[Archived] The Webster Rule

[SundayMondayHabibBeye]

Hello Rovers fans,

With my fellow Newcastle fans getting very excited with signing our first player this summer, there has been little thought given too the impact of this transfer, so I thought I'd share a few tidbits with a more impartial audience:

It would seem that Newcastle United and Gutierrez have produced the third ever enactment of the Webster Ruling, after Andy Webster and Assuncao.

According to reports, Gutierrez had one year remaining on his contract, so he ultimately cost us around about £1m acoording to wage estimates.

Real Mallorca aren't happy and want 15m Euros in compensation from the player.

Meanwhile Celtic have announced that they will sue any player who tries to break their contract. FIFA don't like it either, but the EU and the CAS have forced their hand.

It was only on January 30th that it was finally agreed that the Webster transfer was all correct and proper, and this past week or so has really been the first time clubs have been able to take advantage of the ruling.

This is all very historic, and AFAIK, Jonas has become the first player to leave Spain on the basis of this ruling. Legal ramifications should not be taken lightly right now.

This transfer could have many future ramifications, and you have to wonder whether we have any future dealings of a similar nature lined up.

Right now, this is a massive move by Newcastle United, and with Mike Ashley's track record of price slashing, I wouldn't be suprised if he has decided that he wants to challenge the system over inflated transfer fees.

Why is it so massive though? Well with the legality of this ruling still questionable in the minds of many clubs, Newcastle have not only admitted that they can sign a player by the Webster Ruling, we are also condoning the sale of our own players via the same method.

Michael Owen is now free to join any club outside of England for £5m.

Although he is going for less, we would have definitely lost Emre for £6m if we had wanted to keep him.

Harper could move to Scotland for £1.3m

Taylor can go abroad for £500k

What do you think of this ruling? Any players you'd like to take a look at? Worried Blackburn might lose some of their own players for ridiculous prices?

I hope I have posted this in the right place btw, please move it if I haven't.

[Fife Rover]

Hello Rovers fans,

With my fellow Newcastle fans getting very excited with signing our first player this summer, there has been little thought given too the impact of this transfer, so I thought I'd share a few tidbits with a more impartial audience:

It would seem that Newcastle United and Gutierrez have produced the third ever enactment of the Webster Ruling, after Andy Webster and Assuncao.

According to reports, Gutierrez had one year remaining on his contract, so he ultimately cost us around about £1m acoording to wage estimates.

Real Mallorca aren't happy and want 15m Euros in compensation from the player.

Meanwhile Celtic have announced that they will sue any player who tries to break their contract. FIFA don't like it either, but the EU and the CAS have forced their hand.

It was only on January 30th that it was finally agreed that the Webster transfer was all correct and proper, and this past week or so has really been the first time clubs have been able to take advantage of the ruling.

This is all very historic, and AFAIK, Jonas has become the first player to leave Spain on the basis of this ruling. Legal ramifications should not be taken lightly right now.

This transfer could have many future ramifications, and you have to wonder whether we have any future dealings of a similar nature lined up.

Right now, this is a massive move by Newcastle United, and with Mike Ashley's track record of price slashing, I wouldn't be suprised if he has decided that he wants to challenge the system over inflated transfer fees.

Why is it so massive though? Well with the legality of this ruling still questionable in the minds of many clubs, Newcastle have not only admitted that they can sign a player by the Webster Ruling, we are also condoning the sale of our own players via the same method.

Michael Owen is now free to join any club outside of England for £5m.

Although he is going for less, we would have definitely lost Emre for £6m if we had wanted to keep him.

Harper could move to Scotland for £1.3m

Taylor can go abroad for £500k

What do you think of this ruling? Any players you'd like to take a look at? Worried Blackburn might lose some of their own players for ridiculous prices?

I hope I have posted this in the right place btw, please move it if I haven't.

Hi Habib.

I must admit right away that I have never even heard of this ruling you refer to as the Webster Ruling, but if it is correct (and I am not doubting you by the way) it is going to have severe ramifications for virtually all football clubs (and their fans). This could put a real spoke in the wheels of transfer market.

May turn out to be no bad thing in the long run, but hard to tell at present. What do others think?

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Ultimately this is going to give even more power to players and their agents. Another bad day for football - where all the money generated by the fans (lets not forget that it is fans that pay huge subscriptions to SKY to fund the latest TV deal) will ultimately end up in the hands of greedy players and their agents.

[SundayMondayHabibBeye]

It is hardly surprising that not many are yet familiar with the Webster ruling, as the case study of Andy Webster's transfer from Hearts to Wigan (£150,000, Hearts wanted £5m) was only ratified on January 30th, meaning that there have only been a couple of days when the transfer window has been open to these deals.

I get the impression that not many clubs like this ruling, and I suspect some didn't want to play knowing that they could lose top players the same way they 'steal' them. An unwritten rule not to participate in these deals may even have existed.

Our owner Mike Ashley has a reputation of being a maverick in the business world by not following general unwritten rules, and his business models have always been based around price slashing. Trouble is that Newcastle and Atletico Madrid (Assuncao) have always been major players in the transfer market, and if they have suddenly decided to play by their own rules, huge implosions in the transfer market could be imminent.

[nicko]

Players have to give notice before using this rule - and that notice is just a few days AFTER the end of the season.

So I don't think too many are even in a position to exploit it at the moment.

[SundayMondayHabibBeye]

Players have to give notice before using this rule - and that notice is just a few days AFTER the end of the season.

So I don't think too many are even in a position to exploit it at the moment.

With that in mind, how on earth did Newcastle keep the deal quiet for so long without anyone finding out about it? It's not in our nature.

[DavidMailsTightPerm]

Nicko - would release clauses written in the contract - similar to what they do in Spain - be a potential way around this problem for the clubs ?

Even players can't expect clubs to invest huge sums of money in transfer fees, wages etc to see their investments walk away for comparative small sums when players have served a limited amount of their contracts ?

[SundayMondayHabibBeye]

Nicko - would release clauses written in the contract - similar to what they do in Spain - be a potential way around this problem for the clubs ?

Even players can't expect clubs to invest huge sums of money in transfer fees, wages etc to see their investments walk away for comparative small sums when players have served a limited amount of their contracts ?

Clubs are protected for two to three years, plus in the long term all transfer fees will reduce significantly if this becomes widespread, so in that sense a club aren't going to pay £10m for a player and lose him for peanuts one year later.

Right now, it must be tough on clubs like Mallorca who had been holding out on supposed £7m bids from Portsmouth and Man City in January, only to lose him for £1m a few months later.

[leftfooter]

Clubs are protected for two to three years, plus in the long term all transfer fees will reduce significantly if this becomes widespread, so in that sense a club aren't going to pay £10m for a player and lose him for peanuts one year later.

Right now, it must be tough on clubs like Mallorca who had been holding out on supposed £7m bids from Portsmouth and Man City in January, only to lose him for £1m a few months later.

Today's Times claims that Mewcastle might be facing a compensation claim for the Argentine:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle4258468.ece

"The Spanish club want compensation after claiming that Gutiérrez walked out to join Newcastle with two years of his contract remaining. Fifa, football's world governing body, has been called in to settle the situation, with the player insisting that rules allow players under the age of 28 who have been at a club for at least three seasons to buy out the remainder of their contract..."

Given that Bentley has 3 years left on his; would this explain why Bentley refused to sign a more lucrative contract?

[Eddie]

That should read over the age of 28.

[Hughesy]

And the reports about Spiderman to Newcastle is that they will have to pay £6m ish as compo for the player.

He used the rule where a player under 28, who has been at a club for 3 years can buy out the remainder of his contract! (Bentley falls into this soon doesn’t he?! – Time to sell)

[SundayMondayHabibBeye]

If the compensation fee is consistent with the Andy Webster compo fee, the buyout price will be £2m. You would expect it to be consistent as it was a CAS ruling.

With regard to the 28 year old rule, the laws consider the player's age as the age they are at when the contract ends, so if a 23 year old signs a 5 year deal, they can leave after two seasons for three years wages.

[thenodrog]

Only got a sketchy impression of this new twist but imo this has bad implications for football. Given that we are currently something like the 30th wealthiest club in the world it might be OK for us in the short term. But imo the wider picture will simply disenchant supporters and prove another nail in footballs coffin by turning people i.e. worldwide grassroots spectators away from the sport.

[Head Rover Heels]

I think it was one of your comments in another thread Theno - but this ruling, frightening as it is, is merely pushing us towards rolling one year contracts for players.

With rules such as this taking shape, the only person that benefits from having a contract in the first place is a player, as it ensures he is paid when he is injured.

The clubs get no security, no loyalty (even though it is legally enforcable), simply nothing.

[den]

Although not an official source, THIS article seems to clarify the situation.

"The controversy of the Webster case centred on Article 17, which was established two years ago as a bargaining tool between Fifa and the European Union to try to bring the rights of footballers into line with other EU workers. Under the rule, any footballer aged between 23 and 28 is entitled to walk away from a club, so long as he has served three years of a four or five-year contract.

But, more controversially, any player aged 28 or over can also now terminate his contract so long as he has served two years of its duration. Article 17, in effect, goes some way to abolishing huge transfer fees. For example, if a 29-year-old player wishes to leave one club for another – such as was the case with Thierry Henry last season – the only compensation due would be the value of his wages left on his contract."

[modes98]

so long as he has served three years of a four or five-year contract.

So it wouldn't apply to Bentley as he signed a new contract about a year back didn't he?

In fact Feb 2007, so he is 18 months into a 4 and half year contract.

[AussieinUk]

Although not an official source, THIS article seems to clarify the situation.

"...the only compensation due would be the value of his wages left on his contract."

Thanks Den - Thats very interesting!

Makes you think how much Chelsea got stung on the Shevchenko deal.. £30+m vs £9-12m range for a 30+ y.o

[Fife Rover]

It looks like the EU is trying to make footballers have exactly the same rights as all other workers; which is fine and very humane etc. So OK let's go for it, but along with the status of ordinary workers they must also get ordinary workers wages. Cant expect to have both ways. The players should be made to decide: do they want to be "stars" and have "stars" wages and all the other trappings that come with it? If theanswer is "yes" then they have to accept that contracts are the order of the day for that kind of lifestyle, and the clubs and the fans have rights too. In fact if they want all the "priveledges" of ordinary workers they should also get all the baggage that goes with that particular status; 40 hrs per week of actual work, not finish at lunch time and spend the afternoon on the golf course. Plus all the other "fringe benefits" such as multi-millionaire lifestyles.

It's high time that the fans got a hearing in the EU court to explain their case, and then let the players decide which way they want to go. Ordinary workers OR Big Time Charlie's as they are at present, but who don't seem to want the responsibilities that go with that.

[Baggio]

Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger fears that football is in meltdown.

The French coach claims transfer fees will become a thing of the past and smaller clubs that largely depend on transfer revenue will run the risk of going out of business.

As players become increasingly powerful, Wenger is adamant that the transfer market as we know it will disintegrate.

He said: "The balance of power is switching significantly towards the player. It could mean in a short period of time the complete disappearance of transfer fees.

"Long-term contracts are largely insignificant - in fact they are just two-year contracts.

"You merely give longer contracts because it's a bit of protection for the player to have compensation paid if he moves after three years.

"You can never get him to sign an extension to his contract for less - that means you will always have to increase his salary.

"They have created a situation where inflation goes through the roof."

The Arsenal manager maintains that radical changes in transfer legislation brought on initially by the Jean-Marc Bosman case and more recently by Scotland defender Andy Webster have left clubs in turmoil.

Webster's case is one that European clubs fervently wish wasn't happening - but now that it is, it could lead to a cut-price exodus of dissatisfied players from clubs throughout the continent.

The Rangers defender exploited a FIFA regulation to buy out his contract at Hearts, even though it had two years remaining.

Those who regard player transfers as essential to the financial well-being of the sport will be appalled, but others will view Webster's initiative as another step towards footballers enjoying the same rights as other European workers.

The Webster case will allow players to leave a club after three years of a longer fixed-term contract, or just two years if they are aged over 28.

There are two stipulations: the player must hand in his notice in the 15 days following his club's last official match of the third season, and he may not move to a club in the same country.

Wenger said: "The balance always goes towards the player. And if you go to appeal there is no protection any more.

"At the moment after 28 you need only two years. I see the next thing coming will be people saying, 'Why is it 28 and not 27? That's age discrimination'.

"Who will be disadvantaged? In my opinion it's the smallest clubs.

"We are heading towards an American system, where transfer fees in major sports don't exist.

"It can't be good for the game. What has happened until now is that the big clubs buy players from the small clubs and that money stays in the game and keeps them alive.

"Without it, more and more smaller clubs will face financial ruin."

http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/sport/footba...98487-20625407/

[nicko]

Nicko - would release clauses written in the contract - similar to what they do in Spain - be a potential way around this problem for the clubs ?

Even players can't expect clubs to invest huge sums of money in transfer fees, wages etc to see their investments walk away for comparative small sums when players have served a limited amount of their contracts ?

I don't think you could put a fixed figure on it. A player's value changes from window to window. There is no way you could make it fixed - and it wouldn't help too much either.

The fact is that clubs will ask for what they want and cause mayhem - possibly justifiable - like we are having with Gareth Barry at the moment.

If players could buy out their contract at any time that would be an easier solution...but remember that when a player does that he also has to pay MORE than is in his contract because he would also have to pick up the total bill including the tax that was due.

For example if you paid the last year of your contract which was worth £500,000 you would need to have over £800,000 in cash from someone else - your next club probably - to pay it.

So it is NOT straightforward.

[rebelmswar]

So football is heading in the horrific direction of the NFL? Salary caps and all that crap.

[benlloninho]

So football is heading in the horrific direction of the NFL? Salary caps and all that crap.

Seems like it.

If it's true that a player can be bought for the value of his contract, then I think it's easy to see what happens next. Clubs will have to pay players stupid money (like they already don't) just to make sure they get value whenever a player inevitably wants to leave.

[rebelmswar]

Seems like it.

If it's true that a player can be bought for the value of his contract, then I think it's easy to see what happens next. Clubs will have to pay players stupid money (like they already don't) just to make sure they get value whenever a player inevitably wants to leave.

Then comes the salary cap to stop clubs from doing that.

[benlloninho]

Then comes the salary cap to stop clubs from doing that.

Right, I had to work it out fer myself.

[stuwilky]

It looks like the EU is trying to make footballers have exactly the same rights as all other workers; which is fine and very humane etc. So OK let's go for it, but along with the status of ordinary workers they must also get ordinary workers wages. Cant expect to have both ways. The players should be made to decide: do they want to be "stars" and have "stars" wages and all the other trappings that come with it? If theanswer is "yes" then they have to accept that contracts are the order of the day for that kind of lifestyle, and the clubs and the fans have rights too. In fact if they want all the "priveledges" of ordinary workers they should also get all the baggage that goes with that particular status; 40 hrs per week of actual work, not finish at lunch time and spend the afternoon on the golf course. Plus all the other "fringe benefits" such as multi-millionaire lifestyles.

Whilst ideologically I agree with you. Employment law makes no distinction on the amount of earnings, number of hours worked, or what kind of lifestyle they lead. Sadly.