Chelsea Transfers

[Vesper 28,448]

Why FIFA ruling may force Chelsea into £34m Raheem Sterling U-turn

https://www.thechelseachronicle.com/news/why-fifa-ruling-may-force-Chelsea-into-34m-raheem-sterling-u-turn/

Raheem Sterling’s move to Arsenal came after he and droves of other first-teamers were forced into the now-infamous ‘bomb squad’, but that option may not be available to Chelsea for much longer.

Sterling was the most high-profile Chelsea player to be ostracised in the hopes that it would force them to move on and bring in much needed revenue and wage savings.

But 13 players in total were made to train with the reserves by Enzo Maresca over a period in the summer, including Romelu Lukaku, Trevor Chalobah, Kepa Arrizabalaga and Armando Broja.

All of those players have now moved away on loan or, in Lukaku’s case, permanently.

And while it attracted huge scrutiny from the media and supporters alike, the bomb squad treatment did prove an effective way of giving Chelsea more PSR wriggle room – at least in the short term.

Deivid Washington, Harvey Vale, Alex Matos and – most notably – £200,000-a-week left-back Ben Chilwell are the only players from the 13-man blacklist to still be on the payroll for 2024-25.

The bombastic recruitment strategy under Todd Boehly and Eghbali, who are at loggerheads in the boardroom, means the club feel this kind of draconian treatment is a necessity to relieve financial strain.

Under the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules, Chelsea are allowed to lose no more than £105m over a rolling three-year period, excluding costs such as infrastructure and youth development.

The margins are very tight for Chelsea after spending more than £1.5bn on new signings under the Clearlake-led regime, so saving the bulk of Sterling’s £325,000-a-week salary for the season is significant.

But the method that the club used to persuade the 29-year-old attacker to accept a move to Arsenal has now been challenged at the very highest level.

• READ MORE: Investor who pumped £500m into Chelsea in talks over £6bn-valued takeover in the USA

Ex-Chelsea star successfully FIFA transfer system

Lassana Diarra played 31 times for Chelsea between 2005 and 2007, winning both the League Cup and FA Cup during his time at Stamford Bridge.

But his legacy in West London and beyond will now be defined by the European Court of Justice case against FIFA that has just won.

In a case which is being described as just as significant as the 1995 Bosman ruling, Diarra’s team have succeeded in the case relating to his exit under a cloud from Lokomotiv Moscow over a decade ago.

They argued FIFA’s rule, which holds the player and the club signing him jointly liable for compensation to his previous club when the player terminates his contract without ‘just cause’, is unlawful.

The ruling is expected to greatly increase ‘player power’ and some experts argue it could change football’s ecosystem forever.

Stefan Borson, a lawyer and former adviser to Man City, has claimed that the ruling may mean that ‘bomb squad’ treatment may be grounds for a player to terminate his deal, specifically namechecking Chelsea in the process.

‘In English law, constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of the employment contract, such as violating the implied duty of trust and confidence.

‘Bomb squad treatment – where players are excluded from training without justification – could, in theory, meet this test.

‘However, FIFA’s Article 14(2) does not definitively address marginalisation as a form of abusive conduct, so players have still needed to navigate this grey area and have been hesitant to seek releases from contracts.

‘The Diarra case could trigger a shift in player transfers. Players in bomb squads, who previously feared retribution for claiming just cause, may now feel more empowered to terminate contracts.

‘The reduction in risks for new clubs could encourage more signings of players isolated by their current teams.

‘While Diarra doesn’t redefine abusive conduct, it opens the door for Bomb Squad players to challenge unfair treatment without a self imposed suspension.’

 

Sterling is under contract until 2027, meaning Chelsea will still owe him two years wages – approximately £34m – after this season is done.

If freezing him out is no longer an option, it would be a major blow to Chelsea and would force them to rethink their strategy in trying to get high-wage players off the books.

• READ MORE: Chelsea poised to make £158m transfer announcement with major PSR impact

The ruling and its impact on Sterling, Chilwell and more

In essence, the ruling may mean that the way Chelsea have treated Sterling in order to try and oust him may – in future – be grounds for the player to terminate his deal and another club to sign him for free.

This would give Chelsea far less leverage in their attempting to rid themselves of the likes of Sterling and Chelsea, damaging their chances of complying with PSR.

They are by no means the only club who might be impacted by the seismic ruling, but their financial situation does mean that they will likely have more anxiety about the Diarra ruling than most.

[Vesper 28,448]

EXPLAINED: How the Diarra case could end Chelsea's and other team's "Bomb Squads"

The Diarra v FIFA ruling could significantly impact clubs unilaterally sending players to "Bomb Squads" (isolating players from first-team training to force an exit). Whilst the case doesn't directly change the interpretation of constructive dismissal or abusive processes, it may remove key barriers that discouraged clubs from signing players in disputes, empowering more players to seek just cause departures.

FIFA’s Article 14(2) and Bomb Squads

While Article 14(2) of FIFA’s regulations prohibits abusive conduct, the rule is not specific enough to definitively address bomb squad situations where players are isolated from first-team training. It focuses more on clear harassment or bullying and has not yet been fully tested in marginalisation cases. This means the current interpretation of abusive conduct in such cases remains unclear but it is clear that preventing a player from training with the first team may constitute a abuse by the club. This was reiterated in the recent case of Football Club FCSB SA v. Lukasz Gikiewicz (https://jurisprudence.tas-cas.org/Shared%20Documents/6950.pdf…).

Constructive dismissal, abusive conduct and just cause

In English law, constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of the employment contract, such as violating the implied duty of trust and confidence. Bomb squad treatment - where players are excluded from training without justification - could, in theory, meet this test. However, FIFA’s Article 14(2) does not definitively address marginalisation as a form of abusive conduct, so players have still needed to navigate this grey area and have been hesitant to seek releases from contracts.

What Diarra changes

The Diarra ruling challenges FIFA’s solidarity liability and presumption of inducement, finding they were disproportionately restrictive. Removal of these rules would reduce the risk for new clubs signing players involved in disputes eliminating a significant disincentive that has previously kept clubs from taking on players claiming just cause termination. Post Diarra, new clubs may be more willing to gamble on signing players isolated by their current clubs comfortable that they aren't inviting big compensation claims from former clubs.

Buying clubs more willing to sign an ostracised player?

With the presumption of inducement removed, new clubs will likely feel more confident in signing players alleging just cause. In the past, clubs feared joint liability for signing such players. Under Diarra, this concern is lowered, making Bomb Squad players more attractive to new clubs, even if their case for just cause is uncertain.  

A new transfer world?

The Diarra case could trigger a shift in player transfers. Players in bomb squads, who previously feared retribution for claiming just cause, may now feel more empowered to terminate contracts. The reduction in risks for new clubs could encourage more signings of players isolated by their current teams. While Diarra doesn’t redefine abusive conduct, it opens the door for Bomb Squad players to challenge unfair treatment without a self imposed suspension.

[Vesper 28,448]

Thomas Tuchel given £84m Chelsea transfer shortlist as Man United find Erik ten Hag replacement

Chelsea could help Thomas Tuchel jumpstart his tenure at Manchester United by selling the German a few players

https://www.football.london/Chelsea-fc/transfer-news/thomas-tuchel-given-84m-Chelsea-30085239

Thomas Tuchel could jumpstart his tenure at Manchester United by signing a few familiar faces. The former Chelsea boss has remerged as a potential replacement for Erik ten Hag at Old Trafford, with the Dutchman under incredible pressure.

According to the Manchester Evening News, the Red Devils have identified Tuchel as a candidate for the head coach position. The report states Manchester United were interested in the German, who parted ways with Bayern Munich at the end of last season, when they contemplated sacking Ten Hag in the summer.

Instead, the club activated the option to extend the 54-year-old's contract by a year after winning the FA Cup final. Nevertheless, it's said the United hierarchy will hold a meeting in London on Tuesday, with the Ten Hag's position to be discussed in the coming days.

As it stands, the former Ajax boss has a contract that keeps him at Old Trafford until June 2026. So, with that being said, football.london has looked at what players Tuchel could sign from Chelsea if he were to replace Ten Hag at Manchester United.

Ben Chilwell – £18.5m

Chilwell has struggled to force himself into Enzo Maresca's side, having failed to impress in recent outings. The 27-year-old left-back, who's valued at £18.5m (€22m) by Transfermarkt, has featured just once for Chelsea this season, appearing off the bench in the Blues' 5-0 win over Barrow in the Carabao Cup third round.

Despite questions marks over his ability to play in a back-four and a heavily possession-based side, Chilwell could be just what Tuchel is looking for if the German operates a back-five with flying wing-backs at Manchester United. While he's previously impressed in that role, he has nursed a couple of hamstring injuries since.

Benoit Badiashile – £25.1m

Badiashile enjoyed an excellent vein of form when he first joined Chelsea from Monaco in January 2023, helping the Blues keep three clean sheets in his first three Premier League games. Then, at the end of the season, he suffered a hamstring injury before picking up a couple of groin issues the following campaign.

The 23-year-old centre-half, who's valued at £25.1m (€30m) by Transfermarkt, ended last term as a key player in Mauricio Pochettino's lineup. But, since Maresca took over, Levi Colwill has been preferred alongside Wesley Fofana and the Cobham graduate hasn't put a foot wrong.

Raheem Sterling – £29.3m

Sterling joined Arsenal on a season-long loan on deadline day in the summer. Despite arriving as a 'marquee signing' and topping the club's wage bill, the 29-year-old winger failed to live up to expectations at Stamford Bridge, scoring just 14 goals in 59 appearances in the Premier League.

It's said that the Gunners don't have an option to buy Sterling at the end of the season, leaving the door wide open for Manchester United to take him off Chelsea's hands. Tuchel could use the England international, who's valued at £29.3m (€35m) by Transfermarkt, in the same way he used Timo Werner.

Trevoh Chalobah – £10.9m

Chalobah also left Chelsea on a season-long loan in the summer, without including an option to buy in his contract. The 25-year-old defender, who's valued at £10.9m (€13m) by Transfermarkt, was controversially omitted from the Blues squad before finally joining Crystal Palace.

While Chalobah wasn't necessarily a regular in Tuchel's side at Stamford Bridge, he was called upon in some big games. So, if the German wants somebody who's ready to slot straight into a back-five at Old Trafford, then the Cobham graduate would be a good option in the summer.

Edited 12 hours ago by Vesper

[Mhsc 868]

34 minutes ago, Vesper said:

Why FIFA ruling may force Chelsea into £34m Raheem Sterling U-turn

https://www.thechelseachronicle.com/news/why-fifa-ruling-may-force-Chelsea-into-34m-raheem-sterling-u-turn/

Raheem Sterling’s move to Arsenal came after he and droves of other first-teamers were forced into the now-infamous ‘bomb squad’, but that option may not be available to Chelsea for much longer.

Sterling was the most high-profile Chelsea player to be ostracised in the hopes that it would force them to move on and bring in much needed revenue and wage savings.

But 13 players in total were made to train with the reserves by Enzo Maresca over a period in the summer, including Romelu Lukaku, Trevor Chalobah, Kepa Arrizabalaga and Armando Broja.

All of those players have now moved away on loan or, in Lukaku’s case, permanently.

And while it attracted huge scrutiny from the media and supporters alike, the bomb squad treatment did prove an effective way of giving Chelsea more PSR wriggle room – at least in the short term.

Deivid Washington, Harvey Vale, Alex Matos and – most notably – £200,000-a-week left-back Ben Chilwell are the only players from the 13-man blacklist to still be on the payroll for 2024-25.

The bombastic recruitment strategy under Todd Boehly and Eghbali, who are at loggerheads in the boardroom, means the club feel this kind of draconian treatment is a necessity to relieve financial strain.

Under the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules, Chelsea are allowed to lose no more than £105m over a rolling three-year period, excluding costs such as infrastructure and youth development.

The margins are very tight for Chelsea after spending more than £1.5bn on new signings under the Clearlake-led regime, so saving the bulk of Sterling’s £325,000-a-week salary for the season is significant.

But the method that the club used to persuade the 29-year-old attacker to accept a move to Arsenal has now been challenged at the very highest level.

• READ MORE: Investor who pumped £500m into Chelsea in talks over £6bn-valued takeover in the USA

Ex-Chelsea star successfully FIFA transfer system

Lassana Diarra played 31 times for Chelsea between 2005 and 2007, winning both the League Cup and FA Cup during his time at Stamford Bridge.

But his legacy in West London and beyond will now be defined by the European Court of Justice case against FIFA that has just won.

In a case which is being described as just as significant as the 1995 Bosman ruling, Diarra’s team have succeeded in the case relating to his exit under a cloud from Lokomotiv Moscow over a decade ago.

They argued FIFA’s rule, which holds the player and the club signing him jointly liable for compensation to his previous club when the player terminates his contract without ‘just cause’, is unlawful.

The ruling is expected to greatly increase ‘player power’ and some experts argue it could change football’s ecosystem forever.

Stefan Borson, a lawyer and former adviser to Man City, has claimed that the ruling may mean that ‘bomb squad’ treatment may be grounds for a player to terminate his deal, specifically namechecking Chelsea in the process.

‘In English law, constructive dismissal requires a fundamental breach of the employment contract, such as violating the implied duty of trust and confidence.

‘Bomb squad treatment – where players are excluded from training without justification – could, in theory, meet this test.

‘However, FIFA’s Article 14(2) does not definitively address marginalisation as a form of abusive conduct, so players have still needed to navigate this grey area and have been hesitant to seek releases from contracts.

‘The Diarra case could trigger a shift in player transfers. Players in bomb squads, who previously feared retribution for claiming just cause, may now feel more empowered to terminate contracts.

‘The reduction in risks for new clubs could encourage more signings of players isolated by their current teams.

‘While Diarra doesn’t redefine abusive conduct, it opens the door for Bomb Squad players to challenge unfair treatment without a self imposed suspension.’

 

Sterling is under contract until 2027, meaning Chelsea will still owe him two years wages – approximately £34m – after this season is done.

If freezing him out is no longer an option, it would be a major blow to Chelsea and would force them to rethink their strategy in trying to get high-wage players off the books.

• READ MORE: Chelsea poised to make £158m transfer announcement with major PSR impact

The ruling and its impact on Sterling, Chilwell and more

In essence, the ruling may mean that the way Chelsea have treated Sterling in order to try and oust him may – in future – be grounds for the player to terminate his deal and another club to sign him for free.

This would give Chelsea far less leverage in their attempting to rid themselves of the likes of Sterling and Chelsea, damaging their chances of complying with PSR.

They are by no means the only club who might be impacted by the seismic ruling, but their financial situation does mean that they will likely have more anxiety about the Diarra ruling than most.

Unsurprisingly, known Chelsea hater slbsn interprets everything that happens as proof that Chelsea is doomed, after successfully predicting 25 of our last 1 transfer bans.

Guy is obsessed and no matter that he humiliates himself time after time, he just keeps going.

[DH1988 1,264]

Borson is literally obsessed with Chelsea and to date he's been largely wrong everytime he's been on TalkSport about our club, attention seeker.

[Vesper 28,448]

27 minutes ago, Mhsc said:

Unsurprisingly, known Chelsea hater slbsn interprets everything that happens as proof that Chelsea is doomed, after successfully predicting 25 of our last 1 transfer bans.

Guy is obsessed and no matter that he humiliates himself time after time, he just keeps going.