• The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Player Luka Vuskovic

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

AberdeenYid said:
Declan Rice and John Stones are examples of being very adept in both positions. Which came first, I’ve no idea.

Pretty sure Vincent Kompany went the other way, from mid to defence.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Ledders was able to transition between the two as well. What I will say though is that it's easier to go from DM to CB than it is the other way round, but some have been able to play both roles, even Dier had some success moving into a DM role.
 
Trotter said:
You have totally got the Diarra ruling wrong, and shown you don’t understand the transfer regulations in football on the slightest.

All the Diarra ruling said, was as his club had terminated his contract due to breach of contract, they could not ask for a transfer fee from the next club Diarra joined.

In summary. Vuskovic cannot in any way shape or form just buy out his contract and join another club.

Just think what you are even suggesting here.
A 100m rated player with 2 years on his contract, earning say 20m a year could just ask another club to pay 40m on his behalf to walk away from his contract, costing his current employer 100m in lost fees.

The only place buy out clauses, where a player can basically deposit a sum to buy out his contract, actually exist is Spain, and these are usually set at massive multiples of players earnings and expected worth, sometimes in the billions (Bellingham Yamal Mbappe and many other Barca or Real players have a billion euro buy out clause)
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The point of the CJEU ruling is that the system in place violates EU free movement of labour. Football cannot create an artificial system that operates outside those laws.

Previous FIFA rules were that payments due to a club if a player terminated their contract without clause were based on a black-box calculation of the players' market value, and that any subsequent club contracting for the players' services would then be liable to pay the first club said value.

The CJEU ruled that this violates free movement of labour, as it does - footballers do not labour under a different set of laws than bankers.

It ruled that the termination fee due from player to club must be the same as if the club terminated the player's contract - based solely on the remaining compensation value under the contract at the time of termination, and that a future employer cannot be held liable for the compensation due to the first club.


I don't really understand why people have long believed that sport is contractually unique under the law. Diarra, Bosman, and many other challenges in separate cases around the world have shown that in the eyes of the law they receive no special treatment.

An employment contract does not create a slave, does not convey ownership. Employment contracts must be mutually beneficial and mutually terminable. Anytime real attorneys get involved in a case regarding sport, they rip their sport counterparts to shreds.

So, yes, it will greatly impact the system in coming years, just as Bosman did. Yes, it will create a system where players can and will buyout large remaining sums to accept new employment - where the new employer compensates them for their expense in terminating their previous contract. Same as many other industries. Football isn't special.

It will become another force towards an ESL. If you form the structure as a collective entity, and contract the players with that entity, rather than individual clubs, then the clubs are treated as offices and the player-employees are theoretically assigned to offices based on the needs/desires of the parent entity. Under law, the players are still free to terminate their contracts and seek other employment (outside the ESL), but they wouldn't because no one else would/could pay the sorts of wages the ESL would.


The Lassana Diarra judgement explained: What does it mean for footballers?

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) in October 2024 ruled in favour of former Woolwich, Chelsea and Real Madrid midfielder Lassana Diarra after it found central parts of FIFA’s transfer rules break European Union law. It is a landmark judgement set to improve professional footballers’ freedom of...
www.fifpro.org www.fifpro.org
 
Tomo said:
Our 3 strikers for next season Van De Ven, Romero and Vuskovic.

Might need to get some new CB’s.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Joking aside, IF Vuskovic is as good as they say, IS there an argument for seeing if Romero can push up into more of a #6 role...

Y'know, like Mabbutt & Perryman did from time to time!

especially if the feeling is that Bentancur/Paulinha just don't have what it takes going forward??

It would be great to have a DM who can actually defend, as well as have an eye for goal!!

Just a thought....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top