News: Source: Frank Lampard will play for the Los Angeles Galaxy

Don't think so. Remember that DeRo has been listed at way above max salary for years and he hasn't been a DP because teams were buying down his cap hit. What you see is their actual salary.

 

Nope. Transferring inherently means terminating the old contract and making a new one.

 

But that's not what is being inferred from the article. Yes, the club names have been changed while the terms remained the same.

Hard to tell with DeRo because the terms of his contracts have been changed so often. In 2012, his pay was in mid 600's, in 2010 in mid 400's.

GBS is listed in 2010 at $241K, $650K in 2009, $375K in 2008, $150K in 2007.

I would bet that both 2007 and 2008 are written down due to the allocation use.

 

No. Your inference is incorrect. The article used a poor phrase by saying the "contract has been sold" and you think it means something more than it does. It does not.

No. As I explained, when transferring a team does not take the player's old contract, a new contract must be agreed to. Now of course a player and club can have the same financial terms as his old deal, but in Cudicini's case, it clearly is not. The Galaxy have announced he's not a DP.

No. The player's union reports player compensation. How the team structures it under the cap and how they use allocation is not reported.

The cap hit for a DP last year was $350K. But it's irrelevant for Cudicini since as noted, he's not a DP. Give it up.

 

I understand that this is the usual, traditional procedure, but is there any reason to think that it MUST be this way? I mean, is there some FIFA regulation that requires teams not transfer contracts when transferring a player's registration, or is it just a tradition that's so entrenched than nobody tries to deviate from it?

In international transfers in which both clubs are not subject to European labor law, I can't imagine how something like this could be enforced without FIFA involvement. Transferring a contract is the way things are done in North American pro sports leagues, so it stands to reason that, barring a FIFA rule against the practice, it is possible that it happened in this case.

 

It does not stand to reason that it is possible that it happened in this case. And it's not just a matter of tradition or FIFA rules, it's a matter of law. The American leagues have a legal framework behind which trades are made. That structure does not exist internationally.

In American leagues, players are traded not transfered because players unions have signed collective bargaining agreements with rules that make it so that is the case. In essence, athletes sign contracts with the league and play for a team.

The team thus has the right to trade that contract to another team within the league without the player's consent (unless they have a no trade clause which most people don't get). So a player for the Red Sox has no say whether they want to be traded to the Yankees or not, and with the same contract terms that he had before.

But they can't be traded to the Yomiuri Giants in Japan! And Japanese players can't just be traded to MLB teams! They either leave as free agents or are transferred, similar to soccer transfers. Numerous Japanese players have been sold to MLB teams for large sums, upon which the team has a negotiating window (usually 30 days) to sign the player to a new contract or the deal is off. They do not take the previous contract.

Since MLS has so many different rules than European leagues (including having trades) any contract signed with MLS would inherently be different that one signed with another league. After all, by signing with MLS, Cudicini would be agreeing to be part of the MLS Players Union - that's something that certainly won't be in his contract with Tottenham! Now there's nothing to say that the financial terms and contract length can't be the same as in the previous contract. But because it is a new contract, that of course is up for negotiation.

 

Yeah, I am not sure why we are still talking about this.

Two things are certain right now

1) he is not a DP
2) we don't yet know his salary but will early in the MLS season when the numbers are released.

 

That's not really true, though. Players were traded in the same way that they are now, long before any of the players' unions existed. Players were also sold in straight cash deals, exactly as a transfer, and they still can be, although the practice is not nearly as common now as it was, say, 90 or so years ago when Babe Ruth was sold to the Yankees by the Red Sox.

That's because there is a specific agreement in place between the MLB and the NPB regarding such things. My question was, is there a similar agreement in place in soccer (which I assume would have to come under the auspices of FIFA, and not independent agreements among individual leagues, as in baseball)?

Again, that's because there is a specific procedure in place dictated by an agreement that was negotiated by the two countries' leagues. Is there something similar between MLS and the EPL?

This is a good point. In fact, the answer probably lies in the fact that a contract signed in one country is not legally binding in another, whether the parties are professional athletes and clubs or not.

 

Yes, FIFA stipulates - with the known exceptions of Mexico and MLS, which function a lot more like the other US pro leagues in this regard - that contracts/players are not tradeable.

But that wasn't my point. So, I'll reiterate - Cudicini was presumably on seven figures with Spurs. If that contract was simply assumed - with the player's full consent, obviously - then it's reasonable to estimate it being above the DP threshold.

The union salary data is informative in general but the overall compensation that is quoted there can be subject to allocation related write-down or other accounting tricks (Beckham wasn't exactly making $5.5M while living in LA) that shuffle expenses into the off-the-field marketing deals, etc.

Here's a hypothetical - let's say Cudicini was on $1M/Y with Spurs and agreed to a $650K/Y contract with the Galaxy. $300K of that either written down via allocation or paid off the books via some marketing deal a la Beckham's (in other words, a sponsor pays Cuducini to go on a promotional tour of Italy with their gear and no one in MLS is wiser for it. Beckham bagged annually another $30M in his off-the-pitch activities while on the LAG payroll, so $300K is peanuts in comparison).

There are also precedents for it. In the NFL, players like Deion Sanders were encouraged, for example, to join the top teams for less money, while the players sponsors were compensating him on the back end with increased endorsements corresponding to the increased visibility of their product.

Additionally, there have been other violators. As reference, this is what happened in the NFL a while back with the said violator being closely watched by his competitors.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/nfl/news/2000/12/01/king_salarycap/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28969-2004Sep17.html

And we know that the LAG has a tad of leeway in terms of contracts too.

 

Link?

 

http://www.fifa.com/mm/document/aff...e_status_and_transfer_of_players_en_33410.pdf

 

Thanks, but there is nothing in the linked document that stipulates that contracts are not trade-able. The only statement that comes close to addressing the issue is in Annexe 3 (ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE GOVERNING THE TRANSFER OF PLAYERS BETWEEN ASSOCIATIONS), Article 2 (Issue of an ITC for a professional), sections 3 & 4:

3. Upon receipt of the ITC request, the former association shall immediately
request the former club and the professional to confirm whether
the professional’s contract has expired, whether early termination
was mutually agreed or whether a contractual dispute exists.
4. Within seven days of receiving the ITC request, the former association
shall either:
a) issue the ITC to the new association; or
b) inform the new association that the ITC cannot be issued because
the contract between the former club and the professional has not
expired or that there has been no mutual agreement regarding its
early termination.

The bold parts strongly suggest that, since the the transferred player and the club from which he is being transferred have to agree to terminate the contract, it isn't automatic.

 

None of the data that the Players Union publishes has any information related to allocation write downs. Allocation write downs are specifically used by teams to fit into the salary budget. The Players Union does not care about that money since it has nothing to do with the actual salaries being given to the players.

You are correct about Beckham having items beyond his salary, the two biggest having some control of the revenue of his shirt sales and having the ability to become an owner some day, neither of which the players union tracks.

But you are incorrect to compare what they did to land the biggest name in the sport at 31 years old vs what they had to do to land a 39 year old keeper that pretty much no non soccer fan has ever heard of.

 

If you are trying to point out that labor law is significantly different than it was 90 years ago, you've succeeded.

I'm not sure what you're asking here. FIFA has the international transfer certificate system, which requires all international transfers get FIFA approval, if that's what you mean.

But anyway, that was not your question. This was your question:

I don't know of any FIFA regulation that prevents the transferring of contracts. But then you said:

And here's where I completely disagree with your reasoning. This isn't about whether FIFA is stepping in and enforcing things. It's about what the contracts and laws say.

Let me present a scenario:

You're a scientist, and you do research for Exxon. You have a contract with Exxon where they have the exclusive rights to your research, and you agree to work with them for 5 years, with a no-compete clause that says if you quit, you can't go work for a competitor during the duration of your contract. But then a Saudi oil company comes along and says "Damn. That is a good scientist. I want him working for us!"

What happens next?

A: The Saudis pay Exxon for the right for your services. You are informed you've been traded to Exxon. You have no say in the matter, because you are under contract.

B: The Saudi's negotiate to pay Exxon to relinquish their rights to you. At the same time, the negotiate with you to have a contract to work for them.

Which do you think is the way contract law works? Obviously B!

In order for the transferring of contracts to be legal, it would have to be already within the contract that the player consented to that. And that's where collective bargaining agreements come in. In America, by signing a contract with MLS, you know that the team has the right to trade you to another MLS team. But they do not have the right to sell you anywhere in the world and just transfer your contract.

There's no agreement between MLS and EPL that would allow teams to trade contracts. Players always have a say in negotiating a new contract during a transfer.

Whether they could create such an agreement, I don't know. But they certainly don't have it now.

Not sure what you mean by not legally binding in other countries, because certain aspects of course are legally binding. Look at basketball contracts. Players under contract in one country can't just ignore their contract and go play somewhere else. During the NBA lockout, J.R. Smith had a contract with a Chinese team that didn't have release clause for when the lockout ended, and he had to play out his contract before returning to the NBA.

 

This is not a reasonable assumption. There have been plenty of old players that have come to MLS on free transfers for significant pay cuts. Alessandro Nesta for instance is playing for Montreal for $225,000. Cudicini is 39 years old and has been a backup for years now. He's simply not making DP money for the Galaxy.

 

This isn't COMPLETELY comparable, but it would seem that the MLS is roughly at about the same average age as the EPL teams.

http://www.whoscored.com/Blog/fukyh...League-Focus-Average-Premier-League-Team-Ages

*The study only looked at the starting XI of each EPL team, so the numbers might be a little skewed towards older, more veteran players...

 

Continued via PM.

 

YOU started it with the ignorant comment about Lampard increasing the view of MLS as a retirement league despite the fact that he's one of the premier midfielders in the BPL right now.

 

So then you can't be talking about the Frank Lampard of Chelsea that isn't even a starter then, yeah ?

 

Lampard has started the last 5 games in a row for Chelsea.

When he has been healthy, he has started 10 out of 15 games.

 

Wow. You mean the Lampard that is ONE goal away from being a top 10 goalscorer in BPL this season? That Frank Lampard?

 

Barclay's Premier League. Maybe you should focus more on being a meteorologist.