None of which refutes my point that Yedlin was on scholarship, and thus his parents didn't pay Crossfire anything.
Yedlin's family disagrees that he was on a scholarship and recalls paying for him to play. That being said, I'm not sure that changes the equation any. Even if Yedlin was on a scholarship, the families of the other families were the ones paying for his scholarship, not the team.
I'm just wondering what the language in any contract between Crossfire and Yedlin's guardians (parents) entitles Crossfire a cut of Yedlin's hide after the fact. Especially if that cut is more than value of the scholarship. Both training compensation and solidarity payments would seem to be an illegal restraint of trade, only serve to depress the money available to pay players. As a former union organizer, I'd fight against both forms of compensation tooth and nail to the bitter end. Unless Yedlin's guardians made some sort of contractual agreement with Crossfire, I don't get it. And even if they did, I'm still not sure it should be binding on Yedlin, who was a minor at the time.
Yedlin isn't really a party to the agreement. It's built into FIFA's rules and, theoretically, the club agrees to abide by the rules by being a member of its federatio and ultimately FIFA. And the money doesn't technically come from Yedlin, it comes from the club that purchases his contract. While there may be an indirect impact on what the club is willing to pay him (or pay for him), it's not "his money." It's sorta like a tax, say like FICA on US payrolls. The company sorta takes into account that it's gonna have to pay about 7.5% of your pay into the SSA for the employer's portion. Or a sales tax that has to come from the transaction. Now, the argument can be made that such required 3rd party payments are in restraint of trade under US or other laws. But the parties paying the money freely entered into the transaction. Regardless of any agreement between Yedlin and the club, the discussion will be around if 2 non-US entities agreeing to pay money to a US entity in conjunction with the hiring of a 3rd party, are they violating some law? Ultimately, they'll probably figure out some way for SP to get to a US-entity to either give to the direct club or maybe distribute to all deserving clubs as scholarships. TC is the real issue here and it applies to all players turning pros and many of them signing with small clubs with meager budgets.
I never said it came from Yedlin. But all such funds reduce the amount of money available to pay players. And as a player, part of the artificial reduction of wages is a tax on Yedlin. Yedlin demonstrably makes less money because the sum total of training compensation and solidarity fees that are paid out is part of the larger wage bill paid by professional soccer clubs. There's plenty of evidence that if those fees weren't paid out, the money wouldn't be rolled back as profits, but would instead be used on player wages and transfer fees.
Fair enough (though TC doesn't apply in this case). But Yedlin doesn't have to have signed a contract for parties outside him to make these agreements. It's up to the operation of law and the courts to determine if it's legal. And because it's anti-trust and international, it's gonna be a big mess of thoughts that can go either direction.
This argument seems to prove too much. Sure the money that Yedlin didn't get could have been spent on him or another player. But it also could have been spent on stadium upkeep, marketing, or the owner's yacht.
That would certainly be news to the DRC, as I'm looking at the pleadings right now. Crossfire certainly hasn't amended them.
I know what Crossfire says, just saying Yedlin’s grandparents remember paying. I’ll see if my googlefu is successful, but I think it was in a S@H article.
Good news!! A decision on Crossfire’s case with FIFA is coming by the end of the month.... Unless it doesn’t. Update on the DeAndre Yedlin solidarity payment case. I'm told a decision should be handed down by the end of this month. Yes, I've heard that before. We'll see what happens.— Jeff Carlisle (@JeffreyCarlisle) February 21, 2019 Also, I was told "don't hold your breath" regarding getting a decision on this timeline. If we don't see a decision, hearing other options will be explored. #FIFA #USSF #CrossfirePremier #MLS #Yedlin— Miki Turner (@turneresq) February 21, 2019
ESPN says a ruling will be coming out next week. http://www.espn.com/soccer/soccer-t...ayment-cases-involving-us-youth-clubs-sources
The Sockers have launched a counter-suit against themselves denying any association with Michael Bradley.
Sounds like the Bradley & Dempsey cases were dismissed by DRC. No ruling on the Yedlin case. http://www.espn.com/soccer/united-s...t-claims-related-to-bradley-dempsey-transfers
Sounds like the USSF will be getting sued if their bad record keeping prevents the clubs from receiving the FIFA required payments.
But does the USSF have a legal obligation to keep an accurate player passport, particularly for youth players? It is not clear to me where such a requirement would come from.
Um, it comes from FIFA. Associations are supposed to register players and keep records of their clubs. When a player transfers to a new association his passport is supposed to be up to date and that's the time to bring it into compliance if it wasn't already.