Mix Future Thread: Mix Diskerud is close to moving to IFK Goteborg

There should me a Mix thread for each day of the week. Why the hell not? I feel like he'll be referenced in this forum for a long time to come. Longer then Cookieburger.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kjbert
joe said:
Really curious to see how that "he is still under contract with the league" kicker plays out. #MLS
Click to expand...

Same. MLS owns him. I remember this being an issue of his when everyone thought he was going to Portland a few years ago. NYCFC is paying his contract, but MLS holds the contract. I assume there won't be a transfer fee but MLS could play hardball here as they would keep an entire transfer amount under $750k.
 
Kjbert said:
Same. MLS owns him. I remember this being an issue of his when everyone thought he was going to Portland a few years ago. NYCFC is paying his contract, but MLS holds the contract. I assume there won't be a transfer fee but MLS could play hardball here as they would keep an entire transfer amount under $750k.
Click to expand...
Why? the league didn't pay the money. I would bet, if anything, it works the opposite way. Surely MLS wouldn't attempt to claim recoupment against money they didn't pay. Not impossible, but it wouldn't make sense.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sabo and JGarrettLieb
Midas Mulligan said:
Why? the league didn't pay the money. I would bet, if anything, it works the opposite way. Surely MLS wouldn't attempt to claim recoupment against money they didn't pay. Not impossible, but it wouldn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Additionally you would probably face an immediate strike from the players union if the league decided to hold out on a players contract like that. Sure its probably legal for the league to do, but the players would flip their collective shit if an unattached but contracted player was prevented from signing to a team because the league wanted transfer money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulrich and adam
JGarrettLieb said:
Additionally you would probably face an immediate strike from the players union if the league decided to hold out on a players contract like that. Sure its probably legal for the league to do, but the players would flip their collective shit if an unattached but contracted player was prevented from signing to a team because the league wanted transfer money.
Click to expand...
I'm not ever sure if it's legal (any employment lawyers on the Forums?). Mix signed a contract to play soccer for a specific team. If that team has given up their rights to him/bought out his contract, then he effectively cannot ply his trade as he has no club and yet his transfer rights have not been relinquished by the league.

The league survived one shot at their single-entity/league-owned contracts, but I'm not sure if it'd survive this since it's a very particular arrangement that is skewed when compared to the original suit: Fraser vs MLS (or whatever it was called). I would bet that if it went to court, it'd be similar (but different) to the Bosman Ruling.
 
Ulrich said:
I'm not ever sure if it's legal (any employment lawyers on the Forums?). Mix signed a contract to play soccer for a specific team. If that team has given up their rights to him/bought out his contract, then he effectively cannot ply his trade as he has no club and yet his transfer rights have not been relinquished by the league.

The league survived one shot at their single-entity/league-owned contracts, but I'm not sure if it'd survive this since it's a very particular arrangement that is skewed when compared to the original suit: Fraser vs MLS (or whatever it was called). I would bet that if it went to court, it'd be similar (but different) to the Bosman Ruling.
Click to expand...

MLS wouldn't survive a second shot at their single entity structure at all. Fraser v. MLS was before the DP rule, the existence of that rule rather neatly blows the Copperweld test out of the water, since you can't really claim that there is unity of interest anymore.

http://www.soccerwire.com/news/pro/...le-a-look-at-mlss-shaky-single-entity-status/

Any challenge to the single entity structure of MLS will win, its actually the player's ultimate negotiating trump card. If you really try and screw us over we will kill single entity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paul, SayWhat44 and adam
Ulrich said:
I'm not ever sure if it's legal (any employment lawyers on the Forums?). Mix signed a contract to play soccer for a specific team. If that team has given up their rights to him/bought out his contract, then he effectively cannot ply his trade as he has no club and yet his transfer rights have not been relinquished by the league.

The league survived one shot at their single-entity/league-owned contracts, but I'm not sure if it'd survive this since it's a very particular arrangement that is skewed when compared to the original suit: Fraser vs MLS (or whatever it was called). I would bet that if it went to court, it'd be similar (but different) to the Bosman Ruling.
Click to expand...

Mix did not sign a contract to play for a specific team. That flies in the face of what Single Entity is.

And the players wouldn't strike. If they didn't strike last time, they're not striking over Mix Diskerud.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sabo
Kjbert said:
Mix did not sign a contract to play for a specific team. That flies in the face of what Single Entity is.

And the players wouldn't strike. If they didn't strike last time, they're not striking over Mix Diskerud.
Click to expand...
Actually, he did. He only came the MLS to play for NYCFC. Had that not been the case, then he would have been open to a trade to at least one other team, which he wasn't.

Just so we're on the same page, a no trade clause flies in the face of Single Entity, and yet he had one.
 
Ulrich said:
Actually, he did. He only came the MLS to play for NYCFC. Had that not been the case, then he would have been open to a trade to at least one other team, which he wasn't.

Just so we're on the same page, a no trade clause flies in the face of Single Entity, and yet he had one.
Click to expand...

Wow. Didn't realize you saw his contract. Why have you been holding out on us?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back