SB and that Tweet.....Webster?

[yido_number1]

About an hour ago, he posted this - https://twitter.com/SBerahino/status/639359910015311872

It's a picture of him sitting on a private plane, by the looks. What European leagues' windows are still open?

Are there any u21 internationals he could be travelling to? Imagine that would be on a plane with the whole squad. Maybe he is going back to Barundi?

 

[Xeeleeyid]

SB and That Tweet.....Webster?

Peace may have royally shot himself in the foot!

SB has been at WBA for 10 years he can buy himself out NOW


Webster ruling

The Webster ruling is a test case in association football law involving Andy Webster, a defender formerly with Heart of Midlothian football club in Edinburgh, Scotland. In September 2006 he became the first player to exploit the updated transfer regulations of FIFA, football's governing body, which stipulated that players are able to unilaterally walk away from a contract after a fixed period, regardless of the duration of the contract itself. Although the long-term effects of the decision remain unclear, it has been compared to the landmark Bosman ruling of 1995 in its potential significance.[1][2][3]

Contents

• 1 Background
  • 1.1 Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
  • 1.2 Article 17
  • 1.3 Webster's transfers
• 2 FIFA and CAS rulings on the Webster case
• 3 Reactions and analysis
• 4 References
• 5 External links

Background
Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players
The regulations which led to the Webster ruling were enacted in response to the European Commission, who in 1998 opined that FIFA's then current football transfer system served as an obstruction to players' freedom of movement compared to workers in other industries.[4][5] FIFA, and its European counterpart UEFA, campaigned for a special exemption for football,[6][7] but after the Commission threatened to abolish the system, the new regulations were put in place by September 2001. Because of the complexity and potential legal ramifications for players, it was five years before Webster's test case emerged.[8]

Article 17
Article 17 of FIFA's Regulations for the Status and Transfer of Players is entitled "Consequences of Terminating a Contract Without Just Cause", and is the fifth article of Chapter IV, "Maintenance of Contractual Stability between Professionals and Clubs". It outlines the provisions which apply if a contract is terminated without just cause, and the requirement for the party in breach to pay compensation.[9] Specifically, it states that any player who signed a contract before the age of 28 can buy himself out of the contract three years after the deal was signed. If he is 28 or older the time limit is shortened to two years.[10][11] Article 17 was introduced in December 2004, with effect from 1 July 2005.[12]

Webster's transfers
In March 2001, Andy Webster joined Hearts from Arbroath F.C. for a reported £75,000,[13] plus a "sell-on clause" which entitled Arbroath to 17.5 percent of any future sum received by Hearts for him.[14] He played regularly for the next five years, and also played for the Scotland national football team.[15] In July 2005, Glasgow side Rangers F.C. were credited with an interest in Webster, and the player requested permission to speak to them. This was refused, and Hearts told the player he would be part of their squad that season.[16] However, in 2006 he became involved in a dispute with club owner Vladimir Romanov after refusing to extend his contract, and was subsequently omitted from the squad for the remainder of the 2005–06 season.[17][18] Webster, who still had a year of his existing contract remaining, then signed for English Premiership club Wigan Athletic in August that year.[2] The transfer was a protracted affair; it took several months before contracts were approved by FIFA, and the governing body took further time to ascertain if Webster's former club were due any compensation.[19] The matter was further complicated by Hearts' initial refusal to release the player from their books as they sought to challenge the decision.[20]

Despite the efforts made to sign him, Wigan did not provide Webster with a regular first team place, and in January 2007 he returned to Scotland after Rangers signed him on loan for the remainder of the 2006–07 season.[21] Despite persistent injuries which prevented him playing, Rangers manager Walter Smith extended his loan contract to 2008, although a permanent move was not organised until June 2008 as litigation over the Hearts–Wigan transfer continued.[22][23]

FIFA and CAS rulings on the Webster case
Hearts had initially placed a valuation of £5 million on Webster.[24] However, because he had served more than three years of his contract he was outside of FIFA's "protected period", and any compensation due to Hearts would, per Article 17, be based primarily on the amount of Webster's salary still outstanding—a figure estimated by Webster's advisors at approximately £250,000.[1]

FIFA's transfer arbitration tribunal, the Dispute Resolution Chamber, met on 4 April 2007 and ruled that Hearts were due £625,000, based on Webster's future wages, his earning potential, and the legal costs.[25][26] They also found Webster guilty of breaking his contract "without just cause", although only on a technicality; he and his agent were late informing the club of his intention to leave, because of confusion over the final match of the season (Hearts had reached the 2006 Scottish Cup Final, but the time limit was calculated from the club's last league game, four days prior to the Cup match). For this he was suspended for the first two weeks of the 2007–08 season.[1]

Hearts were quick to lodge an appeal against the ruling, disputing the figure which they said had not been unambiguously calculated.[27][28] Webster had also indicated a desire to appeal, believing the fine against him was excessive.[25] On 30 January 2008 the Court of Arbitration for Sport, the highest arbitration authority in sport, met in Lausanne and clarified the original ruling.[29] They also reduced the compensation due payable by Webster to £150,000.[2][30]

Reactions and analysis
The general assessment from commentators is that the ruling is the most significant since Jean-Marc Bosman successfully challenged the restrictions on freedom of movement for workers for footballers in 1995.[1][31] There is also speculation that the days of record-breaking transfer fees may be at an end.[2] High profile players like Frank Lampard, Cristiano Ronaldo, Michael Owen, Steven Gerrard and Wayne Rooney have all been cited as examples of players who could either leave their club for a relatively small amount, or increase their contract bargaining power as a result.[2][32][33] Several other players have taken advantage of Article 17, including Tony Sylva and Jonás Gutiérrez.[34][35]

FIFA were highly critical of the ruling; president Sepp Blatter said "the verdict in favour of the player will have far-reaching and damaging effects on the game as a whole. [It] is... a Pyrrhic victory for those players and their agents who toy with the idea of rescinding contracts before they have been fulfilled."[36] Football clubs were also hostile; A Hearts spokesman described it as a "dark day for football clubs",[30] while Celtic, one of Hearts' and Rangers' rivals, stated bluntly that they would sue any player who broke his contract, believing that a court of law would support them regardless of any prior arbitration decision.[10] The European Club Association has vocally criticised the ruling on several occasions, most notably after CAS decided Real Zaragoza had to compensate FC Shakhtar Donetsk for Brazilian midfielder Matuzalém's controversial transfer in May 2009.[37][38]

Conversely, players' organisations were highly supportive of CAS's decision. Tony Higgins, a Scottish representative of international footballers' union FIFPro, said "Article 17 gives footballers the sort of employee rights that anyone else would expect in the workplace",[2] while Fraser Wishart, the general secretary of the Scottish players' union who had supported Webster's case, described it as "a new groundbreaking decision enabling players to enjoy greater freedom of employment."[31]

References

I don't know why more players don't do this. When I did my law degree I did my honours dissertation on the legality of the football transfer rules.

FIFA introduced new transfer rules in 2000 as a result of a threatened legal challenge by the European Commission.

However, the new transfer rules were never ratified by the Commission, the Commission just withdrew their threat of bringing a case before the ECJ.

Anyway, only the ECJ can make binding interpretations of the European treaty provisions.

Article 42 of the European Treaty says that workers within the European Union have the freedom to accept offers of employment made and travel freely within the Union for this purpose. Any barriers to free movement of workers is prohibited by the treaty provisions.

In the Bosman case, although the ruling was based on the retention of registration certificates by a club when a player's contract had ended, the judge in the case did suggest that the setting of an prohibitively high 'fee' to release a player's registration amounted to a breach of freedom of movement for workers. Instead, a club would only be entitled legally to a fee that represented 'compensation' for their training and development of a player.

The European commission threatened in 2000 to bring a case before the ECJ as they felt that FIFA's transfer rules breached Article 42 and Articles 81 & 82 that relate to Competition. In this case, it was felt that the transfer system put such a premium on the best players that only the biggest/richest clubs could realistically afford them, leading to the football transfer market being anti-competitive and in some respects having the appearance of cartelling.

FIFA modified the transfer rules, and in a nod to the judge's opinion in Bosman, introduced a system of compensation for out of contract players under the age of 24. FIFA never addressed however, the judge's comments about the inflated transfer fee system. A player has never challenged the FIFA transfer rules whilst under contract. I don't know why as on the face of it, there is a very good case for a player being challenging a transfer being denied.

Berahino was allowed to speak to Spurs by West Brom and had an offer of employment, which by EU law he is free to accept.

West Brom would not release his transfer certificate for a sum of £25 million.

As the judge in Bosman ruled that any compensation that would reflect a club's costs in training and developing the player would be reduced by acknowledgement that partly developing a player is in the club's own interests and they are rewarded by improved performances on the pitch, it is highly unlikely a court would agree that anywhere near £25million would represent compensation for West Brom training and developing the player. £25m is likely to be half of their entire annual turnover!

If Berahino chose to challenge West Brom's decision to refuse to release his registration and pretty much say they would be refusing any bids, he would have a nailed on victory in court in my view.

I believe the lack of challenges are probably due to player's agents, who make a lot out of the existing transfer rules/system.

 

[Rob]

How do we know when SB's current contract was signed? Or does that not matter?

If he signed a new contract last year for example, does that reset the clock?

 

[Xeeleeyid]

How do we know when SB's current contract was signed? Or does that not matter?

If he signed a new contract last year for example, does that reset the clock?

It would probably do so in terms of relevance to the Webster ruling. My point is that he could challenge the entire FIFA transfer rules as being in breach of freedom of movement laws.

If your employer imposed a term in your contract of employment stating you could not terminate your contract by giving notice and that only your employer could terminate the contract, and then they would only terminate your contract if they received a huge sum of money from any new potential new employer, you'd be able to destroy them in court, wouldn't you?

My point is footballers would be no different.

 

[Rob]

I don't know why more players don't do this. When I did my law degree I did my honours dissertation on the legality of the football transfer rules.

FIFA introduced new transfer rules in 2000 as a result of a threatened legal challenge by the European Commission.

However, the new transfer rules were never ratified by the Commission, the Commission just withdrew their threat of bringing a case before the ECJ.

Anyway, only the ECJ can make binding interpretations of the European treaty provisions.

Article 42 of the European Treaty says that workers within the European Union have the freedom to accept offers of employment made and travel freely within the Union for this purpose. Any barriers to free movement of workers is prohibited by the treaty provisions.

In the Bosman case, although the ruling was based on the retention of registration certificates by a club when a player's contract had ended, the judge in the case did suggest that the setting of an prohibitively high 'fee' to release a player's registration amounted to a breach of freedom of movement for workers. Instead, a club would only be entitled legally to a fee that represented 'compensation' for their training and development of a player.

The European commission threatened in 2000 to bring a case before the ECJ as they felt that FIFA's transfer rules breached Article 42 and Articles 81 & 82 that relate to Competition. In this case, it was felt that the transfer system put such a premium on the best players that only the biggest/richest clubs could realistically afford them, leading to the football transfer market being anti-competitive and in some respects having the appearance of cartelling.

FIFA modified the transfer rules, and in a nod to the judge's opinion in Bosman, introduced a system of compensation for out of contract players under the age of 24. FIFA never addressed however, the judge's comments about the inflated transfer fee system. A player has never challenged the FIFA transfer rules whilst under contract. I don't know why as on the face of it, there is a very good case for a player being challenging a transfer being denied.

Berahino was allowed to speak to Spurs by West Brom and had an offer of employment, which by EU law he is free to accept.

West Brom would not release his transfer certificate for a sum of £25 million.

As the judge in Bosman ruled that any compensation that would reflect a club's costs in training and developing the player would be reduced by acknowledgement that partly developing a player is in the club's own interests and they are rewarded by improved performances on the pitch, it is highly unlikely a court would agree that anywhere near £25million would represent compensation for West Brom training and developing the player. £25m is likely to be half of their entire annual turnover!

If Berahino chose to challenge West Brom's decision to refuse to release his registration and pretty much say they would be refusing any bids, he would have a nailed on victory in court in my view.

I believe the lack of challenges are probably due to player's agents, who make a lot out of the existing transfer rules/system.

Interesting read!

If you ever fancy writing something for the front page along these lines then just let us know.

 

[Geyzer Soze]

Meh, it'll blow over. Schniederlin posted something on Twitter this time last year much the same.

Deleted it, moved on, played the season, moved to Man Utd

I expect this fellow will follow much teh same path

 

[ethanedwards]

Meh, it'll blow over. Schniederlin posted something on Twitter this time last year much the same.

Deleted it, moved on, played the season, moved to Man Utd

I expect this fellow will follow much teh same path

Agree, all he has to do is play football for 6 months, with the new TV deal, he will get a mega contract from someone.
Minted.

 

[tototoner]

I don't think he is trouble at all. His been at wba for 10 years wanted to leave and was blocked... We don't know if a promise was broken and judging by Berahino s reaction I reckon one was.

It's common knowledge no one else at WBA gets on with him, there must be some reasons for that.

I am glad we didn't sign him.

 

[dude573]

I personally think this tweet won't blow over as easily as Schnederlin's did, mainly because this saga was protracted with 4 bids and WBA chairman released public statements at every sage. Also, as Saido is young and English, the media will hound this for a while.

Although in January or next summer I am fairly resided to the fact that we may be beaten by United or City when trying to sign him.

 

[melih69]

I personally think this tweet won't blow over as easily as Schnederlin's did, mainly because this saga was protracted with 4 bids and WBA chairman released public statements at every sage. Also, as Saido is young and English, the media will hound this for a while.

Although in January or next summer I am fairly resided to the fact that we may be beaten by United or City when trying to sign him.

agreed. the fact that he posted that photo of him on a plane with the thumbs up has riled up the WBA fans even further. not to mention he isn't the sharpest tool in the box.

it will get interesting

 

[Geyzer Soze]

I personally think this tweet won't blow over as easily as Schnederlin's did, mainly because this saga was protracted with 4 bids and WBA chairman released public statements at every sage. Also, as Saido is young and English, the media will hound this for a while.

Although in January or next summer I am fairly resided to the fact that we may be beaten by United or City when trying to sign him.

I thought he was Burundian?

 

[nferno]

As if Levy isn't already hated enough by other clubs

No way he'd sink this low... I think?

 

[Wellspurs]

you're playing with fire there.....
I think, the last thing we as a club needs is this kind of exposure and unnecessary attention. The player doesn't need it either, it will hurt him in the long run and it certainly wouldn't make us popular when doing business with other clubs in the future. And it will almost certainly mean no more business with WBA - if this debacle hasn't already ended it.

To add to WHam, Saints, Chelsea?

 

[Marty]

I thought he was Burundian?

England U21 international so counts as English regardless of origin.

 

[Lilbaz]

As if Levy isn't already hated enough by other clubs

No way he'd sink this low... I think?

If he did it he would with a stroke be wiping £millions off the value of our own squad. There is no fucking way. Pritchard, kane, carroll, onomah etc... Would be almost worthless if they wanted to leave. The value of spurs would tale a massive hit which would mean the banks wouldn't help finance our new stadium.
Joe lewis would literally kill him. As would all the other chairmen in europe.
Not going to happen.

 

[double0]

It's common knowledge no one else at WBA gets on with him, there must be some reasons for that.

I am glad we didn't sign him.

He had a problem with another player big deal.. his not like Joey Barton ffs. didn't boyhood club Robbie Keane have a punch up with another player at Spurs?

 

[Lilbaz]

He had a problem with another player big deal.. his not like Joey Barton ffs. didn't boyhood club Robbie Keane have a punch up with another player at Spurs?

He got voted players player of the year at wba last season. They can't have hated him too much.

 

[Ribble]

There's been an unsaid gentleman's agreement that no clubs in the PL would touch players who do this. Levy breaking that would have far reaching consequences.

... Which Newcastle broke years ago when they signed Jonas.

 

[Xeeleeyid]

If he did it he would with a stroke be wiping £millions off the value of our own squad. There is no fucking way. Pritchard, kane, carroll, onomah etc... Would be almost worthless if they wanted to leave. The value of spurs would tale a massive hit which would mean the banks wouldn't help finance our new stadium.
Joe lewis would literally kill him. As would all the other chairmen in europe.
Not going to happen.

Levy wouldn't do it. Like I said, I think agents and clubs have vested interests in the current system, in that players are valuable (yet untaxable) assets and agents/agencies make millions from large transfers.

Like Bosman/Webster, any legal challenge is likely to come lower down the football food chain, from a player whose very livelihood depends on a move that is blocked by a club.

I'm still surprised that it hasn't happened yet. I think a couple of players have threatened it. When I wrote my dissertation, it was around the time of Nicholas Anelka trying to force a move to Real Madrid. Arsenal were refusing to do a deal and I believe Nicholas Anelka's agent threatened to take the matter to the European courts. Real Madrid coughed up what the goons wanted in the end.

I think one day it may happen, it just takes a club to be pig-headed enough and a player to be angry enough to do it.

Or it may take the European Commission to threaten action again. I'd be surprised if they don't choose to look at football again in the wake of the FIFA corruption scandal.

The current transfer system is wide-open to money laundering, tax evasion, corruption and bribery.

When i was researching my dissertation I was told by two FIFA agents that they knew of several transfers where footballers or their agents had asked the club to send very large payments to random individuals or companies as part of the deal.

 

[guiltyparty]

Are there any u21 internationals he could be travelling to? Imagine that would be on a plane with the whole squad. Maybe he is going back to Barundi?

Maybe he's going to Standard Liege