Finally get Antoine Griezmann ... Robb wont be happy
posted on 12/7/19
I was responding to Flashy.
posted on 12/7/19
I was looking for answers on this, I have no clue legal matters in this case. But this makes sense:
(U10026)
"They can only be activated when the funds are deposited with the relevant authorities in Spain to break the contract."
posted on 12/7/19
The argument being made is the higher release clause should be met as that was the amount at the time Griezmann agreed to join Barca
posted on 12/7/19
Players agree to join clubs for free before their contracts run out all the time don't they? Don't see how this is any different.
posted on 12/7/19
theyve taken the 7 off of coutinho
posted on 12/7/19
comment by Loco Liverpool (U18018)
posted 3 minutes ago
Players agree to join clubs for free before their contracts run out all the time don't they? Don't see how this is any different.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because his contract hadnt run out Nd didnt for another 4 years
posted on 12/7/19
I know what the argument is, I just don’t think Atletico have a leg to stand on with that because the buyout clause was never activated at that point.
posted on 12/7/19
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
I know what the argument is, I just don’t think Atletico have a leg to stand on with that because the buyout clause was never activated at that point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But it should have been.
posted on 13/7/19
comment by Disappoint-Ed (U22147)
posted 22 hours, 5 minutes ago
comment by Ed The King Woodward (U10026)
posted 14 minutes ago
I know what the argument is, I just don’t think Atletico have a leg to stand on with that because the buyout clause was never activated at that point.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
No. But it should have been.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Why?
posted on 14/7/19
I'm intrigued to know what Atleti's thought process and real intentions are here.
What they basically did was giving him a hefty pay rise in exchange for staying on a season. The €200M clause ensured he wouldn't leave mid-season, while the drop to €120M was basically their acquiescence to him reconsidering at the end of it.
So this definitely can't have come as a shock.
I'm unsure as to whether they really believe they have a case they can win in court (doubt it, but that's one for the legal eagles), whether they just want to give Barça a headache, or if perhaps they might be trying to use this to get some kind of concessions from Barça on potential future deals.