Are players at the mercy of mega wealthy club owners?

Everyone didn't say that at all.

It's an idealistic approach, but one simply not feasible.

Yes they did... the elite teams in the pro sports in the US had a lot to lose by accepting the collective bargaining agreements. BUT, they realized that the sport could only survive and thrive everywhere if they sacrificed. So they gave in. NBA, NHL and MLB all became fully revenue shared leagues and it required the agreement of everyone to get it done.

Interesting thing is that the truly great teams have managed to stay on top. How? By using their history to attract free agents and by trading well. They don't win every year... but they don't stay down very long.

Bernard wanted to move to Porto a lot, begged Atletico Mineiro to let him join them, he got sold to Shaktar.

Lamela cried in training, said he does not want to leave Roma and he is being sold to Spurs for financial reasons.

Ljajic really wanted a move to AC Milan, Della Valle made it his mission to stop that from happening and Ljajic has been sold to Roma.

That's three major cases this window, players are at the mercy of club owners.

M99 wrote:Bernard wanted to move to Porto a lot, begged Atletico Mineiro to let him join them, he got sold to Shaktar.

Lamela cried in training, said he does not want to leave Roma and he is being sold to Spurs for financial reasons.

Ljajic really wanted a move to AC Milan, Della Valle made it his mission to stop that from happening and Ljajic has been sold to Roma.

That's three major cases this window, players are at the mercy of club owners.

lol, they don't have to sign contracts with their new clubs if they don't want to.
Say that Lamela doesn't sign for Tottenham, what are Roma going to do? Tell him that he'll be put in the reserves? Yeah right.

You're right, Morte, but the clubs are making it difficult for them to stay, it is more examples of clubs dictating where players move to.

If your options are so limited it doesn't become much of a choice.

M99 wrote:Bernard wanted to move to Porto a lot, begged Atletico Mineiro to let him join them, he got sold to Shaktar.

Lamela cried in training, said he does not want to leave Roma and he is being sold to Spurs for financial reasons.

Ljajic really wanted a move to AC Milan, Della Valle made it his mission to stop that from happening and Ljajic has been sold to Roma.

That's three major cases this window, players are at the mercy of club owners.

If Porto really wanted Bernard , aka Bernard was that good , they'd have matched Shaktar's offer.

Maybe If Lamela really wanted to stay , I dunno , take a paycut ?

Why would Fiorentina want to sell a good player to some team they see as rivals ? If Ljajic really wants to play for Milan , he can run his contract at the Viola down , then join them as free agent . And of course , if Milan really wanted Ljajic , money talks.


These are instances of players being held responsible for the contracts they signed , rather than being at the mercy of the clubs. If a club chooses to not enforce a contact , that's merciful . But enforcing the contract is within their rights.


Moreover, the pendulum swings both ways . There are players whom clubs would want to get rid of , but can't . Think Bendtner,Almunia,Squillaci . Also, there have been instances of players arm-twisting clubs to walk out of the contract . Like Drogba.

The_Badger wrote:You're right, Morte, but the clubs are making it difficult for them to stay, it is more examples of clubs dictating where players move to.

If your options are so limited it doesn't become much of a choice.

The options are limited because a contract was signed . See out the contract , unlimited options .

drakefyre wrote:

The_Badger wrote:You're right, Morte, but the clubs are making it difficult for them to stay, it is more examples of clubs dictating where players move to.

If your options are so limited it doesn't become much of a choice.

The options are limited because a contract was signed . See out the contract , unlimited options .

No, you don't seem to understand.

Take Lamela. Roma have been pimping him out all summer, yet no top club was interested because they baulked at the asking fee. He made no indication he wanted to move, or even handed in a transfer request. The Spuds come along and throw whatever money Roma want and they pressure him into leaving despite it being clear that isn't what he wants.

These are the same clubs that'll be complaining about player loyalty when someone wants off.

If a player is willing to leave at all costs for their own interests, why shouldn't a club.

I don't see the point of this discussion either. A contract is a contract, if you wanted to leave for another club, you could have seen your contract out or not sign a 5 year contract ffs.

The_Badger wrote:

drakefyre wrote:

The_Badger wrote:You're right, Morte, but the clubs are making it difficult for them to stay, it is more examples of clubs dictating where players move to.

If your options are so limited it doesn't become much of a choice.

The options are limited because a contract was signed . See out the contract , unlimited options .

No, you don't seem to understand.

Take Lamela. Roma have been pimping him out all summer, yet no top club was interested because they baulked at the asking fee. He made no indication he wanted to move, or even handed in a transfer request. The Spuds come along and throw whatever money Roma want and they pressure him into leaving despite it being clear that isn't what he wants.

Lamela can - don't agree personal terms with Spurs and force a Roma stay , take a pay-cut and try to negotiate an amicable stay at Roma .

In the end it comes down to Roma doesn't think it's financially feasible,for whatever reason, to see out the contract they have with Lamela. Lamela would have done the same if he was in a similar situation(feel he's not being paid enough). Players do that all the time see Wayne Rooney vs Manchester United , Part II ....

Hawky wrote:I don't see the point of this discussion either. A contract is a contract, if you wanted to leave for another club, you could have seen your contract out or not sign a 5 year contract ffs.

It seem a case of you not really understanding than not seeing the point, judging by that response.

If players sell their soul to the devil, they shouldn't be surprised to end in hell ^^

daneq wrote:

flameas wrote:

sportsczy wrote:No.... the countries you see failing are not truly capitalistic.  France certainly isn't and i know Greece, Spain and Portugal aren't either.  They were/are welfare states.  Very socialist oriented in a lot of ways.  You have this large layer of inefficient, ineffective and unnecessary government bureaucracy + massive pensions + welfare systems.  The capitalist segment of the country could not carry the cost of these social structures.  The high taxes that were being charged to the private sector were making them non-competitive.  That's why the countries are falling apart.

Now, they are painfully dismantling these systems and the people who became dependent on them are left without support.  This should have happened gradually.  But politicians didn't want to lose votes so they swept the problem under the rug... until it became a full crisis.

France is still in denial... but it's coming too.  

Capitalism has only one goal : earn money for the ruling class. Simple as that. Some countries tried to make living good for the whole population (socialism) but the globan economy, which is ruled by US, jews and illuminati thought that they are making living too easy and society like that isnt making enough profit. So they made up a thing called econimic crisis.

Money is an illusion anyway. Only exicts on bank accounts. Gold of stuff like that isnt worth shit, the value is given to those things to make people want em. And work harder to archive that.

Football used to be about skill and passion, now the businessman have got into the game and made it all about money. Money - the worst thing in the world.

Your interpretation of the current European socioeconomic environment is exhibit 1,000,001 in the case for the degeneration of our species as a whole.

I am dyi9ng, this is one of the funniest things I have read on GL

Let me explain  .

First point - a player wanted to leave.

You are a player. You sign a contract. You can negotiate the contract to be 2, 3, 4, 5 years long, it is your decision in the end.

You can't complain afterwards like Willian did that the club you are playing for doesn't let you leave to a bigger club. You can wait for your contract to run out or you could have signed a shorter contract. It was your decision! If you really want to leave, convince the club you want to go to to pay your release clause. Simple as that.

Second point - a club forcing a player to leave (Lamela case). He left for a better wage that Roma couldn't have matched. He could have said that he doesn't want to move to Tottenham (pull a Di Maria, if you like), not sign the contract with Spurs and remain at Roma. I am sure they wouldn't have sent him to Primavera afterwards lol.

Or if you don't really want to leave, you can pull a Winston Bogarde (GOAT) and stay your whole contract at a club playing in reserves and taking that huge paycheck  .

It's not anarchy. You sign a contract, you respect the details that you agreed upon on that contract, simple as that.

or you can do an Abou Diaby..

play 1 game a season, earn 60K a week

This thread is not about players wanting to leave. It is about players being pressured/forced to leave due to the greed of club owners and the wealth of others.

Do you think that when Lamela signed for Roma in 2011 he envisaged what is happening now? Where he's being forced into leaving a club he doesn't want to simply because another outfit is prepared to cough up the asking price?

You're banging on about players agreeing upon contracts, but are you suggesting that Lamela signed a contract with Roma explicitly stating he'd be forced out if club x were prepared to pay y amount?

The_Badger wrote:This thread is not about players wanting to leave. It is about players being pressured/forced to leave due to the greed of club owners and the wealth of others.

Do you think that when Lamela signed for Roma in 2011 he envisaged what is happening now? Where he's being forced into leaving a club he doesn't want to simply because another outfit is prepared to cough up the asking price?

You're banging on about players agreeing upon contracts, but are you suggesting that Lamela signed a contract with Roma explicitly stating he'd be forced out if club x were prepared to pay y amount?

I think more footballers should be like Assou Ekoto.. just accept the fact that Football is harsh and "play for the money" simple..

Loyalty is dead, football is Corporate now,

What about greedy players that go out in the press and say they want to leave just to get better contracts (see Rooney 2 times)?

It really is a 2-sided problem, no matter how you look at it.

And Lamela could have just said "no, I'm not going to Spurs". But those extra millions he was getting said otherwise  .

Hawky, you're a gem! You've not understood this thread one bit!

Let's agree to disagree then.

You haven't understood the fact that those players didn't have a gun pointed to their head and willingly accepted to leave, getting a bigger paycheck as well in the process (this applies for Lamela, Ibrahimovic and Silva).

I fully understood it.

I echo what Hawky has said. He got it spot on.

 

You're a shit fisherman, AM.

No disrespect meant for the TS, but it seems like he's living in neverland and just wants somebody to echo his feelings. I'm pretty damn sure all these players didn't arrive at City/PSG/Monaco/Chelsea sobbing uncontrollably.

TL:DR version: You're wrong

If anyone wants to take the topic seriously then the answer is no, football players are not at the mercy of their mega rich owners (certaintly not like us mortals that are bound to the whim of our corporate overlords). In fact i can make a compelling argument to show that the mega wealthy owners are at the mercy of the players.

Its a little hard to fully understand the football market comparing it to other human resource markets. Footballers are bought and sold in dubious legality circumstances like furniture, some years back players were at the mercy of owners since they could force them to stay put indefinetly (something many misunderstand as club loyalty).

But The Bosman ruling and globalization brought a revolution in the aperture of the msrket, suddently restrictions were lifted and clubs could see far and wide prospective employees, as a result the market for football wages became extremely efficient and the power shifted again with those who held the highly demanded commodity, the players.

Nowadays, the average European football club has a turnover to wages ratio of 75%, with the number being even higher in many clubs. That means the a group of around 30 or so young adults hold the vast majority of the resources of any given club, with the owners never seeing anying but red in their annual spreadsheets with few very notable (and very criticizised) exceptions.

And it gets more interesting when we examine the transfer market and realize how much power the players hold now. From the start players are in advantage, even young teenagers now have saavy agents which try to squeeze every penny of value they can out of their clients. When it comes time for these teenagers to come unto their own and become big stars (Lamela) they start a facisnating form of legal blackmail that forces their club into either of three positions.

1.- contract renewal with new superstar wages
2.- imminent transfer to new club that will hold the upper hand in negotiations and is willing to pay superstar wages, only to get burned in a few years by their now new toy.
3.- Refusel of the above which results in much sulking and team disruption which is vividly and colorfully chronicled in the press for future reference. Lack of motivation on the players part to perform, and last but certainly not least, the refusel by the player to sign a contract extensions in which the player leaves on a free, leaving behind a trail of negative press.

Of course the clubs are more than glad to repay the players by unceremouniously dumping those old lions which are no longer useful or which are considered flops and/or deadweight. But even here, players hold big advantages, they many times get to hand pick which club they want to retire to and they certainly try to squeeze every penny they can from their club in the form of golden handshakes. Many times they leave on a free transfer which means they can get better contracts at their new club.

But not all bad, players are the same shameful, egotistic human beings like the rest of us are, they are fueled by our same shared dreams of endless rap video parties filled with coke and strippers, an owner like Berlusconi however has been there, done that way too many times and looks for more esoteric pleasures such as basking in the undeserved reflected glory of their football club.

For many years now football has been like this, club loyalty the way fans envisage it is only in their dreams of their rose tinted view of the world. It's ok if you want to stay home forever, where 2+2=5, just don't expect me to come along for the ride. In fact, if a megarich club wants to come and overpay for your player it would be irresponsible as a manager not to sell him. Brian Clough and Peter Taylor understood this to perfection and that is the reason they brought the European cup more than one time to a village team.

Not everything is cynism and Christopher Nolan dark like though. Players like Ryan Giggs show that club loyalty does exist, but its only when both parties get what they want. Giggs was treated well and groomed as a youngster by SAF, Ryan never had a father so Ferguson acted like a surrogate one, when Giggs was ready to become a star, the club had the financial backbone to given him the wages he deserved. Giggs has repaid all his glorious career to United in return. In short, Giggs and United share a satisfactory employee-employer relationship, maybe other clubs should take notice

No offense taken, the Ljajic transfer seems to back up the point. As does Willian, Kaka, Silva, Ibra, Marquinhos, Lamela, Soldado, Bernard...

Also, your comment: "If anyone wants to take the topic seriously then the answer is no, football players are not at the mercy of their mega rich owners" kind of shows you've not really grasped what this thread was about. Read the title and the opening gambit again. Nothing to do with the wealth of the owners at their current clubs.