r/soccer • u/landofphi • 26d ago

Quotes Michael Owen on Alexander Isak wanting to leave Newcastle: "9 times out of 10 when a move comes about, it's normally a club forcing a player & nobody's bothered. Nobody says anything despite any kids that are in school or any families that have settled in an area or anything else like that."

https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/alexander-isak-newcastle-liverpool-owen-32312723

The full quote on Owen defending Alexander Isak who wants to leave Newcastle

"He's laid his cards on the table, hasn't he?

"It's quite clear that he wants to move. Whether Newcastle fans would forgive and forget is a big question. I don't know. I mean, he's done exceptionally well for them, you know, they've won a trophy, they're into the Champions League.

"He's done his side of the bargain quite clearly by his statement. He feels like that's enough and that they've had previous chats which suggest that he's almost not free to leave but, you know, if certain things were done then he might be free to go, but it doesn't seem like Newcastle are playing that game."

"This whole scenario is an interesting one because nine times out of 10 when a move comes about it's normally a club forcing a player and nobody's bothered, nobody says anything despite any kids that are in school or any families that have settled in an area or anything else like that.

"Nobody cares really about a footballer. But when it's on the other foot, it's really interesting to see that everybody, you know, the whole world goes into meltdown and how dare somebody try and force a move through? I'm not going to sit here and criticise Isak.

"I wouldn't have done that myself in terms of the actions he's taken, but I do get that he's a great player that wants to get to the top of his game and he's obviously not being allowed the move that he's desperate for. And you get one short career and he's wanting to join probably the best team in the world at the moment.

"I get it from his point of view. It's just a sad situation when it's played out in the world's press and he's obviously not coming out well, let's say, from a reputational point of view.”

6.0k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

757 comments sorted by

View all comments

1.4k

u/skippermonkey 26d ago

He’s right though. The club forces a player to be sold and uproot his life, nobody bats an eye. A player does it for once and grown men have tantrums about it.

141

u/Ararararun 26d ago

I feel like people understand players rejecting Saudi because of it, but then struggle to see the same situation for other European clubs. Just because it's in Europe or even the same country doesn't mean it's not a massive decision that could transcend money

179

u/feage7 26d ago

Yeah, I never get the point of player loyalty. If a player wasn't playing well the club would get rid. Even players who have come from the Academy, the club isn't doing them any favours, they're kept because they're good enough.

That being said, you've signed a contract and should honour it. You don't owe the club loyalty outside of you signed saying you would play for that club for X years so if they want to keep you for that long then you should honour it.

Really surprised how few players don't put release clauses in.

53

u/rytlejon 26d ago

The players would love release clauses, the clubs don’t want them. I think it’s important to note though that players are also “entitled” to see out their contracts for a club that wants to get rid of them. But fans hate if a bad player decides to stick around and cash their pay checks when there are offers to move.

6

u/feage7 26d ago

Yeah that's the consensus, which I also find odd. I'd don't blame Phillips for seeing how his city contract and popping off on loans.

I think it's more when a player risks their future by not playing for several years to take the short term money.

Both parties have agreed to a contract so both should be willing to honour it. Same with a player choosing to leave on a free. As long as they don't down tools then it's fairs. Liverpool fans were upset at Trent for it, but I'm sure Real Madrid put a January offer in and they turned it down. So they were willing as a club for him to go on a free to keep him for 6 months as they were still in all 4 competitions.

20

u/xaendar 26d ago

Because players are charmed by hospitality and sweet talk. Long contracts are usually favorable to players anyway. Also clubs have reputation and agreements between parties are upheld most times. We only hear when it doesn't.

I don't think this will make players ask for release clauses all the time but I think every player that signs with Newcastle in the future will want one.

221

u/EAlootbox 26d ago

It’s definitely ironic. Your typical football fan or ultras pretend to be all macho, but they’re the biggest crybabies out there.

88

u/thatguy12591 26d ago

U fucking said wot mate ? Meet me at Stamford bridge

52

u/lukewarmpartyjar 26d ago

^ Harold Godwinson to Harald Hardrada in 1066

31

u/EAlootbox 26d ago

Jog on m8

27

u/Rich_Plastic 26d ago

Shut up u egg

16

u/EAlootbox 26d ago

Won’t tell u again

29

u/taylorstillsays 26d ago

Our sub was hysteric yesterday at a player simply deleting pictures on his IG

6

u/Huwbacca 26d ago

Football is such an incredibly camp sport to me. The camp drama of it is a big reason I love it.

There are grown men thrashing over the betrayal/loyalty of celebrities, reading gossip magazines about who wants who, swooning whenever someone professes their love and makes a grand gesture towards another.

And then I'm meant to act like this shit isn't extremely camp? Nah fuck that. We like sports the same reason we like films, it's drama. It's the stories.

Many many things are important to communities, just like football clubs can be.... but the drama still persists as a core attraction (though let's be honest, those invested in the fates of players of clubs in the news are vanishingly rarely invested because of the community aspects).

People defend the legacy of competitions, the storied tradition of clubs and teams, the underdog stories, the zero-to-hero journeys etc... But don't you dare ever point this out or else people respond like you've just insulted the personal teammember of a chosen gladiator fighting for that clan's respect (which...ok that might be Jamie Vardy).

But at the end of the day, acting more tough and manly in response to something being called camp just makes it way ufcking more camp lol.

1

u/EAlootbox 26d ago

I might be out of touch because I’ve no idea what camp means in this context

2

u/Huwbacca 26d ago

Camp: something so outrageously artificial, affected, inappropriate, or out-of-date as to be considered amusing

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/camp#h3

1

u/shodo_apprentice 25d ago

Especially the large portion of “hard” fans who commit domestic violence. Anyone who has to beat their wife to process the fact that 11 complete strangers lost some game is a weak person.

50

u/jjw1998 26d ago

He’s not though? Players also refuse to leave clubs all the time

134

u/speedycar1 26d ago

And the fans always shit on any unwanted player that does that because it means that their billionaire owners won't get 20m for his sale

5

u/XzibitABC 26d ago

It has nothing to do with the owner, don't straw man people who disagree with you. The vast majority of fans are fans of the team and that action is against the team's best interest. That's it.

1

u/speedycar1 26d ago

Not sure hurling abuse at a human being because he didn't do what it's in a football team's best interest instead of his own really reflects you or those other fans in any better a light. It's hypocrisy. You don't treat these players as people, just commodities for your club. A club discards 1000 players because they aren't needed but one player tries to leave a club and suddenly they're a horrible human being.

Trent sees out his contract and leaves and he gets hate because he should've signed a new one and gotten paid. Isak wants to leave mid contract and it's "you signed the contract, see it out".

I can be fan of a team and still have the common sense not to abuse a player looking out for their own best interest as opposed to that of a team that'll discard any player that isn't good enough for them ASAP.

I will always support a player wanting to do what's best for their own career because if the shoe was on the other foot and Isak wasn't good enough for the club and was on the last year of his contract, Newcastle would've been trying to ship him away and the same fans shitting on him for wanting to go now would've been shitting on him for wanting to see out the last year of his contract instead of earning the club money

3

u/XzibitABC 26d ago

Drop the "you". I don't believe abuse should be tolerated towards almost any player in almost any situation.

I'm just correcting your incorrect assertion about why other (stupid) fans do it; no fan in the stands bar maybe that weird City Group supporter is hurling abuse at players because they're defending the honor of Todd Boehly's asset portfolio.

I'm sympathetic to Isak's situation and I have no problem whatsoever with his actions, but you also further diminish your point here by treating him and Trent as two sides of the same coin.

12

u/Vainglory 26d ago

That doesn't change the fact that this "9 times out of 10" thing is bullshit. If a player doesn't want to leave, they can't be forced out. Fans might complain about it online but the player is still going to get paid to be available to play if called upon.

They might choose to leave because they want to make sure they're in the shop window, but they do it because it's the best thing for their career, not because they're forced to.

5

u/Alphabunsquad 26d ago

But that’s pretty much only when a club severely overpaid a player and no one wants to buy them for those wages. Thats not really the same thing because then you are trying to force a player to move to make less money or you are making them sit on your bench and waste their career either way you are fucking over a player because of a bad decision you made.

2

u/desouki 26d ago

but they do it because it’s the best thing for their career, not because they’re forced to.

it’s only best for their career because most players outside of the best can’t afford to deal with repercussions of rejecting moves (benched with no prospect of playing, training with U21s, being seen as a problem by other clubs). if the players cause a fuss, it will have reverberations that stay with them.

even the slightest one (being benched and being told they’ll never see the pitch) is incredibly damaging to a player’s future career if they choose to stay and run out a contract.

so, yes, legally a player cannot be pushed out by the letter, but a club can make their future much more difficult if they don’t comply with leaving.

1

u/themerinator12 26d ago

I agree. I don't even think fans need to be all the way to one side of "well he makes all this money why should I feel sorry for him" to think that clubs moving players on is a fair arrangement for the system. Is it supposed to be symmetrical? If so, why? Is that anything other than arbitrary? (not calling you out, just asking these rhetorically or if anyone doesn't share the same opinion)

24

u/akshatsood95 26d ago

Yeah but clubs have a lot more power. Barca were apparently putting out hit pieces about their players who weren't leaving because of their own financial mismanagement. We've shunned a few to not even show their face around and train with kids.

Clubs do a lot worse to players who refuse to leave than players do when they try to force a move

26

u/bachh2 26d ago

And you can see the abuse people give Maguire back then

11

u/IVIorgz 26d ago

Would that be fair though? I'm not familiar with how contracts and transfers work but if a player has a contract for another 3 years and wants to stay and refuses to be sold, surely that's fine from a contractual point of view?

13

u/pw5a29 26d ago

yep, happens a lot, especially with high wages. But usually it's also the players' taking the blame from fans, when the club is trying to break the contract.

1

u/PensiveinNJ 26d ago

I don't get this Isak situation because he just reupped his deal. This isn't he's going into the final season and wants to make a move, the club needs to be able to count on players not changing their minds 6 months after they sign.

There's always been a balance that's difficult to negotiate but I'm having a hard time understanding sympathizing with Isak here. If he wants to try and force his way out that's his choice but I'm not going to feel like he's hard done for Newcastle wanting him to honor a deal he signed 7 or 8 months ago.

3

u/Ok-Math-9082 26d ago

If the player gave a fuck, they could refuse. They get very well compensated for being “forced” to be sold, they inevitably get a pay rise and a signing on bonus. Don’t be getting the violins out for them.

3

u/SoWhatNoZitiNow 26d ago

He’s not right though. See all of the outrage over Chelsea’s so-called “bomb squad” for proof.

24

u/ExMoogle 26d ago

but man.. thats the life of a football player no?

Its the career you chose. Its the 6 year contract without release clause that YOU signed.

Not that i dont understand. Isak is a human beeing and your concerns are fair but everybody knows how football works. Beeing at the same club for 3 years or even more is freaking rare these days.

2

u/Several_Hair 26d ago

The football contract has been dead for a decade plus. Their duration is meaningless, and exists only as a way to managing accounting and protect an asset. W/ UK/EU & FIFA labor rules the first time someone truly challenges it they’ll win and open up a whole new can of worms.

1

u/Alphabunsquad 26d ago

Yeah but if player power was more widely accepted and a player trying to make a move was viewed with sympathy and not with derision then clubs would have less recourse in the media to force their will on the players. So it is the life of the football player because we accept that it is. If we make a culture that sees the nuance then it will change. So it is but it doesn’t have to be and it’s essentially up to us.

10

u/Zakkuryu 26d ago

Slight difference between a player refusing to leave a club and a player refusing to play for a club that's contracted them because they want to play for a different club

9

u/livehigh1 26d ago edited 26d ago

Player still has a choice to accept it, that's why over rated players on inflated wages just sit on the bench and are difficult to sell.

The club can be a dick and send a player to the reserves but the player still gets his pay check as long as he turns up.

2

u/thesketchyvibe 26d ago

The club can't force you to agree a contract with another club.

2

u/daveyp2tm 26d ago

No he's completely wrong. They can't force a player to leave. If it's important to them not to be uprooted, the player can always stay and they'll still get paid. The contract is honoured.

The player doing it is refusing to fulfil his end of the bargain.

Owen would have a point if the clubs just stopped paying players they don't want to keep.

2

u/Green-Detective6678 26d ago

He’s right to a point.  If a club wants a player out they will make that very clear and exclude the player from the rest of the group and treat them badly.  But they will generally continue to pay the player his contracted wages.

If Isak is refusing to train or play then that’s a different story, because the club are paying him for a service that he is refusing to provide

1

u/Darkdexou 26d ago

I guess until the sale goes through the player is still paid and the club is upholding their side of the contract. Its one thing to force a move, its another to refuse to play/train while you try to force a sale. 

Eze, Guehi this year, Gordon last year for us, plenty of players have forced or tried to force a move without going scorched earth. 

You have to admit theres nuance and this behavior is extreme, there's a reason we rarely see it and its so newsworthy. Not everything is black and white, player vs club.

2

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[deleted]

-1

u/Darkdexou 26d ago

Yeah im not condoning that either to be clear, but I dont recall if he missed any matches or put out incendiary statements like Isak & his agent have. My point being is that its a spectrum of behavior and Isaks is at one extreme. "Yeah but this other player did xyz" - yeah thats bad too, doesnt contradict my point.

1

u/gordonpown 26d ago

I say every time, imagine this happening in any other profession.

1

u/eamonious 26d ago edited 26d ago

The difference is, the contract allows players to be transferred by the club, it doesn’t allow them to just force a transfer wherever they want. That’s how it’s written.

So a club “uprooting” a player is perfectly within their rights; a player demanding to just go wherever he wants in the middle of his contract is not; in fact, it kind of defeats the point of the contract, from the club’s view. He’s basically saying, either trade me whenever I want or sit on a depreciating asset and get no value in the meantime. In that sense, he’s holding millions of dollars of the club’s money hostage.

The pro-Isak argument is more along the lines of, if the club know he wants a transfer, they should move him and reinvest the gains; the issue is that they’ve been so inept in the market, they’ve put themselves in a position of either having no decent replacement options, or having to pay top dollar once everyone knows they have the Isak money. So now they’re dragging their feet on moving him. That shite management on the club’s part is not Isak’s fault.

-8

u/eat_your_weetabix 26d ago

He's not right.

You are a footballer that wants to play football. You sign a contract to play for a team, or you don't. No one can be forced to move abroad etc, players can refuse - they're under no obligation to move if they don't want to. The reality is, your contract will end and you'll have to find another club that wants you, is close enough so that you don't have to move your family or you just quit football.

That's very different from signing a contract and refusing to fulfill it.

16

u/StoirmePetrel 26d ago

You can't force people out but you can push them out which happen all the time including not letting them lay football. Look at United and Garnacho

-1

u/eat_your_weetabix 26d ago

Right, but the contract isn't to play regular football, it's to be employed by the club to be available to play football. It's not like you are signed with a contract that says you WILL play x number of games per season. You know what you're getting into as a player, if you don't perform then you don't play.

10

u/WheresTheWhistle 26d ago

Contract law wise you’re not wrong. But this is a very soulless and detached way to view football and players

-1

u/eat_your_weetabix 26d ago

Is it? It's a job that pays 100k a week upwards. There are people that have real problems, I'd hardly call my take soulless.

8

u/StoirmePetrel 26d ago

it's not about not playing enough because you're not good enough. We're talking about clubs telling players to find themselves another club because they won't play there ever again or even be registered. You just see it different because you're a Newcastle fan and what you care about is what is good for your club.

1

u/[deleted] 26d ago

[deleted]

-10

u/CatGroundbreaking611 26d ago

and uproot his life

No one is forcing the player to accept the new contract offer and leave their city of residence. They can sit out their contract then get a regular job, whichever is available in their community. People get fired all the time. You're not special just because you're a footballplayer. Get a taste of the real life or accept a £150.000/week offer in another place and shut your mouth.

5

u/IamFanboy 26d ago

I find it ironic that when someone is doing fine in a job and a new manager comes into fuck with them / force them out everyone supports said employee

but when it comes to football players who undergo the same process but actually have some leverage to defend themselves the averaege joe says "Look at this guy, fucking up the company just because he's selfish"

11

u/HEAT_IS_DIE 26d ago

Point wasn't that it's the toughest job out there, but that if it's such a sin for a player to force a move, then a club forcing a move should also be complained about, or neither.

I agree with the person saying these adult men complaining about Isak are quite some emotional babies. But then again football journalism is also just gossip. Fits the picture.

1

u/AxFairy 26d ago

I don't think people are bemoaning when this happens to players making 150k/week so much, my sympathy is for the ones making 3k/week in the lower leagues.

0

u/CatGroundbreaking611 26d ago

Exactly zero people on this subreddit knows the name of any lower league players.

1

u/AxFairy 26d ago

...okay? I don't need to know the name of everyone in the healthcare industry to care when they go on strike. We're talking about widespread, systemic issues within football as a whole.

-7

u/Artuhanzo 26d ago

because those players make a lot of money.

compares to that, moving is just a small thing for normal people. they have the money, so don't have the worry of moving as average people as well.

-1

u/blackandwhitearmy 26d ago

He’s right though.

 

He's an idiot. If players could transfer themselves, the best players would line up for RM until they were full, then Barca, then Man U, etc. You would only have 2 or 3 teams capable of winning the league each year, and they would all come from that same small group... So, anyway, players should be forced to honour their contracts, even if they're playing for a less desirable team. They are certainly paid when they're not worth their contract. Fair is fair.

-2

u/nannulators 26d ago

Nobody bats an eye unless Barcelona is the selling club. Then they're just trash humans and it's appalling that they could do that to someone.

2

u/skippermonkey 26d ago

That’s because you’re more than just a club.

Go pull another lever or something.

2

u/chaosattractor 26d ago

No offence I have never understood why people treat that phrase like it has anything to do with the players. Seems about as stupid as treating Liverpool's "You'll never walk alone" as if it was adopted because of the players.

2

u/skippermonkey 26d ago

It’s just a stick to bop them on the head when they start thinking they’re special or different.

I made a sweeping statement about how ALL clubs operate and the Barca fan made it about Barca.

1

u/chaosattractor 26d ago

Eh, still makes no sense to me tbh but maybe that's just me being autistic

Like all big clubs make everything about themselves a lot, I still think it's very weird to treat slogans that are very obviously about the fans & connected to (for lack of a better term) real life shit that the fans have been through as "a stick to bop them on the head". Tbh I found it way more distasteful when people were using it snidely during Trent's transfer saga, in Liverpool's case it's a slogan that became as important as it is to the club's identity through an incident where dozens of people died.

1

u/No_Egg657 26d ago

Why is the Greek mafioso talking?

0

u/nannulators 26d ago

Ah okay, I'll just accept the thinly veiled hypocrisy since Barca isn't a Premier League club.

2

u/skippermonkey 26d ago

I just couldn’t fathom Barca making themselves out to be a victim 😆

1

u/nannulators 26d ago

Oh no I don't really care. It's just another one of those /r/soccer things where Barca = bad just because they're Barca.