Will the transfer system collapse in football today? Five questions about Diarra’s case

Will footballers be able to simply terminate their contracts? The transfer system in the world of football sweeps and bends because of that question.

In Luxembourg, the Court of Justice of the European Union ruled today in the case of French soccer player Lassana Diarra. The world of football is watching with excitement, because the decision could disrupt the current system – with million dollar transfers and mega contracts.

Comparisons are already being made with Bosman’s reign, which dramatically changed the relationship in football in 1995.

The Court of Justice, Europe’s highest judicial institution, will decide whether the now-retired Diarra is right in his case against world football association FIFA.

The French is responsible for the freedom to change employers (football club). In the world of football, governed by FIFA, there are restrictions that, according to Diarra’s lawyer, are against European law.

The Diarra case began in 2014, when Diarra’s multi-year contract with his Russian club Lokomotiv Moscow was terminated after the Frenchman was no longer satisfied (partly due to a salary dispute).

Breach of contract, found the club, which wanted damages of 10.5 million euros. The FIFA dispute committee decided in favor of Lokomotiv Moscow. Diarra was punished: he had to pay the amount, he was suspended for fifteen months and he was not authorized to look for a new club.

In the meantime, Belgian Sporting Charleroi had shown interest in the football player, who wanted to revive his stagnant career. But FIFA rules made a move impossible – or at least dangerous for Charleroi. The club risked transfer sanctions and liability for Diarra’s multi-million fine.

Charleroi asked FIFA if it could eliminate that responsibility, but the world football association was clear: no. Charleroi abandoned the purchase. Diarra was trapped.

That is why the footballer, with the support of the international players’ union FIFPro, went to a Belgian judge. The complaint: FIFA should not have fined Diarra millions and FIFA banned Diarra from working at another club.

After years in courtrooms and other proceedings, the case ended up at the Court of Justice.

In the transfer world, where clubs are bound by FIFA rules, a lot of power in the game of negotiating contracts and transfer fees now rests with the clubs and less with the players. Professional footballers themselves do not have the right to terminate their employment contracts unilaterally – as do other workers in Europe.

The decision of the Court of Justice in the Diarra case relates to FIFA’s rules on contracts. And so too about the labor rights of professional soccer players around the world.

According to the footballer’s lawyers, European rights to competition and the free movement of people in Europe are being violated. FIFA rules would restrict these rights.

The lawsuit appears to be a result of the Bosman ruling of 1995, which gave professional footballers the right to change football clubs without a transfer (i.e. without a transfer of money between clubs) after signing their contract to be completed by lease. club. The Diarra case concerns the right to change clubs while the contract is still running.

Today’s footballers have more autonomy in the courtroom in Luxembourg. So the football world is already talking about ‘Bosman management 2.0’.

The judges who made the decision on Friday were partly based on their decision legal opinion by Polish Attorney General Maciej Szpunar. This spring, Szpunar looked into Diarra’s case.

Did FIFA violate Diarra’s rights to free movement of people when he was denied permission to go to Charleroi? Was Charleroi’s buying policy affected because the club would be liable for Diarra’s fine? Does the design of FIFA’s transfer rules make it harder for players to change employers?

Yes, Szpunar answered those questions. According to him, the penalties imposed by FIFA for breach of contract are “draconian”.

At the same time, the Attorney General also stressed that the current situation in the world of football provides “contractual stability”. The system contributes to maintaining balance in the transfer market, which promotes equality and fair opportunities in different competitions.

If Diarra is right with the Court, it will strengthen the position of footballers in contract agreements. In theory, this could lead to more canceled contracts, more uncertainty among clubs about their players and a reduction in the importance of transfer fees.

The last point would be very unfavorable for Dutch football clubs, because, like clubs from other, smaller European competitions, they are very dependent on income from transfers.

Whether it will come to that remains to be seen. According to Robby Houben, a professor of sports corporate law at the University of Antwerp, the ruling may have mostly symbolic value. “The players no longer accept that FIFA applies unilateral rules. Consultation between clubs and players may lead to a widely supported solution, in which FIFA is more likely to be a spectator.