Search results

Sounds like it would be a good idea for the clubs to band together and challenge that then. None of the structures work without the clubs so they have a collective strength. Plus with players and managers complaining about the number of fixtures I can't see them being against it - less games for...

Hang on a minute I never said they own them. I said employ. I just don't see how a company can be forced to give it's workforce leave to, effectively, go and work for another company for a few months. I don't see why anyone would put that in a contract.

As long as clubs are compensated wages and loss of earnings or the cost of transfer fees and wages to cover a like replacement it might be ok. But so far I have not seen that is the case. The nations do not employee the player and so should have no rights to their work.

Over the tournaments, no. But the players are their employees, very well paid and important employees. You think it is right for a company to lose it's top employees for months?

So as it stands playing for your country is mandatory!? Even if he player does not want to or it is not in their best physical interest to do so? Surely that needs changing. Are clubs at least compensated they players wages (plus reasonable loss of income from reduced form etc) for the time...

How is that legally inforcable though?

Sounds absolutely mad. Surely their employer (their club) should have the final say on if they will allow their employee leave to play for another team. If you asked for leave from your work to go and work for another company for a month and they refused to let you why on earth would you be...