mamboparadise Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 I just had my star player/hot prospect pouched by another club. I did not have any release clauses on him. I thought that meant the player can't be traded unless without my approval. Or am I misunderstading this? Do I need to set minimum fee release clauses on all my players (with prohibitive prices) if I want to protect myself from getting robbed like this? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MelbVictory Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 If he is 6 months or nearer to the end of his contract, opposing clubs can approach him to sign a contract and if he signs you will not be compensated. Called the Bosman ruling. (it may be different for junior players, i think clubs do get compensated) The other way you may lose a player, if he has plenty of time on contract, is that the board may find an offer from the opposing club to good to refuse and will accept it on a financial basis. You have no say in that. Then it will be up to the player to accept personal terms, which may be your last hope of keeping him. I cant think of any other way a club may nab your player without any resistance from yourself. You definitely do not need to have release clauses for all players. But if a player asks for it, it may be an indication of his own ambitions (ie you are a stepping stone for higher glory). If they ask for it, I raise it higher so that if he gets really good, at least the clubs will need to pay big bucks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamboparadise Posted April 14, 2011 Author Share Posted April 14, 2011 Ah.. Thank you so much. That clears it up a bit. I guess it was the board's short sighted decision then, since I had 5 more years on the contract. Sounds like it would be safer to have a protective minimum release clause that is high enough so that other clubs won't even think about approaching the board with temptation. >:[ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wiitastic Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Ah.. Thank you so much. That clears it up a bit.I guess it was the board's short sighted decision then, since I had 5 more years on the contract. Sounds like it would be safer to have a protective minimum release clause that is high enough so that other clubs won't even think about approaching the board with temptation. >:[ Like Real Madrid does, set a minimum release clause like 200m on your best superstar players, also any young players who you think will turn out to be superstars also If any club can afford to pay you 200m then I am sure you can go out get a few replacements to improve your team with that sort of cash Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BiggusD Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Sometimes, when I offer e.g £5m for a player and get it accepted, the player wants a ridiculously low release clause in his contract - often the same as I bought him for. He won't budge as much as a penny. I take that as a sign that he doesn't really want to sign for me, so I find someone else. The basic economic rule in FM is: never sell for less than you bought. If you go on holiday to avoid playing friendlies, for example, your Ass.Man may accept offers if you have not set him to not do this. NOW there are no other ways you could have lost your player. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nottingham Forest Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 Like Real Madrid does, set a minimum release clause like 200m on your best superstar players, also any young players who you think will turn out to be superstars alsoIf any club can afford to pay you 200m then I am sure you can go out get a few replacements to improve your team with that sort of cash This doesn't work anymore of FM11. Or hasn't done for the first few patches. So I assume it's same for 11.3. Release clauses are alot more realistic now. So when you do go to set release clauses, you can't just set £200m all the time. I don't think a League Two club would reject that. Or a Premiership club for that matter. So release clauses are reflected by contracts and clauses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdanio Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 A release clause does not mean that the buying team HAVE to pay that amount. It simply means if they offer that amount you HAVE to sell them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dafuge Posted April 14, 2011 Share Posted April 14, 2011 This doesn't work anymore of FM11. Or hasn't done for the first few patches. So I assume it's same for 11.3. Release clauses are alot more realistic now. So when you do go to set release clauses, you can't just set £200m all the time. The agents part in the contract negotiations takes care of that. If you want to set a really high release clause, he'll probably want to be compensated elsewhere in the deal, such as fees or wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.