TWOCHOICEStom
Members
Can't we just enjoy ourselves for FIVE minutes

Any 2 parties bound by a contract can end that contract if they mutually agree. There doesn't need to be any specific terms in the contract for this because both parties agreeing to end a contract is enshrined in contract law. Compensation is just the amount needed to get 1 party to agree to end the contract with the other, in some cases compensation isn't required because both parties agree to end the contract.Don’t think we have any ‘release clause’ in any contracts. It’s more a compensation thing. They are tied to contracts aren’t they? Release clause in this context is just compensation no?
What’s the difference in practical terms? If another team wants RDZ and he wants to go he will and we’ll get £13m.Don’t think we have any ‘release clause’ in any contracts. It’s more a compensation thing. They are tied to contracts aren’t they? Release clause in this context is just compensation no?
The club don't do release clauses in PLAYER contracts.Don’t think we have any ‘release clause’ in any contracts. It’s more a compensation thing. They are tied to contracts aren’t they? Release clause in this context is just compensation no?
Strangely spurs weren't keen on paying potters release clause. It's definitely some kind of deterrent.What’s the difference in practical terms? If another team wants RDZ and he wants to go he will and we’ll get £13m.
Yes I know - and still don’t think / am pretty sure Potter and RDZ and any of our players don’t have a release clause as this thread has been about?Any 2 parties bound by a contract can end that contract if they mutually agree. There doesn't need to be any specific terms in the contract for this because both parties agreeing to end a contract is enshrined in contract law. Compensation is just the amount needed to get 1 party to agree to end the contract with the other, in some cases compensation isn't required because both parties agree to end the contract.
The difference with a release clause is that it is a term of the contract, if amount £X is paid, then the contract is ended under that term. That figure was agreed at the outset of the contract. There is no negotiation or compensation required because the term of the contract has been fulfilled and the contract is ended not through mutual agreement, but under the terms of the contract.
A bit. If we don’t want him to go we can technically block it if it’s compo - if it’s a release clause we wouldn’t have a say.What’s the difference in practical terms? If another team wants RDZ and he wants to go he will and we’ll get £13m.
So why did Chelsea approach the club etc etc - surely they’d just activate the release clause? Also, not sure how you’d possibly know that - so Pep has a release clause…The club don't do release clauses in PLAYER contracts.
A "release clause" ( the compensation amount ) is standard in MANAGER contracts.
You are right. A manager ( unlike a player ) can just resign so it isn't a release clause. It is the compensation due if they do resign.Yes I know - and still don’t think / am pretty sure Potter and RDZ and any of our players don’t have a release clause as this thread has been about?It’s compensation £s in the contract - not a release clause.
I imagine they approached the club because a) it's the courteous thing to do and bizarrely, we have good relationship with them and b) we're the "holder" of the registration and contract so would need to ratify the existence of the clause and confirm the fee is correctSo why did Chelsea approach the club etc etc - surely they’d just activate the release clause? Also, not sure how you’d possibly know that - so Pep has a release clause…
Was gonna say about Dan Ashworth too - wouldn’t have any such thing as gardening leave if you could just pay a fee and get their services etc I guess.You are right. A manager ( unlike a player ) can just resign so it isn't a release clause. It is the compensation due if they do resign.
Or C) to enquire about his availability and the compensation figure in the contractI imagine they approached the club because a) it's the courteous thing to do and bizarrely, we have good relationship with them and b) we're the "holder" of the registration and contract so would need to ratify the existence of the clause and confirm the fee is correct
That’s exactly what Newcastle ended up doing. They came to an agreement with us over compensation to allow him to join them quicker rather than waiting out his gardening leave.Was gonna say about Dan Ashworth too - wouldn’t have any such thing as gardening leave if you could just pay a fee and get their services etc I guess.
This, it’s relentless.Can't we just enjoy ourselves for FIVE minutes![]()
Ok, I see what you mean. I'm not sure if you are correct or not but I'm no football contract expert.A bit. If we don’t want him to go we can technically block it if it’s compo - if it’s a release clause we wouldn’t have a say.
I’m not sure, I just think compensation and release clause are two very different things as such. I’m sure the club and English clubs in general rarely do ‘release clauses’ it’s more a Spanish etc thing with contracts also. I think the club have said before they just don’t do them as it takes a lot of decisions out of their hands and is pretty silly imo. You’ve only got to look at the 2 articles @Hiheidi posted - the Mail (probably lazily) referring to it as a release clause - The Times, compensation.Ok, I see what you mean. I'm not sure if you are correct or not but I'm no football contract expert.