Neymar joins PSG on a five year deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
Revan said:
That was the case up to last year, with United and Bayern needing to find workaround solutions for Herrera and Martinez. Last year, La Liga changed the rules to make it straightforward and both Spanish and foreign clubs can just pay the clause.

Their excuse seems to be cause they don't believe that PSG can pay the clause and still be within FFP. Which is not their business (it is UEFA's).
Click to expand...
Clearly they think otherwise. It seems the believe they can reject it and they have.

If Neymar was going to go to Real Madrid for 1bn, and it would put Real Madrid in breach of their (La Liga's) rules, then presumably they would be able to reject it. That shouldn't be controversial. La Liga run the shop, after all.

So when PSG have rocked up to their office with a €200 mn check, which they would reject if it came from Real or Atletico Madrid, and they think they have the right to reject it.. then yeah, they've rejected it.
La Liga is understood to have also explained that it is unclear on the origins of the money and that under its regulations only Spanish clubs have the guaranteed right to buy out a contract. The league has repeatedly accepted buyout clause deposits from foreign clubs. It would not be able to reject the money if Neymar himself turned up to pay it.
Click to expand...
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/03/psg-neymar-buy-out-rejected-la-liga-barcelona
 
Just wondering if Barca thought no one could afford it and chose 222 as it sounds funny and symmetric.
Really stupid low clause to be honest. Release clauses should be an affordable number like a billion which Madrid set.
Even 888 sounds funny and is symmetric. Stupid Barca paying for their mistake.
 
Raoul said:
Its not particularly fair when you consider that this will only hyper-inflate transfer prices going forward. It was bad enough that post Pogba, many clubs are suddenly being held to ransom for players this summer, and it will be even worse next year to where the gulf between the haves (Oligarchs and Oil Sheikhs) and the have nots (normal clubs who actually earn their money from football) will widen significantly as the financial arms race to artificially buy success entrenches. This is literally the worst thing that could happen in football and needs to be blocked and called out at every opportunity.
Click to expand...
The Oil Clubs have been around for years, if anything the new TV deal closes the gap slightly (at the cost of massively inflating fees).
 
Revan said:
Thing is, PSG will be totally fine cause on financial sheets, the transfer is divided per number of years on his contract. So, for this year, it will be just 40m or so (assuming that he signs a 5 year contract). If PSG sells Di Maria and Lucas for example, their net spent would be the same as that of United and lower than City's.

And well, UEFA might eventually look at it, but PSG have been fine since their ban 3 years ago, and UEFA looks always for the last 3 years. Barca and La Liga have no possibility of blocking this, they are just being usual twats.
Click to expand...
Except EPL teams make way more money. So much of PSG's revenue comes via sponsorship that what the clubs are really asking is a deeper look into if these are even close to market value.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
They are all pragmatic in these situation, now the situation is damaging their brand so they see things differently. We know that Juventus are on side with them, if they can get some more big names they will have significant influence.
Click to expand...

I don't care who they have in their side, you respect the rules of law, you respect the letters of a contract. You don't make up rules for one club, one player and other rules for other clubs living under the same jurisdiction, that's complete nonsense.

Also I'm for a change of FFP rules, I am for a football were clubs spend what they are able to spend. But we have a problem here, clubs like Juventus or Milan who have a smaller market than PSG have been bankrolled for decades by their sugar daddies, their current place in football is due to that and if we were fair we would give that same opportunity to PSG and City, in my opinion the rules of FFP should be extremely tight and severe but new comers with big commercial potential should be given a period of leeway(obviously with wage and transfer caps), for example the UEFA could establish that for a period of 5-10 years those clubs are given the possibility to finance their budget through their owners but they can't go higher than 50%-60% of the highest budget in the confederation, unless if those deals represent less than 35% of the club's commercial deals.

But we can't just consider that a club that benefited from a sugar daddy in 2001 is alright and one that benefits from it in 2015 is evil.
 
M18CTID said:
I'd hazard a wild guess that Real Madrid have enough influence in the world of football for it not to happen. Instead of wishing for things that are highly unlikely ever to happen, why don't you take a step back, stop skriking, and enjoy watching this drama unfold?
Click to expand...

I am enjoying it very much.

I am certain that a very powerful lobby of clubs and La Liga will move to reign in the state owned & sponsored clubs going forward.

I'm surprised you find this so unlikely given the powerful rhetoric used by La Liga and Juventus on the matter the past couple of days. They have openly been accusing PSG of 'financial doping' i.e. cheating.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
We are all laughing now at Barca, but if this goes through it means that oil clubs can do what they want without any ramifications.

City/PSG can get sponsorship deals 5 times worth United's and it will all be accepted. They can hoover up all talent, buy a club in every country (city smartly already doing this), loan/buy players out to these clubs. They can spend £500m every season until they get it right. This is not good news although pretty funny.
Click to expand...
What has stopped them doing this already?
 
rcoobc said:
Clearly they think otherwise. It seems the believe they can reject it and they have.

If Neymar was going to go to Real Madrid for 1bn, and it would put Real Madrid in breach of their (La Liga's) rules, then presumably they would be able to reject it. That shouldn't be controversial. La Liga run the shop, after all.

So when PSG have rocked up to their office with a €200 mn check, which they would reject if it came from Real or Atletico Madrid, and they think they have the right to reject it.. then yeah, they've rejected it.

https://www.theguardian.com/football/2017/aug/03/psg-neymar-buy-out-rejected-la-liga-barcelona
Click to expand...
Lets see how things go. But it won't end good for La Liga and Barca.

Neymar should threaten to open the Pandora box and pay his contract (not release contract) if they block his transfer because they 'believe' that PSG cannot pay that much money and be okay under financial rules. Or get a Qatar residence (tax free) and send the money himself.
 
Some don't want to see new challengers all the more so that their shareholders come from extra-European countries.

It's protectionism, nothing to do with ethics matters.

Also, please don't say you are concerned about the viability of the market or equality of opportunities: it's just hypocrisy or a pack of lies.

Each defends its own interests of course.
 
DannyDee said:
Agreed. La Liga and Barca are far from the perfect messengers, but someone had to step up. I hope the rest of the old G-14 and eventually 18 (although PSG was a part of this prior to Qatari ownership) stand in solidarity and challenge UEFA to act in the name of FFP. It is in all of our long-term interests.
Click to expand...

feck the G-14.
 
Revan said:
Bale and Ronaldo have clauses worth 1 billion euros. Barca should have done the same for Neymar.
Click to expand...

Doesn't the player have to agree to the clause though? Bale and Ronaldo are different cases to Neymar who's a bit of a mercenary. I dont think he'd have agreed to one that high. Then again even Messi's clause probably isn't as high as Ronaldo or even Bale's so there's a lack of foresight involved too.

Of course there's always the issue of loyalty. You can activate Messi's clause for example, but whether he'll join you is a different matter. I don't think Barca ever thought Neymar would've had his head turned in such a way.
 
Raoul said:
Its not particularly fair when you consider that this will only hyper-inflate transfer prices going forward. It was bad enough that post Pogba, many clubs are suddenly being held to ransom for players this summer, and it will be even worse next year to where the gulf between the haves (Oligarchs and Oil Sheikhs) and the have nots (normal clubs who actually earn their money from football) will widen significantly as the financial arms race to artificially buy success entrenches. This is literally the worst thing that could happen in football and needs to be blocked and called out at every opportunity.
Click to expand...

By paying an outragrously inflated fee for Pogba, we started this trend off.

If it is the worst thing for football, we have played a massive facilitaing role in it.

In the end, we may also have to find our own sugar daddy to compete.
 
Last edited:
It's not for la Liga to decide whether or not PSG are within FFP. That goes without saying. What absolutely must happen though is that uefa/fifa relook the books of all such clubs and impose hefty sanctions in case of breaches. Not financial ones but bans from the CL etc for couple of years and so on.
 
Raoul said:
Best way to do this would be to put a FIFA wide cap on transfer fees or create an arbitration committee that will be assigned when clubs attempt to extort ridiculous fees for players who clearly aren't worth that much.
Click to expand...

That doesn't fix anything. The issue is more about 20-30M players being 60M+, not the actual top of the scale. There's only a handful of clubs that could afford Neymar, be it at 200M or 150M. Even if you capped at 100M the savings would go into higher wages. The problem is if you are Betis, not Manchester United.

The arbitration committee would be a nightmare and a huge can of worms, would drag on and on. The media would love that though.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
Absolutely, I agree. It's a joke that all these external funds can be pumped into a random club like PSG. Same with what happened with City.

I do think it's not La Liga's stand take though. I mean, Neymar being forced to stay would only create more issues. It's UEFA and FIFA that need to act in general rather than in relation to one transaction.

I genuinely do believe the authorities need to take control of the whole situation. As a United fan this transfer is something that doesn't impact me. But the whole free-market thing is clearly skewing the market completely and controls need to be put in place. FFP was a step in the right direction, or thereabouts. Spending needs to be linked with revenue simply to create a balance between performances and resources.
Click to expand...
You don't think that if Qatar chuck them a couple of briefcases full of money they'll turn a blind eye this is UEFA and FIFA we're talking about. I think that was what FFP was about in the first place. There was so much money churning around in football that they were looking for a piece of the action.
 
GloryHunter07 said:
What mess? Neymar specifically or transfer fees in general?
Click to expand...

Out of control transfer fees. You can't have mega billionaires attempting to buy their way to success by competing with one another whilst normal clubs who actually earn their revenues from football related operations are left with the 2nd tier of good players. It will ruin football in a very short period of time. Action needs to be taken immediately at the FIFA/UEFA level to stabilize transfer fees and put in a cap as to how much a club can spend on one player.
 
antohan said:
That doesn't fix anything. The issue is more about 20-30M players being 60M+, not the actual top of the scale. There's only a handful of clubs that could afford Neymar, be it at 200M or 150M. Even if you capped at 100M the savings would go into higher wages. The problem is if you are Betis, not Manchester United.

The arbitration committee would be a nightmare and a huge can of worms, would drag on and on. The media would love that though.
Click to expand...

It would indeed since we wouldn't be seeing the Neymar and Mbpape fees this year, which is dragging those 20-30m players you cited into the 60m range. Everything is interconnected and the problem is mega wealthy owners, not the mid tier clubs like Dortmund/Monaco et al who are merely capitalizing on the hyper inflation.
 
Raoul said:
Out of control transfer fees. You can't havre mega billionaires attempting to buy their way to success by competing with one another whilst normal clubs who actually earn their revenues from football related operations are left with the 2nd tier of good players. It will ruin football in a very short period of time. Action needs to be taken immediately at the FIFA/UEFA level to stabilize transfer fees and put in a cap as to how much a club can spend on one player.
Click to expand...

I'd argue football was ruined a long, long time ago, mate. I still enjoy it, but the magic is gone, for me. And that's not some nostalgic, 'pine-for-the-olden-days' view either. Modern football is very difficult to relate to; nigh-on impossible, in fact.
 
Revan said:
Lets see how things go. But it won't end good for La Liga and Barca.

Neymar should threaten to open the Pandora box and pay his contract (not release contract) if they block his transfer because they 'believe' that PSG cannot pay that much money and be okay under financial rules. Or get a Qatar residence (tax free) and send the money himself.
Click to expand...
Neymar would have the right to buyout his contract if he had completed 3 years of his contract. I don't know if any ruling that says PSG can just buy out his contract - but you'll have to show me it.

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
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Webster_ruling

Sending the money to Neymar is certainly an option, and possibly they have already done that, but I wouldn't think it's easy.

From this simplified analysis, it’s clear that there is a veritable myriad of regulations that have to be complied with for a club to purchase a player through activation of a Spanish buyout clause. It is a transaction that requires systematic planning through both legal and tax frameworks, and cannot be rushed through on deadline day.
Click to expand...
Successful navigation of this system can be seen in the way that Bayern Munich were able to secure the signature of Javi Martinez from Bilbao in 2012, which was a patient, nearly month-long approach to ensure that all the formalities were adhered to.

A buy-out clause offers protection to a club and its management. It allows them to set exorbitant numbers for players deemed valuable, to prevent them from being poached by larger clubs. It also serves as a sleight of hand.
Click to expand...
https://www.sportskeeda.com/football/buy-out-clauses-how-they-work-spanish-football/2
 
Ecstatic said:
Some don't want to see new challengers all the more so that their shareholders come from extra-European countries.

It's protectionism, nothing to do with ethics matters.

Also, please don't say you are concerned about the viability of the market or equality of opportunities: it's just hypocrisy or a pack of lies.

Each defends its own interests of course.
Click to expand...

Literally nobody gives a sh!t about seeing new challengers. If PSG and City had pulled themselves up through natural means then nobody would mind at all. I dare say that most people would be thrilled. You'll notice that we don't somplain about Chelsea because, while they have a rich owner, they have made themselves self-sufficient and are not a rich man using his plaything to buy 'success'. If deals like this become commonplace and City, PSG or whoever, are rrgularly buying the world's best players for fees that are far beyond the means of regular clubs, it'll ruin football permanently. Nobody will take it as seriously with joke clubs like this acting in such a way. If the pretence of a relatively even playing field and the pretence that they're 'real clubs' goes on, then people can try to forget that their status is artifical, but if they start acting like this then they'll make a mockery of themselves and the sport.
 
Raoul said:
It would indeed since we wouldn't be seeing the Neymar and Mbpape fees this year, which is dragging those 20-30m players you cited into the 60m range. Everything is interconnected and the problem is mega wealthy owners, not the mid tier clubs like Dortmund/Monaco et al who are merely capitalizing on the hyper inflation.
Click to expand...
This ^
 
sammsky1 said:
By paying an outragrously inflated fee for Pogba, we starting this trend off.

If it is the worst thing for football, we have played a massive facilitaing role in it.

In the end, we may also have to find our own sugar daddy to compete.
Click to expand...

Correct. We are not completely faultless here, although unlike City and PSG, we are actually a legitimate global football brand who make our money from football and associated ventures, not by how much oil and natural gas we extract.
 
Raoul said:
Out of control transfer fees. You can't havre mega billionaires attempting to buy their way to success by competing with one another whilst normal clubs who actually earn their revenues from football related operations are left with the 2nd tier of good players. It will ruin football in a very short period of time. Action needs to be taken immediately at the FIFA/UEFA level to stabilize transfer fees and put in a cap as to how much a club can spend on one player.
Click to expand...

It could mean United would lose his competitive edge at the domestic level. It works both ways.
 
Fully Fledged said:
You don't think that if Qatar chuck them a couple of briefcases full of money they'll turn a blind eye this is UEFA and FIFA we're talking about. I think that was what FFP was about in the first place. There was so much money churning around in football that they were looking for a piece of the action.[/QUTE]
Correct. FIFA and UEFA have little interest in game's well being as long as the more money is being pumped in. We've played a part in the inflated market as well but the correlation between performances, trophies etc. fronted by footballing revenue and spending power is extremely relevant IMO.
Click to expand...
 
Classical Mechanic said:
I am enjoying it very much.

I am certain that a very powerful lobby of clubs and La Liga will move to reign in the state owned & sponsored clubs going forward.

I'm surprised you find this so unlikely given the powerful rhetoric used by La Liga and Juventus on the matter the past couple of days. They have openly been accusing PSG of 'financial doping' i.e. cheating.
Click to expand...

So state sponsored as well as state owned? Hmmmm....you do realise that rules out United's deal with Aeroflot don't you? Not to mention the aforementioned Emirates deal with Real Madrid (and Arsenal of course). IIRC, Liverpool were also sponsored in recent years by Garuda which is the state-owned airline of Indonesia.

You see, you really really haven't thought this through very well have you? Your perfect utopia will have unintended consequences right across the board which would affect many of the clubs you want it to protect, including your own. Just like the original incarnation of UEFA's FFP rules which both Milan clubs backed, and then when they realised the regs they fully supported actually screwed them over they went crying to UEFA about it and lobbied for a change in the rules that enabled new owners of clubs more leeway to do the kind of things that City and PSG were punished for. You couldn't make it up really.
 
Ecstatic said:
It could mean United would lose his competitive edge at the domestic level. It works both ways.
Click to expand...

I'd rather we all compete for the best players at relatively normal fees than have to throw ridiculous fees at players like Perisic or the 50m plus City had to pay for Kyle fecking Walker.
 
I LOVE this saga so much. La Liga and Barcelona are a complete joke.
 
sammsky1 said:
By paying an outragrously inflated fee for Pogba, we starting this trend off.

If it is the worst thing for football, we have played a massive facilitaing role in it.

In the end, we may also have to find our own sugar daddy to compete.
Click to expand...
We've definitely played a big part. Lukaku's fee is actually a bit of a joke as well as is Matic's. However, at least we've spent decades and decades winning stuff and slowly building our resources. And even with us, I wouldn't mind financial restrictions. The whole 'build something great from what you have' mentality, if if that is something that needs to be "enforced" then I'm all for it.
 
Im all for a transfer cap, but it cant be backdated.
I dont see whats so unreasonable about this transfer really anyway
PSG haven't spent that much money in recent seasons, going nuts on one seems fine.
Didn't see anyone crying about whether juventus could afford Higuain last year.

The drama around this seems completely absurd to me tbh. Barca and La Liga's hissy fit seems about a decade too late to be taken seriously.
 
amolbhatia50k said:
We've definitely played a big part. Lukaku's fee is actually a bit of a joke as well as is Matic's. However, at least we've spent decades and decades winning stuff and slowly building our resources. And even with us, I wouldn't mind financial restrictions. The whole 'build something great from what you have' mentality, if if that is something that needs to be "enforced" then I'm all for it.
Click to expand...
We used to buy all the best players in the league from everyone except Arsenal and Liverpool.

It wasn't fair then either.
 
caid said:
Im all for a transfer cap, but it cant be backdated.
I dont see whats so unreasonable about this transfer really anyway
PSG haven't spent that much money in recent seasons, going nuts on one seems fine.
Didn't see anyone crying about whether juventus could afford Higuain last year.

The drama around this seems completely absurd to me tbh. Barca and La Liga's hissy fit seems about a decade too late to be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
Its not, :)
 
Raoul said:
It would indeed since we wouldn't be seeing the Neymar and Mbpape fees this year, which is dragging those 20-30m players you cited into the 60m range. Everything is interconnected and the problem is mega wealthy owners, not the mid tier clubs like Dortmund/Monaco et al who are merely capitalizing on the hyper inflation.
Click to expand...
Huge assumption. I'd say Pep spending 50M a pop on fullbacks is more relevant than Mbappe. The TV money in the UK, the financials meaning Spurs wouldn't let go of a Kane for under 150M... Virgil van Dijk being 60M... Then throw in the crazy China deals and new owners at clubs like Milan...

It's more likely the midmarket deals are pushing up the top than 1-2 isolated cases pulling all prices up.
 
What a circus this transfer is! If I were Barcelona though I would accept the money and let him go on his way. What's the point of making a fuss and possibly going to court? That would mean they don't have time to get a replacement. They need to pressure UEFA etc to have a look at things for future transfers of this nature, but right now there's no point in posturing. Neymar has already made up his mind to go
 
Ecstatic said:
Some don't want to see new challengers all the more so that their shareholders come from extra-European countries.

It's protectionism, nothing to do with ethics matters.

Also, please don't say you are concerned about the viability of the market or equality of opportunities: it's just hypocrisy or a pack of lies.

Each defends its own interests of course.
Click to expand...
This.
 
AXVnee7 said:
Doesn't the player have to agree to the clause though? Bale and Ronaldo are different cases to Neymar who's a bit of a mercenary. I dont think he'd have agreed to one that high. Then again even Messi's clause probably isn't as high as Ronaldo or even Bale's so there's a lack of foresight involved too.

Of course there's always the issue of loyalty. You can activate Messi's clause for example, but whether he'll join you is a different matter. I don't think Barca ever thought Neymar would've had his head turned in such a way.
Click to expand...

Well its a bit rich complaining about it now if thats the case. More fool them for buying a player who wouldnt sign a high enough clause.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.