a move to LFC or, more likely, a new contract with a friendly release clause.
6. Like I wrote, reality is that this ends with either a move to LFC or, more likely, a new contract with a friendly release clause.
August 19, 2025 at 10:10 PM
of players who reach the end of Year 4 on their contracts without renewing is tiny. (Other than some youngsters, I doubt it's more than 10 in the PL)
6. Like I wrote, reality is that this ends with either a move to LFC or, more likely, a new contract with a friendly release clause.
6. Like I wrote, reality is that this ends with either a move to LFC or, more likely, a new contract with a friendly release clause.
..will take a hit. That's why they'll have to figure out a transitional period in terms of Financial Stability Rules etc.
5. I don't think this as huge as you imagine. In practice, because vast majority of players sign contracts after July 1 you need 4 seasons on same deal to do it. And the number
5. I don't think this as huge as you imagine. In practice, because vast majority of players sign contracts after July 1 you need 4 seasons on same deal to do it. And the number
August 19, 2025 at 10:09 PM
..will take a hit. That's why they'll have to figure out a transitional period in terms of Financial Stability Rules etc.
5. I don't think this as huge as you imagine. In practice, because vast majority of players sign contracts after July 1 you need 4 seasons on same deal to do it. And the number
5. I don't think this as huge as you imagine. In practice, because vast majority of players sign contracts after July 1 you need 4 seasons on same deal to do it. And the number