Decades after Bosman, football's transfer war rages on

Three decades following the landmark European court decision in the Jean Marc Bosman case that reshaped the financial aspects of football, the game continues to grapple with the ongoing legal consequences.

The most recent development stems from a 2024 European Court of Justice (ECJ) verdict supporting ex France international Lassana Diarra, prompting a possible class action lawsuit from players unions that might burden football governing bodies with costs amounting to billions of euros, according to a legal representative speaking to AFP.

The Bosman ruling revolutionised the landscape across Europe. In December 1995, the ECJ sided with the Belgian player after he took legal action against RFC Liege, the Belgian football association, and UEFA, the continents governing organisation, because the club prevented his transfer to French team Dunkerque in 1990.

Even with Bosmans contract expired, Liege insisted on receiving a transfer payment.

This outcome introduced free agency to the sport and more besides. The ECJ further determined that competitions within the European Union must not impose restrictions on athletes from fellow EU nations.

Athletes and their representatives swiftly adjusted to these changes. Dutch stars Edgar Davids and Michael Reiziger were among the initial high profile free transfers, departing Ajax for Inter Milan the next summer, hinting early on that the verdict would hasten the gathering of top talent at the elite European teams.

The judgement arrived amid booming incomes in the major European competitions, especially the English Premier League, and, perhaps unsurprisingly, shortly before wealthy investors started acquiring teams, beginning with Roman Abramovichs purchase of Chelsea in 2003.

The Bosman outcome has triggered numerous subsequent legal challenges, as the sport debates methods for overseeing athlete agreements.

The current initiative, pursued through Dutch courts by an organisation named Justice for Players, targets FIFA, the 28 EU member associations, and the four British domestic unions, building on the favourable decision for Diarra, who once played for Chelsea, Arsenal, Real Madrid, and Paris Saint Germain.

In 2014, when Lokomotiv Moscow sought to reduce his earnings, Diarra reached an arrangement with Belgian outfit Charleroi.

Lokomotiv required compensation, and FIFAs dispute resolution body supported their claim, requiring Diarra to compensate Lokomotiv with 10 million euros and imposing a 15 month suspension.

The ECJs support for Diarra extended to recognising that professional footballers active over more than two decades from 2002 to 2024, and possibly continuing, endured financial losses, explained Dolf Segaar, a Dutch attorney involved with Justice for Players.

We estimate that on average, each player lost eight percent of their income, stated Segaar.

For roughly 100,000 pros during that span, it undoubtedly totals several billion euros, he noted.

The core issue lies in contracts lacking a buyout provision, which remains unlawful in various European jurisdictions, leaving athletes uncertain about the exact compensation owed to their previous employer upon departure.

Segaar aims to enlist domestic players unions to bolster the suits legitimacy.

He anticipates filing in court during the initial quarter of 2026.

The proceedings may span several years, he mentioned.

Ex player David Terrier heads the French players union, which supports the effort, alongside the global FIFPRO Europe, which does not.

Many unions find it challenging as it pits them directly against their national bodies, and some maintain close ties and pacts with those federations, Terrier informed AFP.

Rich clubs stay rich

He expressed hope for dialogue, similar to his attempts in the Diarra matter.

Lassana Diarra avoided becoming another Jean Marc Bosman, Terrier remarked. He noted, I represent the country, I feature for premier teams, and I do not wish to be recalled for this lawsuit. I prefer remembrance for my achievements or setbacks on the field.

Yet FIFA offered no reply.

Terrier voiced puzzlement at FIFAs stance and likened their track record to that of a clubs performance.

As counsel for FIFA, I recognise the futility in aspiring to Champions League or Club World Cup level advocacy, given the string of defeats, he commented.

FIFA, which issued temporary guidelines post Diarra ruling, and UEFA, Europes overseer, declined comment on the verdict, though both announced intentions to overhaul the transfer framework.

Segaar, Terrier, and the football institutions concur on certain elements.

Teams ought to secure initial professional deals with their academy products. Athletes should lack the option to exit in the opening one or two years of an agreement.

Moreover, clubs deserve remuneration via a mutually accepted clear mechanism or through buyout terms.

The forthcoming structure will alter finances to some degree, but likely less disruptively than the Bosman decision back then, Segaar predicted.

However, the wealthier outfits will continue to dominate financially. That dynamic remains unchanged.