31 Aug 2025 15:22:46
I know I might be stupid for asking, but I genuinely don't know why players need the remainder of their contract paying in order to move clubs? Has this always been the case? Seems mental to pay future wages when they'll be paid by another club.
31 Aug 2025 16:09:19
I think we only did it with AWB as we activated his one year option and then sold him. It was to facilitate the move.
Not really the same situation with Sancho and Antony who just need to leave.
31 Aug 2025 16:22:07
I think the issue is that no clubs are willing to pay them the same inflated wages that we do. If they leave, they earn £50k+ less every week, so they insist that we pay them the difference (or at least some of it) to make up for the fact that they’ll be taking a pay cut. We could of course say no, but they know that we need the money from the sale, and that a transfer fee minus the payoff is probably better for us than having no transfer fee and having to pay all of their wages for the remainder of their contract.
This is what happens when you give average players huge contracts.
31 Aug 2025 16:23:29
They're being asked to move on, so they don't want to lose their future earnings. It's essentially a payoff to leave. Not unusual and players are well within their rights.
31 Aug 2025 16:24:55
Players rule the roost now. It is mental like you say that somebody wants paying to leave, especially as said players want to leave anyway. Problem is they have a massive contract (more than they deserve) and when the next team wants to reduce their wages they feel entitled to the shortfall. It's not like they are on a couple hundred a week, these are multi million pound contracts so they aren't going to feel the drop. Imagine telling your boss you want to leave Tesco to go work at asdas but asdas only want to pay you 11 quid an hour and Tesco were paying you 13 quid an hour so you want them to pay the shortfall. You would get told to f off!
31 Aug 2025 16:55:19
I don't think it's uncommon, a contract is agreed to pay a player a set amount over a period of time. Legally they are entitled to the whole of the sum if the club decides to end the contract early.
Normally I think there are some agreements made between the player, and both the buying and selling club. But that's going to be context driven.
31 Aug 2025 17:00:50
Danny,
We have them a contract though, they have always ruled the roost as it’s contract law. It’s also nothing like Tesco where you wouldn’t be on a fixed term contract.
If the player hands in an official transfer request they would forego the payment but as he hasn’t he can claim it from the club, it’s to protect contracts and it’s our fault for overpaying another bang average player.
31 Aug 2025 16:39:07
Think the biggest problem is with psr now you can't afford to pay a player that 4 or 5 million payoff anymore.