Possible Transfer Sell-On Clause Bug/Exploit?

I've put this also in the bugs thread but thought to post here incase it was just me thinking it's a bug.

Giovani Dos Santos has been bought back by Barcelona from Tottenham for 11.5m and in the news message it says Barcelona receive 400k because of a 20% sell-on clause.

Surely if it's Barcelona buying him back then the sell-on clause should be null and void?

If not, then this is a possible exploit in the transfer market.

This is the news article.

And this is Giovani Dos Santos' career history to show him sold back to Barcelona.

Now is it me or do the transfer rules really allow a club to buy a player back and still receive a cut of his sell-on clause they set up in the first place when they sold him? :confused:

This has always been like it - not sure i see a problem myself?

It's not an exploit, what would happen in real life is that the clause would just be ignored and the clause amount would be knocked off the price. In the game the clause is used, but it achieves the exact same thing becuase the same amount of money overall changes hands. So it's not a bug, it's just a bit inelegant.

any idea if Spurs actually had to pay the 400k or if it's just an error with the message?

also, you do realise the Premier League isn't called the Premiership any more? (yes, I'm picky)

if a club had such a clause in place instead of actually paying it, i would be knocked of the price but essentially it achieves the same end so no need to quibble.

and yes its always been like this

Oh well, so it was just me then who thought this didn't sound right.

Didn't realise that was the rule.

Thanks for the replies.

As for the Premiership now being called the Premier League I'll change my XML straight away.