A LITTLE-KNOWN transfer rule allows Alexander Isak to effectively rip up his own Newcastle contract and join Liverpool for free.
The Swedish striker is desperate to switch St James’ Park for Anfield this summer and has gone on strike to force an exit.
In a bombshell statement released last night, Isak claimed promises had been “broken and trust is lost”.
Newcastle then hit back, denying his allegations and standing firm on their stance that he will not be sold.
But the Toon could become powerless in the situation due to Fifa’s Article 17.
The law, which was recently changed thanks to ex-Premier League star Lassana Diarra, has made it easier for players to force a move that their club must accept.
Under previous rules, a player that terminated their own deal without a “just cause” had to pay compensation for breach of contract and his new club would be joint liable for the cash.
The player could even be punished with a ban from playing or denied an international transfer certificate by Fifa to prevent them signing for a new team.
After a dispute with Lokomotiv Moscow in 2014, Diarra triggered his own departure but ended up being denied an international transfer certificate and he therefore spent time as a free agent.
He claimed it damaged his career and that the rules were ILLEGAL as it restricted the freedom of players to change jobs like ordinary people.
Diarra took the situation to court and got Fifa to tweak transfer laws, though he is currently back in court pursuing £56million in compensation.
The new rules make it easier for players to get out their contracts.
As for Isak, 25, his deal at Newcastle runs until 2028.
A player that triggers Article 17 must do so within 15 days of the final match of the season.
And it can only be done by stars who have had a full three years under contract at the club (two if they are aged 28).
Once that happens a unilateral breach of contract has occurred and the player is FREE to join another side.
If Isak remains at Newcastle for the entirety of this season, he could use Article 17 in June 2026.
Liverpool would not pay a transfer fee because he would be a free agent.
Newcastle will then be due compensation, with Fifa footing the bill.
They would calculate how much they are owed based on Isak’s wages, residual value on the Toon’s books and cost of finding a replacement.
Despite these rules, sports lawyers believe using Article 17 would be far from a straightforward process for a player.
Premier League rules would still apply, which make a unilateral termination challenging.
And it would start a huge legal battle that could rumble on for the rest of Isak’s career.
Read the full article here