Article 17

I dont freakin get it , why is it made ( its so unfair ) plus why do the clubs fear the player himself using it? like for example west ham were aware if behrami used it? and they ended up paying more than the player could have bought out his contract?

it has to be removed with immediate effect, despite the fact that it was used only few times and clubs hesitate to use it.

flurffmeister wrote:

I dont freakin get it , why is it made ( its so unfair ) plus why do the clubs fear the player himself using it? like for example west ham were aware if behrami used it? and they ended up paying more than the player could have bought out his contract?

I think West Ham wanted to pay for the player as opposed to having Behrami use Article 17. At least this is what I read.

Seems to me that West Ham didn't want to sour their relationship with us......which IMO is the respectable thing to do.

I would actually say it's more likely that they feared Lotito may drag Behrami to court.

I don't think anyone's really certain if Behrami actually went ahead and used Article 17.

FIFA's article 17 follows Sepp Blatter's (president of FIFA) belief that footballers should be able to move (change clubs) whenever they want. A debate has been going on between Blatter and European clubs about this issue. Blatter calls it "modern slavery" and thinks footballers should have all the freedom. With time this makes long term contracts in valid. In other words it doesn't matter that a player has signed a 5 year contract and a club payed some other club 20 million euro as compensation and in a few years time he can buy out his contract for 5 million.

New regulation in football is moving towards giving players more power. Even though players sign lucrative long term contracts players have been given more and more tools to break free of their contracts. IMO that is not good. Behrami could have left us by paying only 1,8 million euro and many clubs were ready to exploit that.

Your question was why do clubs fear of using that. The clubs who own the player's rights then don't receive the player's full value (Behrami who is worth around 8 million euro could have left us for 1,8 million simply by buying out his contract). West Ham is a club like us and they too wouldn't want their players using the FIFA article and as Caxi said, maybe they thought it would be easier to strike a deal with Lotito than let Behrami use the article 17 and then it would have taken all Summer if Lotito decides to take Behrami to court (albeit knowing that he would loose).

Article 17 is killing the clubs. Already the players have too much to say about their contracts - with Art 17 they can really damage a club...slaves? Blatter doesnt know what he is taöking about when caling a guy like Ronaldo a slave...